|
hobbesmaster posted:Somehow that approach was flown too! As a glider pilot that concept also sounds weird. Either you are close enought to the airfield for a glide or you aren't. Remaining questions are, is the landing field long enough to stop or will the plane sink too fast to flare. I actually simulated the latter last fall at glider landing competition. On my second landing I came down much steeper than we ever land normally and when I did the flare I immediately realized the plane was coming down too fast to flare, so I executed a proper carrier landing. But me and the plane were alright and I won gold, so hurray for airbrakes. Gliders also have an answer to the problem of too short landing strip. If the farmer's field you happened pick turned out to be too short, yam a wing in the ground and do a telemark.
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 03:43 |
|
|
Truga posted:I've read the MiG-21 flight manual a few years ago, the phrase "cut throttle, disengage fuel pumps, and vacate the vehicle immediately" pops up on several occasions, including the "failure to restart engine in flight" section, it owns. My favorite little detail about the MiG-21 is that the gear and brakes both use pneumatics instead of hydraulics...and there's no air compressor on board. There's a compressed air tank that the ground crew charges up and once it's empty, it's empty. There's a little gauge in the cockpit that tells you how much air you have left, and every time you brake (which necessary for taxiing, as it doesn't have a steerable nosewheel) you lose a little bit of your system pressure. Don't ride the brakes! This theoretically shouldn't pose a problem since there's enough air for all the gear operation and braking in a normal flight. However, the system is plumbed with a three-way gear lever: extend, retract, and neutral. In the extend or retract positions, air flows to one end or the other of the cylinders and operates the system. In neutral, the air supply is closed off entirely; if you leave it in extend or retract, a small amount of air continuously leaks out though the cylinder seals. So you take off, flip up the gear handle, and go fly your mission, then come back to base and realize you forgot to move it back to neutral and now all your air is gone, and the gear won't come down and your brakes don't work 
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:49
|
|
|
There's a lever to manually drop the gear if it won't extend normally. Hope you packed a drag chute though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 8, 2018 23:59
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:There's a lever to manually drop the gear if it won't extend normally. Hope you packed a drag chute though. I flipped through the manual to verify that I had it right and it turns out that the chute deployment mechanism also requires pneumatic pressure  Hope you found a really really long runway. How well does a Mach 2 interceptor do in a forward slip?
|
|
#
?
Jun 9, 2018 00:26
|
|
|
Saukkis posted:As a glider pilot that concept also sounds weird. Either you are close enought to the airfield for a glide or you aren't. Also, I'm not 100% sure about about F-104, but since it's similar in age, role and configuration (late 50s, mach 2 interceptor, more a long jet powered pipe with some stabilizing winglets than a plane) as a MiG-21 I'm going to assume it's similar enough in characteristics too, which would also mean the correct and safe way to land one is at 70-80% N1. The MiG, specifically, also features blown flaps, which obviously don't work if you don't have power. I'm sure it's possible to land one after a total loss of thrust, but considering how many of these planes were built it was probably considered cheaper to just ditch the plane and not risk the pilot dying performing an unpowered landing in a plane that lands at 320-340km/h.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 01:19
|
|
|
Load up DCS and try it. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 05:28
|
|
|
Truga posted:
The F-104 also had blown flaps, but there is at least one case of an F-104 being successfully landed after a flameout at altitude, so there’s a chance someone did it with a MiG-21. http://www.sergebonfond.be/index.php/en/app/1970-26-fevrier-dead-stick-landing-sur-f-104
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 08:45
|
|
|
Carth Dookie posted:Load up DCS and try it. I deleted DCS because it runs like poo poo  Used the space to install IL-2 instead, that thing is so loving rad in VR, I load it up basically every evening I have some time now. It's not a real polikarpov, but it's about as close as you can get without owning one I think.
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 10:15
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:My favorite procedure is still the STCed EFB we put in our DC-10s right before the bankruptcy. In the emergency checklist was: I so loving want to do this to all the Surface tablets we have at my airline
|
|
#
?
Jun 11, 2018 23:03
|
|
|
 Dassault memory items. Dear lord. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 00:22
|
|
|
I have always loved how the engineers that set limits clearly never have talked to pilots, or potentially to any actual other human being in their lives. "Let's set the normal Ng to 102%" "...but you're using percentages--a functionally arbitrary scale. Why not make it 100%?" "Because gently caress you, that's why"
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 01:29
|
|
|
Rolo posted:
When I have to learn a limitation, I need to know WHY I need to know it. Max ITT, sure. Brake Ft Lbs? How can I use that information?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 02:16
|
|
|
Ft*lb is a gross unit of energy a lot because it's the same unit as torsional force. Confuses a lot of people for that reason. But to answer the question, you can use that to figure out if the brakes will be large enough simply by knowing a vehicles mass and speed. E=1/2mV^2. If the energy of the vehicle is greater than the energy rating of the brake, you need a bigger brake.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 03:40
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Ft*lb is a gross unit of energy a lot because it's the same unit as torsional force. Confuses a lot of people for that reason. But to answer the question, you can use that to figure out if the brakes will be large enough simply by knowing a vehicles mass and speed. E=1/2mV^2. If the energy of the vehicle is greater than the energy rating of the brake, you need a bigger brake. Why should this be a memory item for the pilot of the aircraft?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 04:49
|
|
|
Hey pilot goons, I just had my first solo this afternoon and passed the written PPL test this morning! Pretty good day  ASEL student flying out of KRAL if AWSEFT is still adding folks to the pilot list 
Reztes fucked around with this message at 05:18 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Ft*lb is a gross unit of energy a lot because it's the same unit as torsional force. Confuses a lot of people for that reason. But to answer the question, you can use that to figure out if the brakes will be large enough simply by knowing a vehicles mass and speed. E=1/2mV^2. If the energy of the vehicle is greater than the energy rating of the brake, you need a bigger brake. When I’m slamming on the brakes trying not to run this bitch into the grass, I’m not thinking about all the words you just said.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 08:14
|
|
|
um excuse me posted:Ft*lb is a gross unit of energy a lot because it's the same unit as torsional force. Confuses a lot of people for that reason. But to answer the question, you can use that to figure out if the brakes will be large enough simply by knowing a vehicles mass and speed. E=1/2mV^2. If the energy of the vehicle is greater than the energy rating of the brake, you need a bigger brake. Oh good, the FO can hop out on landing roll and install bigger brakes if needed. That's why you have two crewmembers!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 13:04
|
|
|
Reztes posted:Hey pilot goons, I just had my first solo this afternoon and passed the written PPL test this morning! Pretty good day Congrats!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 13:10
|
|
|
I was certainly defending that as a memory item and not just explaining the application of such a published figure. Y'all need to chill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 13:57
|
|
|
Harrier NATOPS translates that into a pretty handy number for us: "If you mash the brakes higher than X speed then you'll maybe get a brake fire after you stop. If you mash them above Y you'll definitely get one." And even that's not a memory item.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 14:23
|
|
|
NATOPS 2.3.1 - Student Aviators should anticipate experiencing a helmet fire any time 180KIAS is exceeded. NATOPS 2.3.2 - Student Aviators will experience a helmet fire upon keying the mic. The fire will extinguish immediately upon unkeying the mic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 14:57
|
|
|
DrDork posted:To be fair, military aviation for anyone flying anything starting with a "C" is typically rather boring, as is most flying for anything starting with a "P" and a lot of those "U" guys, too. I mean, flying around a C-5 is not too conceptually different than flying any other large cargo craft, except you have more people harassing you about your 1.5-mile run time and get paid less. State quals please. xaarman fucked around with this message at 15:42 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 15:39
|
|
|
AH-1W/Z everything up through WTO. So, the fun stuff that doesn't involve a <300hr boot trying to autorotate me into the ground at night. I mean, don't get me wrong, all my C-130 brethren enjoy their flying. They just enjoy it in a notably different way. e; And I'd probably have shived someone to get that UC-35 slot out of Andrews, but that's more for the fun of it than for the superior flying experience. DrDork fucked around with this message at 16:04 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 16:01
|
|
|
DrDork posted:AH-1W/Z everything up through WTO. So, the fun stuff that doesn't involve a <300hr boot trying to autorotate me into the ground at night. C-17 4 ship low levels 300' @ 300 KIAS. Won't even get into the SOLL2 missions. C-130 air drop on NVGs with assault strip landings C-146 and U-28 missions are generally classified. C-5s have 26 yr olds in charge of international flights with (multiple) inflight 90k+ lbs of fuel onload. To call anything C or U related boring seems a bit out of one's lane. After having done both, you know whats boring? Flying 737s doing an ILS 2x a day. Thankfully, the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. xaarman fucked around with this message at 17:35 on Jun 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 17:31
|
|
|
xaarman posted:C-17 4 ship low levels 300' @ 300 KIAS. Won't even get into the SOLL2 missions. To be fair helicopter pilots are crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 17:55
|
|
|
xaarman posted:After having done both, you know whats boring? Flying 737s doing an ILS 2x a day. Thankfully, the benefits far outweigh the drawbacks. No joke there. Despite the lack of daily adrenaline dumps, it's not at all hard to fathom why all the services are struggling to keep pilots from wandering off to greener pastures.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 18:04
|
|
|
Reztes posted:Hey pilot goons, I just had my first solo this afternoon and passed the written PPL test this morning! Pretty good day Hell yes. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2018 18:42
|
|
|
Reztes posted:ASEL student flying out of KRAL if AWSEFT is still adding folks to the pilot list 
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 13:33
|
|
|
One of us! One of us!
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 14:29
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:To be fair helicopter pilots are crazy. DrDork posted:AH-1W/Z everything up through WTO. So, the fun stuff that doesn't involve a <300hr boot trying to autorotate me into the ground at night. Well we got a skid guy and a Harrier guy, we’ve completed the triumvirate of USMC air faggotry. Anyone else counting down the days until they get out? On a more serious note, lots of contractors paying big bucks for King Air pilots to fly in the nether regions of the world. What are your thoughts?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 16:43
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:Well we got a skid guy and a Harrier guy, we’ve completed the triumvirate of USMC air faggotry. Anyone else counting down the days until they get out? I know a few. The consensus is that it was a good gig to pad your bank account before finding a more conventional job. I wish I had done it during the recession, but with the pilot shortage the way it is now its probably better to get into one of the legacy airlines if you can, secure that seniority number ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 16:53
|
|
|
Animal posted:I know a few. The consensus is that it was a good gig to pad your bank account before finding a more conventional job. I wish I had done it during the recession, but with the pilot shortage the way it is now its probably better to get into one of the legacy airlines if you can, secure that seniority number ASAP. This is the same that I'm hearing: the silly buxs you can make as a contractor is nice, but it's ultimately not going to last forever and it's not as nice a gig as being a legacy pilot, so get to the legacies ASAP, even if the money for the first few years might not be as good. It's a little different for helo guys, though--since we don't get any ME time (and have to re-learn how to land and not assume that "lower slower" is the fix for everything), contracting out can help build hours and pad the wallet so any penalty turn you take at the regionals doesn't hurt quite as much. But, again, if you can swing it, getting to the regionals and on to the legacies fastest is best in the long run. I'm still trying to figure out whether contract King Airs are ultimately a better plan than doing one of the "rotor to wings" transitions with PSA or Envoy or the like and sucking it up as a budget FO for a few years. Also, do you really want to go back to flying in the Middle East right now? Or, you know, ever? Especially if you have any sort of goals other than making money, flying point A to point B with a pause to orbit point C for two hours and then go back to your tin hut doesn't strike me as a compelling lifestyle. DrDork fucked around with this message at 17:34 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 17:32
|
|
|
I’m four years into a whopping 8 year contract with no end of the fleet in sight. I, like 100% if company grade V22 guys I know, will get out and probably go to a regional. The contract gig just seems fun from an adventure standpoint. You’re also only really working half the year. But yeah that half of the year you’re sleeping a shipping container and flying circles of the assholes of the world. And I can’t do it forever either. I’ve heard a rumor that if you captain at a regional and hang around you can get some sick nasty bonuses. True?
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 18:31
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:
They'll suck your cock to make you not go to a better airline. If you can skip the regionals do it, go straight to a low cost carrier if they'll take you, or if you are itching for world travel and some adventure, go for Atlas or Kalitta. But don't dismiss the possibility that a legacy airline may hire you straight out of the military, so its worth trying. Animal fucked around with this message at 19:24 on Jun 13, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 19:19
|
|
|
Even with the cocksucking, my understanding is that "good" regional Captain pay is still pretty meh compared to legacy FO pay, let alone legacy Captain pay. Unless a legacy won't pick you up, or you really like the routes you're flying, there doesn't seem to be any reason to stay at a regional a day longer than you have to, unless I'm missing something here.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 19:56
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Even with the cocksucking, my understanding is that "good" regional Captain pay is still pretty meh compared to legacy FO pay, let alone legacy Captain pay. Unless a legacy won't pick you up, or you really like the routes you're flying, there doesn't seem to be any reason to stay at a regional a day longer than you have to, unless I'm missing something here. You're not, unless you consider a certain Utah-based regional whose lifers like the quality of life enough to not risk moving and having to uproot their 2 wives, 6 kids and $500k mcmansion from Salt Lake or other points west. Bob A Feet posted:I’ve heard a rumor that if you captain at a regional and hang around you can get some sick nasty bonuses. True? Yeah but management at my company clearly missed that memo, plus the ones paying the bonuses are basing you somewhere lovely like La Guardia on reserve.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 20:21
|
|
|
Butt Reactor posted:You're not, unless you consider a certain Utah-based regional whose lifers like the quality of life enough to not risk moving and having to uproot their 2 wives, 6 kids and $500k mcmansion from Salt Lake or other points west. That certain Utah based regional isn't what it used to be and I can't recommend going somewhere else strongly enough.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 20:28
|
|
|
Minus bonuses, I made about $85k last year as a regional captain, and if I hang around until the top of the pay scale (18 years), I'd make about $120k. Going to a major, I'd take a slight pay cut for the first year, and everything past that would be substantially more than I'd ever make here. On the other hand, there's a lot to be said for quality of life, since I have a good schedule, get most of the days I want off, and have a whopping 20 minute commute, which is drat hard to give up for more money.
|
|
#
?
Jun 13, 2018 23:13
|
|
|
Bob A Feet posted:I’ve heard a rumor that if you captain at a regional and hang around you can get some sick nasty bonuses. True? You can get some "sick nasty" bonuses at my airline by hanging out until about 11am on your first day with the company. Still wouldn't reccomend it though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 03:43 |
|
|
Most of the regional bonuses are aimed at getting new hires in the door, and retaining them for maybe a year or two. There are some places doing retention bonuses for captains, but like Butt Reactor said, they tend to be places where you'll be commuting to reserve on the east coast somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Jun 14, 2018 10:54
|
|