|
Entone posted:The NTSB is back up, but that link is outdated. I've never understood why the NTSB goes to great lengths to preserve the anonymity of the builder/pilot in the body of their report, when rules for reporting the manufacturer of a homebuilt use the builder's full name as the manufacturer.
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 02:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Yep, this is the one. It's like the guy confused building an airplane with restoring an old car, and assumed the risks were exactly the same. To be fair, it was Subaru powered.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 03:35
|
|
|
Entone posted:The NTSB is back up, but that link is outdated.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 05:54
|
|
|
http://www.stuff.co.nz/national/health/7105239/Its-a-wrap-on-Wellingtons-air-ambulancequote:Wellington patients needing flights to get life saving treatment will be all wrapped up in a new plane decorated by Weta Workshop.  Edit: bonus hairy landings at Wellington video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0jnahV81AU
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 07:08
|
|
|
MrChips posted:I've never understood why the NTSB goes to great lengths to preserve the anonymity of the builder/pilot in the body of their report, when rules for reporting the manufacturer of a homebuilt use the builder's full name as the manufacturer. It's easier to always preserve anonymity in the report than to make judgement calls.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 13:26
|
|
|
Blue Angles were buzzing my house this afternoon, didn't get any of the lower/closer flybys though...sorry. Also got home about halfway through it. I believe this one is confused as to how to fly a plane 'up-right'.  
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
I lived right by oceana and the I could watch the Blue Angels practice and do their show from my roof. The man made lake at my complex was kind of a way point for the final approach to the runway. Every other day it was annoying and loud as hell with the everyday operations of the airfield. But when the angels were in town it was magical. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 17:46
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:I believe this one is confused as to how to fly a plane 'up-right'. "well... it's UP, right?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2012 20:36
|
|
|
There are now pictures in that Zeppelin post I made.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 03:14
|
|
|
GnarlyCharlie4u posted:"well... it's UP, right?" It's blue side up, I see nothing wrong with this picture.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 06:54
|
|
|
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/video/2012/jun/15/bloodhound-ssc-1000mph-car-video Video on Bloodhound SSC doesn't contain much new, but LOOK at their rocket scientistiest rocket scientist.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 13:11
|
|
|
Is the rocket powered by PBR?
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 14:11
|
|
|
On the topic of the blue angels: I would like to apologize for not snagging any pics from the airshow at Virginia Beach on Memorial Day. I was too busy enjoying the show with both eyes to stop and take pics. All in all it was amazing and the Blue Angels were spectacular as usual. Here's a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2NGnEtX5M9Q
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 14:39
|
|
|
A finely waxed 'stache does not make a hipster.
|
|
#
?
Jun 15, 2012 14:41
|
|
|
A wee bit of aeronautical insanity. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Z2KfmcsioQ
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 03:27
|
|
|
Fantastic little video, looks like a blast. Have you got the carbon props on yet?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 03:34
|
|
|
Nope. I am going to get a machinist to make me a drilling jig before I start boring holes in carbon fibre.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 03:41
|
|
|
Are...are those contra-rotating props?
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
What kind of hearing protection do you wear? It sounds *loud* even from the ground.
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 18:59
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:There are now pictures in that Zeppelin post I made. Thanks! I've F5'd that post for a week. Nebakenezzer posted:What kind of hearing protection do you wear? It sounds *loud* even from the ground. I checked this forum eagerly awaiting Zeppelin posts by Nebakenezzer. Last post in the "Aeronautical Insanity"-thread by "Nebakenezzer". Bingo. I gathered my kids and the wife by the fireplace. Now, all. There's a new post about Zeppelins by Nebakenezzer *click* gently caress! You know what, mate. Screw your opinion regarding hearing protection. I, no the People, demands Zeppelin posts by Nebakenezzer, and we demand them delivered yesterday.... by cloud car!
|
|
#
?
Jun 16, 2012 19:24
|
|
|
Desktop wallpaper falls into two categories--really attractive girls and airplanes. I found something that looks as good (maybe better) than Katy Perry.  
bloops fucked around with this message at 01:19 on Jun 17, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 01:16
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:I found something that looks as good (maybe better) than Katy Perry.  (747s are bad-rear end, and among my favourite planforms)
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 01:37
|
|
|
16 Spitfires flying at once. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=27b_1339867680
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 09:42
|
|
|
OptimusMatrix posted:16 Spitfires flying at once. 3:13 is magical
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 11:35
|
|
|
That's pornographic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 16:33
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:I found something that looks as good (maybe better) than Katy Perry. Hah, there was a recent post on Tumblr about a passenger being removed from an airline flight for making sexist comments about the pilot. This was the picture they used:  I made a sexist comment about the plane. (Not really, I used it to explain the area rule).
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 17:24
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Delivery McGee posted:Hah, there was a recent post on Tumblr about a passenger being removed from an airline flight for making sexist comments about the pilot. This was the picture they used: 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
A guy I went to tech school with works down at Tyndall in the 82d ATRS...and he got a flight in a QF-4 the other day. Words do not describe my jealousy right now.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 21:10
|
|
|
The WEG was very high on my dream sheet. They're going to start phasing in QF-16s soon...not sure exactly when, but they've been modifying the aircraft for a while.
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 21:20
|
|
|
Godholio posted:The WEG was very high on my dream sheet. They're going to start phasing in QF-16s soon...not sure exactly when, but they've been modifying the aircraft for a while. Yeah, there's a one deep position for a 21M there, which would be near the top of my dream sheet for this PCS if it was on the requirements listing. And looks like low rate production next year with first production delivery in 2014. It had its first flight last month. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 17, 2012 22:12
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Are...are those contra-rotating props? Nope. Everyone calls them biplane props. The original engine was much smaller and used a single prop. When they went to a bigger engine they needed a bigger prop but had trouble manufacturing one so they just stacked two on each engine. It works but is far from ideal. As for noise I wear a standard aviation headset and it is not as loud as it sounds. It has pretty large canister mufflers and the exhaust is up over the wing so unless I am WOT it doesnt make to much noise.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:47
|
|
|
I'm posting this on behalf of a friend who doesn't have an SA account. It's a shot at the belly of the C-130 support craft for the Blue Angels as it flies over Ft. McHenry as part of the War of 1812 celebration. Check out those propeller contrails.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
helno posted:Nope. Everyone calls them biplane props. The original engine was much smaller and used a single prop. When they went to a bigger engine they needed a bigger prop but had trouble manufacturing one so they just stacked two on each engine. It works like a charm for the Tu-95
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 03:54
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:It works like a charm for the Tu-95 He just said they aren't contra-rotating, unlike the Tu-95. So why not just use a 4-blade prop? I'm utterly confused.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 04:08
|
|
|
Regarding the stacked propellors, I found this explanation on lazairforce: "One of the most common questions I get asked about my Lazair is" Why does it have double props" No it wasn't some new technology to increase efficiency, not performance anyway ,it was purely a decision based on economics ,They already had a good stock of carbon fibre props for the 5.5 hp and instead of going thru a costly process of acquiring new propellers they simply doubled up the smaller props to absorb the extra power that the Rotaxs would produce .I'am also inclined to think that their choice of the rotax 185 somewhat based on this abundant supply of small props, seeing that the solo 210 engine was already in good supply, it was lighter, produced more power and was aircraft proven already, but they would have probably had to stick 3 or more props together, highly impractical. anyway probably a shrewd decision at the time. " Which makes me wonder, what performance gains can be had by fitting a better suited prop?
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 04:22
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:A guy I went to tech school with works down at Tyndall in the 82d ATRS...and he got a flight in a QF-4 the other day. Words do not describe my jealousy right now.  they're using one of Robin Olds' old F-4s? That drat airplane should be in a museum. Or you need to have a qualified moustache to fly it. EDIT: Can you imagine the  of the pilot assigned to it? "Oh, you fly the Raptor? That's cool, I guess. I fly the most killingest jet still in the air. There's a permanent mark in the ejector seat from Olds' massive balls."
MA-Horus fucked around with this message at 08:02 on Jun 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 07:48
|
|
|
On the other hand, what better way to retire a warbird than in a blaze of glory? My dad did some research into the F-106 he crew chiefed on when he first joined the AF. Ended up getting access to mission records, which said as a QF it evaded 2 or 3 missiles before one finally caught it and it fireballed into the Gulf. Godholio fucked around with this message at 15:43 on Jun 18, 2012 |
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 15:40
|
|
|
 big source
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:06
|
|
|
Think I spotted one of my Herks, 2nd from the front with the yellow tail stripe.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 21:15
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 15:13 |
|
|
Colonel K posted:Which makes me wonder, what performance gains can be had by fitting a better suited prop? Better props are suposed to increase climb performance quite a bit and get you slightly faster cruise for the same fuel burn. I`ll let you know once I install mine. The story I was told about the biplane props was that they had developed a larger prop but it was made in three parts a hub and then two blades. They had an in flight failure of one and issued a recall. The Biplane props behave as a 4 blade prop. Stacking them doesnt effect the thrust as much as you would think, approximately 4% reduction over running them in a X configuration. Having them stacked does however cut down the drag when the engine is shut down which is pretty critical in a twin.
|
|
#
?
Jun 18, 2012 23:12
|
|