|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:Someone in the comments called the 757 "beautiful" It is  Granted, last time I rode one it was a United 757 in the 90s, but it was more comfortable than their 777-cattlewagon or 767. But yeah, slender, pretty, sounds nice, and great looking in freighter config. The C32-A is a beautiful version of it too.
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2012 19:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
BonzoESC posted:The only time I've been on a 777 I was in I can't remember if it was 3-5-3 or 3-4-3 on United's. SeatGuru says 2-5-2 but that doesn't sound right, because I'm pretty sure I was stuck in an aisle side seat with 2 people between me and the window once. Thankfully, I only ever flew United when my employer was paying, and prefer BA for the most part, it's not MUCH more comfortable, but at least they treat you with dignity - ie, come and change the hay every few hours.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2012 23:33
|
|
AA Flagship Business Class
|
Ridge_Runner_5 posted:Didn't NASA require that whoever gets the shuttles stores them indoors at all times? How is the Intrepid going to deal with that? They're going to build a glass hanger for their space exhibit on pier 86, apparently.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:Harrier? and an F-14? Don't think it's a harrier, the intake looks more like a corsair to me. e: given the camo, I'd personally guess it to be one of edwards' YA-7F Strikefighters prototypes SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Apr 28, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 28, 2012 19:11
|
|
|
Terrible Robot posted:He just wants to fly again I was almost in tears, poor -200 yearns to fly, but never will. (I love the classic 747s, the -400 and on are just too... modern)
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2012 18:07
|
|
|
joat mon posted:I.D. this aircraft: http://www.aviastar.org/air/latvia/vef_i-16.php
|
|
#
¿
Jun 8, 2012 17:18
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Watching a documentary about the Tenerife airport disaster. Getting hella pissed at that KLM captain. Putting all of the blame onto the KLM pilot is a bit unfair, there were mistakes made by pretty much everyone in the disaster... Granted he did hold more of the mistakes on his side, especially starting his roll without explicit 'you have takeoff clearance' and a readback of such (it's possible he heard the 'ok' as meaning he was ok to takeoff) , but even so. The easiest and earliest way it could have been averted was if they use the down-time of Gran Canaria to prepare the aircraft positions for when the airport re-opened, if noone had been taxiing down the runway, noone would have crashed. The KLM captain shouldn't have refueled so much on a short flight from a high altitude short strip. The PanAm captain should have been focusing on the turnoffs more, and the co-pilot should have been more emphatic about the fact that they were still on the runway, given that they knew there was a KLM aircraft in front of them. And so on... everyone takes a piece of the blame, but ultimately it was a collection of accidents and bad procedures (that were accepted as 'ok' at the time).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2012 17:58
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't give a gently caress about pokemon but I kind of like those liveries, is that weird? How about EVA's Hello Kitty planes? 
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2012 15:30
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:Inside? Around doesn't sound like a good combat tactic. Against AIM-4s? You'd probably be fine...
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2012 15:44
|
|
|
meltie posted:This guy is bloody crackers Calling a tristar a 'jumbo jet' *rage* Seriously though, you can afford to restore and operate a RB211 but not a few feet of chicken wire or something to act as a protective barrier over the intake?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2012 14:51
|
|
|
Kilonum posted:A lot of people use "jumbo jet" as a generic term for any widebody airliner. I know, and it makes me rage every damned time.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2012 15:20
|
|
|
Bugsmasher posted:That may be true, but really all the sink did was cause the crash into the trees a little sooner than planned. That aircraft was not going any higher, barely out of ground effect and arguably on the backside of the power curve just to stay where it was. He was almost stalling the wing just before it crossed the first set of trees if you watch the secondary camera, anyway, so yeah, the downdraft just sped up the incident.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 10, 2012 17:09
|
|
|
Now all we need is for someone to combine the two, and put a 75mm cannon back in a B25H and let us have a live-fire strafing run of some beach.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2012 16:55
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:75mm?! Yeah, the -G and -H were WW2 attempts at a tank killer, the -G had a 75mm cannon transplanted from a sherman tank, but it was a tad heavy, so a special 'lighter' 75mm was made for the -H. They were pretty effective against stuff like coastal defences too. Edit: Business end of a B-25H: 
SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Aug 22, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Aug 22, 2012 17:56
|
|
|
Aquila posted:So I've been wondering, how is the market varied enough for the 737, 767, 777, and 787, plus all the Airbus two engine jets? Also what is Boeing going to name their planes after the 797? Well, the 787 was originally going to be 7E7, and the replacement for the 727 was going to be 7J7, so I guess they'll just resurrect the idea of using letters as the middle 'digit'. As for market variation, the boeing planes don't really compete with each other, although there is, naturally, some overlap at the extreme edges of the range vs capacity graph for each, especially between the 757 and 737, or the 787 vs 777-200LR, but there are usually obvious choices depending on your expected passenger density on a specific route (If you have a lower passenger density but need ~9000nm range, then the 787 is going to win, but if you have a higher density, then the 777-200LR might be a better choice, at the expense of fuel economy). As for airbus vs boeing, sadly it's pretty much boiled down to nationalism/'sticking it to the US' in most cases .
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2012 16:35
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:That's because the new United livery is awful. I suppose that depends on how much of a continental fan you were *shrug*. Personally, I've found all of united liveries except the rising blue/blue tulip and 90's grey/blue to be ugly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 1, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
MrChips posted:P-51 Mustang. The shape of the airfoil and the wingtip is a giveaway; the P-51 was the only WWII piston fighter that used a laminar flow airfoil, which is cambered quite a bit different to a conventional airfoil. That's not entirely correct. The Hawker Tempest had a laminar flow wing, as did the Sea fury that was derived from it (e: although the Sea Fury didn't quite make it for WW2, but the tempest was active in WW2, just not very sucessful). But the semi-elliptical planform would have given those away. SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 22:08 on Sep 2, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2012 22:06
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:You are not kidding. And one of the most baffling: Dornier 17, 2,100 built, was one of the most prominent and recognisable german bombers in the Battle of Britain and Spanish Civil War. Number of survivors... none until 2 years ago when a partially rusted away aircraft was found on the seabed. On the plus side, they plan to restore it, although it's missing a *lot* of hardware, and they've yet to raise the remains even though they said they were going to do so in 2011.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 27, 2012 21:54
|
|
|
firehawk posted:In most pictures of Mosquitos I've seen, they have either six ejector exhausts, or a cowling covering them. The KA114 appears to have five exhausts per cylinder bank - what's the idea with this? Some de Havilland Hornets seem to use the same design. Difference between Packard 1650 and RR merlins perhaps? e: 5 exhaust ports seems a common feature for canadian built mosquitos, as seen on one: http://www.aircrewremembrancesociety.com/raf1945/baker.html I was going to timg the picture, but imgur is down 
SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 15:59 on Sep 28, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2012 15:53
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:2. What's the Japanese plane with the radar beneath the Black Widow? A (The since it's the only survivor) J1N... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakajima_J1N
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2012 20:39
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:Hush kits do work, but they come at the penalty of lower exhaust velocity (which reduces performance), added weight, and therefore higher fuel burn. Nope, 'Pan Am' was pretty spot on here... An image of one of their hush-kits from that era:  Yes, the commercially available hush kits (that are a lot less heath robinson looking) came later (boeing called the first one for the 707 the 'Quiet 707 package'), in the late 70s and 80s, but Pan Am were right there at the forefront of it, and largely because JFK is an airport with noise issues, the show was probably pretty much historically accurate on this, but then, it did have ex-panam pilots for technical advisors. Edit: Because someone will claim 'that's video footage, so probably from Pan Am too...'  That's from 1959, and clearly shows the pan am hush kit just 2 years after the 707 introduction http://www.airliners.net/photo/Pan-American-World/Boeing-707-121/1454562/&sid=4e1337eb03f4d537f88a5b29f233f4cb SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Nov 22, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Nov 22, 2012 20:10
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:Yeah, I've been near MIA when the A380 to Frankfurt is followed by an MD-80 to Dallas, and there's no comparison. And remember with the 707 we're talking pre-JT3D upgrade, so they're JT3Cs (turbojets, not even a low bypass turbofan - essentially the exact same engine as a B52 of the same era; the JT3C was a commercialised J57)
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
NightGyr posted:Is there any way that could be light enough to actually fly? That looks about as airworthy as the reliant robin space shuttle. Weight probably isn't that huge an issue, modern engines have a plenty good enough size:power ratio to allow something like that to fly without huge engines, sure, it's not going to be as nimble as a lynx or something, but 'fly' is a lot easier to achieve. If we were still talking about the kind of engines in the first helicopters, then sure weight of the fuselage etc is going to matter, but we're not. Whether he can build a swashplate & rotor system that won't fall apart and render him in tiny pieces? That's another story.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 3, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Chemtrails started showing up around the time jet travel became widespread. Coincidence? What? Everyone knows that chemtrails started with the B17 raids on germany...  Just look at that glorious American chemical warfare! e: for irony, that image came from a conspiritard blog that actually unironically believes that that image shows the 'USAF' using chemtrails against their enemies, thus proof of chemtrails being real! SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 17:48 on Dec 4, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Dec 4, 2012 17:45
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I think that is a risk...but a very mild one. In the 1950s, scientists actually studied the idea of a dirty bomb, and concluded that aside from elevating the cancer risk in the area effected, they would do nothing. Soviets tried the exact same things as the US wrt nuclear planes... Here's their equivalent of the NB-36, a nuclear reactor carrying Tu-95: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-119
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2012 19:31
|
|
|
MrChips posted:PEDs are allowed whenever the crew says they are (which even now is most of your typical flight); what's so onerous about turning them off for takeoff and landing. As much as you or others might argue for a complete reversal of the ban, there are noticeable effects to PED use in-flight, especially cellphones. The "BZZZZZT-BR-BR-BR-BR-BR" of any GSM-based (including the newer 3G/4G types) cellphone comes through loud and clear in both the comm radios and the crew intercom circuit; not only is it distracting, but it can cause you to miss a radio call from ATC, or cause your call to go out garbled. The real problem isn't the act of turning off or on electronics, the real problem is the reaction that paranoid people have. The 'personal electronic devices may disrupt flight equipment' myth has caused many many cases of air-rage and other negative passenger-passenger or passenger-crew interactions. Because paranoid people see some other person using a phone on the taxiway and start ranting/shouting about how 'you're going to kill us all, turn it off, turn it off, turn it off'. That's the reason why most flight crews and airlines want the ban rescinded, because it sends a signal that the whole thing is paranoia and please stop punching our attendants in the face because you're frightened you're going to die because little timmy is playing on his 3ds.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2012 10:23
|
|
|
Is that the brabazon? one of the greatest airliners ever designed, except for the whole '100 passengers in luxury is the way of the future of air travel' problem. Have some footage of it flying: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-f-I2SjHRI
|
|
#
¿
Jan 2, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
Alpine Mustache posted:It sounds like a NASCAR car with an air raid siren on it. '225, '124 and '70, it's like a russian cargo plane lover's (potentially wet) dream. e: Also, fourth plane in the air, probably a L-39 SybilVimes fucked around with this message at 22:49 on Jan 5, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2013 22:39
|
|
|
No spitfires, at all, just hot air and mud... http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-21074699
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2013 10:51
|
|
|
brains posted:got this in super large? beautiful pic http://topwalls.net/fighter-planes-2/ Should cover any res of it you want
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2013 16:24
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:The F-22 looks like a fat toad. Especially when it's sitting on the ground. I suppose it's not quite as ugly as the Boeing JSF entry (the X-32) but still, it's an ugly plane.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 23, 2013 16:49
|
|
|
Blistex posted:I've honestly never read any of his books, but know of him and his love of the BUFF (Flight of the Old Dog). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-52_Megafortress#EB-52_Megafortress But screw that, as awesome as a B52 is... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EB-52_Megafortress#REB-36D_Peacemaker_II_NAWCC Is 10 shades of awesome more awesomer.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 19:02
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:I think the Nimrod might be the only aircraft that is offensive to every sense. Even the AEW3 variant was pure beauty, how can you say any comet derivative is ugly?
|
|
#
¿
Jan 28, 2013 20:54
|
|
|
rscott posted:Is that a single DIN headunit in the middle? If we're looking at the same unit, it's a Garmin mode-C transponder, probably a GTX-327. Still not something I'd expect in a 'stealth jet fighter'.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 2, 2013 22:45
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:It's just that, you know, with that 250 knot VNE, it's going to take a while to get there. If you look closer, the Vne is just over 250, probably 260... waait... the F-313 is a BD5 'kit car' style stealth fighter...
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Was reading up on some of the more esoteric Mig-21 variants and ran into this Mig-21 derived plane, it reminds me of something, maybe something european and a little fighter-y:
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 15:20
|
|
|
Nerobro posted:What, no model name so other people can look it up? 'Ye-8' It would have been the Mig-23 if it had made it through the prototype stage, but was essentially scraped when one of the prototype's engine exploded at mach 2. Got there from looking for info on the Mig-21PD, an attempt at a
|
|
#
¿
Feb 8, 2013 16:34
|
|
|
grover posted:1. Why didn't Airbus design the nacelle to contain the turbine stage like they did the compressor stage? Containment of a fan wheel disintegration at 2800rpm is a lot easier than at 13,000 rpm, which is what N1 and N2 are rated at, and that's not saying it's 'easy' at 2800 rpm.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2013 16:32
|
|
|
Cygni posted:Bombardier has launched a stretched CS300, putting it firmly in the 737 MAX 7 and A319neo range of 160 seats in 1 class. Will be interesting to see how they fair trying to go toe to toe with the big boys. Embraer already backed off and cancelled their move into that market. Doesn't it share the fusalage with the COMAC C919 ? That'd kinda terrify me I think.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2013 22:49
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 18:34 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:I pride myself on my knowledge of obscure aviation facts, but this one popped a few circuit breakers in my brain. Airwolf lied to us all
|
|
#
¿
Mar 18, 2013 16:26
|
|