|
iyaayas01 posted:Since it also featured an Alphajet, and because this video should be posted in the thread at least once every 6 months: That video pretty much has all the best stuff from the movie, though.
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 12:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 23:22 |
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Yep. And I think most Airliners also carry GCAS (Ground Collision Avoidance System) which, in conjunction with Radar Altimeter's would keep you from hitting the ground. And GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) Plus, ILS doesn't just send out a signal that says "You're at this altitude," the way it's portrayed in the film. ILS actually uses an array of antennas sending out signals modulated at two different frequencies, A and B. If you're too high on the glide slope, you receive more A signal than B signal. If you're too low, you receive more B signal than A signal. So you know you're on the glide slope when both signal strengths are equal. That's a simplification, but the gist of it is that the terrorists couldn't just spoof the altitude like shown in the film. Also, the grenades they chuck at McClane when he's in the cockpit have the longest fuses *ever*. Also, there's no such thing as a Glock 7, Glocks aren't made out of porcelain, and Glocks will definitely show up on an airport metal detector or x-ray. Also, they're made in Austria, not Germany. Also, you can't just switch between blanks and real rounds with a machine gun by swapping magazines; they gun uses the energy of the round to cycle the action and load the next round. If you're firing blanks, it won't cycle, so you need to use a blank firing adapter, a device that increases internal pressures to the point where the action will work. In a blowback-action like the MP5, this would take the form of a restrictor inserted into the barrel; if you then switch to real bullets, the thing would blow up in your face when you fired it. Also...
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 16:50
|
|
|
Phanatic posted:Plus, ILS doesn't just send out a signal that says "You're at this altitude," the way it's portrayed in the film. ILS actually uses an array of antennas sending out signals modulated at two different frequencies, A and B. If you're too high on the glide slope, you receive more A signal than B signal. If you're too low, you receive more B signal than A signal. So you know you're on the glide slope when both signal strengths are equal. That's a simplification, but the gist of it is that the terrorists couldn't just spoof the altitude like shown in the film. Yep, ILS is pretty old and actually fairly simple
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 17:06
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:Read something this week that the DoD didn't support this movie with assets because they couldn't discerns SHIELD's chain of command and if the organization belonged to the US or was some sort of international mishmash of dudes. I can see that, but the scene near the end with Army guys shooting was composed of real Ohio guardsmen (part of the city scenes were shot in Cleveland).
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 17:32
|
|
|
hannibal posted:I can see that, but the scene near the end with Army guys shooting was composed of real Ohio guardsmen (part of the city scenes were shot in Cleveland). That was all that the DoD provided before yanking away their support.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 17:34
|
|
|
It was definitely AlphaJets, you can see a thank you to Dornier/consortium in the credits. Glad I'm not the only one confused as to why SHIELD would have a ton of Harriers, but they're fairly recognizable to the public as "different" so why the hell not. You have to turn off your brain to really enjoy it, but it was still an awesome movie. I was amused at the second nuke-laden F-35 launching right after SLJ RPG'd the first one.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 18:24
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:But yeah, I love the idea of a big stealth insane aircraft carrier airship for the purpose of transporting around some antiquated Harriers. CommieGIR posted:Yep. And I think most Airliners also carry GCAS (Ground Collision Avoidance System) which, in conjunction with Radar Altimeter's would keep you from hitting the ground. And GPWS (Ground Proximity Warning System) Phanatic posted:Also, you can't just switch between blanks and real rounds with a machine gun by swapping magazines; I do understand, though. That episode of CSI where they have a bus crash because of a bolt breaking? I was practically throwing things at the TV in rage.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 19:40
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:
That was a LOT of episodes of CSI for me. I did computer forensics for a few years....yeah I was foaming in rage sometimes watching CSI, I just couldn't watch it anymore. ZOOM, ENHANCE! To contribute:  This picture was always so surreal to me.... CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 19:48 on May 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 19:42
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That was Fixed.  
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:04
|
|
|
movax posted:It was definitely AlphaJets, you can see a thank you to Dornier/consortium in the credits. That brings up another point that really irritated me.The power settings needed to take off at an altitude of FL 300 (which is what SLJ mentioned they were at earlier) would be ridiculously high on account of extremely thin air. Maybe an F-35 has that much power available but I sure as hell know most jets don't. An E-3 can fall off a KC-10 boom at FL 290 because we'd exceed Military Rated Thrust. There is no power left for us to stay close.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:12
|
|
|
HeyEng posted:That brings up another point that really irritated me.The power settings needed to take off at an altitude of FL 300 (which is what SLJ mentioned they were at earlier) would be ridiculously high on account of extremely thin air. Maybe an F-35 has that much power available but I sure as hell know most jets don't. An E-3 can fall off a KC-10 boom at FL 290 because we'd exceed Military Rated Thrust. There is no power left for us to stay close. I haven't seen the movie and I'm not going to either, but if it's taking off from a flying platform it just needs to drive off the edge and gravity will accelerate you past flying speeds nicely. I guess it flies upwards in the film.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:26
|
|
|
Ola posted:I haven't seen the movie and I'm not going to either, but if it's taking off from a flying platform it just needs to drive off the edge and gravity will accelerate you past flying speeds nicely. I guess it flies upwards in the film. Yea, it has a typical looking carrier launch.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:27
|
|
|
I let films like Avengers Assemble* get away with a hell of a lot, because my suspension of disbelief is directly proportional to how much I'm enjoying myself. * The UK gets a different title, to prevent us thinking that Black Widow is Emma Peel, and wondering why John Steed is now a black cyclops.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:50
|
|
|
InitialDave posted:I let films like Avengers Assemble* get away with a hell of a lot, because my suspension of disbelief is directly proportional to how much I'm enjoying myself. Oh yeah I loved the movie. It was fantastic. Since there has been some cinema aviation talk here is a picture that is related to it. The Memphis Belle herself. 
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 20:59
|
|
|
I don't think this has been posted yet: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/defence/9203822/Spitfires-buried-in-Burma-during-war-to-be-returned-to-UK.html basically there's a bunch of well preserved (because they were prepared for storage and buried) spitfires found in Burma that some people are trying to recover.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 21:04
|
|
|
Nevermind, didn't read all the way.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2012 21:52
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 03:58
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Reminds me of that seaplane crash several years ago that was used for a movie...then they just left it there afterwards. Found the vid!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 04:12
|
|
|
If we're posting about aircraft with tundra tires... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTuDeKxjPck fake edit: I was going to try and go to the Valdez fly-in this year, but I thought it was next weekend...turns out it was this weekend. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 07:25
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Needs a "DEAL WITH IT" at the end.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 07:54
|
|
|
(Content removed because I've already posted these and have a horrible memory)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2012 12:16
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:That was a LOT of episodes of CSI for me. I did computer forensics for a few years....yeah I was foaming in rage sometimes watching CSI, I just couldn't watch it anymore. ZOOM, ENHANCE! Protip: don't ever watch Bones.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 05:08
|
|
|
SyHopeful posted:Protip: don't ever watch Bones. 3D holographic scene recreation developed by an art major! 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 15:12
|
|
|
UK AAIB has released a preliminary report on the ditched Super Puma: http://www.aaib.gov.uk/publications/special_bulletins/s2_2012_ec225_lp_super_puma__g_redw.cfm Here's what happened (with video of the rescue): http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/10/helicopter-ditches-north-sea-oil-workers Pretty impressive, but it got me thinking. Big helicopters are ridiculously complex. Would it not be better with a hybrid drivetrain, like the diesel electrics of huge ships? Twin turbines spin each their generator, electricity spins a main rotor motor and a tail rotor motor. I don't know if it would be lighter, but certainly less complex. A big important bonus is being able to say "rotor motor" every day.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 15:29
|
|
|
Ola posted:UK AAIB has released a preliminary report on the ditched Super Puma: you'd still need a gearbox, which was the cause of the failure. You'd also be adding complexity, because instead of a turbine spinning the rotor directly through a gearbox, you'd be adding another point of failure in the middle in the form of the electric motor and associated gubbins. You'd also be limiting payload by the weight of the additional drivetrain components and batteries.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 15:39
|
|
|
Maybe you'd need to gear down the turbine to generator interface, but you wouldn't need as much gearbox as they have today. The one (not two, just one) they have in a helicopter today steps down 100 turbine rotations to 1 rotor rotation while getting all kinds of vibrations and torque in the other direction. In addition they need and axle out to the tail rotor which spins at a different rpm feeding a different phase of harmonics back into the cuckoo clock. With an electric drive train, there is no mechanical connection between the turbine and the rotor so there is no extra stress from vibrations and feedback. To be clear, I don't mean a series hybrid like a Prius, but a diesel-electric drivetrain like a ship: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel-electric_transmission
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 16:39
|
|
|
Comparatively speaking; gears are light. A generator and electric motor of similar capacity weighs as much as a two of the motors of that horsepower. A Helicopter such as the puma has what? 3000shp. A 3000hp generator, and 3000hp electric motor isn't going to be small. They'd also need their own gearboxes. At least one for the generator. And you will need a gearbox for the tail rotor drive. Helicopters can not afford any more weight. And they don't need the infinite gearing capability that an electric drivetrain gives.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 16:51
|
|
|
Just get a pair of ramjets at the tips of the blades, job done. What'd ya mean, its too loud? and liable to snap the blades? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairey_Rotodyne
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 17:41
|
|
|
Ola posted:
There is a *fuckton* of extra weight, and a helicopter already has way less payload than an aircraft of equivalent power. A T-55 engine on a Chinook puts out over 3700 shaft horsepower and masses less 400 kg. Okay, you need reduction gearing to bring the final rpm down to 225 or so, so you need a transmission, but that's still a pretty damned good power/weight ratio. Go ahead and try to replace that with a hybrid drivetrain. You need a generator to convert mechanical energy into electrical energy, then that electrical energy spins a motor to turn it back into mechanical energy. Now try doing that in a helicopter that can take off with a useful payload. It is not trivial, or probably even achievable given current technology.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 18:51
|
|
|
B-b-but I want a diesel electric helicopter  But helicopters need to get simpler. It's not just the gearbox and all its vulnerable gears, but all the accessories, emergency subsystems and fatiguing, wearing parts.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 19:01
|
|
|
Ola posted:B-b-but I want a diesel electric helicopter I'm open to proposals. And in your list you haven't hit upon the most complex bit. Helicopters really are quite simple. As long as you don't count the rotor head. Helicopters are hilariously reliable for what they are. The fact that they can autorotate makes them pretty damned safe. For r/c helicopters they do something called a "fixed pitch" helicopter, which gets rid of the collective control. This also means they can't autorotate. For the most part, all of the "backup systems" in a helicopter amount to a good pilot, and a sprag clutch on the transmission input. This means if the engine locks up, the rotor keeps going. There have been some modern developments to helicopters. For instance, the use of composite rotor blades lets them get away from the damped rotor blade hinges.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 19:29
|
|
|
Anghammarad posted:Just get a pair of ramjets at the tips of the blades, job done. 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 23:09
|
|
|
AH-1S Cobra... with the engine hatch open! Always a joy to see some of the more important bits as opposed to just the skin.  
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2012 23:17
|
|
|
grover posted:AH-1S Cobra... with the engine hatch open! Always a joy to see some of the more important bits as opposed to just the skin. What are the odds?  VVV SWAG: Throttle VVV PainterofCrap fucked around with this message at 02:17 on May 16, 2012 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 00:34
|
|
|
So now the question is; what does that L bracket control?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 00:50
|
|
|
PainterofCrap posted:What are the odds? Odd indeed! I took this Cobra engine pic at Shaw AFB not two weeks ago: http://imgur.com/iwWSp Click click click for bigger
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 01:46
|
|
|
grover posted:AH-1S Cobra... with the engine hatch open! Always a joy to see some of the more important bits as opposed to just the skin. Ford Island?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 03:29
|
|
|
Tremblay posted:Ford Island?
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 10:50
|
|
|
Styles Bitchley posted:Odd indeed! I took this Cobra engine pic at Shaw AFB[...] Any more good pics? I was parking cars on the other side of base both days and didn't get to see anything on the flightline.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 11:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 23:22 |
|
|
When I was a kid I saw the Wings show about the Cobra. It said something about it being only 3 feet wide and therefore hard to spot when head on. So I promptly got out the model I had of it, put it in the trees, and had my little brother try to find it. We then made a game out of taking turns setting it on various branches and seeing if the other could see it. I miss being a kid, watching Wings, and making models.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2012 14:47
|
|
