|
OMGVBFLOL posted:the kid in me is still bummed that the a380 wasn't much of a success. i want to see big chungus ocean liners in the sky. imo the airliner variant of the C-5 being cancelled was the point where human progress stalled and began its long regressive slide into ignorance superstition and fascism Lufthansa and Qantas bringing their A380 fleets back as demand surged "after" Covid is either their last gasp, or a sign that there is a market for them on very specific routes - the trans-oceanic long haul routes.
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 23:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:07 |
|
|
MrYenko posted:Ya, that’s right on target for modern Boeing. It’s the “famously looking forward to make sure their airplanes don’t have glaring systems integration issues that directly result in hull-loss accidents” part that they dropped the ball on. Type certificates are a hell of a drug.
|
|
#
?
May 14, 2023 23:43
|
|
|
Wombot posted:Lufthansa and Qantas bringing their A380 fleets back as demand surged "after" Covid is either their last gasp, or a sign that there is a market for them on very specific routes - the trans-oceanic long haul routes. Lufthansa bringing back their A340s is actually the bigger indication toward there being a market. However that’ll probably come in the form of an A350neo variant. Delta is probably burning up the phones at Toulouse asking for the longest possible A32x neo and A350s right now.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 00:12
|
|
|
A380 remains the most surreally stable flight I've been on. Maybe just exceptionally clear weather that day, but really felt more like being on the deck of a stable ship than being on an airplane.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 00:40
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Delta is probably burning up the phones at Toulouse asking for the longest possible A32x neo and A350s right now. Bring back the DC-8-63 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 01:10
|
|
|
Dr_Strangelove posted:Bring back the DC-8-63 I'm...................comfortable they were retired. Fun fact, the largest aviation disaster on Canadian soil* was a crashed DC-8, the largest aviation disaster to an aircraft registered in Canada was also a DC-8 *I mean sure the Air India bombing was terrorism based in Canada but that 747 exploded over international waters so I don't think it counts
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:07
|
|
|
Dr_Strangelove posted:Bring back the DC-8-63 So is the last seat like being strapped into a bouncy chair?
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:08
|
|
|
Dr_Strangelove posted:Bring back the DC-8-63 this long boi made me want to bump this post which has become almost an intrusive thought: hobbesmaster posted:edit: two challenger 600s:
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:16
|
|
|
Just imagine if the Canadian government somehow propped up bombardier even more and they survived to start selling lots of the c series. So let’s do some length comparisons CS100/A220-100: 35m CL65: 20.85m CRJ: 26.77m CRJ-1000: 39.1m So… obviously through some fine Canadian engineering we could have a 1.875 stretch factor to create a 65.6m CSeries. I’m certain there would be absolutely no physics problems with this. Boeing 757-300: 54.4m Boeing 767-400: 61.3m A340 200/300/500/600: 59.4/63.6/67.3/74.7 Boeing 747-SP: 56.3m Boeing 747-100/400: 70.6m
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 02:41
|
|
|
Arson Daily posted:Yes Boeing, famously forward looking when it comes to what it's customers and their customers want in a new airplane As others have mentioned, that specific part of Boeing is actually pretty exceptional. Their 330 number wasn't a wild-rear end guess. They knew. In particular, what they realized that Airbus didn't was that passengers wanted more frequent and direct service, meaning more smaller long-ranged aircraft. Airbus thought landing capacity at major airports would be a bottleneck. This wound up being true at Heathrow but not many other places. Now if only they could also make good airplanes. Mortabis fucked around with this message at 03:15 on May 15, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 03:12
|
|
|
Thanks for the tips a few weeks ago guys. After tons of weather delays, I finally got to go up last night. It wasn't in a 172, but a Piper PA-28-161. Point form thoughts: - this poo poo is great and I wanna go back - but I can't afford to both sail and fly (and shoot guns and play pc games and...) - It was about an hour and I flew 90% of it. All he did was taxi out, show off a stall, and take over on the base leg for landing. - on that note, taxiing is way easier than in MSFS/DCS - kept reminding myself to look outside and not death grip, so that went well - it was more serene and less vibraty/buzzy than I expected, but on the other hand all the other sensations (wind, Gs, turbulence) are way more intense - had to keep looking out for traffic as we were between two international airports, one of which (Pearson - YYZ) is extremely busy A tremendously hosed up thing happened though. My phone went off mid-flight and I ignored it. When I got back to the car I called back, and my friend was asking me questions about transponders and poo poo. A few hours later we learn his brother-in-law had a fatal crash in his personal 182 right around the time I was flying. So...yikes.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 12:28
|
|
|
CmdrSmirnoff posted:Thanks for the tips a few weeks ago guys. After tons of weather delays, I finally got to go up last night. It wasn't in a 172, but a Piper PA-28-161. consider gliding. Usually much cheaper and frankly, much cooler. 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 13:34
|
|
|
A stretch CS/A220 is absolutely in the works. Bombardier said as much in previous interviews (designing it with stretches in mind) and recent reports show the -500 almost a sure thing now. The biggest biggest risk for Airbus is probably cannibalizing 32x sales, but if they can't deliver 32x orders, the bigger risk seems giving the orders to Boeing.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 14:07
|
|
|
Well of course it is, but the question is whether we’ll get some properly absurd long jets. Airbus would probably be happy to basically only product A321neo XLRs or whatever and shift A319 and maybe even A320 sales onto another line.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 14:49
|
|
|
LOL at the A319 Type Orders A319neo 92 A320neo 3,995 A321neo 4,667
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 15:04
|
|
|
You’d think that manufacturers will learn that the shortest version of any airframe rarely actually sells 318, 319neo, 736, MAX7, 338neo, 342, The exceptions that come to mind are the 332 which did about as well as the 333, and the 735 which did very well.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 15:30
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:You’d think that manufacturers will learn that the shortest version of any airframe rarely actually sells I suspect it may be one of those things where being offered is important. There are many tiered products where the lowest end one is basically just there to make the middle tier look better. For aircraft though stretches always seem to be more popular than cuts. That makes sense if the operating cost of the airframe doesn’t change too much as you change it’s length. The fuel saved by running a full A319 vs a 90% or whatever A320 may not make up all the other costs from maintaining all the parts from the larger normal version. So they become very specialized, like for London city specifically in the case of the Airbus. The most successful “cut” was probably the 747SP which was a combination of no ETOPS+special very long routes.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 15:56
|
|
|
Wombot posted:Lufthansa and Qantas bringing their A380 fleets back as demand surged "after" Covid is either their last gasp, or a sign that there is a market for them on very specific routes - the trans-oceanic long haul routes. i still see them routinely blasting off from SFO so that scans
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:07
|
|
|
CmdrSmirnoff posted:Thanks for the tips a few weeks ago guys. After tons of weather delays, I finally got to go up last night. It wasn't in a 172, but a Piper PA-28-161. That all sounds really cool and reading posts like this makes me want to stop being a flight sim nerd and try strapping myself into a flying bathtub irl some time quote:A tremendously hosed up thing happened though. My phone went off mid-flight and I ignored it. When I got back to the car I called back, and my friend was asking me questions about transponders and poo poo. A few hours later we learn his brother-in-law had a fatal crash in his personal 182 right around the time I was flying. So...yikes. aaand nope, never mind, staying on the ground or in passenger aircraft that have a spare engine and anti-ice equipment on board.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:10
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:aaand nope, never mind, staying on the ground or in passenger aircraft that have a spare engine and anti-ice equipment on board. neither of those are gonna save you in the most common light aircraft fatality situations, which are CFIT in instrument conditions by non-instrument-rated pilots, and skidding turns on base to final.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:20
|
|
|
sure, but if humans were capable of reasoned evaluation of danger, nobody would ever willingly operate a motor vehicle, and we'd all live in walkable villages e: which sounds nice
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:25
|
|
|
KYOON GRIFFEY JR posted:You’d think that manufacturers will learn that the shortest version of any airframe rarely actually sells Um, hello, according to that logic Zero One posted:A319neo 92 Getting rid of the A319 would decimate the A320 orders 
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:26
|
|
|
This really depends on the aircraft but often those small versions are not much different from the larger one that it’s worth offering just in case someone wants a few. It’s not like the A319 has a separate line and different tooling. Or sometimes it was just the first offered (like 787-8) and originally sold well as the only option before the stretches existed.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 16:42
|
|
|
So if the short original version is the one that doesn't sell, that implies a stretch A380 for success? Go for 1,500 people per plane and get them GHG per person kilometer right down.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 17:15
|
|
|
Yeah, I’ve read somewhere that the A380-900 design was the ‘balanced/normal’ version of the A380.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 17:38
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:sure, but if humans were capable of reasoned evaluation of danger, nobody would ever willingly operate a motor vehicle, and we'd all live in walkable villages Flying a light aircraft is dramatically more dangerous than driving a motor vehicle, especially if you wear your seatbelt and don't drink and drive.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 18:12
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Flying a light aircraft is dramatically more dangerous than driving a motor vehicle, especially if you wear your seatbelt and don't drink and drive. It's roughly on par with motorcycling per passenger mile traveled, if I recall correctly.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 19:17
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:It's roughly on par with motorcycling per passenger mile traveled, if I recall correctly. IIRC fixed wing GA is slightly safer than motorcycles and helicopters are even more dangerous than motorcycles.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 19:22
|
|
|
The thing with the A319 is that none of the frame sections it removes (it is a shrink of the the 320 after all) none of the missing frame sections are fuel tank sections. So the 319 actually has more range than the 320, thus a better ETOPS certification. It has a reason to exist other than ‘is shorter’
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 22:46
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:The thing with the A319 is that none of the frame sections it removes (it is a shrink of the the 320 after all) none of the missing frame sections are fuel tank sections. So the 319 actually has more range than the 320, thus a better ETOPS certification. It has a reason to exist other than ‘is shorter’ It also mounts literally the same engine, but has a lower thrust requirement, so any engines that get rebuilt but can't make full power to go back on a 320 end up on a 319 until EOL. It's a good ecosystem.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 22:57
|
|
|
Before it imploded, Bombardier was threatening to make another stretched version of the Dash 8, although given that the Q400 essentially couldn't flare (the tail hits the ground at 6 degrees nose up), that would have either required somehow making the main gear taller or just turning the airplane into a taildragger.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 22:58
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:It also mounts literally the same engine, but has a lower thrust requirement, so any engines that get rebuilt but can't make full power to go back on a 320 end up on a 319 until EOL. It's a good ecosystem. The more questionable one is the A318 with only 80 sold and no neo variant offered. The Wikipedia article on the A318’s history is interesting and I’d be interested in a more thorough history. Apparently it originated out of the exploration of a Chinese joint venture for a 100 seat aircraft in the mid 90s. “Market research” indicated that there was actually demand for a 70-80 seat aircraft and the deal fell through. Airbus went ahead and made the A318 anyway and was trying to book orders right after 9/11. It’s funny how the Brazilians seemingly came out of nowhere with a clean sheet design to absolutely nail that 70-80 seat market.
|
|
#
?
May 15, 2023 23:27
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Flying a light aircraft is dramatically more dangerous than driving a motor vehicle, especially if you wear your seatbelt and don't drink and drive. not dramatically, they're in the same ballpark. i wasn't so much comparing one to the other but comparing both to other activities. both are, by a wide margin, the most dangerous part of the day for someone who does them e: well, most people, most days. the day you base jump or share needles has driving and flying both beat Cactus Ghost fucked around with this message at 00:47 on May 16, 2023 |
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 00:42
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:IIRC fixed wing GA is slightly safer than motorcycles and helicopters are even more dangerous than motorcycles. And helicopters are really only more dangerous because the work they often do increases the risk. I'd rather have an engine failure in a helicopter than an airplane.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
ImplicitAssembler posted:And helicopters are really only more dangerous because the work they often do increases the risk. source your quotes
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 01:28
|
|
|
i mean i guess you die faster and with higher certainty so that could be considered positive
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 01:40
|
|
|
Sure, if you have nice flat areas to land in, a plane is relatively safe, but if you don't, you're arriving at the scene of the crash at best glide speed. In a helicopter, (depending on wind, etc), you arrive at at less than 20mph and often in a cabin that has way better crash resistance than most small aircrafts. Especially in the terrain we fly in (Boreal forest, muskeg, etc) with very few open areas, I'll take a helicopter any day. Even if we can't find a spot, at least we can choose the arrival speed.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 01:59
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:It's roughly on par with motorcycling per passenger mile traveled, if I recall correctly. I did the math on it once and this is correct, though I can't remember if it was per mile or per hour. ImplicitAssembler posted:Sure, if you have nice flat areas to land in, a plane is relatively safe, but if you don't, you're arriving at the scene of the crash at best glide speed. You aren't landing at Vg. In a C152 or similar you'll be touching down at like 35 knots. City street speeds. Also in a fixed-wing plane you have about a 10:1 glide ratio instead of 4:1, and you're operating at 5000 feet instead of 500, so you have an order of magnitude more time and distance to pick your spot. I'll take the fixed-wing (and the fatality stats bear this out)
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 03:03
|
|
|
I would simply not crash the plane.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 03:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 11:07 |
|
|
Warbird posted:I would simply not crash the plane. Pulling the chute still counts.
|
|
#
?
May 16, 2023 03:19
|
|