|
The Founding Fathers used muskets that fired lead balls, therefore it is unconstitutional to place any restrictions on use or consumption of lead.
|
#
¿
Sep 30, 2022 15:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Wrong thread, oops
azflyboy fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Oct 3, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Oct 3, 2022 04:28
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Usually it’s approach that gets pissed off. I've heard more people get numbers from towers than any other facilities, but that's probably because I mostly hear people do various runway and taxiway incursions. The best was a Skywest flight that crossed a runway at SEA without permission, and after being given the Brasher warning by the ground controller, called the ground controller back on the radio, since they didn't understand the "phone number" part meant "use the telephone"
|
|
#
¿
Oct 12, 2022 04:55
|
|
|
Psion posted:Seeing an A-5 was one of two bucket list planes that I checked off on a trip to San Diego. Good times. The linear bay did not spontaneously poo poo gas all over the deck of the Midway, so it was disappointingly unrealistic in this one aspect From what I could find, the motor on the AIM-54 produced about 3000lbs of thrust, so all six running simultaneously would mean 18,000lbs of thrust. The J-79's used on the Vigilante were good for 17,000lbs each in afterburner, so three of those would put out 51,000 lbs, which means the missiles would give the three engine version about a 35% increase for the ~27 seconds the motors were burning.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 13, 2022 05:58
|
|
|
Sagebrush posted:Yep. And they tried to sue him for it too, iirc. To add something to this, the Wrights actually won the lawsuit (and several more), with the side effect being that the "patent wars" between them and Curtiss largely blocked development of new airplanes in the US until WW1. At that point, the US Government stepped in and set up a "patent pool" where all US aircraft manufacturers paid a nominal fee (which went to the Curtiss and Wright companies) for being able to use any of the patents in the pool.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 19, 2022 10:41
|
|
|
bull3964 posted:Yeah, I knew the automatic systems would be fine, but it was eerie and definitely the least visible approach I've been on. I used to fly an airplane where the autopilot was too basic to do super low visibility approaches, so we hand-flew them using a HUD, and I think we were the only airline in the world to do that. Our minimums were 600ft horizontal visibility and a 50' ceiling, so an approach to minimums meant that the runway was visible for only a couple of seconds before touchdown, so you just had to trust that the HUD guidance was working properly. In the event you didn't see the runway and went missed at minimums, depending on how heavy the airplane was and how fast you added power, it wasn't unheard of for the main gear to skip off the runway. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jan 24, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2023 07:35
|
|
|
My understanding is that the 737 can be hand flown to CAT III minimums if there's autopilot issues, but the usual procedure is to let the autopilot/autoland system do the work on those approaches.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 24, 2023 18:05
|
|
|
We have a proprietary RNP approach where the missed approach procedure takes you down a fairly narrow valley, and in a worst case situation (single-engine missed approach in a heavy airplane on a hot day), you'll actually be looking up at the sides of the valley for a decent chunk of the procedure, but there's enough clearance for the FAA to sign off on it.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2023 06:23
|
|
|
Mr. Wiggles posted:So much for Reno. This isn't a huge shock, since the fatality last year probably made the arguments from the housing developers around the airport stronger, but it's still sad since the organizers had been working on a bunch of stuff for the 60th anniversary of the races in 2024. Since the races require a venue with some pretty specific requirements (large areas of empty space around the airport, the ability to deal with a lot of spectators, and decent weather in September to reduce conflict with airshow season), I'm pretty sure they won't do anything next year, and it's pretty likely the event never comes back anywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 10, 2023 02:12
|
|
|
Wingnut Ninja posted:I was thinking that too, but also yeesh, one small wrong control input and you just put a nozzle through a very expensive part of a very expensive plane. I'd want a lot of practice first; I wonder if they use the airfield firefighting mockup for that kind of training. The contractor we use in Seattle doesn't seem to believe in practicing, so they manage to cancel several flights a year by flooding the APU with type I, hitting the airplane with the truck, or dropping the boom onto the tail.
|
|
#
¿
May 11, 2023 05:30
|
|
|
Wombot posted:Based on several first-hand experiences trying to fly home to SEA, I thought their SOP was to close the airport until the ice melts normally. That's basically what the airport does, but Alaska refuses to admit that Seattle is terrible at being an airport, so they'll set up all kinds of deicing stuff and attempt to run a normal schedule into an airport that's effectively closed. Last year, that lead to a PA running in the Alaska gates that summarizes as "If you live anywhere near Seattle, just give up and go home, since we don't have any open seats for at least three days".
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2023 01:04
|
|
|
Wombot posted:I got got by the early season snowstorm that hit Seattle in Oct 2017 - I'd landed in LAX around 7am from Melbourne, Australia, enroute to SEA. I availed myself of the Alaska lounge where I promptly passed out. I woke up to utter carnage - SEA was effectively shut down due to a freak snowstorm and pretty much every flight to SEA was cancelled because the deicing contractor hadn't trained staff or bought equipment and, y'know, deicing fluid yet. The lounge was a lock-in, if we left we lost our seats. We ended up stuck in that lounge for longer than the flight from MEL-LAX, like 18 hours or something stupid. Alaska does something very similar to that every year, and every single time it's followed by a "Here's what we learned from this colossal fuckup!" sent out to employees a week or so later, when we all know that they'll completely fall apart the first time it snows nexr year.
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2023 08:22
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
OMGVBFLOL posted:as i understand it, fares are essentially at cost anyway, with all the major airlines making their profits wheeling and dealing on their loyalty programs. which, cool? That depends a lot on the airline. American has a loyalty program that's valued substantially more than the airline itself (about $30 billion vs $12 billion), but smaller airlines or ULCC's will rely more on fees for checked bags, premium seating, etc... for their profits.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2023 19:29
|
|
|
There was another E-175 that had a flight control fuckup, compounded by the captain being dumb. It was on a Republic Airlines flight that initially had the CA pitch trim written up for working intermittently (which was due to frayed wires), and halfway through the process of replacing the switch, maintenance decided to save some time and defer it, which left the switch in place, but instructed the captain not to use it. Unfortunately, when they put the switch back in, it was installed upside down, never had a functional check, and the captain didn't realize this, so he attempted to use the trim switch on the next leg he flew, which is basically muscle memory. This lead to the airplane nearly stalling on several occasions (the CA would hand control to the FO, who got the airplane settled down, then all hell broke loose when the CA took control back) until the crew figured out the pattern and got the airplane back on the ground. As a result, the E-series can't have the yoke trim switches MEL'ed any more, and there's a mandatory service bulletin that makes it impossible to install said trim switches upside down.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2023 07:11
|
|
|
vessbot posted:As it always should have been, jfc Being able to MEL one yoke trim switch would actually be perfectly safe (there's a backup trim switch on the center console, and the one on the other yoke), so what they may have done is just changed the MEL procedure so maintenance can't just placard the switch, and now has to pull a breaker and/or physically disconnect the bad trim switch so it doesn't do anything.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 10, 2023 18:48
|
|
|
bonelessdongs posted:What else would you need to complete the ultimate collection of expensive suicide devices? If you're interested in killing off a tech-bro (or other new money type), you absolutely need a Cirrus in there.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2023 06:05
|
|
|
I've spent the last two days at the Reno air races, and it's been a mixed bag. The airshow acts are never great, and the racing this year has been decent, but the pilot/owner of the second fastest airplane in the Unlimited class (a 3000+hp P-51) has been spectacularly awful. He's a boomer neurosurgeon, and despite the fact that he's been repeatedly disqualified for various things related to how he flies and clearly doesn't know what he's doing, he absolutely refuses to hire an outside pilot, so he managed to get disqualified in qualifying, successfully raced yesterday without doing anything dumb, and then got DQ'ed again today, and depending on what he did (he may have flown too close to the crowd line in addition to other stuff), he might actually be banned from any flying tomorrow.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 03:09
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:How hasn't he crashed yet? He's likely a decent pilot, but flying 450mph in close formation (with someone who doesn't want you there), in a window between 50-250' off the ground is a completely different skill set, which he obviously doesn't have. He did manage to pass the mandatory pylon racing school all the pilots have to attend, so he's at least theoretically capable of flying the course properly. It's probably good that his lack of skill manifests as flying too high, since he's nowhere near other racers (who typically fly as low a line as possible), and rule/inspection changes after the 2011 Reno crash make it fairly unlikely an airplane will go into the crowd without hitting another airplane first.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 14:11
|
|
|
It absolutely is, other than the fact that the specific way he was flying erratically (wide/high), increases the chances of sending an airplane into the crowd.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 20:00
|
|
|
There's a chance there's some specialized tools or equipment required to disassemble or move the airplane, and the Russian forgot to steal those, so this is their "best" option. Plus, if it goes wrong, they'll just blame it on the Ukrainian Jewish Nazis.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 17, 2023 20:20
|
|
|
Spaced God posted:Two T-6s went down during the gold race at reno. jesus christ I saw it happen, and unfortunately, it's the second time I've seen a fatal accident here in as many years. The race was actually done, and the collision was between the first and second place finishers as they were on base/final to land. I assume it was a case of T-6's having large blind spots (one went down with the tail missing, so it was likely hit from behind/above), combined with someone losing track of where the other airplane was. The organizers held a meeting with the three classes that hadn't yet raced to see if anyone wanted to continue, but I saw a lot of the pilots walk out really early, so most of the meeting was probably figuring out if they could salvage something, and then writing the statement when they couldn't. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 02:03 on Sep 18, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 01:26
|
|
|
I go into Reno with the mindset that I'll probably see at least one accident (I've been going about 10 years, and maybe one didn't have an airplane get totalled), but there's enough safeguards in place that it's usually something like a ground loop, fender bender on the runway, or a forced landing after an engine failure, where the worst injury is a broken hand or something. This one kind of hit harder than last year, since it happened during what's supposed to be the safe part of the race, and I'd actually talked to some of the crew of one of the accident airplanes in the hotel this weekend, and they're all super close.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 04:14
|
|
|
Dr.Smasher posted:I know the Reno Air Racing Association is trying to find a new place to race, but after this, I doubt they'll find one. That's probably for the best. They actually had representatives from the six sites that had sent in RFP's in the crowd today (RARA wanted to make sure they knew what the event was really like), so this may change a mind or two. From what I saw of the crash, it wasn't anything specific to Reno (it could have happened at any non-towered airport), and the event is worth a huge amount of money ($75-100 million a year) to the local area, so I'd be very surprised if the bids all go away. I think the limiting factor is going to be insurance and sponsors, since Reno was stupidly expensive to insure *before* the last two years, and obviously this won't help. Reno had also lost their title sponsor last year (Stihl didn't renew the contract), and had the races continued here, they would have run into financial issues sooner than later.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 04:23
|
|
|
Sapozhnik posted:What constitutes reasonable risk? I don't know much about the individual situations of air racing pilots but I'm going to hazard a guess that nobody is placing any pressure on their livelihoods to perform in these races. No one races at Reno for the money. At best, a team might break even, but most of them likely lose money racing, so the pilots and teams are here because they love what they do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 04:27
|
|
|
Cojawfee posted:
The neurosurgeon had successfully passed the required pylon racing school (so the basic skill set was apparently there), and there were rumors he'd been forced to get someone else to fly his airplane today, although that race never happened. They actually banned a pilot for dangerous flying last year, and I think had this year ended normally, the doctor stood a very good chance of being told he was no longer welcome. After the 2011 crash (where an airplane went into the crowd), Reno and the FAA established a pretty strict set of criteria for inspections of airplanes that race, and to my knowledge, they haven't had a single accident caused by a structural failure since then, although there's obviously been multiple blown engines. There's well established procedures for the recovery in place (unless you have a problem that requires an immediate landing, you finish the race, pull up from the course, and then enter the landing pattern in the order you finished), so this seems like it was largely a combination of absolutely poo poo luck and maybe a weak spot in the recovery procedure.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2023 05:01
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:I've got it: A-10 Racing. Ironically, one of the last things they did at Reno was let the A-10 demo pilot do a lap around the course, which was pretty cool to see. Earlier in the week, they let a C-17 do the same thing, and I presume they'd have allowed the F-18 demo pilot to do so as well, had they flown Sunday. HookedOnChthonics posted:Actually changing my answer, An-2s but it’s velodrome sprint style where you spend the first part of the race trying to go as slow as possible and psych your competitors out before the dash for the finish I'm a bit surprised no one has tried entering an AN-2 in a STOL competition for shits and giggles (seeing one doing STOL drag racing would be spectacular), but my understanding is that the FAA puts enough restrictions on N-numbered AN-2's that there's no way that could happen. azflyboy fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Sep 19, 2023 |
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2023 05:30
|
|
|
Wombot posted:Regarding this fatal Reno collision, I dunno poo poo about butts, so maybe there's a good answer for this and I'm ignorant of it. But why the hell were they so close to each other? Is there no controller and spotters handling approach? The basic procedure at Reno is that you finish the race, pull up into the "cool down" (a circle about 2000' over the airport,) and then whenever you're ready, you descend to about 700' over the airport, overly the runway, and enter the pattern. During that process, there's at least two required radio calls (there's possibly more, I'm not sure) in the pattern, of "downwind abeam" (directly across from the landing end of the runway) and "final, gear down" (lined up with the runway, and your landing gear is down). Done correctly, that can result in an airplane landing every ~15 seconds, and it worked pretty well for most of the 59 years they raced at Reno. From what I saw, the two airplanes that collided did so between the downwind and final, so one of the pilots essentially lost track of where the other one was, and either turned or descended into the other airplane, likely without ever seeing it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2023 15:42
|
|
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:Wasn't it the F-22 that had its stealth coating damaged by rain? Both the F-22 and B-2 have had rain-related issues with their RAM coatings, and what's probably the most expensive plane crash in history (a B-2 that crashed on takeoff in Guam) was also caused by rain. I can't imagine the F-117 didn't run into similar issues, but I'd assume the program was secretive enough that they either solved the problem, or it wasn't much of an issue because of how the airplanes were used.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2023 00:00
|
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:
I heard that Doc was grounded for crossing the "foul line" on Saturday, but RARA agreed to let Miss America fly Sunday, if someone else was the pilot. No clue whether it's true, but his flying was erratic enough, and there's enough history behind the airplane that it certainly sounds plausible.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2023 19:50
|
|
|
Advent Horizon posted:I heard a few different things that all looked plausible from my viewpoint. Crossing the show line was one, another was that he may have cut, IIRC, Pylon 6 so badly he actually cut the sport class pylon. He definitely cut two pylons, so that would have been in addition to crossing the show line and the high flying, since there was a lap where he was *way* closer to the crowd than I've seen in all the times I've been there.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 23, 2023 02:52
|
|
|
I would blow Dane Cook posted:here's a firefighting B-17. What are some cool firefighting planes? Some of the more interesting firefighting airplanes were permanently grounded in 2002 after two airplanes (a C-130 and PBY4) crashed about a month apart after their wings separated due to metal fatigue. Now, the US fixed wing air tanker fleet is all turbine, and consists of a mix of C-130's (both private and government owned), BAE-146's, Air Tractors and MD-87's. If foreign companies (usually Canadian) get called in, there's some firefighting 737's, Q400's, and some CL-415's that can also be used. There's a couple of DC-10's still doing firefighting, but the 747 tanker project ended when Evergreen went bankrupt, with one airplane being scrapped, and the second being resold as a freighter, although there's a company running a scam claiming to be getting one flying again.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 9, 2023 07:24
|
|
|
We had a check airman fry a pair of engines by doing a go-around after a bounced landing. Specifically, the Q400 has an "oh poo poo!" power setting where you can push the power levers through a detent to get about 20% more power out of the engines, but since that's accomplished by telling the FADEC to ignore a lot of the thermal limits it usually follows, it's not terribly healthy for the engines. In this case, the airplane bounced on landing at an airport surrounded by terrain, and the check airman put the engines into "oh poo poo" power on the go-around, left them there for about 10 minutes, and then didn't bother telling anyone what had happened. Maintenance only found out after a routine download and analysis of the engine data from that airplane a few days later, and apparently the data was so bad that Pratt & Whitney wouldn't allow the airplane to be flown again on those engines, so maintenance got to do a double engine, gearbox, and propeller swap, outdoors, in Montana, in the winter.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2023 08:35
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 18:06 |
|
|
Elviscat posted:I saw one taking off from Renton or SeaTac a few months ago, they instantly trigger something in my brain that goes "that's different" even though the livery looks the same as any other white dominated one. Boeing used to charter them pretty frequently to fly in parts to repair various 787-related fuckups, and I think AN-124's were also the only way to move 777X engines on their shipping stands via airplane. There was actually a discussion of Boeing chartering the AN-225 at one point, but those plans were scrapped when they figured out that none of the Seattle area airports could accommodate it due to clearance issues at various spots on the airfields.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2024 14:03
|
|