|
MrYenko posted:It looks a lot like this: i hope that's just green balsa wood
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
Inacio posted:i hope that's just green balsa wood It's cheaper than actually flying. It is more expensive than many things, if you are doing the custom-built BnV 138 FPV
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 19:31
|
|
|
Inacio posted:
These guys on Youtube make planes out of foamcore and I just got into the hobby thanks to them. It's really, really easy. http://bit.ly/1se0gMl Sorry for the bitly link but it was the only way I could link a youtube without SA trying to turn it into a video. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0S4epTCmss&hd=1
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 19:51
|
|
|
If you go ask in the RC thread, people will get you set up with a good molded-foam park-flyer and all the electronics for about $200 from HobbyKing. That's plenty if you just want to buzz around and have fun. The  only starts when you decide that you want more speed, or more engines, or video feeds, or autonomy...
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The Emphasis mine.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 20:20
|
|
|
MisterOblivious posted:If you open that up on youtube and read the comments you can't un-learn it and it makes it so much worse. Oh this isn't funny anymore 
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2016 20:35
|
|
|
MisterOblivious posted:It's not Needs more  tags, although on a lighter note, thank you Tom Clancy for teaching me what the guy wandering around the carnage with the camera was saying over and over, and I found it in the comments too - "ЁБ ТВОЮ МАТЬ".
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 00:48
|
|
|
Hahaha, I didn't include images of this one in my lists of insanity because I thought it was just something from Crimson Skies. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
Jesus gently caress, thank god the quality on this video is terrible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:If you go ask in the RC thread, people will get you set up with a good molded-foam park-flyer and all the electronics for about $200 from HobbyKing. That's plenty if you just want to buzz around and have fun. I got into RC planes from a random Flite Test video a nubmer of years ago. Saw a guide on building a $200 kit and thought thats fine, I can afford that. That thing turned into a $2000+ machine with all the cameras, autonomy and poo poo. It was a Predator clone though so was fun to see peoples reaction when it was loitering autonomously with no apparent controller in sight.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
All aviation and related pursuits are, fundamentally, methods to part humans and their money. But it's really loving awesome along the way!
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 04:24
|
|
|
PT6A posted:All aviation and related pursuits are, fundamentally, methods to part humans and their money. Same thing for boats. I owned a Catamaran - it capsized. It was one of those little Hobie Cats which I had named Cap Sized as a joke on how small it was so I was walking right into that one. Then I got the bug again when I found a cheap Tinny and I wanted it for fishing in the rivers. The motor poo poo itself a week after buying it. Boat = Bring on another thousand ($). The tinny had a somewhat funny little story to it. I saw it in a classified and my partner overheard me say to myself "Oh a cheap boat, that'll fit in the back yard" She squealed and approved immediately. I thought it was a trap. She thought I had said 'goat'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 05:29
|
|
|
The trick is to build your own plane from scratch (incl designing it). That's gonna be cheaper.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 15:00
|
|
|
Inacio posted:The trick is to build your own plane from scratch (incl designing it). That's gonna be cheaper. Plans for aircraft won't break the bank, at least compared to total project materials and time cost. They're often in the $300-500 range. Some, like the TEAM Minimax-line, are even free: http://www.teammini-max.com/plans/
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 16:30
|
|
|
I'm not stupid enough to trust anything I've built with my life or indeed anyone's life. Design? Maybe. Building? Not a chance.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 16:44
|
|
|
ehnus posted:Plans for aircraft won't break the bank, at least compared to total project materials and time cost. They're often in the $300-500 range. Some, like the TEAM Minimax-line, are even free: http://www.teammini-max.com/plans/
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Dying in a flying machine you built yourself is one of the coolest ways to go. What's wrong with you guys? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 18:12
|
|
|
Alereon posted:"Free plans, disable firewall to download" inspires confidence. It's the least risky part of the process.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:I owned a Catamaran - it capsized. It was one of those little Hobie Cats which I had named Cap Sized as a joke on how small it was so I was walking right into that one. Then I got the bug again when I found a cheap Tinny and I wanted it for fishing in the rivers. The motor poo poo itself a week after buying it. Boat = Bring on another thousand ($). Also, you can totally make a $100 plane that will go like stink (including battery), but people always want more and bigger and more cameras, and more autonomy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:13
|
|
|
Alereon posted:"Free plans, disable firewall to download" inspires confidence. Download the plans in a VM, or wait until the next Windows 10 service pack which runs Edge instances in their own VM anyways. But if you're that paranoid about safety you probably shouldn't be building your own airplane in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:29
|
|
|
I have three questions if anybody knows the answer: The Fw 190 used electric control surfaces instead of hydraulic ones, as designer Kurt Tank thought electric control surfaces would be 1) lighter and 2) much harder to damage. 1) Did this in fact work in the Fw 190's case? 2) Why didn't it work in other cases? (Long story short the Luftwaffe spec'd a bunch of prototype bombers to use electric instead of hydraulic controls, and they all sucked for among other reasons the system caused high weight compared to similar hydraulic systems, and to add insult to injury, they couldn't exert enough force on said surfaces.) 3) Did any other aircraft follow in the Fw 190's footsteps? (Wing-shadow?)
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
The FW-190 used manual pushrod-operated primary control surfaces. The landing gear, flaps, elevator trim, etc were indeed electric, which wasn't exactly revolutionary. (It was for a combat aircraft, granted.) It's not till you get to jet transport aircraft that you start to see power-assisted primary control surfaces, mostly hydraulic, or electro-hydraulic. (Or pneumato-hydrualic. What the gently caress, Boeing.) I'm not aware of any aircraft prior to the 787 with electro-mechanical power-assisted flight controls, and even THAT aircraft only powers the stab trim and some of the spoilers electrically, using electro-hydraulic power packs for all the other systems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:32
|
|
|
Every time I'm on an Airbus and I hear the flaps going in and out it sounds like they're electrically actuated. There's definitely a loud whining noise. Is that actually electrical? Or just a really loud hydraulic pump?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The FW-190 used manual pushrod-operated primary control surfaces. The landing gear, flaps, elevator trim, etc were indeed electric, which wasn't exactly revolutionary. (It was for a combat aircraft, granted.) E190 has electric stab and flaps/slats. CRJ200 has electric flaps (iirc). B767 has electric alternate flaps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Every time I'm on an Airbus and I hear the flaps going in and out it sounds like they're electrically actuated. There's definitely a loud whining noise. Is that actually electrical? Or just a really loud hydraulic pump? That loud whining noise is the collected internet forums bemoaning airbus' automation and FBW system.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 20:49
|
|
|
A bit off topic but still FW-190 related: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/Default.aspx?pageID=238&nID=104962&NewsCatID=341 quote:Over 50 missing warplanes found buried in central Turkey: Report
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
HawkHill posted:A bit off topic but still FW-190 related: This will be the Burmese Spitfires all over again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:23
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Every time I'm on an Airbus and I hear the flaps going in and out it sounds like they're electrically actuated. There's definitely a loud whining noise. Is that actually electrical? Or just a really loud hydraulic pump? Airbus products use hydraulic flaps, so you're probably hearing the pumps or flap actuators running. If you hear a barking noise on the ground (especially at the gate) that's the PTU cycling to try and pressurize the hydraulic system associated with an engine that's shut down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 21:34
|
|
|
ehnus posted:But if you're that paranoid about safety you probably shouldn't be building your own airplane in the first place. Conversely, if you're not really paranoid about safety you should also not be building your own airplane. Sort of a catch-22.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 22:18
|
|
|
monkeytennis posted:This will be the Burmese Spitfires all over again. Looking this up, found this cool pic: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Inacio posted:Looking this up, found this cool pic: I was hoping for more information, so I searched myself and I found this: http://www.psfk.com/2013/01/burma-spitfire-planes.html posted:
I assume that, despite the caption, that's Australia burying F-111s?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Yep. In an actual garbage dump. Buried deep enough to go undisturbed by fanatics. Apparently it was cheaper than recycling.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 06:11
|
|
|
Why would they care if they're undisturbed? Put one of those hulks on a flatbed out in the desert, announce it on a couple of plane-sperg forums, and it'll be like watching piranhas devour a cow. There's titanium in those airframes that I'd love to get my hands on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 06:45
|
|
|
Because the airframes are toxic and the RAAF don't want to be liable. I think they still have ongoing legal action from former maintenance crews who got sick/cancer back in the 90s working on them.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
drunkill posted:Because the airframes are toxic and the RAAF don't want to be liable. I think they still have ongoing legal action from former maintenance crews who got sick/cancer back in the 90s working on them. I was going to make a "nothing of value was lost" joke, but poo poo, I think that joke already exists. Its name is Robert McNamara. (I don't think I've ever gotten to use the non-apostrophe its. I'm so excited!)
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 07:24
|
|
|
So I took a Virgin Australia flight from MEL to ADL and I have to ask, is there an upper limit on how hard a pilot can land into the runway? This is for a 737-800. The pilot hit the runway hard enough that I had to wonder how hard they need to go before the struts join me in 13D*. Either that or Otto made a surprise appearance and took over. * I assume I'm actually sitting forward of the main gear, but I needed a somewhat graphic way to illustrate my concern at how hard the landing was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 08:47
|
|
|
You survived and the plane was still in flying condition, right?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
KingPave posted:So I took a Virgin Australia flight from MEL to ADL and I have to ask, is there an upper limit on how hard a pilot can land into the runway? This is for a 737-800. Yes, but it can take a lot of abuse. Depending on what document you're reading, Boeing sometimes actually tells pilots to plant that fucker hard so the gear absorbs more energy and slows the aircraft faster. There's a limit, but since you presumably didn't go sliding down the runway on the belly of the jet, it probably didn't come close to the limit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 15:55
|
|
|
Any landing you walk away from (and doesn't leave structural damage = bonus points)....
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 10:50 |
|
|
No injuries? Made your next connection? Not your plane?
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2016 19:22
|
|
