|
Nerobro posted:Then lots of people shouldn't be flying. Well, the F-15 does have that nice gun cross marker at the top of the hud and a flight path marker so if you can't figure out alpha and beta from that then yes you shouldn't be flying.
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
This news story has a few more details regarding the mid air collision in southern California last week http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/aug/17/plane-crash-brown-field-update/ Both aircraft were talking to the tower.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 03:34
|
|
|
  All Nippon Airways will be flying these into YVR. So rad.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
I don't like the way it looks painted across the whole plane. I think it would look better if the plane was painted up like it had been in a turbolaser battle with the engines painted like an R2 unit under each wing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:38
|
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:I don't like the way it looks painted across the whole plane. I think it would look better if the plane was painted up like it had been in a turbolaser battle with the engines painted like an R2 unit under each wing. That would certainly be better, but this is still great. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:I don't like the way it looks painted across the whole plane. I think it would look better if the plane was painted up like it had been in a turbolaser battle with the engines painted like an R2 unit under each wing. I believe the engines are only allowed to be flat white or flat black
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 09:51
|
|
|
Why would this be the case?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:12
|
|
|
thesurlyspringKAA posted:I believe the engines are only allowed to be flat white or flat black Air Canada's 787's have their toothpaste blue colour on the engines too. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:23
|
|
|
Bugsmasher posted:Air Canada's 787's have their toothpaste blue colour on the engines too. Southwest uses their colors on the engines, too. I think everyone does?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
787 engines are special. According to airliners.netquote:The engines cannot be painted because the laminar nacelle's flow characteristics are crucial. Boeing has stressed a lot that the engine MUST be a single, neutral color, as any decals or paint color differences will cause ridges that will affect flow significantly, despite the boundary layer. I wonder how much engineering time went into RR figuring out where to put their decal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
British Airways' 787 engines are dark blue.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:12
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:British Airways' 787 engines are dark blue. hmmmm quote:But Boeing says it is evaluating customer requests to paint the nacelles on a "case by case basis".
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:18
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:787 engines are special. According to airliners.net surely that bit about airflow just affects fuel economy and airlines can choose to sacrifice that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
LUBE UP YOUR BUTT posted:surely that bit about airflow just affects fuel economy and airlines can choose to sacrifice that? It almost certainly also effects the flow over the fan cowl chevrons, which are for noise reduction, which the manufacturer probably isn't willing to sacrifice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 15:40
|
|
|
LUBE UP YOUR BUTT posted:surely that bit about airflow just affects fuel economy and airlines can choose to sacrifice that? Well heat causing delamination of the composites would be a slightly larger problem.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:14
|
|
|
Mr. Showtime posted:The F-35 has one absolute motherfucker of an engine (at mil power it's pushing just as hard as the F-16's F100-PW-229). The A and C carry like 20,000 pounds of fuel internally or something crazy like that to reduce the need for drop tanks. I'd believe it.  43000lbf wet? Why is there not a big twin-engine fighter with two of those? It'd be what the West thought the MiG-25 was. It's obviously not a ridiculous design tailored to the one situation like the RR Pegasus.vessbot posted:Nebakenezzer: "That crazy fighter with the wasp major engine" Those, and the Gee Bee being not incorrectly described as "an R-1340 with wings and a tail" makes me wonder: what single-engine planes have the most power/thrust? Absolute and power:weight both, if you're feeling frisky, for all the categories in the previous quiz (piston, turboprop, jet, maybe even motorjet). Don't bother spoilering your answers, I'm too lazy to curate it as a contest. As a corollary, what is the most overengined plane with any number of engines, based on max thrust and minimum weight for, say, an airshow demo? Probably one of the big cargo haulers or a long-range airliner. Now I'm picturing one of those wacky (French?) designs where the cockpit is in the prop spinner/inlet spike, with a GE90-115B. Would it be possible to have something fighter-sized with a GE90 and 1.6:1 t:w? Edit: also, the motorjet is peak aeronautical insanity, using a piston engine to drive the compressor of a jet engine (and also maybe a prop). Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Aug 20, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:27
|
|
Bad Angus! Bad!
|
Delivery McGee posted:Those, and the Gee Bee being not incorrectly described as "an R-1340 with wings and a tail" makes me wonder: what single-engine planes have the most power/thrust? X-15 at just over 2:1 fully fueled 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:37
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:Edit: also, the motorjet is peak aeronautical insanity, using a piston engine to drive the compressor of a jet engine (and also maybe a prop). There's the Grob Strato 2C as well which used parts of a Pratt and Whitney PW127 turbine to feed a piston engine.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:42
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:X-15 at just over 2:1 fully fueled I probably should have specified "air-breathing."
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:43
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:I probably should have specified "air-breathing." It still breathes air. They just liquefy it first, and only carry the bit that actually supports combustion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:44
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:I probably should have specified "air-breathing." Fine. X-43A
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 16:48
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:30
|
|
|
Delivery McGee posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:34
|
|
|
The F-35 can supercruise at mach 1.2. And the F135 has considerably more thrust than the F119.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
Tires are catchin' fire  When this happens, is it a major maintenance hassle?
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 17:50
|
|
|
Justice.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Tires are catchin' fire Generally, yes:  It really depends on the circumstance, though. An aircraft with all its static wicks present and properly bonded, struck in the air, might get away with no damage at all, or just some paint damage. Other times, not so much. The Delta 737 definitely looks like it went to ground through the gear, so probably some damage. A good strike like that tends to pop breakers before it fries anything, but stuff still gets burned up occasionally. It's really luck of the draw.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 18:08
|
|
|
please trigger warning any pictures of ASA CRJs
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
So the Bugatti 100p replica FLEW! https://www.facebook.com/TheBugatti100pProject?fref=nf  Goddamn that plane is a sexy beast! History has been made, it just took 76 years or so.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 19:59
|
|
|
It's almost like I could swear we have seen it before. Maybe even in this very thread. Yeah, it's pretty 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
drat. Well they uploaded a video today which is pretty cool on their Facebook page. Two straight-8s sound so good.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Vitamin J posted:drat. Well they uploaded a video today which is pretty cool on their Facebook page. Two straight-8s sound so good. They're not using Bugatti engines in the replica; rather, they're using a couple of turbocharged Hayabusa engines. The Bugatti engines are simply unattainable at any reasonable (or unreasonable, for that matter) price.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
MrChips posted:They're not using Bugatti engines in the replica; rather, they're using a couple of turbocharged Hayabusa engines. The Bugatti engines are simply unattainable at any reasonable (or unreasonable, for that matter) price.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:27
|
|
|
Looking forward and aft. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:31
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Even (especially?) today I doubt there's a profitable market in SSTs. There just aren't enough people willing to pay that much more to get where they're going a few hours faster, and we have things like videoconferencing ( I totally agree, but I would bet that Etihad or Emirates would go for a few.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:50
|
|
) now that we didn't then which takes a chunk out of the business market.
|
Why does it strike there and not the
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:53
|
|
|
Lightning does what it wants.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Looking forward
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Looking forward Hmm, turns out it might not be turbocharged after all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 16:03 |
|
|
God says "Don't take off right now". Nebakenezzer posted:Tires are catchin' fire Even if the plane isn't damaged, I imagine the maintenance crew doesn't enjoy cleaning all the poop off the passenger seats in that area of the airplane.
|
|
#
?
Aug 20, 2015 21:15
|
|
