|
mlmp08 posted:We went to the Naval Aviation Museum for one of our anniversaries. (Also to the beaches and wildlife refuges). Dude last time one of these threads had a discussion like this, I bragged that I met my wife at an airshow, but... I cede the upper hand to you now.
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2017 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Apparently as a kid she got to crawl around in a no-poo poo used reentry vehicle before the museum decided maybe little kids shouldn't get to do that. When I was growing up in the pre-safety-foam part of the 90s in Cincinnati one of my regular playgrounds was the one at Lunken Airfield (home of the Aeronca company, coincidentally, who produced the ungainliest-looking kit plane ever made in significant quantity). The playground consisted of the weatherbeaten hulk of an F-86 with a little set of wooden stairs up to the open cockpit, avionics panel replaced with a plywood board but pedals intact, a steam locomotive and caboose on a little section of track, and precisely as much supervision as your parent cared to provide. Plus on the bike trail you could wait at the end of the runway until right as a Learjet was taxiing and coast your bike through the jetwash, so to a planecrazy 7-yo it was basically heaven  Also re: Smithsonians agree on the Sackler and the Freer--they're pretty great collections of stuff you don't typically get exposed to in cohesive quantity and you will literally almost certainly have the place to yourself. I used to spend lunch breaks in there just because it was so peaceful and eventually got to know some of the guards by name. The other hidden little collection that's amazing for dates is the Luce Foundation folk art collection up on the third floor of the Portrait Gallery in Chinatown--ask at the desk and you can get a scavenger hunt list and win a button 
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2017 07:27
|
|
|
For what it's worth the Freer is under renovation until October but the Sackler is open now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 03:02
|
|
|
Did someone mention Connies? I've got some from Tucson right here. Also got some other pics of Pima, The Titan Missile Museum, and Davis-Monathan boneyard if anyone's interested 
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 05:20
|
|
|
I haven't been to Pima in way too many years... I really need to get back down there this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 05:23
|
|
|
Is there anything to see around the ABQ/Kirtland area? I'm getting sent down there to learn about Lockmart's latest and greatest rescue 130's on Saturday for 3+ weeks, and again for another couple weeks in March. Was planning on hitting Los Alamos' museum, the Nuke History museum, and the Very Large Array telescope site while I'm there. Is there something really cool I'm missing on this list?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 05:26
|
|
|
What's the reason for the Snoopy nose on a lot of Connie's? Were those models that had radar? When did radar become standard on passenger planes anyway? david_a fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Jan 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 05:27
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:I don’t know the lingo, so I’m imagining that that inspection goes like this: I missed this a couple pages back, and it's insane that an airplane that only flies 25 hours before doing a ~500-600 man-hour inspection (6 times over the total inspection cycle), a 100 flight hour 11-day-long inspection probably takes between 2500 and 3000 man hours, and a 20-30ish day 200 hour inspection takes anywhere between 3600-4800 man hours is just bonkers to me. To put it in perspective, a HH-60's (an overly heavy bird that doesn't want to be in the sky, and has very low man hours between these inspections, because rotary-wing) equivalents are 150 flight hours with ~150-200 man hours (2x over the inspection cycle), 300 flight hours with ~400 man hours, and 600 flight hour inspections which probably consume about 4000 man-hours. Basically every section has to crawl all over the bird inspecting their stuff, not just the structural guys.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 06:04
|
|
|
seems pretty reasonable maintenance schedule for the fastest and highest-flying air-breathing aircraft ever built
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 06:05
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:seems pretty reasonable maintenance schedule for the fastest and highest-flying air-breathing aircraft ever built Oh I get it, I just cringe at the inspection man hours per flight hours on these things, this isn't even counting the day to day maintenance hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 06:07
|
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Is there anything to see around the ABQ/Kirtland area? I'm getting sent down there to learn about Lockmart's latest and greatest rescue 130's on Saturday for 3+ weeks, and again for another couple weeks in March. Was planning on hitting Los Alamos' museum, the Nuke History museum, and the Very Large Array telescope site while I'm there. Is there something really cool I'm missing on this list? Balloon museum. It's like 2 bucks and dead. Last time I was there Felix Baumgartner's suit from his crazy free fall was on display. The VLA visitors center is wild, lots of displays written in insane technical jargon that I couldn't make heads or tails of. Still cool to walk around the place though. Drive west a ways to Pie Town and have some pie.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 08:55
|
|
|
david_a posted:What's the reason for the Snoopy nose on a lot of Connie's? Were those models that had radar? The Connie and the DC-6 could both be fitted with radar (TWA installed it in the Constellations from 1947) but I think the DC-7C was the first to offer it from the factory. The Grand Canyon disaster in 1956 resulted in on-board radar being legally required on all large airliners from 1962 but it was already becoming common by then - UA had committed to fitting it to their entire fleet in 1955 but had not got around to fitting it to the DC-7A involved in the crash.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 12:21
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:The Grand Canyon disaster in 1956 resulted in on-board radar being legally required on all large airliners from 1962... The type of RADAR you're describing (air-search RADAR,) is not required, nor is it installed on any airliner I've ever seen. The Grand Canyon mid-air prompted the FAA to invest earnestly in ground-based ARSR-1/2 search RADARs, used by air traffic control. Airliners can (sometimes) see other traffic using TCAS situation displays, but those are not using RADAR. (TCAS uses transponder signals to identify other traffic and proved alerts and resolution advisories, not RADAR.)
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
I need this sweater
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:17
|
|
|
david_a posted:What's the reason for the Snoopy nose on a lot of Connie's? Were those models that had radar?
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:32
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:Balloon museum. It's like 2 bucks and dead. Last time I was there Felix Baumgartner's suit from his crazy free fall was on display. The VLA visitors center is wild, lots of displays written in insane technical jargon that I couldn't make heads or tails of. Still cool to walk around the place though. Drive west a ways to Pie Town and have some pie. Cool, I had no idea such a thing existed. I imagine they have stuff on the Eagle (IE the balloon that flew across the Atlantic in the early 80s) and the balloon that flew across the Pacific with the same crew? I ask because I remember the pilots were from Arizona.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:48
|
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Is there anything to see around the ABQ/Kirtland area? I'm getting sent down there to learn about Lockmart's latest and greatest rescue 130's on Saturday for 3+ weeks, and again for another couple weeks in March. Was planning on hitting Los Alamos' museum, the Nuke History museum, and the Very Large Array telescope site while I'm there. Is there something really cool I'm missing on this list? I was going to say nuke museum but you have that covered. Hike to the top of the Sandias. It's cool going from desert scrub to ponderosa pine country to straight up green fields and forests at the top in a few hours.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:54
|
|
|
Unser museum in ABQ is awesome. It's small but has some pretty sweet and unique cars.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 14:58
|
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Is there anything to see around the ABQ/Kirtland area? I'm getting sent down there to learn about Lockmart's latest and greatest rescue 130's on Saturday for 3+ weeks, and again for another couple weeks in March. Was planning on hitting Los Alamos' museum, the Nuke History museum, and the Very Large Array telescope site while I'm there. Is there something really cool I'm missing on this list? I was at Kirtland/Sandia back in the early 90's for training and was invited to tour the other part of the Nuke museum (which I guess doesn't exist anymore since they moved it off base?) but didn't have the time (though I did have the clearance). My understanding is that it was only classified because the shape of the nuke could provide hints as to how it operates to a savvy observer.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Cool, I had no idea such a thing existed. I imagine they have stuff on the Eagle (IE the balloon that flew across the Atlantic in the early 80s) and the balloon that flew across the Pacific with the same crew? I ask because I remember the pilots were from Arizona. I know the Eagle is there since I was amazed that these guys just kinda floated across the atlantic in this open air contraption but I'm fuzzy about the Pacific flight. I know that there was a more substantial gondola on display there but it might have been for a RTW flight? Anyway, hit up a place called The Last Call for burritos when you're done nerding out, the food is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 15:45
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:I need this sweater I'll fight you for that sweater
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
Prop Wash posted:I'll fight you for that sweater You are aware that it is possible to make more that one of a jumper, right Unless that jumper is secretly made out of unicorn hair or something
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:You are aware that it is possible to make more that one of a jumper, right The Sweater of P-38 is a unique item, so no. It's one of the Kelly Johnson set, but you have to be wearing them all for them to activate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:I know the Eagle is there since I was amazed that these guys just kinda floated across the atlantic in this open air contraption but I'm fuzzy about the Pacific flight. I know that there was a more substantial gondola on display there but it might have been for a RTW flight? Anyway, hit up a place called The Last Call for burritos when you're done nerding out, the food is amazing. I read the book "double Eagle" and balloon flight like those guys were doing was well and truly mental The single weirdest aspect is that at the end of every day they'd have to vent helium so they could only stay in the air eight or so days Though they made two attempts, and in the first attempt they nearly died. They took goose-down jackets with them, as in Arizona when you climb mountains, those are what you take they are not at all waterproof and thus after all their goose-down stuff got wet they nearly died of exposure
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 20:19
|
|
|
I'd argue that United 736 midair collision did more, cause having two completely separate systems for military and civilian flights, neither of which talked to each other and were completely unaware of each other's flight is pretty much insanity. Also, the civilian flight had a bunch of ballistic missile engineers/designers on it and the FBI were first on the scene to secure the locked briefcases handcuffed to the wrists of corpses. Party Plane Jones fucked around with this message at 21:25 on Jan 25, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Dude last time one of these threads had a discussion like this, I bragged that I met my wife at an airshow, but... I cede the upper hand to you now. I met this old lady at a bar a few months ago. She worked the B-29 supply chain during WWII, and her husband was a B-29 pilot flying bombing missions over the hump. She was introduced to him by Paul Tibbets. I think that wins. Everything.
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2017 22:11
|
|
|
Here's a weird little fact I came across recently. I'm not sure if anybody else here knows about it. You may remember me mentioning a long time ago an Italian airplane from the Second World War, the Savoia-Marchetti [SM.75] Marsupiale.   Anyway, it turns out there was a successor aircraft made, the SM.82 - sometimes called the Kangaroo. Like the SM. 75, the SM. 82 had a very long range, but unlike the SM. 75, the SM. 82 could also be used as a heavy bomber. So in 1940, flying out of Rhodes, four SM. 82s successfully attacked a British Oil refinery in Manama, capital of Bahrain. The four airplanes then landed in Zula, which is a small town in Eritrea, then a Italian colony. They didn't do a whole lot of damage, but they did force the British to use resources for defenses. It was also a distance of 4000 km - maybe the longest range bombing raid of a Axis power?   Because they were horrifically vulnerable to any sort of defenses (wikipedia mentions a flight of 20 SM.82s being reduced to ten in a single pass by US Fighter aircraft) they were used mostly as transports. The Nazis impressed them into German service as well, keeping them in production once Italy surrendered and Germany took over northern Italy. Anyway, in a real rarity for any sort of Axis aircraft, they remained in use as transports after the war, the last ones being retired in 1960. So there's an example in Italy national aerospace museum. 
Nebakenezzer fucked around with this message at 19:52 on Jan 27, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
I love your posts man. Even the small ones 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:02
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Here's a weird little fact I came across recently. I'm not sure if anybody else here knows about it. That's like the most Indiana Jones airplane ever.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:05
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:The type of RADAR you're describing (air-search RADAR,) is not required, nor is it installed on any airliner I've ever seen. The Grand Canyon mid-air prompted the FAA to invest earnestly in ground-based ARSR-1/2 search RADARs, used by air traffic control. Airliners can (sometimes) see other traffic using TCAS situation displays, but those are not using RADAR. (TCAS uses transponder signals to identify other traffic and proved alerts and resolution advisories, not RADAR.) I know it's technically an acronym but dude just write like a normal person please.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 02:59
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Here's a weird little fact I came across recently. I'm not sure if anybody else here knows about it. Looks alot like the Ju-52. Did they copy it for the -52? The Ju-52 kept flying for work well into the 1980s. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:05
|
|
|
The Italians just really liked trimotors. I think it was indigenous. Is that an Italian P-51 back there?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 03:31
|
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:Is that an Italian P-51 back there?
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 08:45
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Looks alot like the Ju-52. Did they copy it for the -52? Ju-air? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
Grumman Mallard (?) down in Australia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FyYD61SIqdQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dten2Q5IqK0 Can't see anything obviously wrong with the engines so could just be a matter of too much bank angle for the speed. Tragic either way.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:14
|
|
|
Ola posted:Can't see anything obviously wrong with the engines so could just be a matter of too much bank angle for the speed. Tragic either way. Approach to landing stalls suck.
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Yeah, definitely looks like they just cut the turn too tight and slow, the inside wing stalled, and there no space to recover. I've done that a thousand times showboating in Il-2 
|
|
#
?
Jan 26, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:Ju-air? Trains turned out to be more economical.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 01:02
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Trains turned out to be more economical. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 03:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 18:51 |
|
|
StandardVC10 posted:The Italians just really liked trimotors. I think it was indigenous. Like V12s or electrical problems, yeah, the Italians loved tri-motors. I've been reading a book in the Italian navy in World War 2, and I've gotten to learn a little bit about airplanes of the Italian AF. Long story short, they managed to hold their own quite well, with some good designs, despite having an small industrial base and fuel supplies having to be bought from the Nazis. Behold: SM. 79. Medium bomber that was successfully used as a torpedo bomber as well.  SM 79 in Italy's national aerospace museum:   CANT Z506: A trimotor floatplane. Suffered from low self esteem.   
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2017 04:19
|
|