|
Humphreys posted:Confessions of an C2 pilot Excellent
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 11:04 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 10:06 |
|
Sometimes when an article is linked the only good part is quoted in-line for you, but that who thing is great and definitely worth a read. Thanks for that Humphreys.
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 13:29 |
|
While not directly related, this is a really good read as well. A two-part article from a Navy engineer during the bad old times.
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 15:39 |
|
Periodic reminder that the world atmospheric endurance flight record is currently held by a Cessna 172, the econobox of planes.
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 16:21 |
|
FrozenVent posted:Cessna 172, the econobox of planes. Also, the most likely plane for someone crazy enough to have access to.
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 16:24 |
|
Humphreys posted:Confessions of an C2 pilot
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 16:33 |
|
Humphreys posted:Confessions of an C2 pilot Thanks for this.
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 17:42 |
|
slidebite posted:Proclick Agreed
|
# ? Dec 2, 2017 18:21 |
|
~Coxy posted:Sometimes when an article is linked the only good part is quoted in-line for you, but that who thing is great and definitely worth a read. I thought I'd only quote something somewhat vague and nothing juicy so you get to experience it all.
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 03:35 |
|
A lot of that article is, sadly, not too surprising compared to the E-2 (official motto: "the propeller system may not decide to kill you today"), but this bit was loving bonkers:quote:I was flying serial number 148148, the one unique C-2, it was the prototype and at that point 25 years old with nearly 50,000 hours on it. It was in a category beyond POS and started its life as an E-2. It was hacked and built into a C-2. Despite the common design heritage, I can't even imagine how you would go about turning an E-2 into a C-2. I thought the MCU/ACIS was a hosed up kludge of an E-2, but that's a clean sheet design compared to that monstrosity.
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 04:09 |
|
I enjoyed his disdain for pointy airplanes lol
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 05:11 |
|
My favourite bit was the APU without any output plumbing
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 11:06 |
|
Permanently installed ground air cart.
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 11:53 |
|
tactlessbastard posted:I enjoyed his disdain for pointy airplanes lol Finding out that they don't have meals provided was a surprise! Not a surprise is if you KNOW you aren't going to get fed - why not bring a bunch of food?
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 12:06 |
|
Oh my god getting off a 757-300 takes so loving long
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 18:55 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Oh my god getting off a 757-300 takes so loving long You're not playing the right music.
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 21:55 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Oh my god getting off a 757-300 takes so loving long Get a Learjet to stimulate its prostate.
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 22:28 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Oh my god getting off a 757-300 takes so loving long Sure if you don't fly enough to get upgrades. *is 90/100 on list for MSP-ATL*
|
# ? Dec 3, 2017 22:35 |
|
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 00:51 |
|
The B‐29 so thoroughly outclassed every other bomber in the war. It’s almost silly.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 02:17 |
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Oh my god getting off a 757-300 takes so loving long It should tell you all you need to know that United has six rows of 2x2 First, and 41 rows of cattle class, while Delta has six rows of 2x2 First and 49 rows of cattle class in their 757-300s.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 03:32 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:It should tell you all you need to know that United has six rows of 2x2 First, and 41 rows of cattle class, while Delta has six rows of 2x2 First and 49 rows of cattle class in their 757-300s. Row number does not correlate with actual number of rows
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 03:48 |
|
Now I want to know how the rows are numbered in Trump’s 757. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/02/nyregion/donald-trump-tower-heights.html
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 03:52 |
|
Platystemon posted:The B‐29 so thoroughly outclassed every other bomber in the war. it's like it was out of science fiction, no wonder the soviets were hard up to copy it I was remember being surprised to learn its development cost more than the Manhattan project. Nostalgia4Infinity fucked around with this message at 04:59 on Dec 4, 2017 |
# ? Dec 4, 2017 04:46 |
|
Platystemon posted:Now I want to know how the rows are numbered in Trump’s 757. "I always sit in Row #1. Everyone else sits in Row #2. Tiffany and Eric sit in the last row. Always."
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 05:50 |
|
slidebite posted:I thought this is kind of cool, Voyager 1 successfully fired up a set of thrusters that haven't been used since 1980. I think that's why they still use the bus-ring design for probes that goes back to the 60s - it's a tried and true system that's extremely over engineered and durable as gently caress.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 08:38 |
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:it's like it was out of science fiction, no wonder the soviets were hard up to copy it Its Wikipedia page infobox notes that it was Developed into: Tupolev Tu-4 which I can’t disagree with but how often do they count reverse engineering?
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 08:49 |
|
I know the idea of defensive armament on bombers was on its way out by the time the Soviets fielded the Tu-4, but to this day I don't know how Boeing didn't decide upgunning the B-29 with the tens of thousands of spare 20mm Hispano-Suizas laying around over .50 cals was worthy of consideration.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 09:10 |
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I know the idea of defensive armament on bombers was on its way out by the time the Soviets fielded the Tu-4, but to this day I don't know how Boeing didn't decide upgunning the B-29 with the tens of thousands of spare 20mm Hispano-Suizas laying around over .50 cals was worthy of consideration. The .50s worked consistently and the Hispanos didn't, because we hosed up the metric > imperial conversions so the chambers were the wrong size and the firing pin wouldn't hit the cartridge hard enough. See also: The .30-06 CSRG 1918 and the abortive attempt to make a .30-06 MG42 copy that failed because they made the guns too short to properly feed the different cartridge.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 09:22 |
|
Make a Fire Hedgehog but with 20 mm cannons:
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 09:29 |
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:
I never knew that.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 09:43 |
|
The B-29 wing is still flying today as part of the super guppy.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 10:13 |
|
Platystemon posted:Make a Fire Hedgehog but with 20 mm cannons: Holy poo poo! http://www.guns.com/2013/06/29/the-fire-hedgehog/
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 11:39 |
I'm not sure why I've sat on this for the past day. On Saturday I went to see the Endeavor. They had a display where you could touch it's tires from the last mission it flew. I never thought I'd ever get to touch something that went into outer space. And seeing the shuttle was awe inspiring.
|
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 12:01 |
|
Platystemon posted:Its Wikipedia page infobox notes that it was Developed into: Tupolev Tu-4 which I can’t disagree with but how often do they count reverse engineering? From what I recall the USSR completely disassembled the B29, measured everything and simply duplicated it down to the rivet. Reverse engineering is when you know the answer so you design a system with the same principles, even form/fit/function compatible but it's usually going to have differences just based on the parts and systems the RE team can source/understands.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 13:46 |
|
Murgos posted:From what I recall the USSR completely disassembled the B29, measured everything and simply duplicated it down to the rivet. Reverse engineering is when you know the answer so you design a system with the same principles, even form/fit/function compatible but it's usually going to have differences just based on the parts and systems the RE team can source/understands. The latter is the proper definition of reverse engineering but the former is what most of the world thinks it means.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 14:08 |
|
Murgos posted:From what I recall the USSR completely disassembled the B29, measured everything and simply duplicated it down to the rivet. Reverse engineering is when you know the answer so you design a system with the same principles, even form/fit/function compatible but it's usually going to have differences just based on the parts and systems the RE team can source/understands. Just gonna post this again https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/made-in-the-ussr-38442437/ The first thing the Soviets had to do was get permission from Stalin to make it using metric
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 15:07 |
|
In fairness, speaking as an engineer, the temptation to scope-creep things would be heinous (and would have likely delayed rollout)
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 15:50 |
|
Murgos posted:From what I recall the USSR completely disassembled the B29, measured everything and simply duplicated it down to the rivet. Reverse engineering is when you know the answer so you design a system with the same principles, even form/fit/function compatible but it's usually going to have differences just based on the parts and systems the RE team can source/understands. And then that gave birth to the Tu-95
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 16:52 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 10:06 |
|
Did they manage to make copies of the engines or was performance reduced? I understand that aircraft engines were just as bleeding edge metallurgically etc. for the time back then as they are today.
|
# ? Dec 4, 2017 18:12 |