|
Guess I can only follow it up with this post: (Slightly NWS, but it's on Youtube.) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sROH6dXV0tA
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 15:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
c355n4 posted:STOL
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 15:42
|
|
|
xaarman posted:No idea if this is a repeat, but I love watching this video. No, that's not a repost. But from now on it needs to be.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 16:16
|
|
|
cyberbug posted:How about a long takeoff? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWtdtuspnoM With great aussie commentary. That reminds me of the time we saw an antonov 124 I think take off out of msp. They're cleared for takeoff we hear. Roll to position and hold run the engines up for 3 minutes, tower screaming at them to go, two 757's go around and then they barely clear the fence on 12R. Was so happy I had my transceiver that day it was hilarious. Oh-sowwy from the crew after they took off.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
xaarman posted:No idea if this is a repeat, but I love watching this video. The part at 0:50 is cool as gently caress
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 18:03
|
|
|
Guess I hosed up posting my link previously - this is apparently from an IMAX film, which would have been good fun to watch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3HQ-E7_YTA&feature=related
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 18:23
|
|
|
That Red Flag movie is available on DVD. It IS fun to watch. It has some awesome footage and overall they paint a decent picture of the exercise and how it works. But there are some things that are just blatantly wrong...some of them I can understand, some I can't. Almost everything they say about AWACS is wrong. Probably 85%. The control tower will NEVER clear Bandsaw for takeoff. Our scopes are not a 3d depiction, and we don't have a big fuckoff tv on the console tops. None of the guys in that jet were wearing patches that would correspond with Bandsaw, and the Senior Director doesn't stand over people's shoulders unless his scope is broken...I'm assuming that Mission Commander or whatever they called that major is also an SD, because if he wasn't he needs to move his rear end and stop trying to do the SD's job. Their comm was crap throughout that clip, especially considering how many loving Weapons Officers were on that crew. If I was on that crew my weapons team would be pissed at the debriefing I'd give them. The flight lead of those F-15Cs was an idiot. The B-1s wouldn't fly all the way out there "just in case", that would get a lot of people fired probably including a SQ/DO. All that from that short clip, and I didn't even cover it all. One thing they really got right was the briefing/debriefing. There's more to it than they show, obviously, but they do a good job of demonstrating the emphasis put on safety and scenario management. You see the start of it at the end of that clip, where they focus on a safety probably right away. Rest assured, that stuff gets HAMMERED. I saw an E-3/E-4 boom operator almost get curb stomped by a 1-star in a room full of aircrew because of shenanigans in the aerial refueling stack. Fully half the step brief prior to a mission is spent on range restrictions, altitude blocks, and weather contingencies. For all the things they get wrong, I still bought that DVD.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 22:13
|
|
|
From my Archangel book on the A-12:quote:Titanium also was very sensitive to contaminants such as chlorine and cadmium. Pentel pens could not be used to draw on sheets of the metal because their chlorine-based ink left etch marks. Wing panels that were spot welded in the summer failed within six or seven weeks, but those made in the winter lasted indefinitely. The problem was traced to Burbanks water, which was heavily chlorinated in the summer to prevent algae growth but not in the winter. Switching to distilled water to wash the panels after acid treatment prevent a recurrence. Contact CIA and have them send this to you right away.
|
|
#
?
May 22, 2011 22:30
|
|
|
Godholio posted:That Red Flag movie is available on DVD. It IS fun to watch. It has some awesome footage and overall they paint a decent picture of the exercise and how it works. But there are some things that are just blatantly wrong...some of them I can understand, some I can't. Don't forget about the Top Gun-esque *rip the oxygen mask off, fistpump, YEAH!!!* and the tight finger four combat formation. The AMMO bit they do later in the film isn't too bad, other than the fact that a Red Flag frag is a joke compared to AFCOMAC and as far as I know they don't do full blown builds at night...you can build just as easily the day before and load them on trailers for delivery to the line whenever the loaders call for them, but I suppose a build at night is quite a bit more dramatic. And that is the best organized MAC pad I've ever seen. Also,  at doing M904/905 mechanical fuze builds. I think the newest lots of those fuzes were manufactured sometime in the '70s, maybe the early '80s.But yeah, that movie is basically an IMAX Air Force porn. iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 00:15 on May 23, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 23, 2011 00:10
|
|
|
You will enjoy Raymond Baxter's unpleasant argument and you will enjoy the documentaries that follow. So click this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=woqFM_cuqo0#t=5m01s and squeak with glee at a proper dashing Spit pilot delivering a tale as only his lot can. Then click the username which uploaded it and watch all the episodes about the various and quite well known technology battles of WW2 but told in that wonderful low pace non-CGI 70s documentary vibe which is so refreshing in our time of mass produced disinterested generic content. Of particular interest is the constant reappearance of Reginald Victor (R.V.) Jones, who was right in the middle of so much fun - he was a scientific military intelligence expert and got to play cat and mouse games in the electromagnetic spectrum, contributing massively to the war effort in the process. He also knows exactly what he's contributing to the documentary being filmed and knows exactly what to put it and what to leave out for maximum story-telling effect. It's old enough that the interview snippets are all (I think) by people who were actually there (like Adolf Galland and Albert Speer) so given that and the above paragraph, I think you'll find that the two series easily accessible to you now are massively loving recommended by me.
|
|
#
?
May 23, 2011 02:36
|
|
|
I'm sure a lot of you have already seen this...but just in case you haven't: How the RAF marshals aircraft.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2011 06:41
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm sure a lot of you have already seen this...but just in case you haven't: How the RAF marshals aircraft. This is how all things should be.
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2011 14:14
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:From my Archangel book on the A-12: How do I ask and what are the costs?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2011 21:20
|
|
|
AlmightyPants posted:How do I ask and what are the costs? It's free. Call up the Public Affairs office and just ask for the booklet on the A-12 at Langley. (703) 482-0623
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2011 22:56
|
|
|
Boomerjinks posted:It's free. Call up the Public Affairs office and just ask for the booklet on the A-12 at Langley. (703) 482-0623 Reckon there's any chance they'll post that to the UK?
|
|
#
?
May 24, 2011 23:18
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:I'm sure a lot of you have already seen this...but just in case you haven't: How the RAF marshals aircraft. Have seen it but well worth seeing it again. The b-boy stance laying down and the Michael Jackson routine gets me every time.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 00:04
|
|
|
jammyozzy posted:Reckon there's any chance they'll post that to the UK? Can't hurt to ask.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 00:38
|
|
|
Ola posted:Have seen it but well worth seeing it again. The b-boy stance laying down and the Michael Jackson routine gets me every time. The salute with the giant hands during the YMCA routine and the random F-16 taxiing back that he has to get out of the way of during the Scissor Sisters bit were pretty good too (that pilot had to be doing a big  ).But yeah, the MJ routine is great, between the moonwalking back and the crotch thrust "salute."
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 07:03
|
|
|
I love the salute he throws at the end of the b-boy routine, he throws it so hard his whole arm wobbles like it was made of metal.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 08:11
|
|
|
This is probably a repost seeing as it's 4 years old, but does anyone have anymore videos like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xISpZYajveA
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 14:41
|
|
|
Not much is as good as that for missile shots and so on, but the Fighter Fling series sure has loads of unique shots: http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/Guest/35/ It's an annual video made by a compilation of stuff sent in from the various F-14 squadrons. Most excellent. Have seen that F-15 vid in higher resolution, that shot with the massive amount of flares benefits a lot from it as you can see the poor little Sidewinder go absolutely bananas.
|
|
#
?
May 25, 2011 15:19
|
|
|
Ola posted:Have seen that F-15 vid in higher resolution, that shot with the massive amount of flares benefits a lot from it as you can see the poor little Sidewinder go absolutely bananas.  Little Fox Two was so lost.
|
|
#
?
May 26, 2011 02:44
|
|
|
Mr.Peabody posted:This is probably a repost seeing as it's 4 years old, but does anyone have anymore videos like this? I know there is a video out there of a bunch of F-15s down at Tyndall for WSEP/Combat Archer ripple firing off a shitload of AIM-120s, but I couldn't find it. I'll keep looking. In the meantime... Where (F-15) Eagles Fly is a classic. No missile shooting in it, but lots of fighter porn...I like that version in particular because it spends a fair amount of time focusing on the maintainers. This AIM-9X testing video is pretty cool. Breaks down what each shot is going to consist of with a graphic before it shows the footage. The last shot is pretty  . The inset with the IIR images from the seeker head remind me of a poster that's hanging up in the AMMO FTD classroom up here...it's got a picture of the -9X with an image from the IIR seeker head that's tracking on a QF-4. The caption was "This is the business end of the AIM-9X...Any questions?"F-22 doing what it does best, being badass. That one is kind of annoying because of the music and the random editing, but it's not that bad I guess. F-22 airshow demo...having seen this demo in person, I can tell you that it is even more impressive in real life. The amount of thrust those F119s put out is amazing. Finally, related to the marshalling video I posted earlier...Pooh Bear invades the flightline. Ola posted:Not much is as good as that for missile shots and so on, but the Fighter Fling series sure has loads of unique shots: http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/Guest/35/ "First Tomcat Flight-December 21, 1970...First Hydraulic Failure-December 30, 1970...First Ejection-December 30, 1970." I'd seen that video before, but I forgot how it started.
iyaayas01 fucked around with this message at 03:39 on May 26, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 26, 2011 03:25
|
|
|
So, basically the cause of Flight 447s crash was determined to be frozen pitot static tubes.... What I'm trying to figure out is how the Pilot or Co-Pilot didn't notice their Attitude indicators showing they were nose diving into the sea.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 05:08
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So, basically the cause of Flight 447s crash was determined to be frozen pitot static tubes.... isn't that what was speculated as the cause years ago? Supercooled water and all that?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 05:47
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:So, basically the cause of Flight 447s crash was determined to be frozen pitot static tubes.... Basically, the crew was overloaded with information at the time. When they lost the pitot/static data, the crew would have been faced with a massive number of warning and caution messages all appearing simultaneously, and even going through the memory items for the important ones would have required quite a bit of time. Apparently the A330 responds to a complete loss of airspeed data by disabling all stall warnings, and trying to fly an airplane with no airspeed or altitude information, and with zero outside references (it was over water, at night) isn't exactly easy. From what the BEA released today, it sounds like the aircraft was in a deep stall for several minutes (with the engines at full power), with nose-up commands coming from the crew for most of that time, and the aircraft mostly in a nose-high attitude.
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 05:54
|
|
|
Even with the pitot tubes all frozen, wouldn't the artificial horizon still work, and tell them that their nose was pointed at the sky? Doesn't the plane have a radar altimeter, which would have shown a horrific descent rate?
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 06:04
|
|
|
The Locator posted:Even with the pitot tubes all frozen, wouldn't the artificial horizon still work, and tell them that their nose was pointed at the sky? Doesn't the plane have a radar altimeter, which would have shown a horrific descent rate? There would have been a radar altimeter, but they usually can't "see" more than a few thousand feet, and since the descent rate was around 11,000fpm, there wouldn't have been time to recover the aircraft even if the crew was using radar altimeter indications. The FDR data seems to indicate that the crew responded to the initial loss of data by adding takeoff power and pitching the nose up, and there were actually a couple of stall indications before the computer system disabled them due to loss of airspeed data. At this point, it looks like the crew got AF447 into a deep stall situation, but the crew somehow failed to recognize it, as no one in the cockpit ever verbally acknowledged the stall or said anything about correcting it. If the descent rate in the stall stabilized after a short time (which it likely would have with the nose raised), the inner ear could very easily read that as "I'm not falling anymore", which would have made it far harder to figure out that the aircraft was descending, especially with nothing but attitude information as a reference. Keep in mind that during training for an instrument rating, pilots are trained to ignore what their body is telling them is happening to the airplane's attitude and to trust the flight instruments. In a situation where the only instrument indications are a nose-up attitude and full power (especially in a stabilized descent), the tendency for most pilots would be to assume the airplane was climbing. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 07:30 on May 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 07:16
|
|
|
The Locator posted:Even with the pitot tubes all frozen, wouldn't the artificial horizon still work, and tell them that their nose was pointed at the sky? Doesn't the plane have a radar altimeter, which would have shown a horrific descent rate? Set aside an hour or two and read: http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/447730-af447-wreckage-found.html
|
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 12:04
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:There would have been a radar altimeter, but they usually can't "see" more than a few thousand feet, and since the descent rate was around 11,000fpm, there wouldn't have been time to recover the aircraft even if the crew was using radar altimeter indications. CARA (combined altitude radar altimeter) can see WELL past 199,000 Feet. In fact that is how high it can see, its the limit of the digital indicator (whereas the mechanical gauge stops at 5,000 feet) Radar Altimeters can see well beyond the range on the gauge, and keep reporting the 'correct' (as far as the radar altimeter knows...) altitude to the Flight Director. The thing is, if the plane was in a nose down descent, CARA would have seen a HIGH altitude because the radar waves would be going nearly horizontal, making it appear as if you were at a higher altitude...until the last couple seconds... The Locator posted:Even with the pitot tubes all frozen, wouldn't the artificial horizon still work, and tell them that their nose was pointed at the sky? Doesn't the plane have a radar altimeter, which would have shown a horrific descent rate? The ADI (Attitude Direction Indicator) should have show exactly that, it would have shown a straight descent as it is driven by gyroscopes from the Inertial Navigation Unit or its own internal gyros. Either way, it was probably showing exactly what was happening...a straight nosedive CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 20:24 on May 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
May 28, 2011 20:18
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:
I am going to say first that I don't know anything about modern airplane avionics, but I am a mechanical engineering student. One of the first things I would have done with the design is to make it orientate in a way that can't make it possible to read the hypotenuse altitude. Whether it be a mechanical orientation perpendicular to the horizon or simply calculating it by cross referencing the attitude direction indicator (if it's digital). Is something like this done?
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2011 17:55
|
|
|
rcman50166 posted:I am going to say first that I don't know anything about modern airplane avionics, but I am a mechanical engineering student. One of the first things I would have done with the design is to make it orientate in a way that can't make it possible to read the hypotenuse altitude. Whether it be a mechanical orientation perpendicular to the horizon or simply calculating it by cross referencing the attitude direction indicator (if it's digital). Is something like this done? Possibly on some setups, helicopters come to mind. However, for most setups, the CARA antennas face straight down with little or no forward angle. On most aircraft that fly low enough to worry about what is ahead of them, forward looking radar provides that needed warning of drop and approaching changes in terrain. CARA on our aircraft is tied into GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) which alerts the pilot that the aircraft is becoming dangerously close to the ground when the pilot wishes otherwise (CARA allows you to set your MINIMUM ground altitude) Do not forget you also have barometric altitude to look at as well, which will show you your rapid descent, granted its not going to show you how high about the ACTUAL ground you are, only how high above sea level. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 03:22 on Jun 1, 2011 |
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 03:20
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Do not forget you also have barometric altitude to look at as well, which will show you your rapid descent, granted its not going to show you how high about the ACTUAL ground you are, only how high above sea level. Also does not work if the pitot's are iced over, as was the case with the Air France flight.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 03:42
|
|
|
ApathyGifted posted:Also does not work if the pitot's are iced over, as was the case with the Air France flight. True, none the less ADI should have showed them something was amiss.... Which apparently they knew because they were trying to nose up.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 03:46
|
|
|
From gossip around the internet, the Airbus's stall recovery procedure is to set TOGA power, and pitch back on the stick and let the computer figure out the best angle to fly out of the stall. However, with systems lost, the computer apparently couldn't do that, and the pilot(s) "forgot." It looks to be a basic failure in Systems Knowledge 101. When all else fails, there is known pitch and power settings.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 03:52
|
|
|
xaarman posted:When all else fails, there is known pitch and power settings. This this a thousand times this. Loss of tubes kills sooo many people cause they forget to fall back on training. There is no reason not to go to "presets" in a situation like this.
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 05:29
|
|
|
xaarman posted:When all else fails, there is known pitch and power settings. From what I understand about the crash, this is the only thing that could have saved them, which just leaves you to ask, "Why weren't these pilots trained any better?"
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 22:33
|
|
|
Good loving god. Pretty sure this is pure luck he didn't slam into the ground. http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=68f_1306880662
|
|
#
?
Jun 1, 2011 23:37
|
|
|
Mr.Peabody posted:From what I understand about the crash, this is the only thing that could have saved them, which just leaves you to ask, "Why weren't these pilots trained any better?" Cognitive overload from all the other alarms that went off probably made them miss that the control systems went into "alternate law," where you can't just command max thrust and pull back and let the computer keep you from stalling.
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2011 00:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 12:42 |
|
|
There was an entire NOVA on 447 and the frozen tubes: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/space/crash-flight-447.html
|
|
#
?
Jun 2, 2011 00:14
|
|
