|
EvenWorseOpinions posted:Holy loving poo poo Imagine being one of the technicians sitting at a terminal in the back.
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 16:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
Oopsy daisy https://twitter.com/ConflictsW/status/1225083171223539712
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 17:20
|
|
|
that looks bad. that looks "people died" bad.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 17:29
|
|
|
Inacio posted:that looks bad. that looks "people died" bad. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-05/pegasus-jet-splits-in-two-after-veering-off-runway-in-istanbul?srnd=markets-vp Turkey says no fatalities, 183 people on board, 21 injured.
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 18:12
|
|
|
pegasus airlines! i fuckin love those guys. you can get a preflight package where they bring you three beers for like 9 tl
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 18:15
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Imagine being one of the technicians sitting at a terminal in the back. No Actually, assuming I don't poo poo myself, hell yes
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 18:34
|
|
|
Wind changing to strong tailwind right at the time of the accident.   https://archive-server.liveatc.net/ltfj/LTFJ-Feb-05-2020-1500Z.mp3 ATC audio, I haven't listened to it yet but the PPRUNE word is that it's about 20 minutes in, and tower read them the tailwind before the landing. e: and that 2 obvious planes went around for the tailwind vessbot fucked around with this message at 19:14 on Feb 5, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 18:51
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:For example that time Boeing engineers thought the 717’s stall characteristics looked weird and asked for a test with a right bank... Do we have any idea how much altitude they lost doing that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 20:34
|
|
|
slidebite posted:Do we have any idea how much altitude they lost doing that? Started at 15k ft, the FO puts his arm on the CPT at 10k ft is what I recall from an explanation article. Not sure where they ended up
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 20:39
|
|
|
EvenWorseOpinions posted:Holy loving poo poo Yeah that uh, escalates quickly. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 5, 2020 23:41
|
|
|
Speaking of escalating, that Pegasus 737 now has a death toll of 3 and 179 injured.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 01:02
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Speaking of escalating, that Pegasus 737 now has a death toll of 3 and 179 injured. it looked far too rough for nobody dead
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 01:19
|
|
|
drat, RIP.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 01:45
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Started at 15k ft, the FO puts his arm on the CPT at 10k ft is what I recall from an explanation article. Not sure where they ended up From squinting closely at the tape in the upper right, where each major indicator is 500 feet, it looks like they start at about 15200 and regain a positive rate of climb at ~5700 feet. Don't know what that is AGL obviously.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 02:22
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:From squinting closely at the tape in the upper right, where each major indicator is 500 feet, it looks like they start at about 15200 and regain a positive rate of climb at ~5700 feet. Don't know what that is AGL obviously. I was trying to read that but the video (and audio) quality is not great! I think you're right. I also thought I heard "too low terrain" the first time I listened but I think that was just the guys saying something to each other.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:06
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:From squinting closely at the tape in the upper right, where each major indicator is 500 feet, it looks like they start at about 15200 and regain a positive rate of climb at ~5700 feet. Don't know what that is AGL obviously. By this metric I counted 18 bars and some change in 27 seconds so gently caress average 20k FPM?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:21
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:For example that time Boeing engineers thought the 717’s stall characteristics looked weird and asked for a test with a right bank... Well that’ll wake you up better than any coffee can.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:40
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:For example that time Boeing engineers thought the 717’s stall characteristics looked weird and asked for a test with a right bank... nope nope nope nope
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:42
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:By this metric I counted 18 bars and some change in 27 seconds so gently caress average 20k FPM? 20 thousands gently caress! per minute seems about right.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:47
|
|
|
karoshi posted:20 thousands gently caress! per minute seems about right. Or if you're a test pilot, "whoooops".
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 03:49
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:From squinting closely at the tape in the upper right, where each major indicator is 500 feet, it looks like they start at about 15200 and regain a positive rate of climb at ~5700 feet. Don't know what that is AGL obviously. Again as I recall it is AGL as the test flight was over the ocean. Wingnut Ninja posted:Or if you're a test pilot, "whoooops". Both pilots were retired USN test pilots so it might’ve been “that takes me back”. At least that’s what someone said in the Cold War thread the last time it was posted. The real answer of course was “is everyone not wearing a 5 point harness ok?” hobbesmaster fucked around with this message at 04:06 on Feb 6, 2020 |
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:03
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:“is everyone not wearing a 5 point harness ok?” Fine but for the poo poo dribbling out my shirt collar.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:19
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:For example that time Boeing engineers thought the 717’s stall characteristics looked weird and asked for a test with a right bank... More from the Youtube comments: Youtube posted:Doing a little research on this, it appears that this is a McD test pilot crew in the 1998-1999 time frame. Boeing had owned McD by the time they rolled out the first MD95/717, but remember that McD was still a subsidiary at that point with its existing lines of authority and organization. So these are McD guys in the cockpit, possibly ex-Navy Vietnam fighter pilot Randy Wyatt in the right seat, who went on to be a Boeing test pilot, including on the 747LCF, and definitely Gary "Bear" Smith in the left seat. Bear had been an active-duty Navy fighter pilot -- indeed, he was a Blue Angel -- prior to joining the Douglas test pilot group, and stayed active in the Naval Reserves. He died in 2005 in his Super Decathalon while giving advanced flight instruction to an instrument-rated private pilot near Oroville; apparently the student was at the controls.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
The clown show computer future continues. Coffee spills is such a cultural icon, it has messed up mathematical formulas and building blueprints, turns out it can also shut down Airbus engines and make them not start again. EASA just published an AD:quote:Two in-service occurrences were reported involving inadvertent liquid spillage on the ENG START panel or ECAM Control Panel (ECP) on the centre pedestal in the flight deck on A350 aeroplanes. In both cases, the aeroplane experienced an un-commanded engine in-flight shut-down (IFSD) of an engine some time after the liquid spillage. Subsequent engine relight attempts were not successful. In both events, the flight crew performed a diversion and landed the aeroplane safely. https://ad.easa.europa.eu/blob/EASA_AD_2020_0020_E.pdf/EAD_2020-0020-E_1 More here: https://www.flightglobal.com/safety/a350-engine-shutdown-incidents-linked-to-cockpit-drink-spills/136434.article
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 13:47
|
|
|
Soooo, mandatory sippy cups?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 14:57
|
|
|
Man, I would have figured that flight safety critical switches that could remotely be subject to liquid spills were designed to be resistant to that failure mode. I guess that bean counters are the bane of all human existence.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 15:41
|
|
|
One wonders if it's physically impossible or extremely lucky that both engines didn't go.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 15:43
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Man, I would have figured that flight safety critical switches that could remotely be subject to liquid spills were designed to be resistant to that failure mode. I guess that bean counters are the bane of all human existence. When you design something foolproof, the universe produces a stronger fool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Man, I would have figured that flight safety critical switches that could remotely be subject to liquid spills were designed to be resistant to that failure mode. I guess that bean counters are the bane of all human existence. In passenger stuff we put drip shields underneath every gap around a panel that someone could even remotely put a drink on. But when I worked on cockpit installs, there was no such thing because in that plane there was no flat surface to put a drink. My last project was one of those super-first-class suites. We built a full mockup for PDR and purposely handed out lots of coffee and water to the customer reps to log where they were absent-mindedly setting them down when inspecting the mockup. One of them put it on top of the door. Another on top of the IFE monitor. A third on top of the charger/usb ports.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 16:21
|
|
|
ApathyGifted posted:One of them put it on top of the door. This is amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 16:42
|
|
|
Pilots, and by extension all humans, are dirty fukkin animals and I can’t fathom why anything electrically critical in an airplane doesn’t look like one of those flip phones construction guys are always carrying around. Also, the drat thing is like 200 million dollars. How much more would it have cost to waterproof the flight deck?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 18:37
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:For example that time Boeing engineers thought the 717’s stall characteristics looked weird and asked for a test with a right bank... I'm guessing that "OVERSPEED" warning means you're going too fast? Also, it looks like the plane is from a Wiley Coyote universe and realized it can't actually fly and just started falling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 19:26
|
|
|
EightBit posted:Man, I would have figured that flight safety critical switches that could remotely be subject to liquid spills were designed to be resistant to that failure mode. I guess that bean counters are the bane of all human existence. Bean counters and bean spillers: the natural enemies of good aviation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 19:30
|
|
|
ApathyGifted posted:My last project was one of those super-first-class suites. We built a full mockup for PDR and purposely handed out lots of coffee and water to the customer reps to log where they were absent-mindedly setting them down when inspecting the mockup. This is loving genius. Serious kudos to whomever came up with that idea.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
Potato Salad posted:Soooo, mandatory sippy cups? The airline I work for actually did that. We had a couple of spills onto circuit breakers, so we all got mandatory mugs with lids, which were the only thing that was going to be allowed onto the flight deck. Since good travel mugs actually cost money, these were the cheapest possible ones the company could find, and the lids were a press-fit that came off if you so much as looked at them funny. After several of those fell onto the circuit breakers when the lid fell off, the idea was quickly abandoned (it lasted maybe two weeks), but no one ever sent out an email or memo admitting the "mandatory sippy cup" program was dead.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 19:51
|
|
|
beep-beep car is go posted:I'm guessing that "OVERSPEED" warning means you're going too fast? Correct. Above certain airspeeds, the forces acting on the airframe can become so great that they cause structural damage. Maneuvering creates additional forces, so there are safe speeds for that too.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 20:02
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:Also, the drat thing is like 200 million dollars. How much more would it have cost to waterproof the flight deck? That indicator has to be a lot cheaper than waterproofing electronics, yet here we are. In conclusion, bean counters ruin everything.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 22:20
|
|
|
Even if it could be waterproofed, why is it possible for any electrical connection right there to fail in a way which switches an engine off and also prevents it coming back on? I doubt all the important engine brains are located inside that coffee table, but it wouldn't surprise me if they were. Even though airliners fly fine on one engine, as I said earlier it must be just random chance that both weren't knocked out. Maybe it's the fire switches, is it possible to smash both and kill both engines?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 22:26
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Correct. Above certain airspeeds, the forces acting on the airframe can become so great that they cause structural damage. Maneuvering creates additional forces, so there are safe speeds for that too. Though they probably weren’t in any immediate danger - the overspeed warning is for maximum operating speed which is less than the maximum proven dive speed (ie what the test flight program does) and there should still be some slight safety margin above that. That said there’s a reason tail number 1 stays parked at the manufacturer (or is given to NASA in the case of the 737). I wonder how often the g limits are hit in these programs despite the test pilots’ best efforts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 2, 2024 10:10 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Though they probably weren’t in any immediate danger - the overspeed warning is for maximum operating speed which is less than the maximum proven dive speed (ie what the test flight program does) and there should still be some slight safety margin above that. Yeah I was kinda curious of the usability of the airframe after that. They probably didn't hit do not exceed speed though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2020 23:33
|
|