Manny posted:

Edit: Put it this way, the closest thing we have in our country is the Sea Harrier which is cool in itself, but its like comparing a Mini to a Cadillac.

Rev. Dr. Moses P. Lester posted:

how manly does your engine stand have to be to hold a loving merlin?

Ola posted:

internet discussions about modern jets fighting

azflyboy posted:

Hughes was pretty well known for defrauding the government

galliumscan posted:

The Thunderbird pilot swatting at debris floating in the cockpit while doing an 8 point roll is *awesome*.

jandrese posted:

IMHO, the Concorde was a failure in the end because regular Joes couldn't afford to fly on it, and the ticket prices were high enough that most businesses would only let executives fly on it. That's the majority of people who fly. Given the maintenance costs associated with it and the fact that it could only fly over the ocean it's no wonder that nobody is rushing to repeat the experiment.

jandrese posted:

That would suggest a high profit margin on the tickets. If that's the case, why stop flying them?

"Yeah, we had to shut down this division, it was just too profitable."

InterceptorV8 posted:

Holy poo poo. That's loving awesome!

Godholio posted:

What huge tanks? All the fuel these planes carry is internal...they don't use external tanks.

429cj posted:

I was able to find it... It's insane how much effort went into getting 1 bomber over a target.


Click here for the full 775x850 image.

nurrwick posted:

Lately, I've come to the desire to go down and catch a shuttle launch because some reptilian part of my brain is telling me "this is it... this is the last great accomplishment of our time. A reusable space vehicle that big will never happen again in our lifetimes."

Nebakenezzer posted:

Richard Hammond experienced 100 gs briefly during his crash, for example.

monkeytennis posted:

A VERY expensive accident, wouldn't like to have been the guy explaining that one to the boss.

CommieGIR posted:

Just dust em off, put some radar absorbent paint on and its ready for the next mission

slidebite posted:

I hope they dressed the bear up as a pilot.

slidebite posted:

I giggle imagining that.

Cakefool posted:

People who hate Stoke, or 15 ton Autogyros?

ApathyGifted posted:

Of course I don't have an argument as to why you should plot is as percent of tax revenue instead of GDP. Probably because we run in a deficit so often that the percentages of other poo poo + military would be greater than 100. So you could probably go by absolute government expenditures, I suppose.

monkeytennis posted:

Thought you'd like this, sorry it's from the Daily Mail






http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1289185/Navigators-gag-amuses-plane-spotters-fighter-jet-races-Snowdonia.html

Vitamin J posted:

Dambusters!

Lilbeefer posted:

Looks awesome, but is there any reason why camo would be painted on in non organic square shapes?

Boomerjinks posted:

I just got engaged and somehow, despite me knowing the odds, the idea of having a wedding band made from a piece of an SR-71 has entered my head and will not leave...

loving goddammit.

BeastOfExmoor posted:

Not that this thread really needs something to generate replies, but I've been thinking for a while about which military aircraft has proven to be the best investment over time. To me it's between the C-130 and the B-52, but I'm curious to hear other positions.

slidebite posted:

In other happy news, 10 years ago this weekend.

I did not know this until just recently, but there is a team dedicated to restoring one for flight duty in time for the 2012 Olympics.

BonzoESC posted:

Sure is ugly though.

slidebite posted:

I always thought a lawn dart was slang for crashing?

MA-Horus posted:

Or a F-104 Starfighter.

Simkin posted:

Ola posted:

Click here for the full 1920x1080 image.

The FAA posted:

We are adopting a new airworthiness directive (AD) for the products listed above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness information (MCAI) issued by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe condition on an aviation product. The MCAI describes the unsafe condition as:

Wear, beyond Engine Manual limits, has been identified on the abutment faces of the splines on the Trent 900 Intermediate Pressure (IP) shaft rigid coupling on several engines during strip. The shaft to coupling spline interface provides the means of controlling the turbine axial setting and wear through of the splines would permit the IP turbine to move rearwards.

Rearward movement of the IP turbine would enable contact with static turbine components and would result in loss of engine performance with potential for in-flight shut down, oil migration and oil fire below the LP turbine discs prior to sufficient indication resulting in loss of LP turbine disc integrity.

We are issuing this AD to detect rearward movement of the IP turbine, which could result in loss of disc integrity, an uncontained failure of the engine, and damage to the airplane.

Used Sunlight sales posted:

When there's a shaft failure or the disc/blisk fails there's not much that can be done to keep it in the engine.

It's going to leave and there's nothing you can do about it.

azflyboy posted:

Quantas also had an incident earlier in the year where one of their 747's experienced an uncontained engine failure shortly after leaving San Francisco, so it's either an issue with the engines or their maintenance, which means a large company gets in trouble either way.

azflyboy posted:

The Trent family has never been fitted to a 747, so the aircraft in that incident would have been using an RB211.

However, I'm pretty sure some RB211 models use a hot section from the Trent line (I don't know about the engines Qantas uses), so there could be a problem that spans two RR engine lines now.

MrChips posted:

All of QANTAS' 747-400s are powered by RB211 engines.

2ndclasscitizen posted:

Wouldn't the fact that the 380 wings are made elsewhere, and then shipped in and fitted indicate QANTAS would be able to get the damaged one removed and replaced?

dietcokefiend posted:

If stuff is welded or put together in an odd one-time fashion it might not be possible.

quote:

Who foots the bill on this if it turns out it was 100% RR's fault?