Clark Griswold Posted March 14, 2019 Posted March 14, 2019 Another day at the office...https://nypost.com/2019/03/13/nypd-cop-accidentally-recorded-oral-sex-with-her-boss-on-police-body-cam/Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1
Orbit Posted March 17, 2019 Posted March 17, 2019 Damn they really ed up this drop https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=sDo9W_1552726578 1
M2 Posted March 17, 2019 Posted March 17, 2019 Almost as bad as this... https://theaviationist.com/2019/03/09/really-bad-african-paratroops-demonstrate-every-jump-ramp-error-in-one-jump/ 1 1
17D_guy Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 For not non-flyer, because the perspective is difficult, I'm assuming it's a cargo aircraft and the load shifted all back?
D_Vezencuando Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) To paraphrase... Original poster blamed the load team for downloading their jet nose-first. (C.G. shifted beyond aft limit.) Edited March 18, 2019 by D_Vezencuando
Guest Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 To paraphrase... Original poster blamed the load team for downloading their jet nose-first. (C.G. shifted beyond aft limit.)How else would they download it? It doesn’t have a ramp like the C-5. Everything goes in through the front.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
nunya Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 Move the aft load forward before you off load the front stuff. Put the heavier stuff in the middle. Tailstand. Etc. 1
Guest Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 Move the aft load forward before you off load the front stuff. Put the heavier stuff in the middle. Tailstand. Etc.Fair enough. I figured the load plans would usually be such that this wouldn’t be necessary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
JeremiahWeed Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 (edited) 3 hours ago, 17D_guy said: For not non-flyer, because the perspective is difficult, I'm assuming it's a cargo aircraft and the load shifted all back? What may be the issue is the forward belly freight. When the load team doesn't communicate well, they may end up with freight on the main deck aft of the CG. The guys unloading the forward belly (forward of CG) do that too quickly and eventually gravity wins. I've seen this happen a few times. I was working at another cargo carrier (before FedEx) on a layover in Anchorage. My Captain called me and said "turn on Fox News". So, I do and there's the aircraft we're supposed to take to Taipei in 18 hours at LAX looking just like that 747. "Ah..yeah, I guess our ANC layover just got a bit longer." 6000 lb pallet of stuff that was half-way to the door rolled back during the tilt and almost killed a guy who dove out of the way plus did big time damage to the aft bulkhead and a/c structure. Most cargo outfits have a tailstand, a weight cart attached to the nose gear or a strap running through the nose gear anchored to eye-bolts in the concrete during loading/unloading to avoid this. The 777F has the main deck door aft of the wing, so all the main deck freight is loaded and unloaded from front to back. Pretty much impossible to put one on the tail doing it that way (but you'll still never see one of ours without a strap or weight cart). Edited March 18, 2019 by JeremiahWeed 3
Tonka Posted March 18, 2019 Posted March 18, 2019 You think cargo loading is hard, you've never tried refueling: https://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/transport-m/c141/pics02.shtml 1 1
Prozac Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 22 hours ago, ihtfp06 said: How else would they download it? It doesn’t have a ramp like the C-5. Everything goes in through the front. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 747 freighters have a main cargo door on the left side, aft of the wing. In my experience, nose loading/unloading was a rare event used mostly for outsized cargo. Might be more prevalent at different operators though.
Prozac Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 22 hours ago, ihtfp06 said: Fair enough. I figured the load plans would usually be such that this wouldn’t be necessary. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk You’d be surprised at how little aerodynamic/CG thought goes into load plans at freight operators. It’s usually based on what needs to come off the airplane first. I’ve seen some seriously eyebrow raising stab trim settings as a result. Never seen anything blatantly out of CG but fuel savings is pretty much a joke the way the airplanes are often loaded. 1
JeremiahWeed Posted March 19, 2019 Posted March 19, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, Prozac said: You’d be surprised at how little aerodynamic/CG thought goes into load plans at freight operators. It’s usually based on what needs to come off the airplane first. I’ve seen some seriously eyebrow raising stab trim settings as a result. Never seen anything blatantly out of CG but fuel savings is pretty much a joke the way the airplanes are often loaded. On the MD-11, it got some pretty consistent attention. It has a 13K fuel tank in the stab. Once airborne, with the fuel system in auto, it will pump 13K back there if there's room and CG allows which will move the CG aft. It'll put it right at the aft limit for most of the flight if it can. Makes a big difference in fuel consumption. But if someone porks away the load, it's not difficult to negate that capability. Most operators don't plan for tail fuel management and tend to use pessimistic burns just for CYA. Certain issues can deny TFM and if the fuel load is counting on it and it fails, you will land short on some of the longer flights. Another factor is an emergency and rapid descent to landing early in the flight. If the descent is fast and slats come out early, a large portion of that 13K may be trapped back there. Can make the landing kind of sporty if the guys flying haven't experienced a significant aft CG. Edited March 19, 2019 by JeremiahWeed
arg Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 On 3/18/2019 at 5:59 PM, Tonka said: You think cargo loading is hard, you've never tried refueling: https://www.aerospaceweb.org/aircraft/transport-m/c141/pics02.shtml If I remember right, that was a fuel tank vent that was left capped.
MooseAg03 Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 If I remember right, that was a fuel tank vent that was left capped.That’s what the article says. It also says the jet was holding 120,000 gallons when the rupture and spill happened - 804k lbs sure is a lot for a 141.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
arg Posted March 20, 2019 Posted March 20, 2019 1 hour ago, MooseAg03 said: That’s what the article says. It also says the jet was holding 120,000 gallons when the rupture and spill happened - 804k lbs sure is a lot for a 141. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I didn't read the article, just remember the picture. Happens more often than you think. The 141 could hold about 155,000 pounds of fuel, wish I could remember more important shit than that.
M2 Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 No, it's not photochopped, and it's no April Fool's joke either... https://theaviationist.com/2019/03/31/no-its-not-photoshop-this-incredible-photo-from-the-lima-19-airshow-is-real/
ThreeHoler Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 Except the shadow on the lowest A400 is facing the wrong way...Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile app
MooseAg03 Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 Except the shadow on the lowest A400 is facing the wrong way...Sent from my iPhone using Baseops Network mobile appIt appears to me that the shadow on the lower jet is the fuselage and lower vertical stab of the top jet. It’s probably the telephoto compression making them look much closer as the article states. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 1
M2 Posted April 1, 2019 Posted April 1, 2019 Don't forget the 3-4 Pilatus PC-7s involved... I've loaded a larger version of the image for better detail.
Danger41 Posted April 2, 2019 Posted April 2, 2019 8 hours ago, M2 said: No, it's not photochopped, and it's no April Fool's joke either... https://theaviationist.com/2019/03/31/no-its-not-photoshop-this-incredible-photo-from-the-lima-19-airshow-is-real/ Looks like a typical recovery into Bagram to me. 3 2 6
Lord Ratner Posted April 2, 2019 Posted April 2, 2019 Looks like a typical recovery into Bagram to me.Bagram Tower: Antonov6969, hold short runway 3, traffic on three mile final.Ivan: Bagroom tower, I read you! Cleared for takeoff!Bagram Tower: Antonov 6-9-6-9, negative! Hold short, runway 3, landing traffic is on 2 mile final.Ivan: Yes, traffic in sight, Antonov 6969 is taking off! Happy morning tower.Bagram Tower: Fighting Falcon 55, go around, traffic taking runway is ....
Runr6730 Posted April 9, 2019 Posted April 9, 2019 Any Viper drivers on here that can explain how it’s possible to shoot your own aircraft? https://www.foxnews.com/world/dutch-f-16-makes-emergency-landing-after-flying-into-its-own-gunfire-report
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now