|
gently caress, I always get those switched, even though I know that JP8 is plane old everyday jet fuel. I don't know why...I think my brain goes "SR71 is better than other planes, therefore its fuel has the bigger number "
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
We're in automotive insanity, somebody should effortpost the SR-71 startcart.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 17:58
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:The fuel runs directly under the skin of the plane because that way you can both preheat the fuel and cool the skin, and you gain additional range that would be lost if you had to make a separate sealed internal fuel tank. That's another thing that should be mentioned; basically all aircraft with so-called "wet wings" (fuel tanks where the wing skins form part of the tank itself, rather than being separate structures), from Cessna 172s on up, tend to leak fuel to varying degrees. It's just a fact or life that the sealing is never quite perfect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 18:01
|
|
|
also: don't look now but I think someone's following you: http://i.imgur.com/irK05EQ.mp4 [/quote] Very cool but the sperg in me wants to see a Hurricane instead. Surely if we're going for the 'named after winds fighters" we could see a Hurricane + Typhoon + Tempest + Tornado + Typhoon combo!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 18:16
|
|
|
Procurement can be magnitudes of stupid, but it seems like even the New York Times has some sense about aircraft carriershttp://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/22/world/europe/russia-admiral-kuznetsov-syria.html posted:The technology used to launch airplanes is considered obsolete. Most modern carriers fling their fighter jets skyward with a kind of catapult, allowing them to carry a full contingent of fuel and weapons. Planes launched from the Admiral Kuznetsov wobble aloft from a sort of ski jump, forcing them to take off without a full load.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2016 23:03
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:We got a Big'un a few days ago: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0r7jZYcRpI Nothing serious I presume? I really want to fly on a 747 before they get replaced  MrChips posted:No. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:29
|
|
|
slothrop posted:Very cool but the sperg in me wants to see a Hurricane instead. Surely if we're going for the 'named after winds fighters" we could see a Hurricane + Typhoon + Tempest + Tornado + Typhoon combo! I don't think there are many survivors from the WW2 Typhoon/Tempest family, which is really too bad.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:44
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Nothing serious I presume? I really want to fly on a 747 before they get replaced That's Lufthansa, so it may very well be a 747-8i, which they not quite commissioned themselves and was made within the last year or two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 01:49
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:That's Lufthansa, so it may very well be a 747-8i, which they not quite commissioned themselves and was made within the last year or two. If it's going between Germany and Orlando it's a "B" route, so it'd far more likely be a -400 they're running the clock out on - they reserve the A380s and 800s for the hubs and major connection routes. The engines looked like the "older" style, too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:If it's going between Germany and Orlando it's a "B" route, so it'd far more likely be a -400 they're running the clock out on - they reserve the A380s and 800s for the hubs and major connection routes. The engines looked like the "older" style, too. -400s have winglets; -8i has raked wingtips with no winglet and 787-style sawtoothed engine nacelles. e: that's a -400.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Nothing serious I presume? I really want to fly on a 747 before they get replaced Seems to have turned out fine; it landed due to the smell of smoke somewhere on-board. Looking on flight aware, it looks like they sent another airplane, then sent the 747 back to Frankfruit for a check before returning it to service. Also slightly bummed it wasn't a 747-8i, I imagine that's gonna be a rare visitor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
slidebite posted:I really want to fly on a 747 before they get replaced Same, I was super disappointed when my flights to and from England were on 767s.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Seems to have turned out fine; it landed due to the smell of smoke somewhere on-board. Looking on flight aware, it looks like they sent another airplane, then sent the 747 back to Frankfruit for a check before returning it to service. Only 41 of them in operation - matching the A350 currently in number active.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:That's Lufthansa, so it may very well be a 747-8i, which they not quite commissioned themselves and was made within the last year or two.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 06:17
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Is there a way to find what routes aircraft type are scheduled to fly? 747-8i: http://www.gcmap.com/featured/20151129 I've seen the IAD-FRA one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 07:29
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Frankfruit Please don't let this be a typo.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
The 747 is the best looking jet airliner ever produced and I will fight anyone that disagrees. Also, the 747-200 is the best looking passenger variant of the 747, before the upper deck got extended and the lines were ruined. Sitting at Heathrow and seeing all the BA 747s come and go is quite something. The A380 is, on the other hand, ungainly and hideous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 13:45
|
|
|
Anyone been to Houston Space Center? Any tips?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 13:54
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The 747 is the best looking jet airliner ever produced and I will fight anyone that disagrees. 747-SP 4 lyfe
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 16:32
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The 747 is the best looking jet airliner ever produced and I will fight anyone that disagrees. The 747 took a concept that should probably look ugly as poo poo and made it look amazing. The A380 is loving disgusting looking by comparison. Granted I don't think anything Airbus makes is all that visually appealing outside of maybe the A400 with the A340 a distant second.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 16:46
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Anyone been to Houston Space Center? Any tips? There are two tram tours, Red goes to Building 9 with the ISS training facility, and Blue goes to Mission Control. I'm still kicking myself over not taking the Blue tour while I was there. Both tours also visit Rocket Park which has a Saturn V on loan from the Smithsonian. It's a hell of a lot bigger in person. Make sure to grab an orbitere ticket online; they're free. They have it mounted on the transit aircraft out front with some neat exhibits in it. Other than that, I mostly wandered around. It's a neat place.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:15
|
|
|
fknlo posted:The 747 took a concept that should probably look ugly as poo poo and made it look amazing. The A380 is loving disgusting looking by comparison. Granted I don't think anything Airbus makes is all that visually appealing outside of maybe the A400 with the A340 a distant second. The A320 has a certain minimalist elegance. Also: ADMIT WE'RE RIGHT AIRBUS VOR LOC posted:Please don't let this be a typo. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 17:54
|
|
|
Tsuru posted:In Airbus' defence, when the A380 was developed passenger seats forward of the nearest exit were no longer allowed. Just means you need a forward stairway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
Shalhavet posted:There are two tram tours, Red goes to Building 9 with the ISS training facility, and Blue goes to Mission Control. I'm still kicking myself over not taking the Blue tour while I was there. Both tours also visit Rocket Park which has a Saturn V on loan from the Smithsonian. It's a hell of a lot bigger in person. Make sure to grab an orbitere ticket online; they're free. They have it mounted on the transit aircraft out front with some neat exhibits in it. Other than that, I mostly wandered around. It's a neat place. Cool, how long are the tours? (thinking of spending half a day there, then driving down to corpus christi) Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 20:16 on Oct 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
Consider paying for the L9 tour if you're particularly into space stuff, sitting in Apollo era mission control is worth it. Way better than the regular tours. The visitors centre proper is quite kidsy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 00:34
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Ardeem posted:We're in automotive insanity, somebody should effortpost the SR-71 startcart. Here's some start cart insanity, not SR-71 related though. There was Project Constant Peg in the 70s, where the USAF tested (and did dissimilar air combat trainingwith) various Soviet fighters that they could get their hands on. In the beginning they used American start carts for them, which weren't powerful enough and they had to use 2 start carts on 1 plane at the same plane to start it. Well once they got their hands on some Russian start carts, things became a lot easier as they could start 2 planes with 1 start cart simultaneously.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 04:35
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Here's some start cart insanity, not SR-71 related though. There was Project Constant Peg in the 70s, where the USAF tested (and did dissimilar air combat trainingwith) various Soviet fighters that they could get their hands on. In the beginning they used American start carts for them, which weren't powerful enough and they had to use 2 start carts on 1 plane at the same plane to start it. Well once they got their hands on some Russian start carts, things became a lot easier as they could start 2 planes with 1 start cart simultaneously. I don't remember if you were the one that recommended the book Red Eagles about Constant Peg but I checked it out and it was a very interesting read.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 09:26
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:also: don't look now but I think someone's following you: https://gifsound.com/?gifv=irK05EQ&v=ZvCI-gNK_y4
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Yeah no https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=moL4MkJ-aLk&t=120s
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 15:07
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Consider paying for the L9 tour if you're particularly into space stuff, sitting in Apollo era mission control is worth it. Way better than the regular tours. I strongly agree with both statements. L9 is definitely worth the money.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 16:06
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:ADMIT WE'RE RIGHT AIRBUS My first thought was "this looks wrong, the A380 doesn't look ugly enough" then I remembered the photoshop and laughed
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 18:11
|
|
|
tactlessbastard posted:I don't remember if you were the one that recommended the book Red Eagles about Constant Peg but I checked it out and it was a very interesting read. It wasn't me, but just right now I'm trying to decide if I should get that book, or instead "America's secret Mig squadron" by Gail Peck, it's actual founder. (I saw him do a talk on it at Oshkosh and that's how I learned about it in the first place. And that's where that start cart anecdote is from)
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
vessbot posted:It wasn't me, but just right now I'm trying to decide if I should get that book, or instead "America's secret Mig squadron" by Gail Peck, it's actual founder. (I saw him do a talk on it at Oshkosh and that's how I learned about it in the first place. And that's where that start cart anecdote is from) Why make this harder than it needs to be - just get both, you won't regret it!
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 04:19
|
|
|
It's worth knowing the context behind both - iyaayas posted some pretty good explanatory posts probably two years ago. As long as you go in to both books understanding what you're getting and why you're not getting the rest, they're worth it. If you only have to pick one and you don't care that much, Red Eagles is probably the better choice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 05:50
|
|
|
A380 from SFO-LHR got redirected to YVR and 25 treated for smoke inhalation http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/emergency-landing-vancouver-1.3820082 Why wouldn't it go to YYC? Needed to dump fuel anyhow? https://flightaware.com/live/flight/BAW286
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
slidebite posted:A380 from SFO-LHR got redirected to YVR and 25 treated for smoke inhalation I don't think YYC has an A380-capable gate (for another week at least), and if we do I'm fairly sure that no ground crews here have experience with handling one, whereas I believe they used to have a scheduled A380 service in YVR from somewhere. I'm guessing they needed to dump fuel before landing anyway, so the extra flight time probably wasn't a big deal. (Edit: Ah! Like you said in your post which I didn't read fully) Ultimately those are just guesses though, I could be 100% wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 14:34
|
|
|
What could cause the issue that just sickened just the crew? Is 25 the number of all the crew on a BA A380? They're saying smoke inhalation but why weren't passengers affected? Pretty weird. E: according to the news here (I'm in the local area) they tried diverting to Calgary first but that airport can't accommodate the a380. priznat fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 15:37
|
|
|
My guess is a psychological problem. If it were really serious they would have tried to land in Calgary anyhow though right? The runway is long enough isn't it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 15:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 00:03 |
|
|
Guessing food.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 15:56
|
|
