|
 Someone isn’t getting a high enough dose.
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
azflyboy posted:At night, strobes are generally left off until taking the runway for departure, so all they would have seen would be beacons and taxi lights. And those beacons and taxi lights can get lost in the airport lighting (when looking from the air to the ground) pretty easily under certain ambient light conditions. As for this incident at SFO, it wouldn't surprise me if fatigue is noted as a contributing factor here; the flight left Toronto late and after nearly five hours in the air, the crew was landing the aircraft at essentially 3am according to their circadian rhythms.
|
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 22:35
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:The positions of the aircraft look completely wrong. They are. The surface marked "Taxiway C", where the planes are lined up, is actually 28R. 28L is in turn marked as 28R. TWY C is the less prominent surface behind the runway with the planes on it. Also I am positive that the glide slope and sink rate are wrong. And they have the plane landing more than halfway down the length of the runway (01 and 28 cross almost in their centers). But getting that right is a little much to ask when whoever made that is somehow even worse at differentiating a runway and a taxiway than the pilot in question.   Dumbasses. Sagebrush fucked around with this message at 22:52 on Jul 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 19, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/mat/status/887672172499550209
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 01:41
|
|
|
Even that one still has some errors ("fly heading 280" transcribed as "climbing 280", "climb and maintain 3000" transcribed as "[inaudible]"), so it's hard to know how accurate it is. Pretty loving scary if it's anything close to correct though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 01:52
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Also it has computers that do math so you don't have to worry about that. Is XYZ input INS/accelerometer math a function of most modern rad alt's? I only ask this because I've only dealt with legacy standalone rad alt's and doppler-based systems that give "the return was this far away" info until like 6 weeks ago, and I haven't had the impetus to dive into the down-in-the-weeds tech specifications of our (single) new aircraft yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:10
|
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Is XYZ input INS/accelerometer math a function of most modern rad alt's? I only ask this because I've only dealt with legacy standalone rad alt's and doppler-based systems that give "the return was this far away" info until like 6 weeks ago, and I haven't had the impetus to dive into the down-in-the-weeds tech specifications of our (single) new aircraft yet. The way I figure it, the rad alt data that gets displayed on the PFDs has undergone some amount of processing and correction prior to display. Whether that happens partially in the rad alt computers or if the raw data from them, hypotenuse and all, gets massaged elsewhere to display something that won't confuse the pilot or the other computer users of that data (GPWS), I couldn't tell you. My guess is that the rad alts output raw altitude data (internal corrections for coax length etc done prior to output), and user systems apply their own corrections with data from other sensors depending on what they want to use it for. Finger Prince fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:21
|
|
|
Unless I end up with something pressing tomorrow, I'll research this in regards to the aircraft I have data for, and try to come up with a solid answer. It's also intriguing because the A320's rad alt measurements are taken from the aft portion of the aircraft, whereas all the ones I've dealt with are taken from within 5-10 feet (laterally) of the pilot's location, and I'd like to know how that may differ from stuff read at essentially the highest AOA the A/C is supposed to achieve.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 04:30
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
Jesus gently caress, that's no good at all.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 05:03
|
|
|
America doesn't have a gun problem. No sir. Anyway, got your tissues handy? NASA Dryden/Armstrong have uploaded hundreds of test/experimental flight footage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=user?DrydenTV?videos C5 vortices testing http://i.imgur.com/mAu5t0O.gifv drunkill fucked around with this message at 07:41 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 07:37
|
|
|
0:45 Plane lands on Sunrise Highway YapankYouTube app - 15 hours https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0woxrFHU4fg MisterOblivious fucked around with this message at 10:14 on Jul 20, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 10:10
|
|
|
Dannywilson posted:Is XYZ input INS/accelerometer math a function of most modern rad alt's? I only ask this because I've only dealt with legacy standalone rad alt's and doppler-based systems that give "the return was this far away" info until like 6 weeks ago, and I haven't had the impetus to dive into the down-in-the-weeds tech specifications of our (single) new aircraft yet. Radalt is nominally accurate to +/- 2 feet or two percent of the distance (whichever is greater). The vertical displacement resulting from pitch+body station location can affect the height. Normally a bias is included so the radalt indicates zero "at a normal touchdown attitude."
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 12:17
|
|
|
slidebite posted:In case you haven't heard or seen the recreation The sink rate in that recreation is as scary as the impeding collision. Not to mention that according to the shadow it is going somewhere around 30 knots. If it is slowed down it would make the pancake rate all the more crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 12:20
|
|
|
Air Crash Investigations Narrator: All these years later, the Tenerife disaster remains the worst aviation accident in history. Air Canda PIC: Hold my Labat Blue 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 13:08
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
In A&P school one of my instructors friends was a crop duster pilot who gave a little classroom lecture. He then got a government contractor job to fly in Central America to spray coca fields. He said they'd often land and find bullet holes. Sometimes the cartels would make makeshift SAMs that never went near their intended targets. It seems planes get shot up before even flying, too! The 737 fuselages that get built in Wichita and shipped by train to Renton have shown up with bullet holes in them. Recently one of the completed planes (I believe it was a P-8) got hit by stray bullets: http://q13fox.com/2017/06/21/plane-hit-by-bullet-after-shots-fired-near-renton-municipal-airport/
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 13:16
|
|
|
Lake of Methane posted:The radalt isn't fancy and doesn't require inputs. The emission is a fan ~30 deg wide from the aircraft centerline. The first of any returns received is the height. So a 25 deg roll will still give you a tape line height, a 45 deg roll might be inaccurate. (The F-16 has radalts pointing out in a radial arrangement, not just on the underside of the aircraft.) That brings some images back into my mind! Yeah that makes sense if the transmission pattern is basically a cone. Those clever engineers! Platystemon posted:
We had an A330 land in CDG the other day with what I can only describe as "it looks like it got hit with buckshot (or birdshot)" all over the underside of the random. I don't know what else could cause that kind of damage. Extremely localized hail? Random hand full of gravel floating in the middle of the sky? No reports from the pilot of anything weird, no weather that I'm aware of. I figure some angry French farmer took a pot shot at it at some point on the approach.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 13:24
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:We had an A330 land in CDG the other day with what I can only describe as "it looks like it got hit with buckshot (or birdshot)" all over the underside of the random. I don't know what else could cause that kind of damage. Extremely localized hail? Random hand full of gravel floating in the middle of the sky? No reports from the pilot of anything weird, no weather that I'm aware of. I figure some angry French farmer took a pot shot at it at some point on the approach. https://youtu.be/MSmYeDWLaKw
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 14:04
|
|
|
AzureSkys posted:Sometimes the cartels would make makeshift SAMs that never went near their intended targets. You have to tell us more about this because it sounds hilarious. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:You have to tell us more about this because it sounds hilarious.  This picture should give you an idea of the air defense capabilities of a drug cartel. In other words they're probably better at it than the US Army is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 19:03
|
|
|
Lake of Methane posted:The radalt isn't fancy and doesn't require inputs. The emission is a fan ~30 deg wide from the aircraft centerline. The first of any returns received is the height. So a 25 deg roll will still give you a tape line height, a 45 deg roll might be inaccurate. (The F-16 has radalts pointing out in a radial arrangement, not just on the underside of the aircraft.)  I forgot about the fan/cone emission pattern.AzureSkys posted:In A&P school one of my instructors friends was a crop duster pilot who gave a little classroom lecture. He then got a government contractor job to fly in Central America to spray coca fields. He said they'd often land and find bullet holes. Sometimes the cartels would make makeshift SAMs that never went near their intended targets. Yeah, there have been several incidents over the last year or two with H/MC-130's out of Kirtland AFB coming back with bullet holes after doing low altitude stuff over south Albuquerque. Apparently one of the gangs down there (or maybe just disgruntled hill-folk south of town) like using them as target practice.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 19:32
|
|
|
Patrick Smith did a blog post on the SFO near-oopsie. http://www.askthepilot.com/express-blog/ He also gives a hat tip to CBC covering the story and not loving the dog while doing so.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 19:59
|
|
|
Patrick Smith posted:I think this incident was both serious and overblown, if that makes any sense. It could have been disastrous — something akin to the USAir crash in Los Angeles in 1991 — but the Air Canada crew, aided by the vigilance of air traffic control and startled pilots on the taxiway, realized in time that they were lined up incorrectly.  I don’t think ATC ordering them to go around counts as realising in time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 22:20
|
|
|
Airbus has a page on its efforts to restore a Focke-Wulf 200 Condor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 22:39
|
|
|
Nice little 15min video on the SR71 circa 1992 https://youtu.be/WOQncsVloow
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2017 23:22
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
ATC's existence, procedures for going around, and the culture of being able to do that without offending anyone are all important, but if the AC pilots didn't go around when told, the last couple pages would be very different. None of the airplanes need new paint and nobody died, I'd say they realized in time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 00:23
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/Russ_Warrior/status/888062787272019969 At first I was gonna be like "ehhh, I've seen that maneuver before"  and then he just... sort of... hung out there... Then went the other way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 00:43
|
|
|
e: nvm
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 00:59
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:ATC's existence, procedures for going around, and the culture of being able to do that without offending anyone are all important, but if the AC pilots didn't go around when told, the last couple pages would be very different. None of the airplanes need new paint and nobody died, I'd say they realized in time. He's saying that since ATC initiated the go around, the credit for "realizing it" should not go to the flight crew. I think that a bit of it should, since they got the ball rolling with the question about the lights on the runway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 01:01
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:https://twitter.com/Russ_Warrior/status/888062787272019969 Seeing planes do this will never not make my jaw drop.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 01:07
|
|
|
Communist Zombie posted:You have to tell us more about this because it sounds hilarious. I wish I had more detail. He said they were basically glorified fireworks that exploded just after launch or flew off uncontrollably far from doing any harm. He was fascinating to listen to, though, and retired from that to fly a PBY converted for water bombing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 01:26
|
|
|
Go see Dunkirk in 70mm because it is some hot rear end Spitfire porn.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 03:32
|
|
|
Might wanna bring some earplugs, too. Nolan really wants you to know what Stukas sounded like.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 03:46
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:Might wanna bring some earplugs, too. Nolan really wants you to know what Stukas sounded like. Terrifying. That's what they sound like. And the supernatural noise of the He 111 turrets was spooky as hell.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 03:49
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:Seeing planes do this will never not make my jaw drop. Top Gun 2 is gonna get a lot more interesting. Lenin's balls! Ze American just hit ze brakes and vee flew right past zem! Nyet Tovarish, ve still have trick up sleeve. Check zis out!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 05:17
|
|
|
Luneshot posted:Seeing planes do this will never not make my jaw drop. It is incredible but what use does it have outside airshows?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 05:45
|
|
|
fickle poofterist posted:It is incredible but what use does it have outside airshows? Totally gives you a tactical advantage for a clutch shot across the turning circle with a heat-seeker. Real answer, the low speed tricks are of limited usefulness, but thrust vectoring is super handy for stall recovery, and it helps add high-speed maneuverability with less risk of ripping the control surfaces off.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
fickle poofterist posted:It is incredible but what use does it have outside airshows? Surrendering
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 05:48
|
|
|
Enourmo posted:Totally gives you a tactical advantage for a clutch shot across the turning circle with a heat-seeker. Makes mistakes less instantly lethal too. Cutting back across a badly chosen turn and losing all your speed might only buy you a second more of life, but a second might be all it takes for your wingman to get target lock and save your rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 05:57
|
|
|
cowboy elvis posted:Go see Dunkirk in 70mm because it is some hot rear end Spitfire porn. What is the banging around in the cabin I hear during some maneuvers, the control surfaces rattling? Was the degree of post fuel empty maneuvering and landing realistic?
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 06:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 26, 2024 18:22 |
|
|
cowboy elvis posted:Go see Dunkirk in 70mm because it is some hot rear end Spitfire porn. Oh yeah, I guess now that Its out I can post some pictures.     Few more in the Album: http://imgur.com/a/Sauv7 D C fucked around with this message at 08:39 on Jul 21, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2017 08:37
|
|
