|
Mortabis posted:That dude's in terrible shape. He can barely keep jogging while he's about to get arrested. I'm not gonna lie, this was my exact thought Also "lol police stig kicks rear end"
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:03 |
|
|
Mortabis posted:That dude's in terrible shape. He can barely keep jogging while he's about to get arrested. he's probably been running for a while if they have a helicopter on site already
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Aviator Insanity: https://streamable.com/ax6i The local news has been running this footage non-stop. I've watched one of the HPD help pilots practice at a local airfield, not sure if it was the same one, but he was practicing dropping the helicopter from "low but not crashing altitude" to "HOLY poo poo HOLY poo poo skids almost in the grass" altitude to end a pursuit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Having to run and hold his pants up because thug life isn't helping either.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:That dude's in terrible shape. He can barely keep jogging while he's about to get arrested. Welcome to America in 2016.
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 21:46
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:That dude's in terrible shape. He can barely keep jogging while he's about to get arrested. Probably doesn't help that he looks to have gotten at least one leg run over by that police SUV. A better question is "Why didn't the guy(s) in the police SUV tackle him?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 22:20
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Probably doesn't help that he looks to have gotten at least one leg run over by that police SUV. A better question is "Why didn't the guy(s) in the police SUV tackle him?" Houston, in late June. I wouldn't get out of the truck either
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 23:20
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Probably doesn't help that he looks to have gotten at least one leg run over by that police SUV. A better question is "Why didn't the guy(s) in the police SUV tackle him?" I showed the video to the only LEO I know personally, and his major comment was "The guy in the Tahoe chases people the same way I do..."
|
|
#
?
Jun 29, 2016 23:33
|
|
|
Does the MD-500 have a rigid rotor head that would preclude the guy from getting lunched while under the rotor disc? I realize the helicopter is still 5-6' off the ground at the beginning of the clip, but at "skids in grass" level, how far down does the tip path bend during those kind of maneuvers?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 02:15
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I showed the video to the only LEO I know personally, and his major comment was "The guy in the Tahoe chases people the same way I do..." It's like the modern-day equivalent of persistence hunting; the runner will wear out long before the truck does. If he's not immediately endangering anyone, why not just let him wear himself out?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Does the MD-500 have a rigid rotor head that would preclude the guy from getting lunched while under the rotor disc? I realize the helicopter is still 5-6' off the ground at the beginning of the clip, but at "skids in grass" level, how far down does the tip path bend during those kind of maneuvers? The 500 does have a bearingless rotor system, but it's not so stiff as to work much differently than an articulated rotor would. However, the rotor flapping is surprisingly small when the rotor is loaded (e.g. lifting the helicopter). I've done a few flight tests where we've done direct measurements of rotor flapping during maneuvers, and the change in TPP orientation relative to the shaft is typically very small (like a degree or two) for all positive load factor maneuvers where the rotor is hingeless, articulated, or even teetering. For this reason, I usually don't even try to get these measurements anymore since I can calculate the TPP orientation and angle of attack well enough for just about any helicopter with instruments in the non-rotating frame. Where you get in trouble is when the rotor becomes unloaded, for instance when in contact with the ground or during low or negative-gee maneuvers. This is usually where you'll see bad things like mast bumping, tail boom strikes, or blades flapping down and hitting people on the ground.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 09:17
|
|
|
 (click for big) Bristol Brabazon under construction.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 09:47
|
|
|
Huh, they are making a movie about the Hudson water landing starting Tom Hanks. https://youtu.be/mjKEXxO2KNE
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 03:30
|
|
|
Tetraptous posted:The 500 does have a bearingless rotor system, but it's not so stiff as to work much differently than an articulated rotor would. However, the rotor flapping is surprisingly small when the rotor is loaded (e.g. lifting the helicopter). I've done a few flight tests where we've done direct measurements of rotor flapping during maneuvers, and the change in TPP orientation relative to the shaft is typically very small (like a degree or two) for all positive load factor maneuvers where the rotor is hingeless, articulated, or even teetering. For this reason, I usually don't even try to get these measurements anymore since I can calculate the TPP orientation and angle of attack well enough for just about any helicopter with instruments in the non-rotating frame. Yeah, y'know how a B-52's wings flex alarmingly upward in flight? Same thing, the rotor isn't going to be below perpendicular to the shaft anytime it's flying. Bob A Feet posted:I'm pretty sure other than that helicopter with floats on it no plane/helicopter is designed to float. Well especially helicopters. Way too top heavy to do anything other than helocast. Which isn't floating. I mean helicopters are whirling death machines that fly on luck alone. Don't think that luck extends to floating as well. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfPBY5qnpSM Which is what you're talking about, hovering with decks awash (IIRC that's an Army Chinook, probably 160th SOAR, the SF guys don't much care about interservice rivalries when it comes to extraction). But here's a helicopter landing in the water and floating just fine once they stop the engines: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vXi3jdSYxic I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that the Navy MH-53E's bigass sponsons (as opposed to the USMC version with small sponsons and what I assume are drop tanks? What's up with those fuel tanks?) were partially to help it float. Of course I can't find it again, but just look at the thing:  That'll probably stay upright in a calm sea. Also, most airliners are designed to float, if only accidentally -- see Sully there in the previous post. It's a tube full of air and kerosene, it'll float. This situation is ... rather unlikely: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gZUkfmBCsrE Which was probably the inspiration for this Futurama episode: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4RLOo6bchU
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 10:12
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
I know the CH-53E can do a *short* stint in the water, but I'm pretty sure the MH-53 has the enlarged sponsons/fuel capacity because it's designed to lug a sea anchor behind it in the form of a mine countermeasures sled. He flew both the -46D&E and the -53E (with a stint at HM-12 on the MH-53E), and as I recall, the general guidelines on water landings were 'don't do it unless it's necessary, and try not to make it necessary.'
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 10:33
|
|
|
The H-46 and SH-3 both had one-way plugs in the floor that would let water drain out but not come in at quite the same speed. The H-53 doesn't have these plugs, just open holes in the floorboards. So, the Navy knew how to design helicopters to settle into the water, but they didn't include those designs in the H-53. The Marines then took the plugs from their H-46s and installed them in their H-53s and said "hey guys, lookit this" and there ya go. The Navy then saw how effective the sponsons were at flotation and put "water landings are acceptable but a really bad idea" in the manual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 11:43
|
|
|
We're making parts for the c919, wish me luck in dealing with Chinese engineering
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
smackfu posted:Huh, they are making a movie about the Hudson water landing starting Tom Hanks. I don't understand why this is a movie. Like digging into his life post-mishap isn't controversial; it's how an investigation goes. They tear your life apart looking for causal issues.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:32
|
|
|
It really looks quite loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
I can't think of any dramatic aspect to expand on outside of the inherent drama of the water landing. Sully didn't have any skeletons in his closet, he handled a bad emergency in near perfect conditions in practically textbook fashion, and no one died.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Tom Hanks is a loveable gentle caring yet competent fatherly type, and the role matches that perfectly. Add massive headline coverage and producers just see $$$
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:I don't understand why this is a movie. Like digging into his life post-mishap isn't controversial; it's how an investigation goes. They tear your life apart looking for causal issues. It's a movie because it's a great story. There's a dramatic tension between the public perception and the reality: the public sees him as a hero while the investigatory board sees him as a possible villain. We'd like to think that someone's life was significantly improved by such a courageous action, when in actuality his quality of life was diminished by the stress and intrusiveness of an investigation that sought to blame him for what happened. There's person-vs-nature conflict, person-vs-person conflict, and person-vs-self conflict. There's literally no reason why it wouldn't be a good idea for a movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:34
|
|
|
Eh, he's not that great. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQgtJF2byqI
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 19:48
|
|
|
Real? Fake? http://m.imgur.com/gallery/jFmLx
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:I can't think of any dramatic aspect to expand on outside of the inherent drama of the water landing. It's "Flight" for people who would've preferred the pilot to be white with no character failings or flaws. Or "Flight" for your church-going grandparents. It'll still make a ton of money, though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:22
|
|
|
TheNakedJimbo posted:It's a movie because it's a great story. There's a dramatic tension between the public perception and the reality: the public sees him as a hero while the investigatory board sees him as a possible villain. We'd like to think that someone's life was significantly improved by such a courageous action, when in actuality his quality of life was diminished by the stress and intrusiveness of an investigation that sought to blame him for what happened. There's person-vs-nature conflict, person-vs-person conflict, and person-vs-self conflict. There's literally no reason why it wouldn't be a good idea for a movie. Counterpoint: the only way it could be remotely interesting rather than a paint by number Tom Hanks vehicle is if it was told from the perspective of the flock of birds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:24
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:I can't think of any dramatic aspect to expand on outside of the inherent drama of the water landing. If you read the NTSB report as a layman without understanding what the NTSB is for you could get the impression that they were Monday morning quarterbacking. Of course, it's all to come up with recommendations like "come up with a low altitude two engine out checklist, they followed one that's only appropriate at high altitude" and "the aircraft's speed was low, the pilot thought he was on the green dot on the tape, but he was actually much slower, can the cockpit layout communicate this more clearly?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:27
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Real? Fake? really
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:42
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Counterpoint: the only way it could be remotely interesting rather than a paint by number Tom Hanks vehicle is if it was told from the perspective of the flock of birds.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:00
|
|
|
TheNakedJimbo posted:It's a movie because it's a great story. There's a dramatic tension between the public perception and the reality: the public sees him as a hero while the investigatory board sees him as a possible villain. We'd like to think that someone's life was significantly improved by such a courageous action, when in actuality his quality of life was diminished by the stress and intrusiveness of an investigation that sought to blame him for what happened. There's person-vs-nature conflict, person-vs-person conflict, and person-vs-self conflict. There's literally no reason why it wouldn't be a good idea for a movie. Exactly like the guy flying the "Gimli Glider"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:It's "Flight" for people who would've preferred the pilot to be white with no character failings or flaws. Or "Flight" for your church-going grandparents. The thing that bothered me about Flight was they make the copilot out to be a nincompoop when it's immediately obvious it's taken from the Alaska flight in 2000 where they both fought really hard to hold that plane together including real-life flying it inverted. It's a real disservice to the real-life pilots, but obviously it's just a movie and I'm a nerd who'd recognize where they got the scenario from. TheNakedJimbo posted:It's a movie because it's a great story. There's a dramatic tension between the public perception and the reality: the public sees him as a hero while the investigatory board sees him as a possible villain. We'd like to think that someone's life was significantly improved by such a courageous action, when in actuality his quality of life was diminished by the stress and intrusiveness of an investigation that sought to blame him for what happened. There's person-vs-nature conflict, person-vs-person conflict, and person-vs-self conflict. There's literally no reason why it wouldn't be a good idea for a movie. Except by all accounts he never was viewed as a villain and he was never sought to be blamed. When the NTSB gave test pilots the scenario they only managed to return to the airport about 50% of the time, and that's with full knowledge ahead of time. I mean it is "the untold story" according to the trailer so maybe we never heard this account. I don't know, he has a book out so maybe somebody could read that and see what he says. No doubt there were questions about what could have been done differently and it being a haunting experience but the trailer seems to be making up a lot of drama. It's not a documentary, it's entertainment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
CharlesM posted:Except by all accounts he never was viewed as a villain and he was never sought to be blamed. When the NTSB gave test pilots the scenario they only managed to return to the airport about 50% of the time, and that's with full knowledge ahead of time. I mean it is "the untold story" according to the trailer so maybe we never heard this account. I don't know, he has a book out so maybe somebody could read that and see what he says. No doubt there were questions about what could have been done differently and it being a haunting experience but the trailer seems to be making up a lot of drama. It's not a documentary, it's entertainment. Once they put in a delay it was impossible though: NTSB posted:The pilots were fully briefed on the maneuver before they attempted to perform it in the Also bonus confirmation of secret Airbus A320 seaplane work. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Also bonus confirmation of secret Airbus A320 seaplane work. "You say A320 is boring, mon ami? Wait until you see zee A320 flying boat!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:48
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Once they put in a delay it was impossible though: So basically, 53% of the time when the pilots knew exactly what to do before they needed to do it, they managed to land?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 22:53
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So basically, 53% of the time when the pilots knew exactly what to do before they needed to do it, they managed to land? 53% without a handicap, 0% with a handicap to simulate response time. Considering thats basically a 47% chance of 150 people dying and taking a ton of people on the ground with them in a perfect situation, the Hudson was an excellent call. Its called the impossible turn for a reason. Whats interesting is that someone ditched worse than Sully in the simulator despite being briefed ahead of time. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 00:11 on Jul 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Real? Fake? if you ahve to ask.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
It's more that that's what most of the comments are about
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
Pretty sure it's real, they just had to speed up the pace within the GIF so it wouldn't be multiple megabytes and ADDled minds wouldn't click off of it before the bank.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 07:20
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Pretty sure it's real, they just had to speed up the pace within the GIF so it wouldn't be multiple megabytes and ADDled minds wouldn't click off of it before the bank. Then, those that clicked off when the bank happened, wouldn't be paying attention when he then popped full afterburner and launched to FL340 just to use gas.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 15:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 09:03 |
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Pretty sure it's real, they just had to speed up the pace within the GIF so it wouldn't be multiple megabytes and ADDled minds wouldn't click off of it before the bank. Yeah, nothing about it looks fake, besides being sped up which is pretty reasonable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 15:19
|
|
