|
VikingSkull posted:Yeah, I'm not a pilot but that plane wasn't in control at all. Don't swept wing planes have a tendency to roll during a stall like that? The roll didn't seem controlled in the least. Really, the behavior of the 747 is very "text-book" of improper loading/out of balance. If you have an aircraft out of balance, 9 times out of 10 it'll do exactly as the 747 did. If anything could be argued, the crew may have kept the aircraft from rolling left instead of right (left wing dipped before rolling right), but again, the "text book" examples all roll right.
|
#
¿
May 3, 2013 13:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Hahaha no. Maintenance will catch the blame. As the son of a retired USAF crew chief, I know how about how much hell they can catch for an aircraft crashing, even if it's pilot error (to be fair, my dad never lost an aircraft). I feel sorry for that crew right now, they're probably getting their asses ridden right now and might not have a career after this regardless of fault.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2013 01:38
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I dunno about the Blues but the T-birds actually did a test back in the '80s to see if they could meet the time requirement to convert a T-bird Viper back to combat configuration (it was something like 8 hours iirc). It involved removing the smoke generator/reinstalling the gun, reconfiguring a few things on the jet, and then reinstalling the pylons/racks and uploading weapons...what it did not entail was a repaint. So there are pictures out there of a brightly painted T-bird F-16 with two AIM-9s on the wingtips and 6 Mk 82s underneath the wings. When I get back from dinner I'll see if I can find the pictures. A Combat Talon loaded to the gills? I need to see this. Also, iirc, the AWACS have hard points on the tips of their wings to carry a pair of Sidewinders, just in case. But from what I understand, no aircraft have ever flown with that load-out.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2013 04:01
|
|
I'll see if I can find those as well.
|
Bishop posted:I know it's all fantasy land, but from a non pilot's perspective they do seem to include a lot of little details. It would be odd for them to mess up something as simple as killing an engine then using it again. Oh well it was a good scene and thanks for all the answers! AFAIK, Yes. A lot of aircraft terminology is imported from naval and maritime navigation (since an airplane is an "air ship"). Thus, the use of Nautical Miles, Knots, Port, Starboard, Fore, Aft, Rudder, Captain, First Officer, etc.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2013 13:31
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Ah, the answer to the ancient question "How do you get a C-130 in and out of a soccer field?" Fun fact for those of you familiar with Eglin AFB. Credible Sport was tested/developed on the same Aux. Field (Wagner/AF 1) the Doolittle Raiders practiced on.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 6, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Saw something unusual today. Solar Impulse, a solar airplane that is slowly (40mph) making it's way across the country, proving technologies for a v2.0 that will do a round the world flight. Hard to find a solid photo, but does that aircraft only have one landing gear? Is it something like the U-2's layout?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 01:37
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:It's also in the background of almost every shot in Top Gear. iirc, it sits on the runway that extends SE from Chicago/Bentley, but the camera angles usually pick it up when the cars are running through Bacharach and Gambon:  Also, it occasionally is a prop used in the shows themselves, this one from an episode where the boys had to review tractors:  And if you want a full low-down on the plane: http://travel.usatoday.com/alliance...-Setup/598021/1
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2013 01:29
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Anyone like trainers? Is that Pensacola? Tell me that's Pensacola (those trees look very NW Florida).
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 00:40
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Close enough! Whiting Field I lived in that area (well, FWB/Hurlburt) for 15 years. Last place I had was in Navarre right next to Holly Nolf, so I got to see these guys occasionally (or the local RC airplane club). ChickenOfTomorrow posted:Also, surely that grass is too green to be Pensacola? It was probably taken during the winter  (actually the local crab-grass and what not holds up fairly well; the stuff you want to use in lawns not so much)
CovfefeCatCafe fucked around with this message at 01:14 on Jun 18, 2013 |
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 01:12
|
|
|
Geoj posted:A wild B-29 appears! Crap, I need to get up there, too. How did I not hear about this sooner?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 18, 2013 10:41
|
|
|
Butt Reactor posted:That's pretty awesome, I wonder if that stretch of the autobahn still has all the lighting installed? And weren't some sections of highways in the Midwest designed with a similar purpose in mind? I believe the Eisenhower Interstate Act included language that required something like 1 mile of highway for every 5 miles be built for the purpose or capability of handling aircraft (1 straight mile for every 5 miles of road or something like that). Not sure, so I'll have to look it up. It's one of those "common knowledge" things, so it could be total bunk.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 26, 2013 14:34
|
|
|
ehnus posted:I think that's a B-50. I think you're correct. Those are definitely not B-29 engines.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 27, 2013 13:50
|
|
|
My dad recently got a photo with Darrel Whitcomb and his book "On A Steel Horse I Ride: A History of the MH-53 Pavelow" (my dad was a crew chief on the Pavelows). I'm thinking of getting a copy for myself, but Amazon and Barnes & Nobles don't have any copies. Also can't find it on ebay. Anyone know were I might be able to find a copy?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2013 01:15
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:118 knots at 200 feet, 106 upon impact. How the hell was that thing still even in the air 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2013 22:50
|
|
|
Polymerized Cum posted:Since the crash happened at KSFO... Eh, it'll take at least two years for any official verdict. The pilots will be shuffled off to running short hops on 737s with no chance of advancement, and slowly forced into leaving voluntarily. slidebite posted:I guess other than their stupid low airspeed, presuming their sinkrate in itself wasn't crazy, what else would you get for an alarm before a shaker? Honest question. I would think you'd get an altitude warning, but I may be mistaken in thinking some aircraft disable that on approach.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 9, 2013 01:11
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:They have, since 2006 or something I think. If it is a coincidence it obviously means Boeing is cursed. Some strange irony in that, considering Boeing changed the name from 7E7 to 787 precisely because '8' is a lucky number in China, and they wanted their sales.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:And it had nothing to do with the fact that 707, 717, 727, 737, 747, 757, 767, and 777 were already taken? Fascinating. Sorry I went over your head, I'll try to explain in simple terms. It was always the Seven-Eight-Seven, but Boeing broke tradition by using the letter 'E' instead of the number '8' in 7E7. It was a marketing ploy to drum up attention for preproduction orders. Then the Chinese market became something everyone wanted in on, so Boeing changed back to the traditional 787 because in China 8 is a lucky number. Thus the irony in a plane with a lucky number having bad luck. It's because 7Z7, 7O7, 7T7, 7F7, and 7S7 were already taken. Or are you still confused?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Your thick sarcasm aside, still not seeing any evidence that it was a marketing ploy to get Chinese orders. Sorry about the sarcasm, but yeah it was big news on campus at my college when the 7E7 was announced, and then when it changed to 787. MrChips posted:That's not correct. In the initial design phase - before they have authority to offer the aircraft for sale - Boeing commercial aircraft projects typically go by a seven-letter-seven designation. The 767, for example, was known internally as the 7X7, while the 757 was known as the 7N7. The 777 broke with that tradition as its roots were as a derivative of the 767; hence why it started out as the 767X program. Right, but Boeing had marketed the 7E7 as though that was going to be it's name and were taking orders for the aircraft. It was "big news" that Boeing was "breaking tradition" by selling the aircraft this way. Also, this article: http://www.boeing.com/news/releases/2004/q2/nr_040426g.html But, then, China, yadda yadda 787.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 18, 2013 23:25
|
|
I stand corrected.
|
I don't care what anyone says. I think the Typhoon and the Gripen are sexy planes. Especially the Gripen. If I was a rich eccentric multi-billionaire, I would buy one as my personal private jet.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 23, 2013 23:34
|
|
|
Solkanar512 posted:Reminds me of the assholes complaining about the idea of some airlines adding a handful of commercial flights to Paine Field each week. We already have wide body jets taking off and landing there on a daily basis, for christ's sake. Reminds me of the constant bitching from Destin imports about Eglin AFB (bonus hilarity when they complain about Destin Airport). Even the developers have started griping because there is a height limit on the buildings.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 25, 2013 16:19
|
|
|
madeintaipei posted:ftfy This is more correct. If NIMBYs wanted a 'nice quiet place' they'd move to NoDak. NIMBYs purposely move somewhere that is 'popular' or near somewhere 'popular' in hopes of making a buck flipping real estate or impressing their rich friends. After all, it's hard to toast an expensive wine over the sound of a Cessna 152 carrying a student pilot.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
Tenchrono posted:That is one beautiful airplane. Well, when they dress a girl up like that, it's kinda hard not to stare.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2013 14:32
|
|
|
I learned quickly to schedule connections through ATL with at least an hour lay-over. Guaranteed at least a 30 min delay, and gives you plenty of time to get from gate to gate. I've argued until I was blue in the face with people who would connect through there with only a 15 min layover. "Oh, it'll be landing in terminal A and i'll take off in terminal D. Can't be that bad, it's only 3 letters."
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2013 04:14
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:2.) Something about parasitic drag. Apparently the sidecar design has less drag than a conventional fuselage with the same volume. Also, despite the unbalanced appearance, the stability was excellent at all altitudes, which would have made for a good ground-attack platform. Between the BV and Rutan, this is the big reason. It's kinda like the principle of how two 1" holes in a cup full of water will leak less than one 2" hole, but that two fuselages of width 'x' have less drag than a single fuselage of width '2x'. Makes it more efficient, performance wise, so you can get similar speeds out of a less powerful engine, and better fuel economy. I believe it is also suppose to eliminate prop-induced slip/rotation without needing trim tabs, which is why the Rutan bird can fly easy OEI. It is a very stable platform, and I know there are some other benefits, but I can't think of them off the top of my head. The biggest draw backs are, iirc, it's ugly, and it's more intensive to design and manufacture. There is a famous(ish) race car designer who was a fighter pilot in WWII, that encountered the BV-141 while on a sortie over (I believe) Italy. He actually took the design to heart and was inspired by it in his designs. I can't think of the name, but there is a small cloister of fans here in AI that know his works well. I'm sure some of his stuff has been posted in the "Awesome AI pictures thread", and you can probably ask there about who it was.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 10:29
|
|
|
Sir Cornelius posted:You might be thinking of Carlo Mollino that designed an asymmetric racer inspired by the BV 141 for the 1955 Le Mans. He wasn't a fighter pilot in WWII though. Maybe that's him, but I swore he flew, or had encountered one mid-flight. I could be misremembering the story.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 12:58
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:Smokey Yunick Yes! That's him! Him and his Hurst Floor Shift Special Indy car. Boy that Black & Gold (with red pinstripe) he always used is something else, too.  
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2013 14:27
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:I've noticed that most of the people that call them ugly misunderstand what they were designed for, and are often fighter pilots. And this is why AC-130 Spectre & Spooky gunships are beautiful bastards, but the rest are just 'another slick'.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 02:26
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:'Trash Haulers' I don't know, I always thought it was a sexy airplane. And it's design just seems to fit that period of aviation so well, like this is the acme design of the "jet age". 
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2013 02:48
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Having arranged a few vanity trips at my old job, all of that is pre-arranged, not only with all the PICs involved, but also with ATC. Typically we would figure out when and where we want to photograph, then arrange for an altitude block when we file our flight plan. We'll talk with the ATC unit in charge of the airspace we want to use (if there is any; uncontrolled airspace makes these things a hell of a lot easier) to figure out a plan that works for both parties. Then with all that information in tow, we would file a flight plan (if the shoot is in controlled airspace) with the contact info for the person we dealt with in the ATC unit, just to confirm details. With all that done, only then it's kick the tires and light the fires. Reminds me of a story related to me by a fellow alumnus. One of the typical "routes" for student pilots soloing would be to fly from DAB down to Marathon, sometimes with a planned "lay over". He gets down there and there are about 5 other pilots from my school already there when the weather warnings for DAB start coming in. So, all six of them take off one right after the other to get back to DAB before the poo poo hits (typical summer storms you get over the Florida peninsula). Well, with six of our birds flying close enough together, and technically all six flying VFR, they all decide to have an impromptu formation. Within about a minute ATC jumped on their poo poo and told them to knock it off.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 04:21
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Why did ATC tell them to knock it off? Do you have to file formation flights? I thought in VFR the only thing required for formation was that all the pilots agreed to fly formation, then the formation leader talked to ATC and the flight acted like one aircraft until the pattern. I believe with formation flights you are suppose to file a flight plan regardless of VFR/IFR conditions, or at least give ATC ample warning so they don't think six student pilots in Cessna 172s are attempting to "merge the dots".
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:For the last month or so Boeing has been flying the Advanced Super Hornet out of St. Louis and Pax River. I'm going to have to get some more pictures of that, just to see how completely they've altered the design. I've never been big into Boeing military aviation, but the F/A-18 as always interested me, from an aerodynamics perspective (most of my favorite aircraft were built by companies Boeing bought out, though :P). The engine intakes look different, as does the 'transition' from wing to fuselage. That weapons pod looks like something out of some cyber-punk/near future sci-fi anime or Dues-Ex.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 30, 2013 04:15
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:Better: The USAF Thuderbirds.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2013 00:02
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Dunno nothing about c130s, but if it was an a330, the APU battery is on a separate switch. +1 Airbus! Yeah, Hercs I thought are suppose to operate on 'unimproved' airstrips in the middle of nowhere. Basically give RED HORSE a few sticks of dynamite and the 130s can start rolling in equipment so the bigger stuff can land.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 3, 2013 13:20
|
|
|
parrhesia posted:At least nobody can say they couldn't see the vacuum leaks coming. The engineer in me wants to see what would happen if a SRB suffered crankwalk.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 00:19
|
|
|
Mzuri posted:
That's a hard one to call out on. The plane looks very still, considering photography of that era, but I'm not saying it's impossible. After all, a James Bond film featured a plane flying through a hangar. All I can say is, if the plane is actually flying through the hangar, the guy on the floor is either stupid has hell, or has bigger balls than the pilot. And that's saying something considering all the aerodynamic effects that come into play when you're flying off the deck like that.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 13:44
|
|
|
Polymerized Cum posted:Not a great year for Sikorsky. I mean they just managed to launch the S-76D. Bad couple of years. Not sure the whole deal, as I've had my fingers off the pulse of USAF acquisitions for a while now, but I know it had to hurt to have the MV-22 and then the CH-47 picked over the S-92/H-92 (big deal where I use to live, former home of the Pavelows).
|
|
#
¿
Sep 6, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Sup Gripfans? This will probably be the 3rd time I post this image, but: I'd imagine it's because you get a fighter aircraft that handles like a fighter aircraft for pennies on the dollar of what the pilots will likely be flying (F-35). A "T/F-18" would have two engines, one engine is perceived to be more fuel efficient, which is good for a trainer, and is akin to the F-35's layout. I can see a Gripen being a good aggressor for Top Gun/Red Flag and all that stuff, too. And could open the door for a Boeing/SAAB joint aircraft in the future when/if the F-35 proves to be a dud. Basically, Boeing wants to buy SAAB, just like it bought all the other American jet fighter companies.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2013 01:04
|
|
|
IOwnCalculus posted:According to the NTSB, the model aircraft pilot's fault - he was apparently operating in an area specifically off-limits to R/C aircraft at that event, and had not been in contact with the coordinator for clearance to fly. That RC driver better count his lucky stars that the bi-plane only suffered "substantial damage" instead of finding someone's back porch. Jeez Louise. To segue though, if I wanted to launch a rocket, what is the best way of going about getting the clearances/okays/ figuring out where I can safely launch without shooting down RJs on approach to CAK?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 01:09
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:So I went to Long Beach Airport today, hoping to get a look at the last C-17 delivered to the USAF. I got caught in the morning rush hour and missed it (didn't get the memo that it would be leaving early anyway) but while I was there this guy did a missed approach: That looks like an AF/military style serial on the tail, but I couldn't tell you what unit it belongs to. Quick trip to Wikipedia suggests it is the C-146 which is exclusively used by the 524th SOS (5 airframes in inventory). But, you know, Wikipedia. All I can tell you is, best to my recollection, when I was at Ft. Walton Beach some 5 years ago that the VIPs in and out of Hurlburt/Eglin tended to use the C-21 (Learjet 35). That, of course, was 5 years ago. e: 524th SOS is under the 27th SOW out of Cannon AFB, NM.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2013 01:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
grover posted:Thanks, missed that link. I am absolutely amazed that club was permitted to fly RC aircraft that close to an active runway in the first place. Doesn't surprise me, given it was probably a "local" fly-in. One of the local car show + fly-in gigs around here will often use the active runway to direct cars to their parking spots. Granted, it's a grass field airstrip only used by a small sky-diving operation, and by the time they open it up all the airplanes are where they need to be and most of the cars are where they need to be so good management prevents a Taylorcraft Cub from landing on a Chevrolet Corvair.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2013 01:37
|
|