|
LUBE UP YOUR BUTT posted:ehhh reciprocity is pretty much the only thing keeping world leaders from doing stupid poo poo like giving advanced anti-aircraft capabilities to rebels. karmas as good a runner up as it gets Counter point: 224 people don't find your karma very comforting right now
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 06:42 |
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Counter point: 224 people don't find your karma very comforting right now
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Of course there's no way we left and lost track of a loving patriot battery so SAMs seem to be out. Yeah Patriot batteries can't float away like other air defense systems.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
I'm gonna take a wild stab in the dark and guess that Syrian and Iraqi stocks of tracked SAM systems aren't all accounted for, and in the collapse of the militaries of aforesaid countries trained operators might be available for the right cash/ideology but I'm also guessing that while the Sinai is a bit of a warzone, Egypt still controls it enough to notice such things? Gonna bet bomb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:46
|
|
|
DesperateDan posted:Gonna bet bomb. Gonna bet structural failure: http://aviationweek.com/commercial-...392288af7d6aadc
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 21:54
|
|
|
I'm gonna bet "wait until the facts come out before speculating" but I'm a funhater that way.mlmp08 posted:Yeah Patriot batteries can't float away like other air defense systems. We cannot allow a hovercraft SAM battery gap!
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:24
|
|
|
Psion posted:I'm gonna bet "wait until the facts come out before speculating" but I'm a funhater that way. This times a million. You bomb-loving loving morons. The CEO of the airline only said that because he came to realise that he's in extraordinarily deep poo poo if it's anything BUT a bomb.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 22:52
|
|
|
Jonny Nox posted:Counter point: 224 people don't find your karma very comforting right now Thank you.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:02
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Gonna bet structural failure: Now thats what I get for basing my bets on what I saw on general news articles, sounds like the cause could be one of a few things but all centred around lovely maintenance/crew concerns being ignored.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2015 23:15
|
|
|
slidebite posted:
I'm glad to hear people like to read me going on and on about lovely outer covers  Ardeem posted:Oh god, who thought anything about the r101 was a good idea or airworthy at this point? At the risk of siphoning off my own thunder, I've been thinking about this. Of the people who knew what was going on with R101, you have the operations people (think the men actually building and flying R101), the engineers, and the politicians/bureaucrats. Certainly among the people flying R101 - there was by the summer of 1930 that R101 a wildly held belief that the airship had serious flaws. On the eventual India flight, several of the crew were substituted, as they had refused to fly in R101 unless they got danger pay. Similarly on the construction side, the Royal Airship Works was not a happy place to be in 1930 - the only word from on top was "you've got to be faster" and it was clear that a project that started out aspiring to very high standards was now doing things in an increasingly sloppy and reckless manner. The engineers, especially the head engineers, were like many other engineers (before and since) who have made bad mistakes. Admitting the mistakes would net them nothing, so they just decided to be optimistic about the whole thing, and hope it'd work out. This was seriously aided by the Air Ministry, who placed all their hopes in getting their white elephant to fly in the midsummer displacement increase - they just wouldn't let the engineers make the changes necessary to actually fix the problems instead of glossing over them. The pride of the Royal Airship Works chiefs was on the line, too: they had spent years looking down their noses at the R100 project - admitting "yeah, we had all the money in the world and we still made a worse airship that doesn't meet the baseline of the contact" was just too much for them to contemplate. Even revising some of the more troublesome subsystems was out, as the revisions needed would have been to copy the R100. We've often said around here that the SE Asian approach to cockpit communication can cause bad problems. Similarly, all the engineers were being terribly British about the whole thing: keeping a stiff upper lip and just hoping everything would turn out alright. The bureaucrats, meanwhile, either only gave a poo poo about political directives or were being asked to regulate matters they didn't understand. Compounding this turbo-fuckery was the notion of a contest. If you've been reading my posts, you might have come to the conclusion that the contest was good PR (and some sort of 'acceptable political compromise' ) but was otherwise straight-up bullshit. One of the two contestants was the judge of the contest, and had several political motives to declare themselves the winner. As you can see in the posts, this also lead to R100 and R101 being treated wildly differently; a minor structural thing with the tail might be a reason for R100 not to fly to Canada, but R101 can be staggering around the sky leaking hydrogen to the point that she's on the edge of being literally un-flyable, but that's alright. Lord Thomson himself is to blame for all this, too. In addition to all the other political machinations, you have this guy who is trying to massage the process just so he can make the trip to India in Her Majesty's newest Airship, thus proving he's the right man to be put in charge of India. His view of the whole project was (well, no surprise here) aristocratic - all he, Lord Thomson, needed to do to get the R101 operating properly is to set firm deadlines and threaten to chop off some heads if his wishes weren't fulfilled. This might be a functional management paradigm in some context - but it sure as hell isn't in a technologically complected project. While he was doing this, he was saying in Parliament "that the R101 would be as safe as houses - except for the millionth chance." Considering that he seems to have thought he'd be flying to India in fall 1929 (!) it could be that the dude was utterly clueless that the risks this approach would rack up might not be political in nature.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Yeah Patriot batteries can't float away like other air defense systems. But enough about the navy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 00:37
|
|
|
 An old man and his airplane.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 01:31
|
|
|
Impressive as hell that a test pilot from that era could make it into his 90s.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
Yesterday I got to pay $35 for a 6 minute helicopter flight. First time I was ever in a helicopter, and the first time I've been in any kind of aircraft since I was like 3. I've been a flight simulator nerd since high school, but it wasn't until yesterday that I was finally able to get the time (and second person) to take a flight. I may or may not have become an addict. I feel like I need to take one of those 1+ hour flights over lakes and rivers. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:53
|
|
|
A couple of years ago he backseated in an F-15 that went supersonic. The dude rules.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:54
|
|
|
The Right Stuff, indeed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 02:58
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:Yesterday I got to pay $35 for a 6 minute helicopter flight. First time I was ever in a helicopter, and the first time I've been in any kind of aircraft since I was like 3. I've been a flight simulator nerd since high school, but it wasn't until yesterday that I was finally able to get the time (and second person) to take a flight. When I was in cadets, I got to ride in the right seat of a Kiowa while hotdogging around a wetland centre. That pretty much made me want to be a helicopter pilot right then and there. ~25 years later, still hasn't happened. Helicopters are still awesome tho.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 03:28
|
|
|
I arranged the three short videos I took on the flight and just really quickly slapped them together into one. It's a Robinson R44 Raven, the one with hydraulically assisted controls. That's my brother in the seat in front of me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oIwuWjGXnRg
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 03:32
|
|
|
heh captain's bars in a robbie  But yeah, those and Schweizers are pretty fun as hell to toot around in. I wish I had the money to continue in flight school but jeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeesus it's 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 04:03
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Gonna bet structural failure: quote:On May 25, 2002, a China Airlines Boeing 747-200 (registered B-18255) flew a scheduled service from Taipeh to Hong Kong... This bothers me more than it should.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 04:46
|
|
|
Duke Chin posted:heh captain's bars in a robbie The R22 and R44 feel kinda like the motorcycle of "serious" aviation (meaning stuff that's not a homemade autogyro or single seat kit plane). They're really small and zippy and you can just buzz 150 feet off the ground and bank so hard that the artificial horizon is nearly 90 degrees, and they fit anywhere.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:This bothers me more than it should. Well that would have been correct 100 years ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:05
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Well that would have been correct 100 years ago. Not if you were using Wade-Giles  (Actually it's bothersome how they switch between romanization systems here. You can drive down the same road and see it's name spelled three different ways.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:20
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:This bothers me more than it should. Canadian spelling 
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
YF19pilot posted:Not if you were using Wade-Giles You can walk and see it spelled differently from block to block.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 06:07
|
|
|
A clip from a documentary a few years ago, showing some aerial footage of planes and then a quick look at ATC operations in Australia. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKV8ovw3QN0 The stat is now out of date, Syd-Mel is now 4th busiest I think.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 07:49
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Wireless Telegraphic Direction Finding (the so-close to comedy acronym WTDF) almost always provided accurate navigation fixes, useful when you can't see the ground. I'm gonna start using "what the drat gently caress." As in "what the drat gently caress, another Neb airship post right when I have to go do X chore!" I just remembered, in your great B-36 post in one place you inverted the meaning of "aspect ratio" and said it has a low one. (In another place, you correctly said it is high.)
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 07:50
|
|
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34702153 Dat fog
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 14:35
|
|
|
vessbot posted:I just remembered, in your great B-36 post in one place you inverted the meaning of "aspect ratio" and said it has a low one. (In another place, you correctly said it is high.) Thanks. This *does* sound like me... e: Good news! This thread's favorite non-existant F-15 variant may be getting a new shot at life!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
They'll probably get them too, because Boeing's going to pour lobbying money into it with dump trucks so they can keep their ex-McDonnell Douglas units open after losing LRS-B. Flightglobal is also reporting that the semi-stealthy variant is the one requested.
Mortabis fucked around with this message at 15:55 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:52
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Thanks. This *does* sound like me... "We're still really really angry about the Iran deal. Hows about some F-15s?"
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 15:59
|
|
|
Anybody have thoughts on the new domestic Chinese jetliner?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 16:18
|
|
|
david_a posted:Anybody have thoughts on the new domestic Chinese jetliner? Umm, Airbus is screwed? Nope, I guess I don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 16:24
|
|
|
david_a posted:Anybody have thoughts on the new domestic Chinese jetliner? The China.jpg thread does. Consensus seems to be "lol" and "who wants to bet that hundreds of millions end up in pockets where they don't belong"
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 16:31
|
|
|
The first all-melamine jetliner.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 17:20
|
|
|
I figured somebody might have info on whether it's even competitive with david_a fucked around with this message at 17:30 on Nov 3, 2015 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 17:26
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:e: Good news! This thread's favorite non-existant F-15 variant may be getting a new shot at life!
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 17:39
|
|
|
david_a posted:Anybody have thoughts on the new domestic Chinese jetliner? Looks like a swollen C-series. Isn't, I assume, but looks like it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 17:42
|
|
|
Please don't plane-shame.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 06:42 |
|
|
I haven't seen this, got a link?
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2015 18:00
|
|