|
Plastic_Gargoyle posted:I was going to post something about the Ekranoplan being useless in an opposed assault landing, with the added detail that the Convar R3Y Tradewind was cancelled for that reason, but I remembered that was just a comment made by a third party a few years ago. Man, checking their wiki page, Allison never did make an aircraft engine that didn't cause anybody who had to deal with it to curse continuously when mentioned.
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 07:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
priznat posted:Gadzooks those V8s sounded sweet. The 454 was quite the beast, always wanted to drive a Chevelle with one. I thought the 454 was, like the 460, an iron pig of a motor whose internal geometry made loads of torque but, combined with abysmal factory heads, gently caress all power? Or have I been reading about the post-smog motors?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 08:10
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Man, checking their wiki page, Allison never did make an aircraft engine that didn't cause anybody who had to deal with it to curse continuously when mentioned. Allison made the P-51 a lovely airplane. I will never forgive them for that.  E: gently caress. The same Allisons were used to make the Lightning the twin forked murder machine. I'm so conflicted. Spaced God fucked around with this message at 08:18 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 08:13
|
|
|
IPCRESS posted:I thought the 454 was, like the 460, an iron pig of a motor whose internal geometry made loads of torque but, combined with abysmal factory heads, gently caress all power? Or have I been reading about the post-smog motors? For its day it was pretty impressive, with I believe in the neighbourhood for 350-380hp and I want to say over 400ft-lbs of torque? Edit: Wiki says 390-465hp and 500ft-lbs and it was possibly underrated. So it had oodles of power too but that displacement, holy crap. It'd be a thirsty bugger. They kept using them in their trucks until 1996! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_Big-Block_engine#454 I mean yes, they were iron pigs and you could get much better power with a supercharged small block or even some v6 twin turbos with much better efficiency these days. But drat they sounded good.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 08:17
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Man, checking their wiki page, Allison never did make an aircraft engine that didn't cause anybody who had to deal with it to curse continuously when mentioned. As has been pointed out, they at least made the engines that made the P-38 a mean machine. Also the engine that powered the C-130 for over 50 years until the -J model. Which is more than can be said of Westinghouse's jet engines. Without a single redeeming quality and responsible for all but singlehandedly crippling an entire generation of naval fighters.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 09:00
|
|
|
iyaayas01 posted:As has been pointed out, they at least made the engines that made the P-38 a mean machine. Also the engine that powered the C-130 for over 50 years until the -J model. According to one terrible p-38 book I've got there was a standing joke that the reason that the P-38 had two Allisons was that there'd be a chance that one of them would keep running long enough to get you home.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 09:14
|
|
|
Oops: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XT7BC0HyNV0
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 11:19
|
|
|
I'm amazed there isn't some safety protocol in the airbus that prevents you from doing just that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 11:53
|
|
|
How much damage would that do to the aircraft?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 13:58
|
|
|
Splode posted:How much damage would that do to the aircraft? Enough that I winced. Less than if it had fallen the whole way, rather than be lowered down by the rolling nose gear. The electronics bay on a 320 is behind the cockpit on the bottom so it probably took the brunt of the hit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
A320 drat your fine move it so you can sock it to me one mo time
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:21
|
|
|
priznat posted:Gadzooks those V8s sounded sweet. The 454 was quite the beast, always wanted to drive a Chevelle with one. We had a Buick station wagon with the 455. Despite weighing upwards of 5000 pounds, it could beat a V6 Camaro off the line. Torque like you wouldn't believe. I did so much stupid poo poo as a teenager.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:27
|
|
|
HOW HOW
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
Barnsy posted:I'm amazed there isn't some safety protocol in the airbus that prevents you from doing just that? Yes, but it can be defeated, which makes me think this aircraft is undergoing maintenance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
It's not just a collapse, because the nosegear doors snap open first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 15:06
|
|
|
0toShifty posted:It's not just a collapse, because the nosegear doors snap open first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah. Is that why the ground dude raises his hands? he might be gesturing to the guy in the flight deck to select gear up, but they didn't pin the gear, which is what you should always do if you're going to be monkeying around with the gear. Complacency strikes again! Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 16:01 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
Go on, where's that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 17:18
|
|
|
Linedance posted:he might be gesturing to the guy in the flight deck to select gear up, but they didn't pin the gear, which is what you should always do if you're going to be monkeying around with the gear. Complacency strikes again! At least they pinned the mains.  Airbus dudes: what procedure were they trying to accomplish, there? I can't think of a single time I ever raised a gear handle on the line, but I never worked on Airbus products. I did get to raise a DC-10-30 center gear on the ground once. That was pretty cool. Still didn't get to touch the gear handle.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:At least they pinned the mains. They probably didn't, but the mains won't collapse because of the way they fold. They'll try though! As for what they were up to, could be any number of things that I can't remember off the top of my head (and could have been taking shortcuts instead of doing things like cheating prox sensors). I know there's a fairly routine task that has you select the gear lever up, but I can't remember what it is at the moment. Also, the 320 does have a habit of collapsing the nose in certain circumstances related to towing, but that doesn't look like what happened here. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 18:14 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
On the E-jets (and probably on most aircraft), there's several system tests (example: autobrake control switch) that require you to make the aircraft think it's off the ground. You can physically fool the downlock sensors on the landing gear, or you can use this fancy override box with long cables and a bunch of switches. I don't think you usually need to touch the gear lever for those tests, but that's all I can think of. If you're testing the gear themselves you're probably up on jacks already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
A320 nose wheels sound finicky. Any reason why?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:50
|
|
|
How does an Airbus not have WOW switches?! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 18:57
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:How does an Airbus not have WOW switches?! oh I bet someone said wow after hitting that switch
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
simplefish posted:Go on, where's that? Aichi E13A (Jake), Nikko Bay, Palau
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
In a similar vein https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tZWop1Se5nA Gibfender fucked around with this message at 20:12 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Psion posted:oh I bet someone said wow after hitting that switch Is it like many aircraft where you can pull the breaker for WOW to bypass it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 20:45
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:A320 nose wheels sound finicky. Any reason why? Airbus nose wheel steering is finicky because it's not technically essential, so the redundancy isn't the same level as other systems, which is why they can get stuck out in the runway unable to steer. The gear itself isn't any more or less finicky than other manufacturers, in fact I can think of a few incidents of dropping a 767 on its nose. Nostalgia4Infinity posted:How does an Airbus not have WOW switches?! It does, they work, but perhaps that was what they were troubleshooting.. Maybe there was a fault in the air-ground system? CommieGIR posted:Is it like many aircraft where you can pull the breaker for WOW to bypass it? You can disable the computers that process the prox switch data (or just cheat the sensors), fooling the aircraft into thinking it's in the air. There are a lot of reasons you might want to do this, and a lot of precautions you have to keep in mind if you're going to do so. Again I don't know what the deal is with the video, but when you're performing maintenance, you're deliberately disabling or dealing with degraded systems that would ordinarily be working on a serviceable aircraft in flight, which is why you need to pay heed to the precautions and warnings in the maintenance manual. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 21:02 on Jan 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Linedance posted:The gear itself isn't any more or less finicky than other manufacturers, in fact I can think of a few incidents of dropping a 767 on its nose. That reminds me - most of the engineers at work have worked on BAE146s / Avro RJs in the past. Several of them have separately told me about seeing other people drop those on their noses too. Apparently on the 146/RJ it's very gentle but still unstoppable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 21:20
|
|
|
David Hartman was right, that nosewheel strut was mushy!
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
They should have taken a leaf from the Marines and put a stack of mattresses below the nose first.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Airbus nose wheel steering is finicky because it's not technically essential, so the redundancy isn't the same level as other systems, which is why they can get stuck out in the runway unable to steer. I was thinking more about the incidents of the nose wheel failing to retract in flight leading to emergency landings and media freakouts.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
My dad used to work at American Airlines' maintenance base at Ft Worth Alliance airport and another crew dropped a 767 on its nose in a similar fashion. The maintenance task required disabling the weight-on-wheels mechanism and having the gear lever in the up/retracted position. When this is done, the gears themselves are supposed to be safety pinned to prevent accidental retraction. Someone didn't install these pins on the nosewheel of that aircraft (and only partially installed them on the mains) and it eventually fell on its nose while being pulled into the hangar. What sucks is that it crushed the avionics/INS bay which is VERY costly to repair. Boeing sent their special team in for that one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 12, 2015 22:45
|
|
|
http://www.cnn.com/2015/01/12/travel/new-york-london-record-flight-time/index.htmlquote:Transatlantic flight nears supersonic speeds Thanks, CNN! 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:12
|
|
|
Why did they even report that?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Why did they even report that? I'll bet a CNN editor was on that flight. Live CNN iProducer iReporting from the aPlane.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:37
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Why did they even report that? CNN just recently discovered that aircraft routinely reach a destination without crashing, disappearing, or getting shot down, so naturally this is news to them.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:52
|
|
|
Have they entertained the possibility that the plane skirted a black hole, thus giving it additional velocity?
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 05:46 |
|
|
Ardeem posted:Man, checking their wiki page, Allison never did make an aircraft engine that didn't cause anybody who had to deal with it to curse continuously when mentioned. I've got no complaints about the -427's we've got on the E-2. They're rock solid compared to the Hamilton Sundstrand props...
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2015 02:03
|
|
