|
Tsuru posted:Bits of CF6-50 turbine and exhaust nozzle also tended to fall off when these jets were still flying in the west, with the full benefit of western maintenance standards and acres of money and parts. A KLM jet famously lost parts of the hot section of one of its CF6 engines when departing from LAX, right over the beach. There has been an SB for this problem for quite a while.
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 23:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:08 |
|
|
CharlesM posted:Nice job landing with 2 engines. And both on the same side. Wheeeee.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2015 23:53
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:Bit fell off your 747 mate... Not as scary as your 747 growing another engine. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Not as scary as your 747 growing another engine. Before anyone asks, that's a spare engine being ferried in for a different 747. Boeing included a special fifth hardpoint on the wing just for that purpose.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 00:16
|
|
|
That's just the nacelle too, the guts of the engine are taking up cargo space.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:That's just the nacelle too, the guts of the engine are taking up cargo space. Nah, it's basically a whole engine. All they do is remove the fan blades and lock the shafts in place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Mahan is not as badly affected by the sanctions as you might think, they even have some fairly recent equipment like A340-600's that they picked up for cheap. According to the internet they have 2 747-300's operational powered by CF6-50 engines. It's not so much the aircraft themselves, it's the spares and maintenance. I knew a guy who was an engineer for Iran Air who was working as a security guard at Heathrow. He had some stories. He opted to emigrate to the UK instead of working under duress to release aircraft he couldn't in good conscience do. They have major parts supply problems, and much of what they get is black - or very grey - market, with no documentation. We've assisted the guy who handles them in Heathrow and seriously their operation is so sketchy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 01:02
|
|
|
Plus there is Mahan's alleged tie-up with Iranian intelligence and the Revolutionary Guard, which makes those spare parts even harder to get a hold of.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 01:17
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:Bits of CF6-50 turbine and exhaust nozzle also tended to fall off when these jets were still flying in the west, with the full benefit of western maintenance standards and acres of money and parts. JAL 46E dropped one over Anchorage. From news reports back in the day I want to say it landed in a parking lot. http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19930331-0 includes a couple pictures. Edit: JT9Ds, though. Still a 747 dropping an engine, though. Edit 2: In June, Boeing proposed modifying all 747 jumbo jets to make engines less likely to fall off in flight. Advent Horizon fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
ALL-PRO SEXMAN posted:Before anyone asks, that's a spare engine being ferried in for a different 747. Boeing included a special fifth hardpoint on the wing just for that purpose. So they all have that hardpoint? I've never heard this before.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
Godholio posted:So they all have that hardpoint? I've never heard this before. Yep! It's a pretty common feature. Dunno how much use it gets.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 03:15
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Not as scary as your 747 growing another engine. Caldari design?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 03:26
|
|
|
Wasn't just 747s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 03:44
|
|
|
Godholio posted:So they all have that hardpoint? I've never heard this before. A thread with pictures. According to that the 742/743 had terrible 3 engine ferry range so it made more sense to take the fuel hit on the 5th pod on another flight. The 744 has a reasonable 3 engine ferry range so its not really necessary anymore. Well, unless you're trying to get home to Australia for the engine. According to them most 744s do not have the hard point. Now I'm curious how you move a GE-90 around for a disabled 777. hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Oct 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 03:46
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Now I'm curious how you move a GE-90 around for a disabled 777. Dreamlifter!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Now I'm curious how you move a GE-90 around for a disabled 777. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 04:01
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:A thread with pictures. According to that the 742/743 had terrible 3 engine ferry range so it made more sense to take the fuel hit on the 5th pod on another flight. The 744 has a reasonable 3 engine ferry range so its not really necessary anymore. Well, unless you're trying to get home to Australia for the engine. The fan section is removable/install-able in the field. You ship the core as normal, with the fan section laid down on a separate pallet. To ship the completely assembled GE90 by air requires an AN-124 or the AN-225. Separated into two parts, it'll fit in any nose-load 747. (Not sure if it'll fit through the cargo door of a converted 747.) 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 04:02
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:
Submarine 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
I laughed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 04:44
|
|
|
Jumpingmanjim posted:Submarine Dang.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The fan section is removable/install-able in the field. You ship the core as normal, with the fan section laid down on a separate pallet. To ship the completely assembled GE90 by air requires an AN-124 or the AN-225. Separated into two parts, it'll fit in any nose-load 747. (Not sure if it'll fit through the cargo door of a converted 747.) It will fit in the side cargo door on a 747. It will also fit in a 777F which is what that picture shows.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 05:29
|
|
|
http://i.imgur.com/0xwuyYQ.gifv
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Yep. That's why it's a dual signature to check cowls closed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 12:06
|
|
|
TEAH SYAG posted:Caldari design?  Well played.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 12:55
|
|
|
Gull wing doors are pretty cool
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 13:02
|
|
|
Inacio posted:Gull wing doors are pretty cool Somewhat less cool when they're self deploying/jettisoning though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
Linedance posted:Yep. That's why it's a dual signature to check cowls closed. A pair of core cowls that refuse to line up and lock are basically the stuff of my recurrent nightmares. Also anything to do with reverser PDMs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 17:07
|
|
|
Tuesday, October 27, between 9am and 12pm is the tentative schedule for the USAF museum to move the XB-70 Valkyrie from the restricted-access on-base hangar to the new museum building. Also very likely your only chance to ever see it under sky and decent lighting. http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Expansion.aspx 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 18:21
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Tuesday, October 27, between 9am and 12pm is the tentative schedule for the USAF museum to move the XB-70 Valkyrie from the restricted-access on-base hangar to the new museum building. Also very likely your only chance to ever see it under sky and decent lighting. I've seen it under sky and in decent lighting, way back in the late 80s when it was still just kept outside in the weather. I can't wait for that new building to open so I can go see it whenever the hell I want. Also, to sneak aboard, sit in the pilot's seat, and make jet noises.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 19:20
|
|
|
My only complaint about that museum is that there aren't any raised viewing platforms. The shuttle trainer sort of acts like one in the modern/Cold War section since it's a story high but they really need more of them. It's hard to grasp how massive the B-52/B-36 are from underneath. Plus some of these jets look kinda samey at eye level. I don't think the new section will have any platforms either, unfortunately. The B-70 is so massively tall it would really benefit from it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
david_a posted:My only complaint about that museum is that there aren't any raised viewing platforms. The shuttle trainer sort of acts like one in the modern/Cold War section since it's a story high but they really need more of them. It's hard to grasp how massive the B-52/B-36 are from underneath. Plus some of these jets look kinda samey at eye level. I don't think the new section will have any platforms either, unfortunately. The B-70 is so massively tall it would really benefit from it. I don't know how it will turn out, but you can look down on the B-36 and B-47 from the Hall of Missiles. Probably going to have a similar balcony going out the other way into the new building. Udvar-Hazy it ain't, but better than the R&D hangar all the cool stuff was in on base.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2015 20:26
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:Tuesday, October 27, between 9am and 12pm is the tentative schedule for the USAF museum to move the XB-70 Valkyrie from the restricted-access on-base hangar to the new museum building. Also very likely your only chance to ever see it under sky and decent lighting. How big is the flight deck on the XB-70? I can't find any pics of the interior on Google, and from the outside it looks pretty roomy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
Inacio posted:How big is the flight deck on the XB-70? I can't find any pics of the interior on Google, and from the outside it looks pretty roomy. Cozy. http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/media/086/XB-70A%20Pilot%20Station.html http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/media/086/XB-70A%20Copilot%20Station.html http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/media/086/XB-70A%20Electronic%20Equipment%20Compartment.html It looks like you can get up and walk around in the equipment compartment but there's nowhere to sit or anything. I also can't figure out what's through the little door in the back. FYI, this page is awesome, and looks like it's been updated a lot since the last time I looked it up. http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/Visit/VirtualTour/Cockpit360.aspx Plinkey fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Oct 17, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:24
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:Cozy. Six engins and no flight engineer, co-pilot must have been a busy job with a lot of checklists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Six engins and no flight engineer, co-pilot must have been a busy job with a lot of checklists. Hydraulics, pressurization, electrical, comm, yea. Number of engines don't have much to do with it. It's all the sub systems on his plate. He's gotta divide his attention between radios and checklists plus emergencies. Not to mention flying and keeping an eyeball out the window.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 04:12
|
|
|
Plinkey posted:Cozy. Flight deck is sexy 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 04:13
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Flight deck is sexy NO SEX IN THE COCK-PIT
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 05:47
|
|
|
Slo-Tek posted:I don't know how it will turn out, but you can look down on the B-36 and B-47 from the Hall of Missiles. ...why haven't I made the drive out to Dayton before to see this museum before?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 13:07
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:Six engins and no flight engineer, co-pilot must have been a busy job with a lot of checklists. holocaust bloopers posted:Hydraulics, pressurization, electrical, comm, yea. Number of engines don't have much to do with it. It's all the sub systems on his plate. He's gotta divide his attention between radios and checklists plus emergencies. Not to mention flying and keeping an eyeball out the window. Remember that the XB-70 was a prototype, and thus only had two crew. The co-pilot could safely monitor the systems without dividing his attention to mission critical issues like SAMs or MiGs. The full production B-70 (and I think the unfinished 3rd airship) was to have had the traditional USAF bomber four-man crew of pilot, co-pilot, engineer, and bombardier/radio-man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 04:08 |
|
|
LeadSled posted:...why haven't I made the drive out to Dayton before to see this museum before? Then again, going multiple times is clearly the superior option because it's impossible to see everything in detail on one trip 
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2015 15:18
|
|