|
Comrade Gorbash posted:Ironically half the reason there isn't a 757 replacement is the airlines short-sightedly thinking they didn't need/want one. When Boeing was looking for orders to see if they had the interest to justify developing a new plane back in the 90s/00s, most of the airlines said "nah, we're good,' figuring they'd just buy up more 737 size aircraft instead. And then all the things they expected to make that a viable plan didn't happen and whoops that 757 size is perfect for how they actually operate. And when they called Delta all they wanted was to know when the MD-90 was going to be produced again.
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
Seeing -300s come out of National is interesting:
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:I don't really mind the long narrowbodies. As long as it's boarding from L2 it's all good. What's L2?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 03:59
|
|
|
CharlesM posted:What's L2? Left side, second door.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 04:13
|
|
|
I'm reading Ben Rich's book about building the F-117 this week. He's got a lot of anecdotes and details about that aircraft plus others. The book is ultimately more than just the Nighthawk, as he goes into detail with his fellow colleagues, the U-2, and SR-71. So far the standout tidbit has been about the Blackbird where in testing a pilot had both engines flame out only to have them restarted around 30,000 MSL. The resulting sonic boom after the -71 regained airspeed destroyed lots of windows and collapsed a chimney at a nearby factory, which killed two workers.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 05:01
|
|
|
Eej posted:I said this the last time this picture was posted in this thread but the fuselage still looks like it's bending mid-flight to me like when you wobble a pencil. It is bending.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 06:53
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Seeing -300s come out of National is interesting: Hasn't been called that for 18 years now. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 07:51
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Hasn't been called that for 18 years now. Some of us are over 18.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 08:14
|
|
|
Thai Gripen crashes during Children's Day air show; pilot dead http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/1180041/gripen-jet-crashes-during-air-show-pilot-killed 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 09:38
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Hasn't been called that for 18 years now. I won't ever call it Reagan, and I'm not alone in this area.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 11:10
|
|
|
National Airport was already named for a president: George Washington.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 11:26
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:Thai Gripen crashes during Children's Day air show; pilot dead https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vD337cuIljA 240p so very hard to make out detail, so why not speculate? The Gripen FBW is a usual suspect by now. It might look like he's rolled it and is going to pull a sharp, flat turn, but then it goes into an accelerated stall, drops the lower wing and he fails to recover in time. Or maybe GLOC?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 16:36
|
|
|
So what do you guys think happened here? http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2016/12/cessna-525c-citation-cj4-n614sb.html?m=1   From its highest altitude it looks like it would have taken <1 minute to impact the lake. Check out the last two reported speeds too. Control surface failure?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 16:52
|
|
|
I sat in one of these recently.  It's been years since I last traveled by air, so it was all quite new and exciting. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 17:06
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:Control surface failure? Pilot error and weather probably; turning at night over water with a pilot with 2 years experience under his belt in 30+ knot winds and snow isn't the best way to start off your flight.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 17:09
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Pilot error and weather probably; turning at night over water with a pilot with 2 years experience under his belt in 30+ knot winds and snow isn't the best way to start off your flight. Yeah I probably wouldn't have agreed to fly with him in those conditions. I can imagine how that type of aircraft could give you an excess of confidence.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:wrap it up, Reasonailures, even Chuck Yeager endorses disruption: I'm usually all about saying "gently caress techbros and their disruption poo poo" but I really really want an SST.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Pilot error and weather probably; turning at night over water with a pilot with 2 years experience under his belt in 30+ knot winds and snow isn't the best way to start off your flight. Yeah, there's a reason why single-pilot IFR is heavily restricted for commercial operations (at least in Canada, I'm not sure about the US) -- it's difficult at the best of times, much less when you're flying a single pilot jet where everything happens faster, and you have relatively little experience either in general or on type. And arguably, you probably shouldn't be flying a business jet with 2 years experience either. EDIT: Maybe F/O under an experienced captain, but not by yourself. Just because you have the money to do something, doesn't mean you should. PT6A fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Jan 14, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Vincent Van Goatse posted:I'm usually all about saying "gently caress techbros and their disruption poo poo" but I really really want an SST. I know how you feel. On the one hand, I find quite a few of their "airliners haven't tried to innovate since the sixties" dumb bullshit, but I think the idea of SSTs again is pretty neat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:I won't ever call it Reagan, and I'm not alone in this area. You're not alone, but close to it. I've lived in Fairfax for 17 years, and almost never hear it called National.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 20:20
|
|
|
Anyone who cares anything about labor will never call it Reagan
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 21:50
|
|
|
You could also just call it DCA.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Anyone who cares anything about labor will never call it Reagan let's name an airport after the man who killed more queers than hitler
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:25
|
|
|
Aeronautical Insanity: ITT we get mad at the 1980s
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:26
|
|
|
it's always time to get mad at reagan  i literally have more respect for people who like nixon than people who like reagan
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:32
|
|
|
There's a county road near where I grew up that was renamed Ronald Reagan Blvd around 2001, even as a kid it took me like 5 years to stop calling it 427 cause gently caress that guy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 22:34
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Aeronautical Insanity: ITT we get mad at the 1980s Isn't that basically Defense Procurement Megathread?
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 23:47
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:I'm reading Ben Rich's book about building the F-117 this week. He's got a lot of anecdotes and details about that aircraft plus others. The book is ultimately more than just the Nighthawk, as he goes into detail with his fellow colleagues, the U-2, and SR-71. Skunk Works is a loving amazing book and pro-read for anyone. If you want to go even deeper into the sperg there's From Rainbow to Gusto which includes cool stuff like the A-1 through A-11 and some info on FISH/Kingfish. Re: SSTs, this paper is dated but pretty interesting; http://www.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a510143.pdf
|
|
#
?
Jan 14, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Isn't that basically Defense Procurement Megathread? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 00:55
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Skunk Works is a loving amazing book and pro-read for anyone. If you want to go even deeper into the sperg there's From Rainbow to Gusto which includes cool stuff like the A-1 through A-11 and some info on FISH/Kingfish. Yea it's a great read. Absolutely mind boggling that the F-22 came about in 1988. God knows what Skunk Works has on the drawing board now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
holocaust bloopers posted:Yea it's a great read. Absolutely mind boggling that the F-22 came about in 1988. A bunch of run-of-the-mill flying wing UAV's and a fusion reactor that, like all fusion reactors, is "10 to 15 years out." Allegedly an unmanned hypersonic SR-72 and an optionally-manned U-2 replacement. I suspect that because Ben Rich didn't have the same hold over Lockheed leadership that Kelly Johnson had, he probably didn't get to hand-pick his replacement and now Skunk Works is just a milquetoast blue-sky development program within Lockheed with the invasive amount of corporate oversight that Johnson constantly fought to avoid. Occasionally when Lockheed is worried about bad press on something they've done, they'll trot out some concept that a Skunk Works engineer doodled because it's what he WISHES he was working on instead of the Desert Hawk RC plane so they can say they're working on something cool.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 15:47
|
|
|
Hey now if we just keep giving them billions that fusion reactor will come along any day now. I really wish that were true.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 16:04
|
|
|
LostCosmonaut posted:Skunk Works is a loving amazing book and pro-read for anyone. If you want to go even deeper into the sperg there's From Rainbow to Gusto which includes cool stuff like the A-1 through A-11 and some info on FISH/Kingfish. Just remember that any quarter he claims he won off Kelly was probably somebody else's.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Nostalgia4Infinity posted:Hey now if we just keep giving them billions that fusion reactor will come along any day now. Well... 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 18:36
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Calling that chart speculative is being generous. It is predicting something that is totally unknowable.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 19:26
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Calling that chart speculative is being generous. It is predicting something that is totally unknowable. Well not unknowable. Geoffrey Olynyk is an MIT Grad that worked on their defunded fusion program.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:13
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Well not unknowable. Geoffrey Olynyk is an MIT Grad that worked on their defunded fusion program. That gives him a big reason to argue for the program's funding, not perfect prescience.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
Ola posted:That gives him a big reason to argue for the program's funding, not perfect prescience. Sometimes people involved in programs saying those programs are underfunded are correct.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:34
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Well not unknowable. Geoffrey Olynyk is an MIT Grad that worked on their defunded fusion program. I doubt even he knows how much money it would take to develop fusion. Vincent Van Goatse posted:Sometimes people involved in programs saying those programs are underfunded are correct. But what they say has minimal connection to whether or not they're underfunded. It provides us with no additional information.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 06:52 |
|
|
Yeah, I have to say, that graph assumes that research into fusion works like researching new techs does in Civilization games--money in is a direct indicator of progress, and can be used to estimate time of completion. Which as we all know has...issues.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2017 20:49
|
|
