|
Look, it may have the Myspace angle going for it, but you cannot deny that the Super Connie looks drat good in that photo. e: new page tax https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taU6qu5pXBo
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 02:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
A visual crime.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 02:39
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:some kind of enormous propeller-driven elephant dong  Check out this guy I was behind, using his Audi to its fullest potential 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 02:50
|
|
|
Ardeem posted:From the op All Constellations Are Beautiful
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 03:16
|
|
|
They found corrosion in the wings of this thing a few months back, not sure it'll ever fly again. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gF0fLBYlZ8&t=415s A-380 landing shot from the front, it's really cool how when it derotates and the wings lose lift, they quite visibly bend down.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 04:48
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:That’s a weird way to pronounce F-22. quote:An F-22 restart would not take five years minimum, but it would also be expensive. “Assuming a buy of 194 aircraft, the total procurement cost is estimated to be between $40 and $42 billion (BY16$),” the report reads. “When the total procurement cost is combined with the non-recurring restart estimated costs of $9,869 million (BY16$), the total restart cost is estimated to be $50,306 million (BY16$).” http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=27199
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Going back to the wake turbulence chat, x-post from PYF. Video games sure are different from when I was a whipper snapperlilbeefer posted:Exposing my inner sperg here, but I love that the developers of the flight sim DCS have integrated wake turbulence into the game.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 05:09
|
|
|
Youtube channel Flugsnug has videos that through excellent video skills, timing, and luck, gets basically visualizations like that IRL. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sqPGofHM554 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WizVovGeHKg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3hTdJzkHE1o And, my favorite, the last one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dfY5ZQDzC5s
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 05:30
|
|
|
Yeah part of the reason I posted that stuff in PYF is I have seen the flugsnug stuff before and have always had an interest in the vortices & turbulence caused by planes. Incdentally DCS also has awesome wing tip vortices and that condensation forming around lifting surfaces due to pressure.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
A380: 5Head Flexing durrr 747: Sit down son 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 05:38
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:
I think Bombardier has pretty much given up on the whole "airplane" thing. They sold the C-series to Airbus, sold the Q400 (and Beaver, Otter, Twin Otter and Dash 7 type certificates) to Viking, and sold the CRJ line to Mitsubishi. All they've got now is the Challenger line and Learjet, so they've basically ceded anything bigger than a corporate jet to Boeing and Airbus.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 06:31
|
|
|
Oh I didn't realize they sold off the Dash 8 / Q400. Wow. Only sold it for $300 million too, though I don't know how many orders they have out there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 07:08
|
|
|
Really the CF fighter replacement should be an up-engined twin otter 
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 07:26
|
|
|
priznat posted:Really the CF fighter replacement should be an up-engined twin otter What if we go back to Spitfires, enemy Air to Air missiles will get confused and not be able to slow down/have turning circle to engage.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 08:18
|
|
|
Charles posted:Oh I didn't realize they sold off the Dash 8 / Q400. Wow. Only sold it for $300 million too, though I don't know how many orders they have out there. Viking has committed to keeping the Q400 line open through 2021, which I think takes them to the end of the current Q400 orders (about 50 airplanes), and that's also when the lease on the Q400 production line (which Bombardier leased from some level of government) expires, so they'd have to either re-negotiate the lease, or move the line somewhere else. The Q400 doesn't sell terribly well (everyone wants E-175/195's and A220's), so Viking might keep it in very low rate production, but I also wouldn't be surprised if they just shut the line down and focused on supporting the existing airframes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 08:44
|
|
|
Through the trees at new house, and some colourisation:
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 12:58
|
|
|
Humphreys posted:Through the trees at new house, and some colourisation: My guess is that you want this thread.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 13:11
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:That’s a weird way to pronounce F-22. Why does Canada need fighter jets at all?
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 13:40
|
|
|
Cocoa Crispies posted:Why does Canada need fighter jets at all? Most pressing reason: Aerial and maritime sovereignty. Well beyond fear of WW3 type stuff, there's good reason to worry that without any way to put armed-capable aircraft up over Canada's north, Russia may well play real fast and loose with territorial boundaries. Other reason: To go do stuff with NATO and FVEY countries when they decide to do operations overseas.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 13:52
|
|
|
Even if a fully pacifist world, where the mere notion of war would seem nothing more than an absurd fever dream, governments would still want to have fast jets so as to be able to check in on errant aircraft quickly. Most interceptions are of civilian jets that have stopped responding to the radio because of a technical problem, or similar scenarios. The fast jets can catch up with them quickly, assess what's happening, and if needed can guide the other aircraft to an airport for emergency landing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 14:18
|
|
|
I'd hate to be the pilot tasked with the interception, the best case is that someone gets to tail the zombie-plane until they're satisfied it's going to crash without killing anyone else. 1: https://www.forbes.com/sites/johngoglia/2014/09/05/frosted-windows-offer-clue-to-unresponsive-plane-crash-ne-of-jamaica/#57d7adb6966c 2: https://www.theguardian.com/world/1999/oct/26/julianborger
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 14:44
|
|
|
Instead of an edit, let’s have a crash landing balloon instead. https://www.instagram.com/tv/B11FXgNl0Io/?igshid=1c0pgrop8w1xm Minor injuries, probably a good laugh over beers later (from Austria).
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:14
|
|
|
Finger Prince posted:Lovely airplane. Possibly the sexiest US build prop-planes. For me, only the An-3 beats it. Sagebrush posted:reminder Dang that would look so much better. Also those windows look way bigger than the actual design. Brings a new meaning to glass cockpit huh. Anybody know the official reason as to why they never went with a design like this? e: Platystemon posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ybdaJcrFhE Nice bonanza all the same, not sure how i feel about V tails but good think damage seems minimal. 
The Real Amethyst fucked around with this message at 15:19 on Aug 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:16
|
|
|
Airbus is all about keeping commonality between all of the different models of their airplanes, cockpit height being one of them. They wanted pilots transitioning from an A320 or -330 to have a similar sight picture on the big jet.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:19
|
|
|
 commonality good
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
Icon Of Sin posted:Instead of an edit, let’s have a crash landing balloon instead. That's a pretty big gently caress up. Unless the video is missing a previous bounce, someone must've pulled a vent, because that envelope is not fully inflated at the beginning, and they're only on a single burner, when a balloon of that volume should have 2-3, which should be cranked. Then it gets spun and the people fall out. I would guess one of them is the pilot, it looks like he's holding a vent line, though maybe the turning vent, and not the main vent? That would explain why it spun the way it did on the first impact (balloons just don't spin like that without help) All that being said, I've had landings 75 percent as bad as that, and they made me reevaluate if I should be ballooning. But bad landings happen, especially when initially learning. The biggest issue by far is dumbfuck trying to stop the balloon by getting in front of it. That's killed 2 of my friends, and almost me. Everything visible in that video is completely preventable and could be rectified at almost any point. I can only hope that there's a big piece of the puzzle missing.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:43
|
|
|
The Real Amethyst posted:Dang that would look so much better. Also those windows look way bigger than the actual design. Brings a new meaning to glass cockpit huh. Somebody mentioned a while back that it has to do with regulations prohibiting passenger seating forward of the cockpit, which would cut down on the available first-class area that would presumably go in the nose like in the 747, which was grandfathered in prior to the regulation. No idea how true that is vs. the commonality reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 15:51
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:Somebody mentioned a while back that it has to do with regulations prohibiting passenger seating forward of the cockpit, which would cut down on the available first-class area that would presumably go in the nose like in the 747, which was grandfathered in prior to the regulation. No idea how true that is vs. the commonality reasoning. Airlines want to maximize business class, not first.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 16:20
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Airlines want to maximize business class, not first. I’m flying DEN-FRA today on a 747 without first class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 16:23
|
|
|
drgitlin posted:Airlines want to maximize business class, not first. The definition of first/business for international is going to vary greatly. Never mind US domestic first class which is what is known as “premium economy” for transoceanic flights.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 17:52
|
|
|
My last transatlantic flights were on LH - A359 out and 744 back. The top classes for both were business and the experience for pod/seat/service in AC were virtually identical. And excellent IMHO. Not a private room by any means, but I had no complaints. Spending a day and a half in Seattle next month. Full day before our cruise and half a day when we return. Plan to do the touristy thing around pikes/space needle area, but has anyone done the 90 minute Boeing factory tour in Everett? Worthwhile? We did the Museum of Flight last visit which won't be repeat this time unless I want to precipitate a divorce.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 18:17
|
|
|
It's cool if you want to see the giant factory. I just went, but it was a Sunday, so they weren't working. I did a different tour many moons ago and it's cool to see them work, but the museum tour seemed short and a bit basic. No pictures allowed. Edit: also it's Pike Place Market
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 18:24
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Plan to do the touristy thing around pikes/space needle area, but has anyone done the 90 minute Boeing factory tour in Everett? Worthwhile? It's a bit of a chore getting up to Everett from Seattle proper, but once you're at Paine Field there's a TON of aviation enthusiast stuff to do (way more than you could fit in one day, unfortunately): 1) Flying Heritage & Combat Armor Museum - doable in about 60-90 minutes, impeccable-condition aircraft, most of them flight-worthy. Paul Allen's former collection. 2) Future of Flight Aviation Center - you already know about this one because this is where you pick up the Boeing tour. 3) Museum of Flight Restoration Center - this is deceptively large, 23,000 square feet. But you'll see things in here that you won't see anywhere else, like the nose piece of the 2707 SST mock-up. 4) Historic Flight Foundation - nothing incredibly rare, but very well-kept planes, most in flying condition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historic_Flight_Foundation BIG HEADLINE fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Aug 31, 2019 |
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 18:41
|
|
|
BIG HEADLINE posted:It's a bit of a chore getting up to Everett from Seattle proper, but once you're at Paine Field there's a TON of aviation enthusiast stuff to do (way more than you could fit in one day, unfortunately): Yes to all of this, and double to the Restoration Center if you like Weird Stuff. I was thankfully alone, because after the docents noticed I had been there for like three hours just staring into the guts of their deHaviland Comet, we got into Discussions about what makes these old planes tick and how to get them working again and I got to go super behind the scenes and see stuff that most people don't. I assume a similar experience would start with divorce papers on your end. Also, I absolutely recommend the Boeing factory tour just so your pathetic human brain can gain some sense of scale. It's humbling to see "a room" with six 747s almost lost inside, and realize they've got six more "rooms" like it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 18:52
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Also, I absolutely recommend the Boeing factory tour just so your pathetic human brain can gain some sense of scale. It's humbling to see "a room" with six 747s almost lost inside, and realize they've got six more "rooms" like it. You probably won't see six 747s in the factory at once any more 😢
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 19:16
|
|
|
Charles posted:Edit: also it's Pike Place Market  It probably would be a Sunday that we go there as well, never thought of the place not "working" - that's a good point. babyeatingpsychopath posted:Yes to all of this, and double to the Restoration Center if you like Weird Stuff. I was thankfully alone, because after the docents noticed I had been there for like three hours just staring into the guts of their deHaviland Comet, we got into Discussions about what makes these old planes tick and how to get them working again and I got to go super behind the scenes and see stuff that most people don't. I assume a similar experience would start with divorce papers on your end. Sounds like we'll do the factory tour though, and then probably hit the road starting the loop back to Alberta via Yakima and hopefully drink a ton of wine and cider.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 19:17
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:Yes to all of this, and double to the Restoration Center if you like Weird Stuff. I was thankfully alone, because after the docents noticed I had been there for like three hours just staring into the guts of their deHaviland Comet, we got into Discussions about what makes these old planes tick and how to get them working again and I got to go super behind the scenes and see stuff that most people don't. I assume a similar experience would start with divorce papers on your end. No exaggeration, the factory tour gave me a headache trying to process the scale of things. Multiple 787s nose to tail in one bay inside really is mind blowing. Sad I didn’t know about the restoration center, though. It sounds fun.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 19:19
|
|
|
slidebite posted:My last transatlantic flights were on LH - A359 out and 744 back. The top classes for both were business and the experience for pod/seat/service in AC were virtually identical. And excellent IMHO. Not a private room by any means, but I had no complaints. I’m on LH 447 DEN-FRA on the 747, and thanks to United app check-in fuckery yesterday I’m stuck in the middle seat of a middle row of 3 downstairs. Hopefully when I get to DEN they can change it because the LH app won’t let me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 19:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 22:08 |
|
|
meltie posted:You probably won't see six 747s in the factory at once any more 😢 I think there were 4, plus a cockpit in a jig. They don't let you take pics or even take notes so I have to go on my shoddy memory. They're only cargo orders now, and I think she said turning them out at a pace of one every other month. One thing that was happening despite being Sunday was the cranes overhead were lifting a 747 wing. In the scale of the building it looks kinda small. I also didn't know about the restoration center until last week and want to go sometime. I'm going to the Museum of Flight in a few hours to catch the Apollo 11 exhibit before it closes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 31, 2019 20:53
|
|