Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2243 »

HookedOnChthonics: Dec 5, 2015; Profoundly dull

MrYenko posted:

There are significant trucking operations that literally ONLY haul jet engines. A LOT of engines move by truck.

Oh, yeah, I'm well aware of that, I've just never seen an engine half as big again as the truck cab rolling up 99.

# ? Jan 5, 2016 20:54

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 20:32

Finger Prince: Jan 5, 2007

Possibly robbing flight test at Boeing field to ensure an on-time delivery from the factory?

# ? Jan 5, 2016 21:21

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

Holy living gently caress I got to see a living, breathing Super Guppy in person today! I never in a million years would think I'd get to see one outside of a museum!

Literally started screaming when I glanced over my shoulder driving off base and saw the straight-up tail and silver sausage lurking by a hangar. Best day ever.

# ? Jan 5, 2016 21:24

HookedOnChthonics: Dec 5, 2015; Profoundly dull

The engines were going north from Tacoma towards KBFI.

The super guppy is friggin ace, like everyone else in seattle when we got the FFT I was more hype for the delivery vehicle than the payload (that's a lie, the FFT is amazing too).

The pilot, a former shuttle commander, gave a pretty great talk about aero spacelines and what it's like to fly that beast. He also told an amazing shuttle program joke/anecdote that I wish I remembered in its entirety but ended with a NASA controller deadpanning something along the lines of "remember kids, deploying the landing gear is important for reducing drag on the runway."

# ? Jan 5, 2016 21:45

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

I wasn't able to stick around long enough to see what they were loading/unloading (probably an F-16C that poo poo the bed), but I was blown away when I looked down at my phone to send pictures to friends and the whole front end had opened by the time I looked up.

Acres of shiny, unpainted metal. loving ACRES.

I've seen Boeing's Dreamlifter in person, apparently minutes before takeoff. I would have skipped the Boeing plant tour if it meant I'd get to see that humptydump take to the air.

I don't get to see as many zany things as I'd like, but the occasional C-17, C-5, F-35, and even a Hawker Hunter makes certain days exciting.

I can only imagine what it's like to work next to Davis-Monthan or any base where active testing of weird, wild stuff goes on.

# ? Jan 5, 2016 21:55

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

I should have been more grateful when I used to see a flying super guppy drat near weekly, generally under such bright sun that it almost hurt to look at. Also when 4-ships of NASA livery T-38s would take off and bank along the highway.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 00:07

shame on an IGA: Apr 8, 2005

I once walked out of a Dunkin'Donuts in Charleston and immediately got buzzed by the An-225

# ? Jan 6, 2016 00:11

Wingnut Ninja: Jan 11, 2003; Mostly Harmless

Fredrick posted:

Unf. That's a lot of concentrated hotness.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 02:16

BIG HEADLINE: Jun 13, 2006; "Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

Kind of an odd rack on the Turkey's side, too. Looks like a rack for a Phoenix, Sparrow, and Sidewinder. I've only ever seen Sparrow/Sidewinder and Phoenix/Sidewinder.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 03:45

karoshi: Nov 4, 2008; "Can somebody mspaint eyes on the steaming packages? TIA" yeah well fuck you too buddy, this is the best you're gonna get. Is this even "work-safe"? Let's find out!

Wingnut Ninja posted:

Unf. That's a lot of concentrated hotness.

Let's not talk about the kid in the right back with polio.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 04:02

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

Is that a "conformal" fuel tank?

# ? Jan 6, 2016 04:36

Wingnut Ninja: Jan 11, 2003; Mostly Harmless

karoshi posted:

Let's not talk about the kid in the right back with polio.

Hey now, the A-4 may not have been as flashy as the Phantom or Tomcat, but it had a pretty amazing career in a lot more roles than originally intended for a cheapo attack plane.

Godholio posted:

Is that a "conformal" fuel tank?

It's an extra avionics package.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 04:41

bloops: Dec 31, 2010; Thanks Ape Pussy!

Skyhawks are cool as gently caress. The Discovery Wings special about them is so goddamn good. It's on YouTube.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 04:43

Mao Zedong Thot: Oct 16, 2008

karoshi posted:

Let's not talk about the kid in the right back with polio.

shut your whore mouth

# ? Jan 6, 2016 04:54

Boomerjinks: Jan 31, 2007; DINO DAMAGE

shame on an IGA posted:

I once walked out of a Dunkin'Donuts in Charleston and immediately got buzzed by the An-225

I don't think I'd survive this.

I saw an An-124 parked more than a mile away at DIA and barely made it out alive.

Around 4pm I was walking in the park near my house and the Super Guppy actually flew right over, less than 2,000 feet up. Today was a goddamn miraculous day.

People are freaking out on the local news station's facebook demanding to know why a Global Hawk drone is spotted over a civilian population. :jerkbag:

# ? Jan 6, 2016 05:49

Previa_fun: Nov 10, 2004

Skyhawk seems like it'd just be a hell of a lot of fun to fly. The roll rate was, what, near 720 deg/sec, and later versions with the -P408 motors had a drat near 1:1 thrust:weight ratio once you burn off some fuel.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 05:50

Wingnut Ninja: Jan 11, 2003; Mostly Harmless

Previa_fun posted:

Skyhawk seems like it'd just be a hell of a lot of fun to fly. The roll rate was, what, near 720 deg/sec, and later versions with the -P408 motors had a drat near 1:1 thrust:weight ratio once you burn off some fuel.

For max fun, consider that the Blue Angels flew them for 13 years. Stripped down to the basics, with upgraded engines installed. :hellyeah:

# ? Jan 6, 2016 06:36

ChickenOfTomorrow: Nov 11, 2012; god damn it, you've got to be kind

joat mon posted:

To heck with the Ju-52, what happens to Victor Gaunt!?!

(I don't know how the serial ended, the next issue with the final installment is missing. His career probably did end in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa.)

# ? Jan 6, 2016 06:57

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

Boomerjinks posted:

People are freaking out on the local news station's facebook demanding to know why a Global Hawk drone is spotted over a civilian population.

If it were actually Global Hawking it would be far too high to be casually spotted.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 07:00

HookedOnChthonics: Dec 5, 2015; Profoundly dull

mlmp08 posted:

Also when 4-ships of NASA livery T-38s would take off and bank along the highway.

I think I might legitimately hate you.

NASA may be more well-known for spaceflight, but I think I can confidently say their true contribution to mankind is achieving aesthetic perfection in fighter jets.

Exhibit b:

HookedOnChthonics fucked around with this message at 07:15 on Jan 6, 2016

# ? Jan 6, 2016 07:08

ehnus: Apr 16, 2003; Now you're thinking with portals!

Wingnut Ninja posted:

For max fun, consider that the Blue Angels flew them for 13 years. Stripped down to the basics, with upgraded engines installed.

The Singaporean Skyhawks with F404's sound like a blast

# ? Jan 6, 2016 07:31

BIG HEADLINE: Jun 13, 2006; "Stand back, Ottawan ruffian, or face my lumens!"

Godholio posted:

If it were actually Global Hawking it would be far too high to be casually spotted.

They were doing a low-level flight to get a pinpoint fix on the RFID tags Obama had put in all the ammo that was panic-bought and buried after the Sandy Hook hoax. Also, the chemtrail sprayer had a stuck flap that day so they couldn't drop the signal-magnification nanites suspended in the bio-active medium that slowly turns you into a Muslim. :tinfoil:

# ? Jan 6, 2016 07:51

Buttcoin purse: Apr 24, 2014

Psion posted:

Assuming you mean Desert Storm still, I believe it was something along the lines of "print out a phonebook size ATO every loving day and chopper it out" but this is the US military - I'm sure the actual process was 34 times as complicated.

S-3 instead of chopper, but yes. But that wasn't the first solution they used, it was just the solution that turned out to be the fastest :negative:

GWAPS Volume I posted:

[...] Eventually, the
Computer Assisted Force Management System (CAFMS) was used to
transmit the Air Tasking Order throughout the theater.

[...]

[...] When
CAFMS first became operational during Desert Shield, its operators in the
Tactical Air Control Center made paper tape copies of daily Air Tasking
Orders and then sent them to a Navy UHF communications van in Riyadh.
The van beamed the contents of the daily Orders via satellite to the
Navy�s Automatic Digital Network (AUTODIN) switching center on Guam.
There, the Air Tasking Order was fed into the Navy�s Computer
Processing and Routing System, which then sent it back to Navy carriers
via a Defense Communication System satellite. The ATOs took this
circuitous route during the first weeks of Desert Shield because the
carriers did not have CAFMS terminals and because, initially, the paper
tapes did not fit the Navy�s communications formats.

But wait, a better scheme came along:

quote:

Other forms of transmission to the aircraft carriers were tried, but
none bettered the means developed during Desert Shield: voice radio
communications by Navy liaison officers serving in the Tactical Air
Control Center supplemented by hand-delivered, hard-copy Air Tasking
Orders flown directly to the carriers themselves. Because the carriers
lacked super high-frequency terminals, the Tactical Air Control Center
could not send the ATOs to them. [DELETED] Using hand-
delivered copies of the Air Tasking Orders proved a hardship for Navy
air sortie planners, especially for Navy airspace controllers on its AEGIS
missile cruisers stationed in the Persian Gulf. but the problem could not
be overcome either before or during Desert Storm.

From a footnote:

quote:

In 1989, there was an Air Force-Navy initiative to install CAFMS on the USS MT
WHITNEY in support of Operation Solid Shield. The test was supported by a SHF SATCOM
link through the Norfolk Naval Ground Station. The link supported successfully a 1,000
sortie ATO and the transfer of more than 100 messages between 5O7 TACCS (located at
Shaw AFB, SC) and the USS MT WHITNEY. However, the lessons learned from this installa-
tion were not appIied-CAFMSs were not installed on carriers, training did not continue, and
neither the Air Force nor the Navy expressed a desire to put CAFMS on other ships.

During Desert Shield and Desert Storm, the JFACC was required to support six carrier
fleets and forty-two additional remote terminal users. Typical organizational problems
in disseminating the ATO were compounded by procedural and mechanical limitations.
Navy personnel were not trained to use or maintain CAMS. There had been no pre
conflict training, there had been no exercises, nor had the lessons of the USS MT WHITNEY
in Solid Shield 89 been applied. Mechanical obstacles included an insufficient quantity
of equipment initially deployed to support the size of the campaign, the communications
links were incapable of supporting a very large daily ATO, uninterrupted WWMCCS links
were unreliable and unable to transmit the ATO, and the deployed carriers failed to
dedicate a SHF SATCOM link to support receiving the ATO.

During Desert Shield, the Navy tried at least five ways to receive the ATO: AUTODIN
(too slow), WWMCCS (ATO too long, satellite link unreliable), PC transfer to Pentagon then
forwarded to FLTCOMM (too slow), software conversion program developed to put ATO in
Navy message format-Janap 126-then paper tape was cut on CAFMS and passed to Navy
over FLTFLASH (too slow), use of S-3 aircraft to hand carry the ATO. The final solu-
tion-use of S-3 aircraft-proved the fastest and most effective.

Actually, though, the air force did the same thing as a backup anyway:

quote:

[...] Although Central Command Air Forces
staff realized that the information transfer situation would improve over
time, they feared that the limited ATO distribution system would become
saturated rapidly. A backup to the electronic system was needed should it
break. To solve this problem, on 21 August 1990, the CENTAF Director of
Operations, Col. James C. Crigger, Jr., requested that C-21 aircrafl be made
available to fly the Order to several bases. Aircraft courier flights contin-
ued throughout the war and were considered the backup should the ATO
transmission system fail. [...]

# ? Jan 6, 2016 09:30

I would blow Dane Cook: Dec 26, 2008

Boeing testing new 5 engine 747

# ? Jan 6, 2016 13:04

Ola: Jul 19, 2004

Jumpingmanjim posted:

Boeing testing new 5 engine 747

Don't be stupid, you know better than that. It's a 6-engine, there's obviously one on the other wing as well.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 13:17

0toShifty: Aug 21, 2005; 0 to Stiffy?

There are several places to mount the all the extra engines!

# ? Jan 6, 2016 13:24

Nerobro: Nov 4, 2005; Rider now with 100% more titanium!

Jumpingmanjim posted:

Boeing testing new 5 engine 747

Serious answer: That's the hardpoint for carrying a spare engine to replace an engine on an airplane far away.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 13:44

Chillbro Baggins: Oct 8, 2004; Bad Angus! Bad!

Dannywilson posted:

Watching HH-60's refuel is like high schoolers fumbling around in each other's pants in the dark at a party:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7lSCcC7fUg

Duke Chin posted:

Finally - a good use for drones: http://i.imgur.com/TXtZJTa.gifv

Relevant to both, :lol:

USMC:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tO0sRWCf9k4

Edit: Related videos:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W-CRA3OqyCw

Where does the ramp gun go if they're carrying pallets or similar? Do they just leave the guns at home on trash-hauling missions, and only mount them when they know they'll need 'em? Or do they just pick it up and stow it in the tail? That's how I'd do it if I were in charge of designing it.

Chillbro Baggins fucked around with this message at 15:38 on Jan 6, 2016

# ? Jan 6, 2016 14:57

Axeman Jim: Nov 21, 2010; The Canadians replied that they would rather ride a moose.

After a long pause my dad has started scanning his historical airliner photos again.

These are from 1963. The first three shots are from London Heathrow:

DC-7 Freighter

Fokker F-27, with a Vickers Vanguard in the background. Always thought the Vanguard was a really nicely-proportioned plane.

This HS748 was brand new when this shot was taken. It was written off in Nepal in 1997 when it overshot the runway at Pokhara.

This image is from Hurn (Bournemouth) and shows the first production BAC-111, G-ASJA, a few days before its first flight. In the 80's it was bought by Kenny Rogers as his personal jet, because nothing's more Country and Western than a howling British airliner.

Correction, this is in fact the prototype, G-ASHG which crashed a few months later on a test flight - it was the first airframe loss ever attributed to the then-unknown phenomenon of "deep stall", whereby a t-tailed aircraft at high angles of attack has its horizontal stabilisers caught in the unstable airflow from its wings, rendering the elevators useless and the aircraft uncontrollable.

Axeman Jim fucked around with this message at 20:28 on Jan 6, 2016

# ? Jan 6, 2016 20:15

StandardVC10: Feb 6, 2007; This avatar now 50% more dark mode compliant

BAC One-Elevens seem like they made reasonably popular business/VIP jets for a while, I guess before many large bizjets had come on the market.

# ? Jan 6, 2016 21:44

Captain Apollo: Jun 24, 2003; King of the Pilots, CFI

Feds are getting sued for creating a terrible rule when Congress told them to do exactly the opposite of what they did.

I really hope the Feds get bitch slapped for this dumb drone registration idea. But it's weird because I hate drones. I guess I'm really big on privacy from others.

Should I have to register a drone with the government? No
Should another person be able to use a drone to spy on me? No

Crazy times we live in.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2016/01/maryland-hobbyist-sues-faa-to-overturn-new-drone-registration-rule/

# ? Jan 7, 2016 05:42

Nerobro: Nov 4, 2005; Rider now with 100% more titanium!

Captain Apollo posted:

But it's weird because I hate drones. I guess I'm really big on privacy from others.

Stuff that drives Nerobro batshit crazy. "Drones" in the FAA's eyes is "everything that flys, has remote control, and is more than 250g" Because I know you, I know your definition of drone is "Flying camera platform that could give my Mooney a really bad day." And my idea of drone is a military weapon system. The vocabulary is all screwed up.

I also want to reinforce, that even with an Inspire 1, you're not really going to go around and seriously invade anyone's privacy. I feel like you need to come out flying with someone who does FPV, or even flys a camera platform to get a grasp of what they really can do.

I don't recall what corner of the country you're in. Have you flown r/c stuff before?

# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:04

OhsH: Jan 12, 2008

What if the drone dropped a waiver on a line down to the person and they could sign and then send it back up to the drone before spying?

# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:06

Advent Horizon: Jan 17, 2003; I�m back, and for that I am sorry

As much as I hate to enter the drone chat, here's something:

My parents had to tell the neighbors to control their teenage son's drone use after my mother caught him looking through their bedroom window with it.

# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:13

Captain Apollo: Jun 24, 2003; King of the Pilots, CFI

Nerobro posted:

Stuff that drives Nerobro batshit crazy. "Drones" in the FAA's eyes is "everything that flys, has remote control, and is more th

I don't recall what corner of the country you're in. Have you flown r/c stuff before?

Oh yeah dude. This catch all term of drone is the worst. It's almost like anybody not agreeing with Obama/Bush as being a racist or terrorist, respectively.

I'm in the southwest American geographic region.

And- I was an AMA member from age 10-15 I think. I built my own, Kadets and "SPAD" (plastic gutter pipe) airplanes before I really knew what a real airplane looked like.

# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:24

Vitamin J: Aug 16, 2006; God, just tell me to shut up already. I have a clear anti-domestic bias and a lack of facts.

The FAA's biggest problem? They have no forward looking thought. Newest drone innovation? Sub-250g drones with the same capabilities as their bigger counterparts, but no FAA registration needed!
http://www.readymaderc.com/store/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=379_380&products_id=5033&zenid=51bd77f4b3d8b65f982e6256e1c67d7f

Outfitted with the right gear this thing can cause just as much trouble to an airliner as a DJI Phantom, fly out of line of sight distances, and be piloted FPV carrying an HD recorder to spy on little Susie.

OhsH posted:

What if the drone dropped a waiver on a line down to the person and they could sign and then send it back up to the drone before spying?

The first amendment protects anyone's right to take photographs from the air. You don't have any expectation of privacy to things visible from the air. No, not even your daughters sunbathing in your back yard behind a tall fence.

Advent Horizon posted:

As much as I hate to enter the drone chat, here's something:

My parents had to tell the neighbors to control their teenage son's drone use after my mother caught him looking through their bedroom window with it.

Kids being kids. He probably would have had more luck sneaking into a tree and using a good old fashioned camera with a zoom lens than using a loud, flashy device and probably could only see glare on the window anyway. Either way there's no need for a new law to cover something existing laws already address. I'm sure your mother is a beautiful woman but I probably wouldn't take her word that it was "spying" anyway. I heard a similar story on an FPV forum a year or two ago, a guy was flying his drone around for fun and some old neighbor lady came running outside in her robe and underwear to complain that he was trying to take pictures of her in her underwear...no I don't think he was interested in that.

e: Perfect example of this anti-drone, spy-paranoia in this story. Proof that this type of attitude causes way more harm than drones themselves.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregorymcneal/2014/07/14/woman-assaults-minor-over-a-drone-gets-mere-probation/

Vitamin J fucked around with this message at 07:03 on Jan 7, 2016

# ? Jan 7, 2016 06:56

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

Vitamin J posted:

Outfitted with the right gear this thing can cause just as much trouble to an airliner as a DJI Phantom

What gear? Pilot‐blinding LASERs? Antimatter?

The FAA only cares about �drones� insofar as they constitute a threat to manned aircraft, and maybe bystanders on the ground when they fall from the sky.

If these toys stay under 250 grams, as far as the FAA is concerned, that�s problem solved.

# ? Jan 7, 2016 07:10

Vitamin J: Aug 16, 2006; God, just tell me to shut up already. I have a clear anti-domestic bias and a lack of facts.

Platystemon posted:

What gear? Pilot‐blinding LASERs? Antimatter?

The FAA only cares about “drones” insofar as they constitute a threat to manned aircraft, and maybe bystanders on the ground when they fall from the sky.

If these toys stay under 250 grams, as far as the FAA is concerned, that’s problem solved.

I would wager a 250 g dense cube of metal and raw, sharp carbon fiber is probably similar to 1000g of plastic bubble with some metal inside when it comes in contact with a windshield. Likewise your skull.

# ? Jan 7, 2016 07:25

Nerobro: Nov 4, 2005; Rider now with 100% more titanium!

And strikes with animals less than 2lbs aren't reported....

# ? Jan 7, 2016 08:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 3, 2024 20:32

Captain Apollo: Jun 24, 2003; King of the Pilots, CFI

Yeah but if something hits the prop it can be reported to insurance for a tear down of the engine

# ? Jan 7, 2016 08:29

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2243 »