|
`Nemesis posted:the R9X seems like it could be ideal for anti-balloon missions I don't think there's a platform that can both carry a hellfire and also get it within range of a balloon at 60,000+ft. Edit: apparently the Reaper has a ceiling of 50,000ft, that might be close enough but then it may not be capable of targeting something above it. Theris fucked around with this message at 16:50 on Feb 8, 2023 |
#
¿
Feb 8, 2023 16:46
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
Deptfordx posted:I wasn't talking about a balloon attack in particular and more the inexplicable perception that 'EMP's don't count somehow' that some people seem to have. That you could just openly fire a missile with impunity and America would just have to go. Welp. My understanding is that the people who think "EMPs don't count somehow" think that because they believe <US geopolitical rival they're most afraid of> either currently has or is developing something that can generate a large-scale EMP without involving a nuclear weapon. In their fantasy it doesn't count for nuclear retaliation because it wouldn't be a nuclear attack.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2023 19:34
|
|
|
Was Kaman purchased by private equity recently? Because the article's repeated mentions of "growth" smacks of the "we're going to stop doing (or make worse) a thing we do that's profitable and sustainable just because it shows no signs of being way more profitable in the near future" moves that private equity loves to make.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2023 14:46
|
|
|
Seems like the solution would be for the FMS to assume that if the GNSS and IRU suddenly disagree by more than a little bit, it's the GNSS that's wrong instead of the other way around currently. Maybe verify with DME-DME, assuming you're flying over a country that isn't eagerly dismantling all their VORs.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 21, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:I think this is after-the-fact spin from Boeing. That and it is an astonishingly poor reason to wreck your brand and expose your company to massive liability. "Southwest made us do it" is a perfectly valid explanation for why the MAX exists. It in no way excuses the constant fuckups and there's no reason to believe a notional clean sheet 797 would have been any better. It might have been even worse since they wouldn't have had the solid foundation of the 737 to work from.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 7, 2024 19:14
|
|
|
Also noise suppression. And despite that Conway powered DC-8s and 707s were the loudest commercial aircraft ever besides the Concorde.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2024 18:06
|
|
|
TheFluff posted:What about the Tu-114, the airliner version of the Tu-95 Bear? Wikipedia claims 108+ dB in some parts of the cabin Warbird posted:Depending on how you slice that pie I think there are some rocketry firms that would disagree. Ok, fine. Everyone please pretend I said "jet" instead of "aircraft." Thanks.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 20, 2024 19:05
|
|
|
Cactus Ghost posted:if you use the current usage of "jet", the tu114 still qualifies. if you use the older usage of jet, then the rockets qualify! Goddamnit I even thought about throwing in "and I mean the colloquial usage of 'jet,' not BLADE's 'technically a turboprop is a kind of jet even if literally no one actually uses the word that way in practice' or the source of JPL's name" but didn't think I'd actually need to. And really the contention with the rockets is that their operators would probably not care for you calling them aircraft rather than spacecraft. Either way, i promise I like waffles. Please don't put in the newspaper that I hate waffles. Edit: You know what? The 108db always quoted for the Tu-114 is from right next to the engines inside a cabin with Soviet noise isolation. (ie, none) The source for the claim for the civilian Conways is 116db measured under the flight path of the plane at a point 21,000ft from the start of the t/o roll. I bet the Conway 707/DC-8s were just straight up louder anyway even if the cabin was certainly much quieter. Edit 2: The same source has the Tu-144 Concordski at 110db for the 21,000ft from the t/o start measurement. It does beat the Conway 707 with 114db 450m laterally from the runway centerline vs the 707's 112db. However, it also has a variant of the Convair 880 at 117db for the under the t/o path measurement, and a JT3D-7 powered 707 at 120db under the approach path vs 112db for the Conway, so  It's here if anyone is interested. (Edit 3: fixed the link) Theris fucked around with this message at 15:20 on Feb 21, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2024 14:28
|
|
|
Saukkis posted:How much better a tricycle plane is at braking than acceleration? There's a ton of variables involved but generally landing distances are a good bit shorter than take off. Landing speeds are slower than take off speeds - the plane is lighter and can use more flaps since the drag is helpful rather than a hindrance - and brakes are (usually) more "powerful" than engines. Airliner brakes in particular are incredibly powerful; very similar to F1 cars with "packs" of multiple discs and full circle friction surfaces. Most airliners can land in around 1/2 to 2/3rds their takeoff distance under normal operation, shorter than that if they're willing to make the passengers a bit uncomfy, and in a spectacularly short distance if they treat the brakes as disposable and maybe get ARFF involved. In the bi-mono's case, landing speeds would have been higher since it was missing ~half its takeoff lift, plus conventional gear means it can't brake as hard as a tricycle, so it probably did need a lot more runway for landing than takeoff.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 13, 2024 13:08
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:Annoyed chat bot: the A220-100 is ABC DE five abreast It's been a long time since I've been on one but I vaguely remember previous 5-wide planes (like the DC-9 and family) being ABC DF or maybe AC DEF, which seems less confusing since it upholds the "A/F are windows, C/D are aisle" that people are used to. Did I just imagine that or did Bombardier/Airbus decide they wanted to be different? Or did it depend on the airline?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2024 00:00
|
|
|
Hadlock posted:What's the stall speed of a commercial jet liner in that sort of situation at that altitude? I'm sure extreme roll and pitch maneuvers bleed off some speed but I'm really struggling to imagine a 737+ sized jet entering a stall immediately after cruise speed and altitude, followed by a flat spin My first reaction to this question is "coffin corner:" as a plane climbs the the indicated airspeed of its maximum mach decreases while its stall speed stays the same or increases. Where these intersect is the plane's ceiling, and flying close to the ceiling means the margin between stall speed and max speed is very small. But, this would not have been a problem for Aeroflot 593. It was cruising at 33,000ft which is not that high for an A310 unless it's really heavy, and with only 63 passengers and ~6hrs of fuel, SU593 would not have been that heavy. Both times it stalled were the result of maneuvering: the first while pulling several Gs in a steep bank, and the second after a hard climb left it at only 99kts. Remember: stalls aren't a function of speed but angle of attack. "Stall speed" is shorthand for "the speed where the angle of attack required to maintain level flight exceeds the AoA at which the plane's wing will stall." A plane can stall at any speed if you can get the AoA high enough, and the events that lead to the crash of 593 put it at a very high AoA. Twice. Like with any reasonably well known commercial airliner crash, the Admiral Cloudberg writeup is probably the best combination of detailed and readable you'll find. Well worth a read. Theris fucked around with this message at 12:32 on Apr 22, 2024 |
|
#
¿
Apr 22, 2024 12:29
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:Airbus is the most boring name possible for an aeroplane company. It's a travesty considering the legendary names among its predecessor companies.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2024 12:14
|
|
|
BalloonFish posted:The mock-up used green-on-black CRTs and looked incredibly 70s. I need pictures/video of this immediately and Google is failing me. Edit: Found some!
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2024 17:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 03:05 |
|
|
It's a white path painted on the wing bordered by arrows. I'm not sure what more you could do. Maybe have the arrows be lights that light in sequence towards the slide?
|
|
#
¿
May 16, 2024 11:32
|
|