All Things Aviation Related

[KNS]

Originally Posted by svandamme

But center of mass becomes an even bigger issue with freight.
rollrate reduces dramatically when you load up weight off the center line..
And rollrate is quite important at mittigating crosswinds at landing.

furthermore, the engine maintenance/replacement still poses a massive problem.

I doubt it makes for a viable shift in design for just 1 part of the market.
Now a plane is designed and can do both.
Seasonal change in requirements (more vacationers in summer ) well you just install seats and you have a commercial people plane.. sudden increase in package needs. put seats back in.

Same for pilots.. new pilots will probably find it easier to get their hours in on freighters , they grind their hours on freight, then move up to people flying..
Not really going to happen if they use completely different designs. it's a hindrance.

Having 2 completely different designs just kills off any hopes of flexible use.. And that's what makes a plane design successfull and economical

The challenges may end up being too great but the rewards are high - fuel economy and reduced emissions which are driving a lot development right now, both of which blended wing show strides.

Engine placement is not insurmountable, that alone wouldn't nix the move forward. Those challenges have been met before (look at seaplanes).

In most cases aircraft are either dedicated freighters or passenger planes. A freighter doesn't make a good passenger plane (floors with rollers, no windows and enormous cargo door).

A lot of pilots aspire to UPS or FedEx as the top of the career path (flying a Boeing or Airbus). They are some of the top paying salaries and aren't susceptible to the whim of the flying public (no idiot pax to deal with either).

[svandamme]

Originally Posted by KNS

The challenges may end up being too great but the rewards are high - fuel economy and reduced emissions which are driving a lot development right now, both of which blended wing show strides.

Engine placement is not insurmountable, that alone wouldn't nix the move forward. Those challenges have been met before (look at seaplanes).

Sideways pods is still a long way different from top mounted pods..
Sideway, you can still roll up equipment besides the plane to lift the engine pod.

Top mounted, no you can't. you need a big crane with lots of reach.




And sure, you can roll equipment inbetween the V
But you still have to reach up top
It'll be heavy equipment that needs to go up and out.
And you are working inside the V, so pain in the hole, risk of damaging the fuselage cause you are working in a cramped corner.

This alone does not kill off the design.
But it's a combination of things that well, airlines aren't waiting for.

They want somethign that works for them
not something they need to change their ways and infrastructure for.

Most successful designs have pods hanging down
Because it keeps the maintenance turnaround time low.

This design, does not
it just adds complications
- Engine Maintenance
- Weight distribution
- Roll rate
- Wider landing gear foot print needs wider taxiways
- Different gate requirements
- Different evacuation needs
- ... other.


Aviation, and especially civil commercial aviation has been for the most part evolutionary, not revolutionary.. Because well, It's safer in terms of safety. but also in terms of economics.


a typical Airliner today, looks similar to an airliner in the 60ies.

Obvious different details, like winglets and what not.. but it's still a long tube, 2 wings, 1 stab and 2 elevators
and engines hanging offf the wing because of maintenance benefit


Look at Concorde.. revolutionary.. but Gone
Engines in the stab.. gone
podded engines above the elevators, gone
Seaplanes.. pretty much gone as well.







It's natural selection really..

[KNS]

Countless high wing turboprops have been in service for decades with the airlines, maintenance staff simply use work stands and hoists.

If the manufacturers produce an airplane with significant fuel savings, unconventional design or not, the airlines will buy it and adapt.

The biggest reason the traditional design has stuck around for so long (partly because it's good and it works) is certification. Bringing a radical new design into service costs money. The gains will have to outweigh the initial costs and they'll have to sell enough of them to see a profit.

[svandamme]

oh yeah, those high wing turbo probs do exist, but they aren't as heavy as a big bypass fan like this plane uses..

[RNajarian]

I’ve been watching this F94 fuselage/shell on eBay for some time. Seller has reduced price from $20,000 to $15,000. Here is his description. . .

“1948 Lockheed f94 A Model number 2 prototype 40 ft. Long. 1st all weather jet radar intercepter Army air core. The cockpit, It has both seats and sticks and pedals but, no instrument panels or gauges.There are no wings or tail fins, only what you see in the pictures is all there is. If you want wings, T33 wings are compatible with this aircraft and they are out there and you can find them. No engine in it.”

I wish I had the time and resources to make this happen. On the plus side. . . I bet there is no rust.

[svandamme]

very cool
but very big to keep and transport !!

[RNajarian]

I had no idea there were so many T-33s available, at extremely reasonable prices considering the airframe. The first link is one for $79,900. Still a project, but more complete than the eBay one. The second link is for a “turn key” T33. More expensive, ($300,000) but appears to have had a nicely done restoration.

https://www.aircraft.com/aircraft/200787047/n133ck-1951-lockheed-t33

https://www.trade-a-plane.com/search?make=LOCKHEED&s-type=aircraft

The used warbird market is amazing. I saw an F-104 ($850,000) on the market and a C130A. Don’t know what would be worse, the maintenance or the flight restrictions.

Ah, it’s fun to dream though.

[svandamme]

300 grand sounds reasonable considering what you get for it
Those planes will beat most Ww2 warbirds in terms of practical performance.
Most USAF and Nasa people of fame used T33's as their personal little scooter getting to and from anywhere within the USA back in the 50ies.. Buzz, Armstrong, Olds, Yeager.. they had to be somehwere in the weekend, they took a T33 and flew there .. All good, they had to get their hours anyway..
I reckon a T33 jet pretty low maintenance compared to a P51 with a RR Merlin..

If I win Euromillions, I'de like to get me a T38 or a Sepecat Jaguar :P

[Seahawk]

I flew a lot of UAS testing at Reno/Stead Airport years ago. I can't remember the name of the company, I think Aviation Classics, that rebuilt MIGS:



They flew the pattern quite a bit. Tiny.

The ramp from GE a few minutes ago:



The folks were great and let us poke around to our hearts content.

[KNS]

For those with the mean$ you can get a complete T-33 checkout (among various other models) here:

Jetwarbird | MIG 15 Training | Fouga Training | L-29 Training

[Heel n Toe]

[RNajarian]

They put this type of accident to the test on Mythbusters in 2008. . .



Annotated Mythbusters: Episode 45: Shredded Plane, Fire without matches

[KNS]

Found this nifty plane on the ramp today at Fort Worth-Alliance (KAFW)

[edgemar]

https://www.darkaero.com/

[RNajarian]

Originally Posted by KNS

Found this nifty plane on the ramp today at Fort Worth-Alliance (KAFW)

That’s a Red Tail from the 187th FW AL ANG.

Always loved the F-16.

[dlockhart]

YouTuber Accused Of Staging Plane Crash For Likes And Views


https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/youtuber-accused-staging-plane-crash-likes-and-views



.

[Evans, Marv]

Originally Posted by dlockhart

YouTuber Accused Of Staging Plane Crash For Likes And Views
https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/youtuber-accused-staging-plane-crash-likes-and-views.

I live about 20 minutes driving time (maybe less) from there & didn't hear about it. Aound here if a mountain lion kills a deer, everybody hears about it.

[RNajarian]

I watched the entire video, did he declare an emergency with ATC at any point?

EDIT: More info about the incident

https://www.independent.com/2022/01/04/did-youtuber-trevor-jacob-crash-his-plane-in-the-los-padres-on-purpose/

[svandamme]

He'is going to get a ton of bricks on top of him, that doesn't look right in any way.
And if he removed the videocards : Isn't that tampering with a crash investigation???

Who the hell goes flying with an Skydiving rig, I've jumped, those are great in the air, but they are rubbish to sit in a seat with.

this is the actual one I jumped out of :



Harnass broke on first attemp to Tandem jump, just when they tightned me up to the jummaster, just before my jump.. (I was like huh??!!?)

rode the bird down for a landing, which was interesting as well, since they just point it close to straight down to pickup new jumpers.. was like them parabolic flights, i was weightless.

second jump with new rig ok
then solo.. did theory and practice on the ground, then got grounded for 5 weeks due to weather

Finally we could go up, you know how it works?
I jokingly say
"yea, pull right, count to 5 parachute if nothing, pull Cutaway and Reserve, count to 5 parachute again. If nothing at that point burrow a hole in the ground and wait for the ambulance"
EXACTLY, you DID pay attention to the course

and we went up

2 failures, first
count to 3 parachute.. NOTHING
course memory kicks in.. they drilled it in.. nothing is often a sticky pilot chute
SO I rotated, it opened.. and I had a high speed twist
woosh, jumpmasters are gone at that point

Debated pulling reserve, but managed to untwist it
That was FUU U U U UN


In any case.. skydive rig in the pilot seat is BS. He knew damn well he was going to ditch the plane before he even took off.

[Rtrorkt]

at the Inde Racetrack in Willcox, AZ near the paddock a number of old fighters are parked. Here is a sample