| Forum Home | ||||
| PC World Chat | ||||
| Thread ID: 138653 | 2014-12-31 08:46:00 | tracing Aircraft | mzee (3324) | PC World Chat |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 1391309 | 2015-01-05 01:03:00 | Crashed AirAsia jet should not have been on route? Nothing to do with the disaster at all, rather seems like the comment of some bureaucrat(s) laying a smoke screen. | WalOne (4202) | ||
| 1391310 | 2015-01-05 01:18:00 | A family friend who flew 777’s when Airbus were having all their teething troubles had a saying “If it ain’t Boeing, I ain’t going”. He claimed he could fly a 777 upside down if he wanted to but an Airbus would just give you a message “Declined, you are operating outside parameters”. I think he may have been exaggerating a bit but the message was clear. :D Tex Johnson did just that in a prototype 707 in 1955. I posted this clip a while back, but here it is again: Boeing 707 Barrel Roll (www.youtube.com) And for those who need to know what a barrel roll is, Google "do a barrel role" (without the quote marks) :) |
WalOne (4202) | ||
| 1391311 | 2015-01-05 01:31:00 | While I searched for the 707 clip, I came across this one: Concorde does a Barrel Roll (www.youtube.com) If the manouvre is smoothly performed and with positive G, I guess any aircraft could do it but personally like your family friend, B.M. I'd think twice about it in an Airbus ... |
WalOne (4202) | ||
| 1391312 | 2015-01-05 06:31:00 | Thanks for the links Wal. Maybe the family friend could have flown a 777 upside down? However, my understanding is with an Airbus the computer dictates what manoeuvres you can do and you can’t override it. This leaves the Pilot as nothing more than a computer operator as indicated in the previous article you posted. But be that as it may, one can’t overlook the fact that in 2009 Chesley Sullenberger landed a powerless airbus A320 in the Hudson River without a casualty. How the hell he managed that defies belief but I remember an exchange of E-Mails with the family friend who acknowledged it was one of the great flying feats of all time, but rather ungraciously added “I’ll bet he couldn’t do it again”. Whether he could or not we’ll never know, but I wonder if in this particular situation the computer was actually a help? :confused: |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1391313 | 2015-01-08 22:52:00 | www.wired.com | Whenu (9358) | ||
| 1391314 | 2015-01-10 07:56:00 | Very illuminating Whenu, thanks for the link. | Winston001 (3612) | ||
| 1391315 | 2015-01-10 18:27:00 | Considering the number of flights every day, planes crash rarely. However, they always have, they do improve safety constantly. So a couple haven't been found.....well this was common once, take the Bermuda Triangle for instance, quite a few were never located. Does it matter? OK, they can usually see what the sequence of events was before the crash and see why it happened but in the latest case they have a fair idea already.....it doesn't bring anyone back. They're still dead. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 1391316 | 2015-01-10 18:48:00 | Aircraft accident investigation is intended to identify the causes of the accident so steps can be taken to prevent a duplicate. Finding dead people is a separate political activity; suing someone after the accident is a procedure whereby the legal machine is financed, with any overflow spread to persons who did not take the flight. Air Transport Crash investigation has become largely a means of justifying the employment of crash investigators; Road Transport Crash investigation is too, but also is a means of adding legal trauma to all other trauma of at least one of the survivors (plus some suitable selected statistics can be used to add bulk to whatever campaign is currently flavour of the month in the Police hierachy). |
R2x1 (4628) | ||
| 1391317 | 2015-01-10 20:18:00 | Yesterday whilst watching Daughter and Grand-kids flight back to Aus on FlightRadar24, I noticed a number of “Airport Ground Vehicles” coming up on the Radar. Never seen them before, anyone know what the story is? They seem to run up and down the runway at varying speeds and there seems to be at least four of them. :confused: 6137 |
B.M. (505) | ||
| 1391318 | 2015-01-10 20:54:00 | They seem to run up and down the runway at varying speeds and there seems to be at least four of them From all the TV programs about airports, they usually are looking for crap, or items on the runways that are not meant to be there. Pieces of metal being sucked up into an engine will cause a lot of damage. Good example of that was when Concorde crashed, a piece of metal from the previous flight (part of the engine cowl) that had landed cut a tyre on Concorde, starting a chain reaction------- Read fully story , en.wikipedia.org |
wainuitech (129) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||