Non-Military Aviation

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Fri Aug 26, 2016 9:18 pm

Looks like the Trent 1000 as used in ANA's fleet of 787s is having some corrosion problems:

Airline cancels Boeing 787 flights to fix Rolls-Royce engines
http://komonews.com/news/local/ana-canc ... boeing-787

The 787 can be ordered with either the Rolls-Royce Trent 1000 or the General Electric GEnx engines. GE can't really talk any smack about RR on this, since GE already had to make some changes to the GEnx in order to deal with icing problems.

dodint
Posts: 59442
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:41 am

Image

Whoops.

Best comment:

"Guys, I must tell you this new Amazon same day service is great. I ordered a cowling for a CFM56 jet engine just this morning, and darn if it wasn't delivered to my front yard later that morning by one of those Amazon delivery drones."

:lol:

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sun Aug 28, 2016 8:03 am

:lol:

tifosi77
Posts: 51671
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Sun Aug 28, 2016 12:01 pm

Nice

RonnieFranchise
Posts: 12522
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 29, 2016 7:40 am

For the first time in 6 weeks, I'm not flying anywhere. Few notes:

- I like to keep this a secret but aviation geeks will find it: MSP has one of the few in terminal observation decks I'm aware of, above the D Concourse behind Rock Bottom. If I have a choice I always fly through MSP, eat at Ike's then go sit in the observation deck.

- The airlines can shove their CRJ's where the moon don't shine. Just put some spikes in the thing and make it a true torture device. If I have to go somewhere like Lake Charles, Beaumont or San Angelo- give me an ERJ every time. Preferably the 135/145 especially if I can get on the 1-seat side.

- The airlines have done a remarkable job making sure every seat is full on every flight. I am happy to get a row without a middle seas anymore. Doesn't happen often. My half full flight to Omaha last Monday was the first of those I have seen in a long, long time. Good for them, bad for me.

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:49 am

Source of the post - The airlines can shove their CRJ's where the moon don't shine. Just put some spikes in the thing and make it a true torture device. If I have to go somewhere like Lake Charles, Beaumont or San Angelo- give me an ERJ every time. Preferably the 135/145 especially if I can get on the 1-seat side.
All of my PHL>SAV flights are on CRJ-200's now, which couldn't feel more cramped [to me]. They started out as ERJ-170s, which I much preferred for the seat width alone, then moved to the CRJ-900 two years ago, and now the CRJ-200. The way this trend is moving, it'll turn into a Dash 8 next year.

RonnieFranchise
Posts: 12522
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 29, 2016 8:16 am

Source of the post - The airlines can shove their CRJ's where the moon don't shine. Just put some spikes in the thing and make it a true torture device. If I have to go somewhere like Lake Charles, Beaumont or San Angelo- give me an ERJ every time. Preferably the 135/145 especially if I can get on the 1-seat side.
All of my PHL>SAV flights are on CRJ-200's now, which couldn't feel more cramped [to me]. They started out as ERJ-170s, which I much preferred for the seat width alone, then moved to the CRJ-900 two years ago, and now the CRJ-200. The way this trend is moving, it'll turn into a Dash 8 next year.
or Beech 1900 lol

When I was a rookie flier I once did not mitigate my coffee intake before boarding one of those. With no lav I have never been so relieved to get to Newark.

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Mon Aug 29, 2016 8:24 am

I've never flown on one of those, but it looks similar to the Dash 8. I used to fly from CLT>HHH on a Dash 8, and while there was no lav, I always had the entire back row to myself. Even when there was a body in every single seat in front of me, not one person ever decided to just move to the back row for more room.

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Mon Aug 29, 2016 1:36 pm

Another picture of that Southwest 737 from the forum on airliners.net:

Image

Looks like the cowl debris nailed the wing root and punched a hole in the fuselage.

Here is the ATC for the emergency landing. You can hear the pilots are wearing their oxygen masks at the start of the recording: http://www.liveatc.net/forums/index.php ... ttach=8999

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:24 pm

Below is a great BBC documentary following a British Airway 747-400 through a D-check. Commercial aircraft typically undergo one of four types of regular maintenance checks: A, B, C, and D. The D-check occurs every 6–12 years and is the most intensive check. It involves pretty much the removal of everything removable for maintenance and inspection. This is often where the parent company will update the seats, add a better entertainment system, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x_yHtfGH0nI

I'm not sure how old the documentary is, but G-CIVX is still in service. Earlier today it flew from Heathrow to Sea-Tac, and it's on it way back to Heathrow right now.

tifosi77
Posts: 51671
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Batuu

Non-Military Aviation

Postby tifosi77 » Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:35 pm


dodint
Posts: 59442
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Mon Aug 29, 2016 7:59 pm


columbia
Posts: 34731
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:23 am
Location: South Baldwin Yinzer Strokefest

Non-Military Aviation

Postby columbia » Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:57 pm

The Canberra bomber was designed way back in the 1940s. So why is Nasa still using three of them today?
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2016030 ... ocid=fbfut

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 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 4:09 pm

TIL about the Airbus Beluga

wow

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:46 pm

Boeing's equivalent is the 747 "Dreamlifter": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_Dreamlifter. The Beluga is definitely the goofier-looking of the two, mostly because the Beluga is based on an A300, which is much smaller to begin with than the 747.

In 2013 a Dreamlifter accidentally landed at Jabara Airport, a small general-aviation airport in Wichita, instead of landing at McConnell Air Force Base, which is nine miles past Jabara's runway on the same heading. Fortunately, the aircraft was empty at the time (it was headed to McConnell to pick up 787 fuselage parts from a supplier that abuts the base), and it was able to take off successfully the next day:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBYX2Xg-ivo

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Thu Sep 01, 2016 5:52 pm

Remove the audio, and I'd believe that was a slow-motion video.

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Fri Sep 02, 2016 4:29 pm

Allegiant Air, with ultra-low fares, draws FAA’s attention over safety concerns
Just over a year ago, Allegiant Air pilot Jason Kinzer was sitting in the cockpit of a 24-year-old McDonnell Douglas MD-80 aircraft bound for Hagerstown, Md., having just taken off from St. Petersburg, Fla.

As the plane climbed through 2,500 feet, a cabin attendant alerted Kinzer to a strong burning smell. Alarmed, Kinzer turned Allegiant Air Flight 864 back toward the airport. Fire and rescue crews met the plane on the runway as smoke wafted from an engine. Kinzer told the 144 passengers to disembark. He then helped a flight attendant carry a paraplegic passenger to the exit.

It seemed to be model behavior. But Allegiant Air did not praise Kinzer. It fired him.

In a dismissal letter, the airline called the evacuation of the plane “unwarranted” and faulted Kinzer as not “striving to preserve the Company’s assets, aircraft, ground equipment, fuel and the personal time of our employees and customers.” Later, the company’s attorneys would call Kinzer’s account an “inaccurate and self-serving recitation of events.”
That's just scary.

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Fri Sep 02, 2016 8:45 pm

KLM introduces world's first on-tap draft beer on flights:

https://blog.klm.com/worlds-first-perfe ... d-a-plane/

(Alas, it's only Heineken.)

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Fri Sep 02, 2016 8:58 pm

Allegiant Air is flying some awfully old aircraft. Delta has already retired its MD-83s and has ordered replacements for its MD-88s, and while Delta flies a lot of older aircraft, they also have a rigorous in-house maintenance program to keep them all running, and as other airlines retire those models Delta will buy them up for spare parts. I don't see Allegiant Air performing that level of upkeep on its fleet.

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Sat Sep 03, 2016 8:24 am

Allegiant Air is flying some awfully old aircraft. Delta has already retired its MD-83s and has ordered replacements for its MD-88s, and while Delta flies a lot of older aircraft, they also have a rigorous in-house maintenance program to keep them all running, and as other airlines retire those models Delta will buy them up for spare parts. I don't see Allegiant Air performing that level of upkeep on its fleet.
I've always been wary of budget airlines for these reasons alone. American actually just retired around 20 MD-80s this past week. Those are pretty old metal.

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Tue Sep 06, 2016 11:39 am

I've always been wary of budget airlines for these reasons alone. American actually just retired around 20 MD-80s this past week. Those are pretty old metal.
Agreed, especially for short-haul aircraft. My understanding is that the life expectancy of a commercial aircraft depends more upon the number of landing/takeoff cycles than it does upon total time flying or years in service. A long-haul aircraft like a 777 that spends its life flying from Chicago to Seoul and back once every 24 hours (2 cycles) can thus have a much longer service life than, say, an A320 that starts its day in Chicago and over the course of 24 hours flies to four different cities with a return leg to Chicago each time (4 cycles).

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:14 pm

The Ukrainian Antonov company is teaming up with a Chinese company to build more examples of the massive Antonov An-225 Mriya cargo plane. The venture will first complete a second Mriya that has been half-built since construction halted in 2009, and then the idea is to construct updated models in China. The Mriya was originally developed to carry the Soviet Buran space shuttle and is the largest cargo aircraft ever built. It was rescued from a boneyard in the late 90s and is used by Antonov Airlines for chartered flights of super-heavy cargo.

http://www.defenseone.com/business/2016 ... es/131321/

dodint
Posts: 59442
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:39 pm
Location: Cheer up, bіtch!
Contact:

Non-Military Aviation

Postby dodint » Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:29 pm

YUGE.

NTP66
Posts: 60968
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 2:00 pm
Location: FUCΚ! Even in the future nothing works.

Non-Military Aviation

Postby NTP66 » Wed Sep 07, 2016 5:36 pm

How many airports can actually accommodate one of those, though?

Shyster
Posts: 13176
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 6:08 pm
Location: Nullius in verba

Non-Military Aviation

Postby Shyster » Wed Sep 07, 2016 6:29 pm

According to the spec's on Antonov's web page, the AN-225 needs an airfield length of 3,000—3,500 meters at MTOW. That's a decently long runway, but plenty of runways are longer. Most major airports have at least one runway in that length range. For example, runway 10R/28L at PIT is 3,505 meters, so the AN-225 could operate from Pittsburgh with no problems. It might be limited more by stuff like the minimum widths of taxiways and any weight limits.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Joegap and 116 guests