|
Previa_fun posted:JT3C > JT3D, even with the goofy hushkits. Old jet nacelles were so drat futuristic looking, in that "future as seen from the 1950s" way.  Back when the future was made of shiny chrome.
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:27 |
|
|
MrChips posted:cruise at up to Mach 0.9 (which back in the bad old days they would do all the loving time) please tell me that my dream of seeing a non-concorde do mach 1 has been already realized i mean 0.1 is not a big number right guys
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:03
|
|
|
Speaking of 707s: https://yearinberlin.com/2012/03/27/the-curious-tale-of-tegels-boeing-707/
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Inacio posted:please tell me that my dream of seeing a non-concorde do mach 1 has been already realized Of course.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Inacio posted:please tell me that my dream of seeing a non-concorde do mach 1 has been already realized A Douglas DC-8 broke the sound barrier in a dive during pre-delivery testing. One of CP Air's planes. I think they put a placard in it for the rest of its airline career. e: beaten.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
quote:“Well, if we can get up to .97, we can get up to 1.01. That’s not so far away.” That's so dope. The 60s were crazy, but cool crazy. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:11
|
|
|
Inacio posted:i mean 0.1 is not a big number right guys That last little bit is the hard part, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:14
|
|
|
Fast airliners, you say? CV-880 was the best 50s/60s jetliner. https://imgur.com/a/ZY0um Edit: anyone know why my imgur picture isn't showing up when I use vB code? Previa_fun fucked around with this message at 20:21 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:18
|
|
|
Previa_fun posted:Fast airliners, you say? That's a link to the imgur page. The image URL will have a i. and a .jpg (or .png, .gif, etc.). So in this case the image URL is https://i.imgur.com/TjhVEr1.jpg. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:23
|
|
|
Let's also not forget about the coolness of the 747, which is still extremely cool. It's the only double-decker airliner that doesn't look like pure rear end! EDIT: And passengers can sit ahead of the cockpit which is also pretty goddamn cool, if you ask me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 20:43
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's the only double-decker airliner that doesn't look like pure rear end! You sir are wrong   edit: Honorable mention to the Martin Mars, but that big elliptical tail and fixed floats do look just a teeny-tiny little bit goofy 
Captain Postal fucked around with this message at 21:36 on Oct 29, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:03
|
|
|
That is really cool and a nifty bit of flying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:05
|
|
|
Russian maintenance (embiggen to look at the details):
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:44
|
|
|
PT6A posted:This is true. I still can't believe they bought PMC engined ones. Like, I guess a lot of their techs have got experience rigging engine fuel controls from the -200 737s but holy crap those PMC engines are awful.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 21:50
|
|
|
So apparently the AA flight that self-immolated at O'Hare was a uncontained engine failure: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-chicago-airplane-engine-idUSKCN12T0Q7quote:The O'Hare incident marks the third uncontained GE engine failure in little over a year, following a British Airways Boeing 777 in September 2015 and a Southwest Airlines Boeing 737 in August. Both aircraft used different engines, the GE90 and CMF56, made by a joint venture of GE and Safran of France. Enjoy your flight!
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
PT6A posted:It's the only double-decker airliner that doesn't look like pure rear end! but a380
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 22:25
|
|
|
Screw the haters.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 22:26
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Screw the haters. Who turned the Fisher-Price toy I had when I was 4 into an airplane?
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:I still can't believe they bought PMC engined ones. Like, I guess a lot of their techs have got experience rigging engine fuel controls from the -200 737s but holy crap those PMC engines are awful. Apparently it was all part of the deal they cut with Boeing Capital to get the airplanes in the first place. They are zero-hour engines on their aircraft. IMO they were stupid to buy those 767s in the first place; they were rode hard and put away wet by QANTAS, and we're on the edge maintenance-wise when they were stored. Added to that was Westjet's reluctance to take on a full set of spares for the aircraft, which means that when all this odd poo poo breaks, they are AOG for days instead of hours trying to source stuff from Boeing or their competitors. What they should have done was cut a deal to buy some or all of the "terrible teen" 787s - apparently they went for basically a song and a dance once they found a buyer for them (likely Air Austral or Ethiopian). Better operating economics, new aircraft without questionable maintenance histories and more in line with what the competition is flying these days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 23:00
|
|
|
MrChips posted:IMO they were stupid to buy those 767s in the first place; they were rode hard and put away wet by QANTAS, and we're on the edge maintenance-wise when they were stored. As far as I can tell, it's basically the equivalent of looking at an ad for a suspiciously cheap 172 or something and going "there's no possible way I can lose! What a deal!"
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
MrChips posted:Apparently it was all part of the deal they cut with Boeing Capital to get the airplanes in the first place. They are zero-hour engines on their aircraft. I don't think full spare sets even exist for 767s anymore. It's all borrowed and or sketchy 100th-hand poo poo from third party overhaulers. Also, part of the joy of operating 767s is that when poo poo breaks, it breaks hard and that cow is in a hangar for days. By the sounds of it, WJ ops has been struggling learning that the hard way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:I don't think full spare sets even exist for 767s anymore. It's all borrowed and or sketchy 100th-hand poo poo from third party overhaulers. Also, part of the joy of operating 767s is that when poo poo breaks, it breaks hard and that cow is in a hangar for days. By the sounds of it, WJ ops has been struggling learning that the hard way. But the 767 line is still open? The Boeing website says they have 73 767-300Fs unfulfilled and then they just have the 23 KC-46s to build.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But the 767 line is still open? The Boeing website says they have 73 767-300Fs unfulfilled and then they just have the 23 KC-46s to build. Unless they're building them somewhere else, there was no 767 line as of last year when I last visited the Everett factory. There's the KC-46 line, but it's a special military princess. I really don't think they'd let you rob production from that. They might be able to convert a 747-8 line to 767 but they were still putting together some of them when I was there. There's also the fact that 767s were built for so long to so many different specs that in a lot of cases what's broken simply isn't built any more, and to replace with newer spec would require major modifications/service bulletins/engineering instructions to be implemented if you could even do it at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Inacio posted:please tell me that my dream of seeing a non-concorde do mach 1 has been already realized Does this count? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Mexico_Learjet_25_crash
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 01:20
|
|
|
quote:We took it up to 10 miles up, 52,000 feet—that’s a record—and put it in a half-a-G pushover. Bill maintained about 50 pounds of push. He didn’t trim it for the dive so that it would want to pull out by itself. In the dive, at about 45,000 feet, it went to Mach 1.01 for maybe 16 seconds, then he recovered. But the recovery was a little scary. When he pulled back, the elevator was ineffective; it didn’t do anything, so he said, “Well, I’ll use the stabilizer,” and the stabilizer wouldn’t run. It stalled, because of the load. What he did, because he was smart, is something that no other pilot would do: He pushed over into the dive more, which relieved the load on the stabilizer. He was able to run the [stabilizer] motor, with the relieved load, and he recovered at about 35,000 feet. That was a fun few seconds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 01:53
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Unless they're building them somewhere else, there was no 767 line as of last year when I last visited the Everett factory. There's the KC-46 line, but it's a special military princess. I really don't think they'd let you rob production from that. They might be able to convert a 747-8 line to 767 but they were still putting together some of them when I was there. We still make 767 parts from 1980s drawings, idk what you're talking about and still get the occasional AOG request for stuff like that too
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But the 767 line is still open? The Boeing website says they have 73 767-300Fs unfulfilled and then they just have the 23 KC-46s to build. FedEx has 767-300F planes on order all the way until 2020. I did the Boeing tour back in 2014 and it was great, but sadly the 767 area was not part of it. I figured it was because of security rules due to the military tanker version, but not sure?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Screw the haters. Ok, now THIS I will probably side with Holocaust Boopers on. Finger Prince posted:Unless they're building them somewhere else, there was no 767 line as of last year when I last visited the Everett factory. There's the KC-46 line, but it's a special military princess. I really don't think they'd let you rob production from that. They might be able to convert a 747-8 line to 767 but they were still putting together some of them when I was there. This article disagrees. Is the KC-46 line actually fully dedicated already? Godholio fucked around with this message at 03:02 on Oct 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:But the 767 line is still open? The Boeing website says they have 73 767-300Fs unfulfilled and then they just have the 23 KC-46s to build. AF apparently (per wiki) intended to buy at least 179 KC-46s through 2028, so Boeing listing 23 tankers is probably a technicality until another parcel are ordered. The type's supposed to be KC-135 replacement, of which there are more than 400 in service so the 767 production line's gonna be in service for a looooong time, with continued spare parts support. a patagonian cavy fucked around with this message at 03:22 on Oct 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 03:18
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Screw the haters. This is the second ugliest Connie I've ever seen.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Screw the haters. It's like the Constellation got fat. This must be how Holly Bloops sees planes all the time. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 04:53
|
|
|
rscott posted:We still make 767 parts from 1980s drawings, idk what you're talking about and still get the occasional AOG request for stuff like that too This might surprise you, but there are a lot of parts on a 767. I'm pretty sure you don't make all of them. Godholio posted:This article disagrees. Is the KC-46 line actually fully dedicated already? All the times I've been there, the KC-46 line was shrouded in covered fencing so you can't see the top secret goings on in there. They were building one when I was there last though. I wonder if they just pull the fencing down to do a run of civvie 767s and then put it up when it's a tanker on the line, or just leave it up all the time for convenience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 05:01
|
|
|
It just entered low-rate production, but I don't know what kind of timeframe that means. Whether they can do a run of a couple KC-46s then fill a civilian order, etc, or what.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 06:13
|
|
|
Please nsfw uggo planes
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 06:24
|
|
|
Is this the sexy Connie page?
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 06:30
|
|
|
Jesus loving Christ set that thing on fire.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 07:09
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Is this the sexy Connie page? Dog dick.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Jesus loving Christ set that thing on fire. The North Koreans thought the same thing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 09:40
|
|
|
We can still go uglier. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 16:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 17:27 |
|
|
I was on the Boeing tour at Everett in September; They had a single FedEx 767 in assembly, along with maybe four KC-46s. The tour mostly sticks to the 747/787/777 lines, and doesn't really go back towards the 767 bays.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2016 16:16
|
|
