Non-Military Aviation

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:48 pm

You should put landing at Yeager Airport in Charleston, West Virginia on your bucket list. Nothing like landing on top of a mountain.
Found a video on YouTube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r0vLvxFzLa0

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 6:51 pm

That's more like a hill than a mountain.

tifosi77
Posts: 51634
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Mon Oct 10, 2016 7:32 pm

Catalina Airport (off the Los Angeles coast) is similarly disposed.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQ70UfR4Iig

But Catalina's secret sauce is that the middle of the runway is about 8' higher in the middle than either threshold. So that means if there's surface traffic on the far end of the runway, you can't see it. And there's no tower.

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Tue Oct 18, 2016 4:09 pm

Google Flights finally added price prediction and tracking. Hopefully, the prediction feature will actually be more useful than Kayak's, which essentially had no data for any flight that I have ever searched for.

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Oct 23, 2016 1:14 pm

Airportraits

This photographer basically took hundreds of photographs of airplanes at numerous airports, and stitched them together. Fantastic work, IMO. Here's a sampling:

Image

Image

Image

dodint
Posts: 59389
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Sun Oct 23, 2016 2:39 pm

Photographing airport operations? Is he a terrorist?

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:54 pm

I'm not sure that can be considered "airport operations".

dodint
Posts: 59389
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:54 pm

is joke, brah.

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Oct 23, 2016 3:55 pm

I know, but I felt compelled to reply. :)

dodint
Posts: 59389
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Sun Oct 23, 2016 4:00 pm

Ah. MiMH disease.

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Oct 23, 2016 4:04 pm

Not at all. My reply made sense.

tifosi77
Posts: 51634
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Sun Oct 23, 2016 4:46 pm

Image
I spent many a lunch break at this spot eating a Jersey Mike's sub.

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sun Oct 23, 2016 11:42 pm

Beautiful. The all-black special paint job on the Air New Zealand 797-9 in the bottom-right of the third photo is amazing. ANZ was the launch customer for the 787-9, and the first aircraft got that special livery.

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Sun Oct 23, 2016 11:59 pm

Beautiful. The all-black special paint job on the Air New Zealand 797-9 in the bottom-right of the third photo is amazing. ANZ was the launch customer for the 787-9, and the first aircraft got that special livery.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIla0U8UPb8

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Mon Oct 24, 2016 7:23 am

It does look amazing. Penguin-like, too.

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:26 pm

So the charter aircraft carrying VP candidate Mike Pence went of the end of Runway 22 at LaGuardia Airport. Fortunately for them, 22 is the only runway at LaGuardia that does not end in water. Based on initial videos it looks like the aircraft went at least partially through the EMAS (engineered materials arrestor system), at the end of the runway and then ended up in the grass. An EMAS is made of crushable concrete and serves a similar function the a runaway-truck ramp—the force needed to squish it slows the aircraft down.

It was raining, and the runways at LaGuardia aren't particularly long, but neither are they particularly short. This was apparently a 737-700, and even with a wet runway it should have been able to land comfortably. Commercial airliners typically use a lot more runway to take off than they do to land, and they can easily land at airports where they could never take off again. Something must have gone wrong, such as a failure of the spoilers to deploy (or a failure of the pilots to arm them). Or the pilots muffed the approach and tried to squeeze in a long landing when they should have gone around.

dodint
Posts: 59389
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:29 pm

It's, like, a conspiracy man. Pence never should have gone against Trump in the VP debate.

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:30 pm

Make LaGuardia Great Again?

tifosi77
Posts: 51634
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:35 pm

Or the pilots muffed the approach and tried to squeeze in a long landing when they should have gone around.
If this proves to be the case, it would be another example of why it's best to execute a go-around if something goes awry late in the approach to a short-ish runway.

Mentioned some time ago that flying into Burbank is adventurous in this regard; if they overshoot the touchdown point by more than a couple plane lengths and still try to stick it down, the aircraft is likely going to end up on North Hollywood Way.

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Thu Oct 27, 2016 9:55 pm

In other news today, UPS just placed an order for 14 Boeing 747-8F freighters with 14 further options, which should keep the 747 line running through 2020 or so. Boeing had pretty much cleared the backlog of 747 orders, but this new order should mean that the 747 will make it to 50 consecutive years of production (1968–2018).

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-boein ... SKCN12R1UX

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:39 pm

At Chicago O'Hare, American Airlines 767 catches fire on runway
Terrified passengers aboard an American Airlines 767 that aborted takeoff on a runway at Chicago's O'Hare International Airport scrambled to safety Friday afternoon after huge flames erupted on the right side of the plane.
Apparently, some people tried to grab their luggage from the overhead bins before exiting. Those people deserve to be trampled over.

https://www.twitter.com/Kryptonlogic/st ... 04/video/1

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:47 pm

Pretty severe damage to that aircraft. CNN has some photos of the other side, and the right wing is melted to the point where the end is on the ground.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/us/ohare- ... -incident/

Initial reports are that a tire burst on the takeoff roll, and it looks like shrapnel from the tire hit the right engine and started a fire. Aircraft tires can get go with quite a lot of force—an exploding tire (caused by running over debris on the runway) was the cause of the Air France Concorde crash in 2000.

Breaking news: There's also a FedEx MD-11 on fire at Fort Lauterdale:

https://twitter.com/ABC7News/status/792127834600931328

NTP66
Posts: 60922
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Fri Oct 28, 2016 7:50 pm

Scary stuff indeed.

Shyster
Posts: 13158
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Fri Oct 28, 2016 11:24 pm

Correction: the FedEx aircraft was a MD-10, which is a DC-10 that's been upgraded to the MD-11's electronic cockpit and thus no longer needs a flight engineer. The airframe is 45 years old and was originally delivered as a passenger DC-10 to United Airlines in 1972. I'm going to go out on a limb and guess FedEx is just going to write that one off.

American's plans for its 767 fleet is to phase out every 767 that hasn't been recently updated by the end of 2017. The 767 that caught on fire at ORD was unfortunately one that American recently upgraded and was planning to keep for a while. It was delivered in 2003, which makes it fairly young for a widebody like a 767. While the initial reports were a blown tire, it now looks like there was an uncontained engine failure.

Today would have really sucked for someone trying to fly from Chicago to Fort Lauterdale (or vice versa).

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 35313
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Tue Nov 01, 2016 10:00 pm


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 138 guests