The General Airplane Thread

[Fat Tyre]

Has anyone here ever flown on a Boeing 727? Since most of them are being taken out of service, I'll never get to experience flying in one, which is a shame because I really like the design of them.

I flew a few times actually, the one I remember clearly was from Madrid to Athens in 1997, I can't remember which leg of the trip (we had a short stop in Barcelona). I also think I flew in a McDonnell Douglas DC-10 that same year which has a similar engine layout.

EDIT: I was wrong the DC-10 had one engine on the tail and one on each wing, my bad. Now I'm doubting whether I did fly on that DC-10 or it was a different McD...

 

[BobK]

I flew a few times actually, the one I remember clearly was from Madrid to Athens in 1997, I can't remember which leg of the trip (we had a short stop in Barcelona). I also think I flew in a McDonnell Douglas DC-10 that same year which has a similar engine layout.

EDIT: I was wrong the DC-10 had one engine on the tail and one on each wing, my bad. Now I'm doubting whether I did fly on that DC-10 or it was a different McD...

The DC-9 comes to mind. It was a twin engine though, but they were in the tail. It's a layout that's also fairly common with bizjets like Learjets, Cessna Citations, etc etc.

 

[Dan]

Holy crap. I never imagined the Dash-8 Q400 was a horrible plane until I read this rant. It's hilarious and a little long, but absolutely worth it. Profanity warning.

 

[Fat Tyre]

The DC-9 comes to mind. It was a twin engine though, but they were in the tail. It's a layout that's also fairly common with bizjets like Learjets, Cessna Citations, etc etc.

So I definitely didn't fly on a DC-10, I'm quite sure the airline was Austral an Argentine domestic carrier. I've checked their retired fleet and it shows the MD-80 now I think that was the one which says was an updated DC-9 so you were correct.

 

[Pupik]

Holy crap. I never imagined the Dash-8 Q400 was a horrible plane until...

Won. Won. Wan. Wan. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Wawahhannhn. Waahhnnn. 1-1-1-1-1.0001, one-Won-one. Waahhnnn. Wan. Wan. Won. Won. Wonder-won't-wan. Wan-wonder-wun. Won. Won.

[repeat 298 times]

 

[Dan]

Won. Won. Wan. Wan. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Waahhnnn. Wawahhannhn. Waahhnnn. 1-1-1-1-1.0001, one-Won-one. Waahhnnn. Wan. Wan. Won. Won. Wonder-won't-wan. Wan-wonder-wun. Won. Won.

[repeat 298 times]

???

 

[Pupik]

???

That's what it sounds like to every passenger.

Good to know pilots and mechanics hate it, too.

It does have a terrific ability to take-off/land on really short runways.

 

[Dan]

That's what it sounds like to every passenger.

Good to know pilots and mechanics hate it, too.

Oh. You had me confused there.

It does have a terrific ability to take-off/land on really short runways.

That's the beauty of turboprops.

 

[TJ13]

Well this could be in the Car and Plane one.

I think everyone would want one of these?

 

[Dan]

Well this could be in the Car and Plane one.

I think everyone would want one of these?

Saw it on the news a few days ago. I think it's $1.5 million. IMO, the black scoop behind the door and the headlights look like they're from McLaren.

 

[TJ13]

Saw it on the news a few days ago. I think it's $1.5 million. IMO, the black scoop behind the door and the headlights look like they're from McLaren.

They announced it at 1.2 million.
with a 430 mile flight on a tank.
513 miles all road.

 

[Obelisk]

They announced it at 1.2 million.
with a 430 mile flight on a tank.
513 miles all road.

The trade-off is you have to get a pilot's license for it.

 

[TJ13]

The trade-off is you have to get a pilot's license for it.

Thought that is what autopilot is for?

 

[Bleached]

Thought that is what autopilot is for?

And this whole time I thought we were talking about a pilot named Otto.

 

[Populuxe]

Personally, I'm a big fan of the Taylor Aerocar.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerocar

 

[Fat Tyre]

I'm not sure if I mentioned this before but I actually am terrified of flying but I still love planes, I especially hate flying alone. Today I have two flights, Bangalore to Delhi which I'm just about to depart and Delhi to Madrid.

Silver lining is that I will get to travel for the first time in a 787 Dreamliner, I hope it all goes well.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

I'm not sure if I mentioned this before but I actually am terrified of flying but I still love planes, I especially hate flying alone. Today I have two flights, Bangalore to Delhi which I'm just about to depart and Delhi to Madrid.

Silver lining is that I will get to travel for the first time in a 787 Dreamliner, I hope it all goes well.

I don't see why it wouldn't.

 

[wfooshee]

Air show this past weekend at Tyndall AFB here! At a certain point of the schedule they were supposed to launch a B-25, but my finely tuned hearing picked up an incorrect engine note as the takeoff roll started. Too many engines, specifically!

Speaking to them later, I found that the B-25 had a mechanical, so they brought their B-17!!!

A freaking B-SEVENTEEN!!!!

Not only did it fly, but it was open to climb through when parked. So picture overload now.....

Climb into the hatch behind the chin turret, then look forward to see the bombardier station

Aft and up for the flight deck. I'm sure the displays in the upper center are not original.... probably the same for many of the instruments on the panel.

Turn around and squeeze through this walkway through the bomb bay

Immediately aft of the bomb bay on the port side is the radio operator's station

While in this area, you can pop your head up through the roof hatch and look around

Further aft, the waist guns, one on each side

Looking back towards the tail gunner's station

and a couple of shots of the belly turret

Nose art. Apparently everything's bigger in Texas...

 

[unit-one]

F-35 in Estonia

Not my photos =(

 

[Swagger897]

Air show this past weekend at Tyndall AFB here! At a certain point of the schedule they were supposed to launch a B-25, but my finely tuned hearing picked up an incorrect engine note as the takeoff roll started. Too many engines, specifically!

Speaking to them later, I found that the B-25 had a mechanical, so they brought their B-17!!!

A freaking B-SEVENTEEN!!!!

Not only did it fly, but it was open to climb through when parked. So picture overload now.....

Climb into the hatch behind the chin turret, then look forward to see the bombardier station

Aft and up for the flight deck. I'm sure the displays in the upper center are not original.... probably the same for many of the instruments on the panel.

Turn around and squeeze through this walkway through the bomb bay

Immediately aft of the bomb bay on the port side is the radio operator's station

While in this area, you can pop your head up through the roof hatch and look around

Further aft, the waist guns, one on each side

Looking back towards the tail gunner's station

and a couple of shots of the belly turret

Nose art. Apparently everything's bigger in Texas...

Great shot out of the nose.

I wonder what it'd be like late afternoon with a yellow tint to it.

 

[Carlos]

Great shot out of the nose.

I wonder what it'd be like late afternoon with a yellow tint to it.

Wonder no more!

Not exactly what you wondered, but I see yellow!

 

[Swagger897]

Ew... it's that, 35 thing.

 

[TVR27]

Ew... it's that, 35 thing.

That thing is a waste of money.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

That thing is a waste of money.

This has been debated on here before, but surely you can expand on why. There is only one reason I can think of but that's not enough to say it's an overall waste of money.

 

[wfooshee]

They tried so hard to make one airframe be everything for every service branch that they compromised it so badly that it does nothing well for any branch. The idea was to save money by building an airplane that the Air Force, Navy and Marines could all use, with common parts pools, common training, common capabilities, but every time it failed at something they just threw more money at it.

Look, vertical takeoff!
But it has no payload capacity or range

Look carrier capable!
If you don't mind the occasional snapped wheel strut

And on and on.

if you want a carrier fighter, then damn it, design one. If you want an air superiority fighter, then damn it, design one. If you want a ground support fighter capable of operating from unimproved fields, then damn it, design one.

But don't force the Navy to accept a VSTOL aircraft with the bits removed, or force the Marines to accept a carrier jet with extra vents to point thrust downwards. That just doesn't work....

 

[Dan]

if you want a carrier fighter

F/A-18 Super Hornet

If you want an air superiority fighter

F-22 Raptor

If you want a ground support fighter capable of operating from unimproved fields

A-10 Warthog. Gee, it almost seems like we didn't a trillion-dollar fighter program after all.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

F/A-18 Super Hornet



F-22 Raptor



A-10 Warthog. Gee, it almost seems like we didn't a trillion-dollar fighter program after all.

Problem was if it didn't need a cash injection due to bad direction and engineering, we wouldn't see people who have no real knowledge of planes or prior tossing a stereotype as if they do. If they didn't compromise and screw up so often on what makes the plane so strong and better than those listed it'd be one of the best fighters ever made. Problem is it did have the program screwed up too many times, and it did cause delays, more money, more rework over and over.

 

[ScottPuss20]

Get this: Australian Air Force pilots couldn't do any stunts with the F-35 at this years Avalon Airshow because they hadn't been trained yet But honestly, the F-35 is a cut price F-22 and it shows - doesn't really look fit to replace the Hornet. A gigantic wad of cash has quite literally been thrown at the wall just to get the plane into active service...
Here, tell me which looks better:

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Get this: Australian Air Force pilots couldn't do any stunts with the F-35 at this years Avalon Airshow because they hadn't been trained yet But honestly, the F-35 is a cut price F-22 and it shows - doesn't really look fit to replace the Hornet. A gigantic wad of cash has quite literally been thrown at the wall just to get the plane into active service...
Here, tell me which looks better:
View attachment 643617
View attachment 643618

The F-35 honestly, but then again the F-22 looks better than both and then the YF-23 looks even better and then the SR-71 being the greatest. The main reason being that everything is uniform, it looks like a menacing plane, something you'd see out of a not so futuristic star wars.

As far as I know the F-35 has barely begun delivery to Australia, so unless the sim hasn't been used or your military feels real trumps simulators. Can't tell you why they aren't a bit ready. I see the F-35 all the time in my area, but that's because they've had them for a couple years now. Also what knowledge do you have that tells you that it's a cut price F-22?

And no that's not how the development of the F-35 worked, if you want I can either find my original post in here trying to help clear up this simple sterotype or rehash it with more detail this time. I personally don't like seeing something perpetuated because it has been allowed to do so. Is the F-35 a horrible plan, nope. Was it in a development hell that engineers fear and cause for it to be seen as trouble for the layman, yes.

 

[TVR27]

Watch the Video from 36:11

http://www.abc.net.au/4corners/stories/2013/02/18/3690317.htm