|
So what you're saying is they told the pilots not to fly it in that part of the envelope. 
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 01:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
SocketSeven posted:So what you're saying is they told the pilots not to fly it in that part of the envelope. Well, they weren't supposed to be flying like that in the first place, but you know, marines...
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
SocketSeven posted:So what you're saying is they told the pilots not to fly it in that part of the envelope.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 02:29
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Staying out of VRS is really akin to "don't stall", and yet people still fall out of the sky every day. Yeah but instead of add power and drop the nose the solution is reduce power and drop the nose. When you do that at a few hundred feet AGL your insides turn to mush very quickly. Its also much more difficult to recognize as your only reliable indication is the VSI. You don't get a really annoying horn to work with.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 03:15
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Yeah but instead of add power and drop the nose the solution is reduce power and drop the nose. When you do that at a few hundred feet AGL your insides turn to mush very quickly. Its also much more difficult to recognize as your only reliable indication is the VSI. You don't get a really annoying horn to work with. Incidentally the fix was to install a really annoying horn.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Incidentally the fix was to install a really annoying horn. They should just make the horn sound like an annoying teenager going "sssssssSSSSSSTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHP!" Terrible joke, I know. But honestly wouldn't that make you quit your VRS maneuver? Either that or turn the craft around and go home.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 03:54
|
|
|
N: http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4514403-seat-on-hamilton-s-avro-lancaster-fetches-79-100/ V: Lucky bastard.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 04:19
|
|
|
I think the big issue with the ring vortex crash on the V-22 was that one rotor lost lift before the other (as might be expected; planes stall this way too with any amount of turning), and the asymmetric thrust from the other rotor put it into an uncontrolled roll at low altitude with no forward speed for the control surfaces to correct it with. A conventional helicopter would be falling like a stone, but at least you're not flipping upside down and have some chance of flying out of it. That said, I'd be interested to see how, say, a Chinook would react in such a case.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
Fucknag posted:I think the big issue with the ring vortex crash on the V-22 was that one rotor lost lift before the other (as might be expected; planes stall this way too with any amount of turning), and the asymmetric thrust from the other rotor put it into an uncontrolled roll at low altitude with no forward speed for the control surfaces to correct it with. A conventional helicopter would be falling like a stone, but at least you're not flipping upside down and have some chance of flying out of it. a chinook really isn't going to develop VRS in one rotor system only, because it is a tandem system. you'd have to fly it in a full slip with a critical sinkrate and a shallow diving bank, aka flying sideways with airspeed while falling and turning, in which case you're well outside of the flight envelope anyways so no surprise there when it falls it out of the sky. interesting sidenote, the way to escape settling with power in a chinook requires lateral input, as opposed to a conventional rotor system which requires forward airspeed.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 16:00
|
|
|
MA-Horus posted:Just found out I'm going to be in England just in time for Flying Legends. They're not sold out, I bought two not five minutes ago. Try here: https://www.maximweb.org/DuxfordV7_UI/SelectDay.aspx
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:00
|
|
|
When I went a few years back I just bought them on the door.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Apparently the ATC tower in Chicago caught fire? I have a friend who said her flight is delayed indefinitely.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:34
|
|
|
rscott posted:Apparently the ATC tower in Chicago caught fire? I have a friend who said her flight is delayed indefinitely. Fire alarm in a bathroom at ORD TRACON so they issued a ground stop, they're moving some personnel to ZAU to get things moving again.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 19:40
|
|
|
rscott posted:Apparently the ATC tower in Chicago caught fire? I have a friend who said her flight is delayed indefinitely. It's at the Chicago approach control facility, which is located in Elgin, IL about 30 miles away from the airport. Friend of mine works there, but he is off today. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 20:49 on May 13, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 20:00
|
|
|
"ABC NEWS posted:Sources said a fan motor overheated in the women's lounge, which is near the control center, leading to smoke- but no fire I know there's a Horrible Mechanical Failures thread in here, but is there a Hilarious Mechanical Failures thread?
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2014 21:07
|
|
|
SocketSeven posted:I've always liked Skycranes. They look like dragonflies. During the bushfires in Sydney last year we had a skycrane come to the university pond to fill up on water. Did it for most of the day (needless to say very little got done that day). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzM17Tmkw9Q What the video doesn't show is that said pond is just outside the main university hub, and there were dozens of people just sitting and watching them fly about all day.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 00:31
|
|
Also, one of the biggest heavy lift helicopters out there.
|
brains posted:interesting sidenote, the way to escape settling with power in a chinook requires lateral input, as opposed to a conventional rotor system which requires forward airspeed. Conventional rotorcraft can escape settling with power by (reducing collective and) gaining airspeed in any direction, not just forward. Forward is generally easiest/safest. The chinook may specify lateral for its tandem design, but single rotor aircraft can do that too.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 02:03
|
|
|
So it's confirmed, the Canadian government can't buy helicopters without loving up. (This is not meant to be a comment on the quality of the Bell 429, about which I know nothing.)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
The Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum has held an auction for a passenger seat on their Lancaster's trip to Britain this summer. A guy from England won it for $79000. http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4514403-seat-on-hamilton-s-avro-lancaster-fetches-79-100/ the Spec posted:Then on Aug. 4, he will join seven others — five crew and two members of a documentary film team — aboard the Lanc. After taking off from Hamilton, the warplane will make overnight stops in Newfoundland, Greenland and Iceland before finally landing in Prestwick, Scotland. It's expected they'll be in the air for 18 hours. I hope he brings ear protection.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 04:46
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Yeah and watching it knock over photographers and important people as it lands near a crowd would be kinda funny. This actually happened a few years back during Fleet Week in NYC. One guy from the unit I was in and I were coordinating all the air stuff but luckily we didn't take any heat for it. One highlight I remember is a tree limb crashing down on some old dude; there were no serious injuries, thank God. Here have a video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=whngAV9igdA
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
rocket_350 posted:The Canadian Warplane Heritage Museum has held an auction for a passenger seat on their Lancaster's trip to Britain this summer. A guy from England won it for $79000. That article should say stops in Labrador, not Newfoundland I got amazingly excited for like 2 seconds 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
I donated $100 to them to fix up their Bristol Blemheim/Boilingbroke. Its an underloved airplane, and not many exist, let alone fly. Sad thing is they are going to cut a big door in the side so the fat old guys can climb in and fly it 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 19:49
|
|
|
MattD1zzl3 posted:I donated $100 to them to fix up their Bristol Blemheim/Boilingbroke. I never tire of British naming conventions. Ships are fantastic, planes are even better. If it isn't something heroic chest-pounding like Spitfire or Typhoon, it's heraldry or ornithology or something. Quick! Scramble the Cambridgeshire-Balmoral Gadfly Petrels!
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:20
|
|
|
Nothing will ever beat Fairy Battle for silly British plane names in my mind. (Yeah, I know it's spelled Fairey, but it's pronounced like the sprites, so whatever!)
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:24
|
|
|
There has been more than one HMS Unfatigueable (sp?), so yeah, I wholeheartedly agree.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:31
|
|
|
If we're gonna get into an argument over the coolest British ship name, let me nip it in the bud with this classic.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
It's job was to carry balls. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
bolind posted:There has been more than one HMS Unfatigueable (sp?), so yeah, I wholeheartedly agree. Surely that should be Indefatigable? Or did they both exist?
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
SocketSeven posted:It's job was to carry balls. I didn't know SKF was Swedish. I guess it makes sense, WWII Britain buying balls from Svenska Kullagerfabriken and not Fischers Aktien-Gesellschaft; because all the Fischers Aktien-Gesellschaft balls would have been German.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:If we're gonna get into an argument over the coolest British ship name, let me nip it in the bud with this classic. That's a boat. 
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
Speaking of odd British military names, this has always popped out at me. Now, it is not a comment on the many men who have served or the accomplishments of the regiment, but when you're going down the list of names dating back to WWI, there's nothing quite like Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
Aeronautical Insanity: Boats, Ships, and Gay Vikings
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
FrozenVent posted:So it's confirmed, the Canadian government can't buy helicopters without loving up. Considering your government didn't neuter the Bell 429's MTOW like ours did, it's probably a really safe purchase.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 02:06
|
|
|
Brovine posted:Surely that should be Indefatigable? Or did they both exist? I misremembered, seems you are right: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Indefatigable
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 04:42
|
|
|
Indefatigable is a GREAT ship name and I'll hear no different.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 04:45
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:Indefatigable is a GREAT ship name and I'll hear no different. I agree but it's bloody hard to pronounce. What's wrong with calling her Tireless?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 07:27
|
|
|
Perhaps they didn't want to insult the Lebanese if they ever had to dock in their harbour!
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 07:36
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:I agree but it's bloody hard to pronounce. What's wrong with calling her Tireless?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 07:37
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:I agree but it's bloody hard to pronounce indie fat eeeeee gabble 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 07:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 07:32 |
|
|
monkeytennis posted:I agree but it's bloody hard to pronounce. What's wrong with calling her Tireless? aaaaaand that's why US ships have poo poo names. HMS Dreadnought sounds much better than HMS Isn't-affraid-of-anything Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 07:43 on May 15, 2014 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2014 07:39
|
|