Non-Military Aviation

shafnutz05
Posts: 50378
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby shafnutz05 » Sun Jul 31, 2022 9:32 pm

That's a great rig!!!

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sun Jul 31, 2022 10:35 pm

Neat.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sat Aug 06, 2022 12:29 am

Embraer has a new render out of its proposed new-generation turboprop aircraft. While the program has not been formally launched, Embraer supposedly already has more than 200 letters of intent for the planned aircraft. Existing turboprops like the ATR and Dash 8 are based on decades-old designs. This new turboprop would share a fuselage with Embraer's E-Jet E2 regional jets. GE, Rolls, and P&W have supposedly all expressed interest in providing turboprop engines. Embraer is projecting 15% lower cost than an ATR-72 while at the same time being 20% faster.



I can see this aircraft making inroads in the US as replacements for the smallest RJs. Between all of the contractors flying for American Eagle, Delta Connection, and United Express, there are still something like 200 Embraer ERJs and 300 CRJ-200s serving the 50-seat market for the smallest regional airports even though neither of those jets are still in production and haven't been for years.

NTP66
Posts: 60742
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sat Aug 06, 2022 6:51 am

I’m honestly surprised that anyone is still developing a prop plane. I do not miss my flights on a Dash-8, neither do my ears.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sat Aug 06, 2022 7:04 pm

There are routes and applications where turboprops can have substantially lower costs than turbofan jets. That especially goes for shorter routes. Jets are most efficient when they are cruising at high altitudes for relatively long periods of time. They are much less efficient at lower altitudes. So if you're flying short routes, like hopping between islands in the the Caribbean, a turboprop will be much more fuel-efficient. And over those short distances, the slower speed of the turboprop doesn't make much of a difference in overall time. Turboprops are also generally designed for slower stall speeds and lower takeoff/landing speeds, and by pitching the props backwards their engines are much better at doing reverse thrust than jet engines, so turboprops have a lot more "whoa" than jets and can more easily land at smaller airports with shorter runways. A 50-seat CRJ-200 needs around 1,900 m to take off and 1,400 m to land at maximum weights. A 70-seat ATR-72 needs around 1,300 m to take off and only 900 m to land at maximum weights.

The crossover point varies, but I've read that it's somewhere around 500-600 miles. So a flight from, say, Washington National to LaGuardia or Miami to Jacksonville would be more fuel efficient on a turboprop than a jet. Basically, if you can fly there in around an hour or less, a turboprop is going to use much less fuel/passenger for that flight, and the time increase would be de minimis (likely an additional 10 minutes or less).

shafnutz05
Posts: 50378
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby shafnutz05 » Sat Aug 06, 2022 7:53 pm

I'll never forget flying back from Gitmo.

Gitmo to Jacksonville, JAX to Miami, Miami to Tampa :lol:

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Sat Aug 06, 2022 11:31 pm

There are routes and applications where turboprops can have substantially lower costs than turbofan jets. That especially goes for shorter routes. Jets are most efficient when they are cruising at high altitudes for relatively long periods of time. They are much less efficient at lower altitudes. So if you're flying short routes, like hopping between islands in the the Caribbean, a turboprop will be much more fuel-efficient. And over those short distances, the slower speed of the turboprop doesn't make much of a difference in overall time. Turboprops are also generally designed for slower stall speeds and lower takeoff/landing speeds, and by pitching the props backwards their engines are much better at doing reverse thrust than jet engines, so turboprops have a lot more "whoa" than jets and can more easily land at smaller airports with shorter runways. A 50-seat CRJ-200 needs around 1,900 m to take off and 1,400 m to land at maximum weights. A 70-seat ATR-72 needs around 1,300 m to take off and only 900 m to land at maximum weights.

The crossover point varies, but I've read that it's somewhere around 500-600 miles. So a flight from, say, Washington National to LaGuardia or Miami to Jacksonville would be more fuel efficient on a turboprop than a jet. Basically, if you can fly there in around an hour or less, a turboprop is going to use much less fuel/passenger for that flight, and the time increase would be de minimis (likely an additional 10 minutes or less).
How does scale factor into this? Like how many ATR flights does it take to match the passenger haul and revenue of a single 737? I've flown turboprops before, but it was into small regional airports like AOO, SCE, and RSA. I think the only large-ish destination I've ever flown into on a turboprop was FAT, which is like 30 minutes flight time from LAX.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sun Aug 07, 2022 4:49 pm

Roughly two ATR flights to equal the capacity of a 737 or A320. For the distance examples I gave, there likely would be enough demand for the route that a larger aircraft would be appropriate even at a lower fuel efficiency. Something like Miami to Tallahassee would be a better example, or the flights from Washington National to Charleston VW or Norfolk VA rather than LaGuardia.

RonnieFranchise
Posts: 12389
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:45 pm
Location: Phil Kessel's name is on the Stanley Cup. Thrice.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby RonnieFranchise » Sun Aug 07, 2022 6:34 pm

Not long ago United flew props (Dash 8-400s) IAD to PIT and similar short haul destinations. It was pretty large for a prop.

Farther back they also did that route on tiny J-31s. Don’t miss those whatsoever.

NTP66
Posts: 60742
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Aug 07, 2022 6:48 pm

I used to fly Dash-8s from CLT to HHH before I discovered that SAV was the better option.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sun Aug 07, 2022 8:49 pm

For some routes it might be props or nothing, or at least fewer flights. Delta is planning to retire its 50-seat Delta Connection CRJ-200s within the next couple years, and there are no plans to replace those with new 50-seaters because there are no new 50-seaters. Airports currently serviced by those aircraft will either have service dropped entirely, or they will see fewer flights. Like instead of a daily CRJ-200 flight, there might be an Embraer 175 two or three times per week. Or there might be a bus. American is dropping commuter flights from Philly to Allentown and Lancaster in favor of running a bus to those cities.

Shyster
Posts: 13093
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Mon Aug 15, 2022 7:54 pm

Oopsie.


dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Fri Aug 19, 2022 9:12 am

I've started my ground school studies. And as part of that, I enrolled in a radio communications course. I have a touch of social anxiety about talking on the phone or on radio. I'm not sure what it is but I have some slight aversion to prompted scenarios. Whether it be calling for a pizza or working the radio at a sports car event I just don't like initiating those calls. Obviously, that's going to be something I'll need to overcome as a pilot. :lol:

There is a service that allows you to interact with real ATC in the flight sim. I did my first flight into a towered airport last night (San Luis County, near Santa Barbara). After flying for 40 miles and rehearsing it all in my head I keyed the mic and contacted the tower with all my info. Felt good because it all came out as it should. The immediate reply was that I was broadcasting on Guard, the emergency frequency. Had my microphone switched to my back-up radio. :face:

Anyway, I contacted tower and made my landing. The service I use (Pilot Edge) has a ladder of qualifications you can earn by doing scenarios and I passed that one. I felt like I did absolutely horrible, but they capture all of the radio traffic and upload it to their website every hour. I went back and listened to it and the calls were fine, unremarkable. I need to get out of my own head.

DigitalGypsy66
Posts: 19680
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 7:33 pm
Location: Iodine State

Non-Military Aviation

Postby DigitalGypsy66 » Fri Aug 19, 2022 10:58 am

:shock:
The co-pilot who fell to his death after getting off an aircraft mid-flight in North Carolina may have been sick and was described as "visibly upset" prior to exiting the plane without a parachute, according to a preliminary report from the National Transportation and Safety Board.

Two people -- a pilot-in-charge and a second-in-charge -- were initially on the July 29 flight, but only one person was on the plane when it landed, the Federal Aviation Administration said at the time. The body of Charles Hew Crooks, the 23-year-old second-in-charge, was discovered hours later in the backyard of a home in Fuquay-Varina, about 18 miles south of Raleigh, police said.
The plane, a twin-engine CASA CN-212 Aviocar, was being operated as a skydiving flight, the NTSB report said. It had already flown two skydiving runs and was on its way to pick up a third group. As Crooks flew the plane on its descent to Raeford West Airport, the plane descended below the tree line and "dropped," according to the report.

While attempting to get the plane climbing again, the right main landing gear "impacted the runway surface," causing a hard landing. The pilot-in-command took over controls from Crooks, reached over 400 feet again and directed him to declare an emergency and request a diversion to Raleigh-Durham International Airport for landing, the report said.

At this point, Crooks was responsible for communicating with air traffic control while the pilot-in-charge flew the plane. They hit turbulence while approaching the airport and about 20 minutes into the flight, Crooks "became visibly upset" about the hard landing, the report said.

The pilot-in-charge said Crooks then opened his side cockpit window and "may have gotten sick," at which point the pilot-in-charge took over radio communications, the report said. Crooks lowered the ramp in the back of the airplane, indicating he "felt like he was going to be sick and needed air," according to the report.

"The (pilot-in-charge) stated that the (second-in-charge) then got up from his seat, removed his headset, apologized, and departed the airplane via the aft ramp door," the report said.

The pilot said there was a bar that Crooks could have grabbed about 6 feet above the ramp, but he never saw Crooks grab it before exiting the plane. The pilot turned the plane around to search for Crooks and notified air traffic control about Crooks' departure from the plane.

The pilot proceeded with an emergency landing at the airport. On post-accident examination, the plane had substantial damage to the landing gear lifts and the airframe structure, the NTSB report said.

The plane has been retained for further examination, the report said, and the incident is still under investigation.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/16/us/north ... index.html

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Fri Aug 19, 2022 11:19 am

Yeah, that's wild. People are **** weird.

Unrelated, but there was a pretty bad mid-air in California. Some hotshot in a twin-engine Cessna entered a busy pattern with a straight-in approach doing 180kts. It smashed into a Cessna 152 that was turning base to final approach, killing everyone in both planes.



I've read the ATC transcript but haven't heard the audio. It's an uncontrolled field so pilots have to use the radio to deconflict:
"Watsonville Area Traffic Twin Cessna [callsign] 1 mile straight in Two Zero full stop looking for traffic on left base"

[2nd voice] "Yeah I see you you're behind me" [pause] "I'm gonna go around then because you're coming at me pretty quick man"

[3rd voice] "[Callsign] is in the left crosswind for runway Two Zero Watsonville"

[4th voice] "Everybody please be advised there is an accident towards the runway Two Zero please be advised Watsonville"
180kts being flown by the twin is three times the landing speed of the C152 (second voice). It's also much faster than the landing speed required for that kind of plane. Dude was just being a sky dick.

RonnieFranchise
Posts: 12389
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:45 pm
Location: Phil Kessel's name is on the Stanley Cup. Thrice.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby RonnieFranchise » Sat Aug 20, 2022 9:55 am

OMG THE GOODYEAR BLIMP JUST WENT OVER MY HOUSE

I've seen it probably 10 times and it just never gets old. At least partly because it's usually unexpected. Everytime I see it, it's like I'm a 5 year old. I was out watering and didn't have my phone, by the time I got it I didn't get any good photos. Someday when I know it is coming in to Wingfoot I want to head over and see it land.

By the way, the lights said Ronnie's a Pimp.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Sat Aug 20, 2022 1:40 pm


Unrelated, but there was a pretty bad mid-air in California. Some hotshot in a twin-engine Cessna entered a busy pattern with a straight-in approach doing 180kts. It smashed into a Cessna 152 that was turning base to final approach, killing everyone in both planes.




180kts being flown by the twin is three times the landing speed of the C152 (second voice). It's also much faster than the landing speed required for that kind of plane. Dude was just being a sky dick.



Interesting that the twin normally flies 95kt in final, but this time he was going 180kt all the way through the crash.

shafnutz05
Posts: 50378
Joined: Tue Mar 24, 2015 7:27 pm
Location: A moron or a fascist...but not both.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby shafnutz05 » Sun Aug 21, 2022 1:39 pm

That guy was a dick.

Just saw a really weird mini helicopter fly over. It was quite small, and looked like it had a split cockpit with a sizable opening in the middle, and long, skinny white prop blades. Can't identify it on Google

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Sun Aug 21, 2022 4:22 pm

OMG THE GOODYEAR BLIMP JUST WENT OVER MY HOUSE

I've seen it probably 10 times and it just never gets old. At least partly because it's usually unexpected. Everytime I see it, it's like I'm a 5 year old. I was out watering and didn't have my phone, by the time I got it I didn't get any good photos. Someday when I know it is coming in to Wingfoot I want to head over and see it land.

By the way, the lights said Ronnie's a Pimp.
If you're ever in Los Angeles head south down the 405 to Carson. The west coast base is right along the freeway, and you can watch them launch or recover. It's pretty neat, actually.

RonnieFranchise
Posts: 12389
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2015 5:45 pm
Location: Phil Kessel's name is on the Stanley Cup. Thrice.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby RonnieFranchise » Mon Aug 22, 2022 8:40 am

OMG THE GOODYEAR BLIMP JUST WENT OVER MY HOUSE

I've seen it probably 10 times and it just never gets old. At least partly because it's usually unexpected. Everytime I see it, it's like I'm a 5 year old. I was out watering and didn't have my phone, by the time I got it I didn't get any good photos. Someday when I know it is coming in to Wingfoot I want to head over and see it land.

By the way, the lights said Ronnie's a Pimp.
If you're ever in Los Angeles head south down the 405 to Carson. The west coast base is right along the freeway, and you can watch them launch or recover. It's pretty neat, actually.
They do the same at Wingfoot Lake near Akron. Last time I saw it was over 76 near Kent and I tried to head over to see it, but thought they used the blimp hangar at Fulton Airport and missed it.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Mon Aug 22, 2022 2:55 pm

Re Watsonville

According to FlightRadar, the operator of the 340 twin aircraft had flown that route several times without any airspeed anomaly. (He wasn't just honking along at 2x normal approach speed, he was in excess of max speed for normal landing gear and flap operation.) So I don't know what was up on this particular day, or who he thought he was fooling with the 'full stop' call. The operator doesn't seem to have a history of idiocy, but I guess everyone's brain can fade without warning. Did the 152 pilot turn base-to-final after the 340 called 3-miles? Ordinarily I believe you're supposed to defer to lower altitude aircraft in the pattern, but I also don't think you're supposed to turn in front of an aircraft established on 3-mile final. It seems like both pilots were aware of each other's presence in and around the pattern, and neither took early steps to deconflict.

Also, RIP doggie, who was a passenger in the 340.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Mon Aug 22, 2022 3:09 pm

Yeah, the consensus I've heard is that you always defer to the plane on short final.

That said, I highly doubt the 152 anticipated the 340 would be entering the pattern at 180kts.

If we want to be contributory about it I'd say 80% on the 340 and 20% on the 152. And that's generous to the 340 since the 152 did take evasive action but the absurd speed of the 340 nullified it.

tifosi77
Posts: 51511
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Mon Aug 22, 2022 3:20 pm

Well, they're all 100% dead, so I'm not really sure it matters.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Mon Aug 22, 2022 3:22 pm

If it leads to having straight-ins at uncontrolled fields outlawed some good can come from it at least.

dodint
Posts: 59160
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Mon Aug 29, 2022 10:16 am

Training is a much better use case for MSFS than for fun. I uninstalled the game pretty damn quickly, personally.
This move your needle at all? Lots of neat historic planes coming in November:


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 112 guests