|
Colonial Air Force posted:Paging Burt Rutan to this thread.... I swear his designs originate as drunken bets.
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 15:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Tsuru posted:Of course, which is why the big three are making GBS threads themselves because of the following up and coming new engine manufacturers with their revolutionary new design philosophies that nobody in the west has ever thought of: Seeing as this is AI, I just need clarification about what you mean by this. If you mean the big three of P&W, GE, and RR, then you've missed the point of what I was saying, congrats! If you mean the big three of Detroit, please don't forget to breath, because boy you are that dumb.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 15:42
|
|
|
Maybe you can go first by explaining exactly how I was wrong with my initial post and why it needed to be quoted "for posterity" before you get to demand any further explanation from me. Also, I think there might be a bit of projection going on here... 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 15:59
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Maybe you can go first by explaining exactly how I was wrong with my initial post and why it needed to be quoted "for posterity" before you get to demand any further explanation from me. Wow, you really did mean the big three of Detroit. I meant that more as a a friendly goony jab, but if you want to get into an internet dick waiving contest, you can charge those windmills yourself.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 16:43
|
|
|
 This really needs more love.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:I find that extremely hard to believe. Not to detract from Japanese engineering, but a new engine from a new manufacturer is not going to be better than one with 40 years worth of improvements by a company with over half a century of experience. To help prevent one of my favorite threads from delving into a string of poo poo posts, here's a serious post/answer to your response: First: As I said before, there are multitudes of design considerations that are taken into account when designing an aircraft. Some of these considerations don't always end up with the "best" equipment or design -or what would seem the "best" on paper to a layman. Remember, aircraft design with a budget is about making compromises; some of these are to make your performance "on mission" better, some of these are so that you can have a domestic engine manufacturer producing parts for a domestically built military aircraft, so that you can keep everything inside your borders. Second: Ask pretty much any pilot that flies over water, and in an SEIO/OEI situation, most would rather have three engines still turning than just one. This is often considered in the design phase, or in the very least, the design requirements set forth by the government that writes the contract. Considering the mission profile for ASW, I would rather four engines than two, regardless the size of the bird or the "efficiency" costs. Third: 40 years worth of "improvements" by a company with "over half a century of experience" doesn't mean poo poo unless you can actually back that up. Often, that means buying out the upstarts with the innovative technology that could bring you down, or by subcontracting to them, because you know you need their ideas and they know they need your manufacturing base. Sometimes you subcontract both design and manufacture to a company (usually to localize or diversify your base), share some ideas, maybe license a design or two, lend some engineers to "help". Fourth: When a government, like Japan, wants an "all domestic" bird, a big company, like GE, who has been subcontracting to a local design/manufacturing company like IHI, might not be able to get in on the gig themselves, so they'll flip the project: IHI becomes the primary contractor, GE will act as a subcontractor, or provide "technical support", so it's IHI's name on the tin, but GE's know-how on the inside. Don't discount an "upstart" because you haven't heard of them before, especially a company like IHI which has been around much longer than you might think. Especially considering that they've been in bed with GE for a while. You know, the same GE that's a 50% owner of CFMI. Fifth: I quoted your post "for posterity" because I though it was "cute" because you seemed to take a simplistic view of what decisions go into designing an aircraft. Lastly: The point is moot anyways, because you were talking about a "40 year old engine design" which is just that, a forty year old engine. As was already said, the CFM56-7 is not the same engine, it is not that 40 year old design. Even if we were talking about that, it wouldn't take much for a competent company (read: not Chinese) to build a modern engine that was better. Even less when you get your technical support from the company that designed said "40 year old engine" and it's replacement. Now, let's get back to spergin' about planes.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 17:28
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Now, let's get back to spergin' about planes. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 17:53
|
|
|
Kitfox88 posted:Four engine twin fuselage pusher/puller prop configuration someone make my nightmare dream happen. http://www.luft46.com/junkers/ju635.html It got as wind tunnel tests and cockpit mockups.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 18:07
|
|
|
PhotoKirk posted:http://www.luft46.com/junkers/ju635.html I'd say that seems more suited for B&V but I realized it's not lopsided enough. Even so, 
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Leaving out the the parts which have nothing to do with the engine's performance, some of which actually in agreement with what I posted earlier and some of which being self-contradictory, this is where you show how little you actually know about this industry:YF19pilot posted:Often, that means buying out the upstarts with the innovative technology that could bring you down As with the actual aircraft that they power, the physical infrastructure, skill and knowledge required takes many tens of billions over decades to develop by the world's most brilliant graduates, and are at the US and UK's respective forefronts in terms of trade secrets. Even the Russians in their heyday, still the world's premier supplier of titanium, never managed to build an engine which could hold a candle to the western models of the same period. A turbofan engine which is an improvement in terms of efficiency and reliability over anything GE, PW and RR currently build, does not exist and is not even on the horizon. THAT is the point I was making. Nothing more, nothing less.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 19:29
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Leaving out the the parts which have nothing to do with the engine's performance, some of which actually in agreement with what I posted earlier and some of which being self-contradictory, this is where you show how little you actually know about this industry: Not trying to be a pedantic fuckwit or anything, but sometimes I can't help it... But google and apple have got nothing on GE. They wrote the book on buying up competitors and innovative industries and making them all GE. GE is a capital company, not a manufacturer. They just buy up profitable industries and run them under their banner. It just so happens that aero engines are very profitable. If the weren't, GE would dump the whole sector.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 21:32
|
|
|
There's two Delta A330s just parked in the middle of the KSEA center runway (or a taxiway very close to it). They're just sitting nose to tail. Are they parked there for lack of gate space, or is this something else?
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:01
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:There's two Delta A330s just parked in the middle of the KSEA center runway (or a taxiway very close to it). They're just sitting nose to tail. Could be a lot of things, but one could be having a technical problem or something that they're dealing with, and the one behind it can't go anywhere until the one in front gets out of the way.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:04
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:There's two Delta A330s just parked in the middle of the KSEA center runway (or a taxiway very close to it). They're just sitting nose to tail. When a mommy A330 and daddy A330 love each other very much... Sometimes though, if mommy's been unfaithful, out comes a 777.
|
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Party's over. One just got towed away. I guess they were just parked there, but it seems like a strange place to park a widebody. There's lots of room at KSEA. Also, Boeing Bingo. So far, 787, 777, 767, 757, 747 (cargo), 737. A lot more fun than Airbus bingo. Edit: 330s were parked right in the middle of taxiway Tango, which is parallel to all 3 runways. Strange place to park. 
Worthleast fucked around with this message at 22:23 on Dec 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Dec 26, 2014 22:19
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Leaving out the the parts which have nothing to do with the engine's performance, some of which actually in agreement with what I posted earlier and some of which being self-contradictory, this is where you show how little you actually know about this industry: Your question was "why are they using an engine from some new guy instead of a 40 year old design?" I answered that question, but you still seem to be missing the point, and bunny trailing off. The reason why I didn't hash about engine performance is because sometimes engine performance has absolutely nothing to do with why you pick one engine over another! That was my point. Otherwise, your "ignorance" (projecting much?) is coming close, but still failing to understand how being a subcontractor works. Small companies subcontract or get bought out. A large company like IHI form "technical alliances" when they subcontract with companies like GE so they can avoid the teething years. Whether you personally feel their engine is better or not isn't the point; the point is they're a competent manufacture, backed by the knowledge from one of the big three, their engines will be "good" and not piles of poo poo just because they're a "new" company (which they're not, they've been building engines since at least 2000 and have existed as a heavy industry manufacturer in one form or another since the 1850s). Lastly, I'm sure what they produce will be on par with at least GE's current offerings, and will be better than a 40 year old engine. And yes, sometimes companies are created for the sole purpose of being bought out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 02:37
|
|
|
 fffffaaaaaarrrrrttttt
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 03:14
|
|
|
I suddenly want to see KC-135 do a F-111 style fuel dump.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 03:17
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:
Looks like a valve on the chemtrail dispenser got stuck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 03:32
|
|
|
blugu64 posted:I suddenly want to see KC-135 do a F-111 style fuel dump. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1gWCq6e2PzI Pissing it away! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 03:34
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Looks like a valve on the chemtrail dispenser got stuck.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTw5vTJfQlI (A380 dumps fuel while a couple of pilots in a Citation catch a glimpse).
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 05:25
|
|
|
Was at the airport today dropping a friend off with some other friends and noticed an outside broadcast van for a tv channel on the departure road, we were wondering if they were covering some sports star or musician arriving or something but it turns out they were repoarting on Qantas last flight of a 767 which left an hour after we were there. http://www.9news.com.au/national/2014/12/27/14/04/qantas-boeing-767-makes-final-flight quote:Mr Galvin said the plane, once the workhorse of the fleet, had served passengers well but would now be sold into another carrier and flown to the US in January.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 13:18
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:
goddamn, Citations are loud fun plane to work on, though, love the low wings and gear, makes it a breeze to get up on the fucker
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 17:00
|
|
|
Worthleast posted:Party's over. One just got towed away. I guess they were just parked there, but it seems like a strange place to park a widebody. There's lots of room at KSEA. There's actually not a whole lot of extra room at Seattle for parking airplanes that isn't already being used. The south side of the field is mostly occupied by hangars for Delta and Alaska, and although there's some open room on the north side of the field, there are normally quite a few airplanes parked there, so it's pretty common for Tango to be used to park a couple of Delta widebodies on slow days. It's pretty rare for pilots to actually use Tango as a taxiway, since most aircraft make a turn at November or Juliet after landing, and then use those taxiways to cross the center runway. Ironically, I'm writing this from a crew room in Seattle, while waiting for a new airplane to arrive to replace one that got written up for smelling funny.
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Go on, someone post the FW: FW: RE: pilot write ups and maint responses
|
|
#
?
Dec 27, 2014 21:21
|
|
|
So, uh, I just found out that Lockheed had the audacity to offer a navalised version of the F-104 Starfighter to the US Navy in the early stages of the program. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 03:50
|
|
|
MrChips posted:So, uh, I just found out that Lockheed had the audacity to offer a navalised version of the F-104 Starfighter to the US Navy in the early stages of the program. How the heck was that supposed to work without completely re-designing the wings and landing gear? From what I could find, the approach speed of a F-104 was somewhere around 170kt, with a minimum speed of 150kt at touchdown, and given the landing gear and tire design, that would have been absolutely terrifying to land on a carrier.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 04:03
|
|
|
It'll be fine, just make it a tailsitter and land vertically like the Pogo, what could go wrong? It had enough thrust*! *At full afterburner and pretty much empty weight. A good combination.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
MrChips posted:So, uh, I just found out that Lockheed had the audacity to offer a navalised version of the F-104 Starfighter to the US Navy in the early stages of the program. I want to see test video.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 04:33
|
|
|
Sounds like we may have another airliner down. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/world/2014/12/28/AirAsia-flight-from-Indonesia-to-Singapore-missing.html
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
zinc68 posted:Sounds like we may have another airliner down. http://english.alarabiya.net/en/News/world/2014/12/28/AirAsia-flight-from-Indonesia-to-Singapore-missing.html  A/C asked for an "unusual" route apparently, weather event, hijack, aliens?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:20
|
|
|
It's a 7 minute long flight according to flightaware. Not too much of an opportunity to go way out there?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:22
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:It's a 7 minute long flight according to flightaware. Not too much of an opportunity to go way out there? I don't think flightaware is correct on that.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:It's a 7 minute long flight according to flightaware. Not too much of an opportunity to go way out there? Yeah, I can't imagine it was loaded with an excessive amount of fuel outside of what is needed for divert/emergency. Sounds like SAR is already being sent out and about, unlike the chucklefucks in Malaysia. e: says they lost contact 42 mins after takeoff, it's not super short
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:26
|
|
|
Yeah flightaware's data is very inconsistent, claims previous flights were 7 minutes long and covered about 800 nmi.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:32
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Yeah flightaware's data is very inconsistent, claims previous flights were 7 minutes long and covered about 800 nmi. Wanna see that one take off.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:34
|
|
|
lol that's an average speed of almost 6900 knots
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:50
|
|
|
The correspondent on CNN doesn't seem to grasp aviate, navigate, communicate -- there's a reason pilots don't immediately radio upon an unexpected event or mishap. ACARS is still a choice these days, right? Is it optioned on every airframe, but up to the operator to pay for bandwidth?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 05:53
|
|
|
CNN?
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 06:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:06 |
|
|
Apparently getting on an airplane with "asia" as part of the company name is a really bad idea, since they seem to have developed a habit of crashing into seawalls, disappearing, or getting shot down over the last 18 months. Interestingly, AirAsia is also based in Malaysia, so this has been a spectacularly awful year for airline safety in that country.
|
|
#
?
Dec 28, 2014 06:02
|
|