Godholio posted:

I didn't expect it to have cut almost completely through the tail, wow.

Edit: Also, the woman with neck pain.

Godholio posted:

I didn't expect it to have cut almost completely through the tail, wow.

Boomerjinks posted:

EMBEDDED gently caress

quote:

BATON ROUGE, LA (WAFB) - The regional airline, ASA, denied Wednesday that one of the aircraft involved in a freak hangar accident is to be written off as a total loss. "There has been no such determination by ASA or our engineers working on the event," said Kate Modolo, spokesperson for Atlantic Southeast Airlines.

Three CRJ passenger jets sustained serious damage when a young mechanic pressed a starter switch to slowly spin jet engine compressor blades for routine washing. She had successfully performed the same action on the jet's right engine without difficulty. However, mechanics familiar with the accident said that when the mechanic repeated the action on the left engine of the CRJ model 700 jet, a computer control system known as "FADEC" ignited the engine and immediately spun up to near takeoff power. Someone had left the throttle setting for the left engine at 85% power, sources said.

The 34 ton passenger jet leapt forward, plowing into two other CRJ aircraft in the hangar. Airport manager Anthony Marino said the pair of model 200 aircraft that were damaged will be repaired at the Baton Rouge maintenance facility, which employs 120 people. "That's a sign of the high skill levels over there" at the new ASA hangar. Marino was instrumental in construction of the $6 million hangar to lure the ASA maintenance facility to Baton Rouge.

Marino acknowledged that the three-plane smashup could have become an explosive disaster. The incident occurred in the pre-dawn hours of Monday, July 7th. None of the 14 ASA mechanics and cleaning workers inside the hangar was injured. The 1:50 a.m. incident produced little media attention until WAFB News learned of the magnitude of the accident on Monday, July 21st.

ASA spokeswoman Modolo said the investigation of the accident is still underway. Ordinarily, any damage that renders an aircraft not flyable requires a report to the National Transportation Safety Board. However, the NTSB told WAFB News it was not investigating the ASA incident. The aircraft carried no passengers, were not in flight, and were damaged in an FAA-approved maintenance facility.

Together, the three jets are valued at $50 million, according to Modolo. The young woman who set the multi-million dollar chain of events in motion is not likely to bear full blame for the event. "There's plenty of blame to go around," said one airport employee familiar with the accident. While ASA would not discuss its specific safety policies, airliners inside repair hangars ordinarily are drained of most of the fuel and circuit breakers pulled on equipment that could set the engines in motion.

The 60-foot run of the CRJ 700 at near full takeoff power was just 300 yards from normally busy Plank Road on the east perimeter of Baton Rouge airport. The CRJ 700 jet ordinarily carries 70 passengers. The CRJ 200's usually have 50 seats. ASA was purchased from Delta Airlines in 2005 and sold to Air West. ASA has a fleet of 160 aircraft, most of which are CRJ's. The name is derived from the name bombardier Canadair Regional Jet. FAA records show that the most severely damaged plane is actually owned by Wachovia Bank, a common situation in airline financing of their equipment.

Slo-Tek posted:

Rutan's final project is a Flying Car.

http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/blog...mentId=blogDest

Ola posted:

Mustang, Skyraider mid-air at Duxford last weekend.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_A4xdGFXoE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xctYWSuwoYA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLQsJS7zQOM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKDxkLtPuX4

rcman50166 posted:

Is it just me or did that Mustang still look flyable? I don't question the pilot's choice to eject but still, it would be a shame if it could have been landed.

rcman50166 posted:

Is it just me or did that Mustang still look flyable? I don't question the pilot's choice to eject but still, it would be a shame if it could have been landed.

Styles Bitchley posted:

Can't believe the F-22 fleet is still grounded.

ursa_minor posted:

I think if maybe if he took time to assess the situation at such a low level, problems could have compounded very quickly - and there was no way for him to know exactly what was damaged or how badly it was damaged. As sad as it is, he did the right thing, and did it very well.

It really did look flyable, and I bet it was - but there aren't many options at such a low altitude. A less professional pilot probably would have tried to save the plane - as weird as that logic may seem.

iyaayas01 posted:

Given the situation he was in, he could've run out of airspeed, altitude, and ideas pretty quickly had something (else) gone wrong. Doing a manual bailout at that altitude is pretty impressive.

MA-Horus posted:

Why are the F-22s still grounded? Mechanical fault, or software issues?

quote:

Being new on an Airbus brings new meaning to being new on lets say a Boeing aircraft. When I tell the Captain that I am new on the Airbus, I commonly don't get the standard response of, "Oh, well that's okay," from him or her. It is usually, "Oohhhh, well, are you getting the hang of it now?" See the difference? That's because all I can tell you is that compared to a Boeing (or similar jet aircraft) the Airbus can give the impression of being a really wacky machine. That is until you get to learn its brain and naturally its logic. Even all the Check Airmen and Captains who have 9000-plus hours on the plane all comment that the Airbus is indeed very unusual. They even go on and say sometimes they see something new that they have never seen before. Well that's comforting, isn't it?

There's even an old joke about Airbus pilots:

How can you tell an Airbus pilot? (S)he's the one who says, "What's it doing now?"

How can you tell an experienced Airbus pilot? (S)he's the one who says, "It's doing that again!"

Styles Bitchley posted:

Issue is the system that generates oxygen for the pilot.

Random link:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=7098675&c=AME&s=AIR

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad posted:

Fuckin' pilots, what a bunch of whiny crybabies.

oh we want oxygen waah waah we need it to live waaaah

joat mon posted:

BonzoESC posted:

At least theirs is simple and easy to fix:


From http://www.b737.org.uk/airconditioning.htm

BonzoESC posted:

An excerpt from Techniques for the new Airbus Pilot:

iyaayas01 posted:

Given the situation he was in, he could've run out of airspeed, altitude, and ideas pretty quickly had something (else) gone wrong. Doing a manual bailout at that altitude is pretty impressive.

BonzoESC posted:

An excerpt from Techniques for the new Airbus Pilot:

The Electronaut posted:

That dude owes his rigger a bottle of booze.

Revolvyerom posted:

edit: I'm an idiot, he had to actually pull himself out of the cockpit, didn't he? Even more then, jesus.

Styles Bitchley posted:

Issue is the system that generates oxygen for the pilot.

Random link:

http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=7098675&c=AME&s=AIR

Lowclock posted:

I am not sure if you're being sarcastic, because that actually looks a lot simpler than I would have expected.

iyaayas01 posted:

This is a pretty good article that peels back a bit of the onion on the OBOGS issues.

And yeah, getting everyone back up and qualified is going to be a pain in the rear end.

ursa_minor posted:

He pops the canopy almost immediately, you can see it fluttering behind the Mustang - and then yeah, old cat had to physically stand up and jump out of a rapidly falling airplane, only a few hundred feet off the ground. The more I really try to put myself into that position, the more it gets.

BonzoESC posted:

Trip report: MD-90s are quite quiet up front.

ack! posted:

While you're enjoying your soft speaking chat up there think about the poor souls in the last few rows next to those spinning noise makers and the few inches of materials separating them.

The only time I ever got airsick was a 2+ hour flight last row, middle seat in the Spring going to KLAS. Them are torture seats I tell ya!

dissss posted:

How much of that is because Airbuses are relatively uncommon in the US market?

BonzoESC posted:

That it's a compressed-air powered air conditioning system seems a bit nutty. For a fun game, count the turbines.

MrChips posted:

Airbuses aren't rare at all in the US. United, Delta, US Airways, jetBlue and Virgin America all operate variants of the A320 (to say nothing of Delta and US Airways A330 fleets). By my best guess, there are something like 600 FBW Airbuses operating in US airline service.

quote:

Unusual maybe, but the air cycle machine is an incredibly elegant and lightweight means of providing environmental control.

OptimusMatrix posted:

I remember seeing some video or page about the 777 and it's engines and development and how they strapped one on the wing of a 747 and it made more power than the two on the other side combined and that said it could handle such and such amounts of water before it shut down. Does anyone have the slightest clue on what I'm talking about?

VikingSkull posted:

Well, the first C-17 landed at Stewart yesterday to start replacing the C-5s. I got to watch it come in which is historic or something, but don't take my C-5s away

Seeing a C-5 and a C-17 in the air together was pretty cool, shame they didn't fly in formation, though.

SwimNurd posted:

I wonder if they have been doing this at Wright Patterson. I keep seeing more and more C-17s. They don't sound as cool as the C-5s.