|
CommieGIR posted:Spaceflight Update on NASA's Image: JWST scares the crap out of me. The thing is so unbelievably complex at this point and it's going to be beyond servicing range. I did an internship at Goddard a couple of years ago and they were putting the mirrors on and in the viewing room for the clean room they have monitors that continually loop an animation of the unfolding and the number of steps is unreal. I wish NASA's budget wasn't so small and volatile, it would have been a cool place to do a postdoc but civil service jobs afterwards are a pipe dream.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 00:52 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 08:00 |
|
Mokotow posted:Pitot heating was on for last 15 departures, not this one.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 00:54 |
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I'm in the middle of reading Outlaws Inc. right now and the IL-76 is a good example of how a plane might have a good design and be well piloted, but still have a high crash ratio simply because of the vibrant second life they have flying around Africa/South America/the Middle East Outlaws, Inc. is hell of a read. I recommend it to all aviation enthusiasts. It's chock full of crazy stories of shady flights around the world.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 01:20 |
|
quote:Leaping elk crashes low-flying research helicopter in Utah
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 02:15 |
|
MD500 NOTAR supremacy
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 02:26 |
|
MikeCrotch posted:I remember an episode of Air Crash Investigation where a plane crashed in (I think) the Caribbean because it was overloaded and the pilots turned off de-icing to conserve power. Wonder if anything like that could have happened here. That's done for systems like engine or wing de-ice that use engine bleed air to melt ice, since tapping off some of the air reduces the engine's total thrust by a small amount. Pitot tubes are heated electrically so that shouldn't be an issue. At least, that's how it normally works. I wouldn't put it past a Russian engineer to design some kind of crazy bleed air-powered pitot heat system.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 02:34 |
|
https://twitter.com/GenChuckYeager/status/963295504686727168
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 02:43 |
|
Minnesota Mixup posted:JWST scares the crap out of me. The thing is so unbelievably complex at this point and it's going to be beyond servicing range. I did an internship at Goddard a couple of years ago and they were putting the mirrors on and in the viewing room for the clean room they have monitors that continually loop an animation of the unfolding and the number of steps is unreal. It's going to be absolutely nail-biting horrific to picture so much capabilitiy and treasure strapped to the top of a bomb like a hostage. I'm trying to think of the last time we had, what, $8Bn on a single launch?
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 03:01 |
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:That's done for systems like engine or wing de-ice that use engine bleed air to melt ice, since tapping off some of the air reduces the engine's total thrust by a small amount. Pitot tubes are heated electrically so that shouldn't be an issue. To add to this: if pitot heat was off, it's because it got forgotten. Most pitot heat systems, at least all the ones I've dealt with, will have a maximum amount of time they can be run on the ground, since they can overheat without airflow around them, so you have to turn it on as part of the takeoff checklist.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 03:15 |
|
https://twitter.com/erikhaddad/status/963545023210909696 Um
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 03:50 |
|
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 04:10 |
|
Lightbulb Out posted:Elk beats helicopter This guy just won the hangar stories game.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 04:44 |
|
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 04:49 |
|
You're right, General. If someone had bet me today you were still alive, I would have taken the odds.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 05:07 |
|
That's because it's not a problem.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 07:52 |
|
HAHA perfect! For those not familiar with 'the front fell off' skit: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3m5qxZm_JqM
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 08:44 |
|
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 14:23 |
|
"THERE ISn't SOMETHING ON THE WING!"
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 17:20 |
|
Godholio posted:That's because it's not a problem. Yeah it’s only a problem when the other engine goes out. Then again it’s “engines turn or passengers swim”
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 17:22 |
|
In the "front fell off" series, there's also an Algerian B736 losing its right front wheel during takeoff.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 17:42 |
|
it'll buff out
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 18:46 |
|
On the bright side, a lucky An-124 crew gets a day or two's worth of vacation in Hawaii now!
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 21:36 |
|
Looks like it was a contained (not uncontained like the tweet says) engine failure and the shaking ripped the cover off. There's 1 1/2 blades missing from the fan. https://twitter.com/Steady1970/status/963797840668524550?s=09
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 22:50 |
|
bull3964 posted:Looks like it was a contained (not uncontained like the tweet says) engine failure and the shaking ripped the cover off. There's 1 1/2 blades missing from the fan. Not sure who that guy is chastising. United? The Media? Twitter? Himself? Nose cowl missing so may not be a blade failure as the root cause. If the cowl blew from overpressure, it could have taken out the fan, and the fan cowls might have blown open from airflow after that point.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 23:21 |
|
Finger Prince posted:Not sure who that guy is chastising. United? The Media? Twitter? Himself? He claims its an "Uncontained" failure, but that's not true. The turbine blades would have to eject THROUGH the turbine containment housing to be uncontained. Nobody said the broken blades didn't have to leave another way after the failure
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 23:30 |
|
CommieGIR posted:He claims its an "Uncontained" failure, but that's not true. The turbine blades would have to eject THROUGH the turbine containment housing to be uncontained. Nobody said the broken blades didn't have to leave another way after the failure Blade-rich exhaust.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 23:39 |
|
I'll see this blade in a few days probably. This bird might chirp the real reason if I hear it.
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 23:43 |
|
PT6A posted:Blade-rich exhaust. Chunky bypass engine
|
# ? Feb 14, 2018 23:43 |
|
PT6A posted:Blade-rich exhaust. CND: no exhaust found coming from engine
|
# ? Feb 15, 2018 02:57 |
|
I believe this qualifies for both Awesome AI poo poo and this thread, but the sexy Connie (?) cargo version won out so here you go: Shamelessly stolen from Petrolicous’ FB feed
|
# ? Feb 16, 2018 17:27 |
|
I think that's a Bristol Britania
|
# ? Feb 16, 2018 17:46 |
|
0toShifty posted:I think that's a Bristol Britania Close. It's a Canadair CL-44, which was an enlarged Britannia with a hinged tail built in Canada.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2018 18:16 |
|
Does someone have to hook up and test hydraulic lines after each cargo loading/unloading?
|
# ? Feb 16, 2018 18:33 |
|
StandardVC10 posted:Close. It's a Canadair CL-44, which was an enlarged Britannia with a hinged tail built in Canada. Is that the entire Lotus field parked next to it? I’m not up on my vintage race cars.
|
# ? Feb 16, 2018 18:49 |
|
MrYenko posted:
Lotus, Brabham, Cooper, BRM, and Lola, I'd expect. Potato Salad posted:Does someone have to hook up and test hydraulic lines after each cargo loading/unloading? The Britannia and CL-44 used mechanically actuated servo tabs for control. Wiki says 'push pads' made the connection at the joint.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 00:02 |
|
Potato Salad posted:Does someone have to hook up and test hydraulic lines after each cargo loading/unloading? I don’t know about the Britannia conversions, but the original Boeing 377/C-97-based Guppys required re-rigging of the tail each time the aircraft was split. It wasn’t a big deal for operators like NASA, who were/are moving things very occasionally (the NASA Super Guppy is coincidentally the last 377/B-29/C-97 descendent in regular operation,) but it was a huge issue for other operators, like Airbus, who were using them commercially. So they went and built the Beluga. Which is the most apt name for that thing. It’s perfect.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 00:23 |
|
StandardVC10 posted:Close. It's a Canadair CL-44, which was an enlarged Britannia with a hinged tail built in Canada. I'm guessing someone at Canadair got a good deal on a bunch of Britannias and some cutoff wheels with the CL-44 and Argus projects.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 06:29 |
|
MrYenko posted:I don’t know about the Britannia conversions, but the original Boeing 377/C-97-based Guppys required re-rigging of the tail each time the aircraft was split. It wasn’t a big deal for operators like NASA, who were/are moving things very occasionally (the NASA Super Guppy is coincidentally the last 377/B-29/C-97 descendent in regular operation,) but it was a huge issue for other operators, like Airbus, who were using them commercially. So they went and built the Beluga. Any idea if the Dreamlifter has the same problem? I kinda doubt it, but my google fu is weak on this one.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 06:49 |
|
No, because they are all fly by wire, and all the appropriate bits are wired into that hinged section, and don't have to be touched unless they are replaced.
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 07:28 |
|
|
# ? May 25, 2024 08:00 |
|
I’m at a scale model exhibition and there’s some thread-worthy stuff Insanely detailed B-29 cutaway diorama: United ‘C-70’ Navalized A-10:
|
# ? Feb 17, 2018 21:42 |