|
AI finds some...interesting things sometimes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tri-star_%28wheel_arrangement%29
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 13:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:AI finds some...interesting things sometimes.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 14:15
|
|
|
 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 14:22
|
|
|
An album of people with too much time on their hands http://imgur.com/a/oWLEU
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 18:38
|
|
|
OBi posted:An album of people with too much time on their hands http://imgur.com/a/oWLEU Best one in the album: 
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 18:46
|
|
|
EVA BRAUN BLOWJOBS posted:Best one in the album: Every Cobra pilot I've ever talked to thats been stationed at Pendleton has claimed to have done this whenever they're doing anything near Mission Beach
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 18:55
|
|
|
 They stole our ten-miler uniform...
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 20:34
|
|
|
The Messiah has returned.
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 21:20
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
May 2, 2013 23:58
|
|
|
In regards to that 747 crash from several days ago, the carrier has released this statement to clear up some of the murkiness surrounding the mishap aircraft. http://www.sacbee.com/2013/05/01/5387895/statement-from-national-air-cargo.html#storylink=cpy Looking at the video again, I think it's telling that the crew was aware of a problem almost immediately on rotation. The gear being down points to two things: crew hasn't established positive rate of climb and/or leaving the gear down is indicative of them being aware that an crash was almost a certainty to which the gear's purpose would be to absorb some of the impact. The jet rolling to the right could very well be an intended maneuver. Jet rolls right, jet yaws left. That is a move where the pilot could've made the choice to trade off altitude to gain airspeed. Problem is that when a wing goes low, it loses lift. So close to stall margins put that in a very bold move that might've paid off if the crew had some altitude to work with. In this instance, the jet stalled immediately. I will say that this is not a stall recovery procedure, but a crew fighting tooth and nail to save themselves. The Sitka 43 crash is a textbook example of a wing low inducing stall when near stall stall speeds while in a turn. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qJ2we7EB3Qs
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 03:53
|
|
|
Every flight school I've ever been to, from learning to fly a sail plane and Cessnas to learning to fly the buckeye, they teach you to never loving ever go cross controled (rudder in the opposite direction of the stick) when you are any where close to a stall. That's what causes spins and no ducking way that sit would ever be recoverable in a 747. poo poo happened, dude panicked, he was hosed regardless.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 04:47
|
|
|
River Raid posted:Every flight school I've ever been to, from learning to fly a sail plane and Cessnas to learning to fly the buckeye, they teach you to never loving ever go cross controled (rudder in the opposite direction of the stick) when you are any where close to a stall. That's what causes spins and no ducking way that sit would ever be recoverable in a 747. You're getting a procedure mixed up with trying to save your life. The crew was able to roll left wings level. They had just enough lift to accomplish that maneuver.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 04:51
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:You're getting a procedure mixed up with trying to save your life. The crew was able to roll left wings level. They had just enough lift to accomplish that maneuver. It's less procedure and more "don't ever do this, because it will kill you." It didn't do them any good, it was a bad decision, but unless those wings got grabbed by the hands of the almighty himself, they were going to die anyway. I don't fault the dude for doing what he did, but I'm just pointing out that the suspected reasoning is horse poo poo and there's no way it was a good decision, but i don't think it was intentional, either.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 04:56
|
|
|
It certainly looks intentional. It also almost worked. Another 500 feet and we may not have seen a gigantic fireball at touchdown.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:01
|
|
|
River Raid posted:It's less procedure and more "don't ever do this, because it will kill you." It didn't do them any good, it was a bad decision, but unless those wings got grabbed by the hands of the almighty himself, they were going to die anyway. I don't fault the dude for doing what he did, but I'm just pointing out that the suspected reasoning is horse poo poo and there's no way it was a good decision, but i don't think it was intentional, either. I've done enough sim time, hangar flying, and crew "what-if" poo poo to feel it very well may have been pilot input till the very end. Either way, we'll know when the investigation is done at some point in the future. edit: I'm not making the case that they could've flown out of the crash with where they were at in terms of altitude. I agree with you that they were not going to make it regardless of anything that they did. bloops fucked around with this message at 05:11 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:03
|
|
|
Booblord Zagats posted:Every Cobra pilot I've ever talked to thats been stationed at Pendleton has claimed to have done this whenever they're doing anything near Mission Beach Can confirm this 100%.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:
I know, dude. I read GiP enough to know you aren't an idiot or pedantic goon. Just putting up my experience against what I saw in the video. Didn't mean to come off as a know it all rear end in a top hat about it, myself. It's all good,I hope
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
River Raid posted:I know, dude. I read GiP enough to know you aren't an idiot or pedantic goon. Just putting up my experience against what I saw in the video. Didn't mean to come off as a know it all rear end in a top hat about it, myself. It's all good,I hope No worries, man! CRM here at GiP.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:24
|
|
|
I don't understand why they didn't just eject.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:28
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't understand why they didn't just eject. Please do not 0/0 shame the gorgeous Boeing 747 tia.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:29
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:I don't understand why they didn't just eject. A good captain goes down with his ship. And drags all the annoying fuckers with him for running a train on his wife.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:In regards to that 747 crash from several days ago, the carrier has released this statement to clear up some of the murkiness surrounding the mishap aircraft. Not trying to be morbid but is there a full version of this video? Maybe even the one with the tower/SOF/Crew radio chatter?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:31
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:Not trying to be morbid but is there a full version of this video? Maybe even the one with the tower/SOF/Crew radio chatter? If you were AD still, I'd direct you to your SQ or WG flight safety guy.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:33
|
|
|
Discount_Bees posted:Can confirm this 100%. One of the first military videos I saw in my life was a thermal of a couple banging in the back of a pickup from an apache down at JRTC.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
Also RE: Ejection... What's the definitive list of Aircraft you're going to blow up inside of? Off the top of my head I've got AWACS, JSTARS, B-1? B-2? B-52?, -130, -135, uhh and a bunch of others. Now that I think about it you can't really eject out of most aircraft now.. Man back in the old days almost everything had ejection seats or pods on it. like, even the Valkyerie had ejection pods. I seriously don't think I've spent more than a few minutes time thinking about ejection seats.. our SERE dude gave us the gay annual training to be allowed to fly in the back of a tub, and other than that I never really thought about it. gently caress, if your F-15 is disintegrating over Missouri, just pull the loving lever... but if your C-17 goes unrecoverable.. hahaha, best of luck dudes. Kinda..hosed up. maybe it just seems weird because  but that just seems really loving bizarre to me to think about
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:38
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:Also RE: Ejection... What's the definitive list of Aircraft you're going to blow up inside of? H-60. Well, really any helo but the KA-50/52 (there may be one other with ejection seats but I can't remember for sure).
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:40
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:If you were AD still, I'd direct you to your SQ or WG flight safety guy. That's where the full vid w/ chatter is? Have you seen/heard it? Did they have any time to react on the radio at all or anything was the SOF screaming like mad or anything, or was it routine to the last second?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:Not trying to be morbid but is there a full version of this video? Maybe even the one with the tower/SOF/Crew radio chatter? Crew radio: Oh shiiiiiiit. HOLD ON!. BLAARRRRRRRRHSAFHDS:LGKFHSD:LFKJS:LHHHhhISSSSSS Plane goes below horizon, massive fireball rises. Someone near the camcorder yells "OH NOOO! God Damnit!" A woman screams. *A siren starts*
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:41
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:That's where the full vid w/ chatter is? I've seen the full video and read the transcript. AFAIK, the only guys privy to the CVR were Wg flight safety and leadership. As for the crew, they were with it till the right wing stalled and after that it was pretty morbid. I make a habit of not reading transcripts or listening to CVR's any more. Flight safety, while utterly fascinating to me, is a phenomenal way to gently caress with your head while still actively flying if you start going down rabbit holes. B-52's have ejection seats. The nav gets shat out of the bottom. bloops fucked around with this message at 05:45 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:42
|
|
|
Ikarus posted:H-60. Well, really any helo but the KA-50/52 (there may be one other with ejection seats but I can't remember for sure). The most bad rear end rotary wing thing ever aside from ejection seats and stealth blackhawks, is the old liquid rocket boosters they used to integrate....into the rotors. That would enable an insane quick burst of power for take offs of manuvers. They got the technology down pretty good in the late 50's and 60's, but it just never really caught a following. It was pretty brilliant engineering.. if you ever get a chance read the book "Ignition!" (I cant remember the dudes name) he talks about it as a side project he worked on. That book is all kinds of bad rear end because it's written by a crazy rocket scientist (really a chemist who worked on rocket fuels) and it's just a history of the liquid fuel rocketry science from the days of goddard all the way to the post Apollo era and it's written like a GiP story but with science and poo poo. actually you know what hang on im gonna dig up a link to the book online, its a loving great book and a wonderful cold war awesomeness everyone should read if they like cool stuff.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:44
|
|
|
B-2 has an ejection seat too. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=go2Ntc9tqZ8
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
OBi posted:An album of people with too much time on their hands http://imgur.com/a/oWLEU
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
Chinatown posted:Crew radio: Oh shiiiiiiit. HOLD ON!. BLAARRRRRRRRHSAFHDS:LGKFHSD:LFKJS:LHHHhhISSSSSS Just to confirm, this is the same flight where it was the pilots fault 100% and he is essentially a giant rear end in a top hat for having killed everyone, right? Or am I confusing this with that B-52 fini flight shenanigans that killed an OG/CC, SQ/CC and I think the hot dogging fucker was like wing safety or stan/eval and poo poo.. anyway-- complete 100% pilot error and he had a stupid long history of rear end clownery.. that was the B-52 story right, not the C-17 one? And what on gods green loving earth are they doing that 1) they were flying that pattern (Seriously I can't think of what the tactical utility of that was, am I missing something?) 2) Someone was video recording it? It just confuses me so much, I can't understand why a C-17 would be flying like that. I'm admitedly p. baked but I just can't wrap my head around it. There is no reason whatsoever to have been flying that plane like that, unless someone has some secret wizard C-17 ninja knowledge I don't have or something (Bc I seriously didn't know the B-52 had a downward ejection for the nav, holy poo poo lol. What about the FE, does he get to eject? Do B-52's have FE's? I could have sworn there were enlisted guys that flew in B-52's in some capacity)
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:50
|
|
|
Shim -- here's all the answers to any questions you may have: http://www.pacaf.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-101214-048.pdf TL;DR Sitka 43 was practicing for the Arctic Thunder 2011 air show. They landed, did a quick-turn, took off and immediately began a series of slow, high-angle turns that were flown too slow, too low. The aircraft commander was known as a stellar pilot that was given just a bit too much slack. edit: content 
bloops fucked around with this message at 05:54 on May 3, 2013 |
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:51
|
|
|
Cerekk posted:B-2 has an ejection seat too. holy poo poo that's what 2 billion dollars looks like on fire also sincerely didn't know B-2's had ejections seats that's a weird gap in aircraft knowledge to have considering all the other crazy intel sperg stuff I remember about aircraft.. but I never thought about crew egress really, and just assumed they didn't have that poo poo on big aircraft.. so if the B-2 and B-52 has ejection seats.. do C-17's or C-135's?
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:53
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:Just to confirm, this is the same flight where it was the pilots fault 100% and he is essentially a giant rear end in a top hat for having killed everyone, right? Only enlisted guys on -52's were aerial gunners back in the day.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:57
|
|
|
gently caress me that cartoon kills me everytime I loving tear up for real when I see it gently caress
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
GAS CURES KIKES posted:gently caress me that cartoon kills me everytime At the 962nd, there's a memorial in one of the hallways with a binder of the crew bio, pictures, the original flight orders, and a box of stuff recovered from the crash that they couldn't trace back to any of the guys. It is chilling.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:14
|
|
|
I'm guessing you're thinking of this rear end in a top hat: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQa4PpIkOZU
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 14:49 |
|
|
Bones also have ejection seats. So every strategic bomber in the US inventory has ejection seats, it's just the mobility heavies and then AWACS/JSTARS that don't.GAS CURES KIKES posted:gently caress me that cartoon kills me everytime That was a real bad 6 months. Sitka 43 happened in the summer and then Haney went down in November. Sitka 43's crash site was pretty loving awful. One of my guys at the time stepped out for a smoke and had the C-17 fly right over him when it was already well into the mishap sequence...he was probably the better part of a mile from the crash site, with a pretty significant amount of trees in between him and it, and he still felt the heat from the fireball. But from what I understand it still wasn't as bad as Yukla 27. It is really, really eerie how close the two crash sites are together...standing on the railroad embankment you face toward Sitka's site and you only have to rotate maybe 30 degrees to face Yukla's. They're only a couple hundred feet apart.
|
|
#
?
May 3, 2013 06:22
|
|
