Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
@Huntn what is the largest plane you’ve piloted?
Pilot on B-727 and A-320 (180k pounds gross weight) Flight engineer on B-747, non flying position, but all airlines long ago, got rid of dedicated flight engineers, and switched to using pilots to cycle through that position on their way to the right seat.
[doublepost=1532359747][/doublepost]
Thanks in big part to the US government and lobbying.
I’m not familiar. Could you describe? Airlines first consideration seems to be profit margins.
 
What is it like to be "just a passenger" in planes you've previously instead been in the cockpit?! In situations like turbulence or other flight disruption, is it like being in the back seat when your kid's at the wheel and some idiot ahead of him does something stupid? Or do you just figure hey, I'm off duty...

I’ve had no issues with not being in control. :D Turbulence has never caused me anxiety, just physical discomfort. While piloting, I had a flight attendant who was picked up and thrown down breaking his arm. The seat belt sign was on, and announcements had been made. Sometimes things ratchet up quickly.

One day we were flying from Kennedy down to Miami along the East Coast, in the Summer with many thunderstorms. We had a TCAS (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_collision_avoidance_system)
which shows other aircraft, and which overlays the weather display.

2CACD34A-39CF-4851-AC97-65F41D13B58B.jpeg

We were navigating between thunderstorms, when I noticed an opposite direction New York based airliner flying right into a thunderstorm. I told the First Officer, Look at that!. The next thing we heard on the radio. Flight XXX, declaring an emergency, emergency decent! We looked at each other and made a sarcastic comment about the skill of their pilots. ;) Yes, they survived, but I don’t know if they continued to destination or diverted, nor know if anyone bounced off the ceiling. :oops:

Turbulence can be severe, but as a rule, wings have not fallen off, but tails have infrequently left aircraft resulting in a crash. Not trying to scare you. Flying statistical is about a thousand times safer than driving a car. :D
 
Years ago, as a teenager travelling to France, I saw Concorde - parked - in Orly airport, (and dwarfed by a B-747), and subsequently know people who flew on it (the well off parents of a college friend), but, while it was not especially luxurious, (the service was excellent), and the seating comfortable, the most noteworthy thing according to those I knew who flew in it, was not just the speed (and the passenger area had a speedometer which allowed you to see when you reached Mach 1), but the altitude you could reach at such speeds.

My friend's parents spoke of having been able to see the curvature of the earth and the 'edge' of space.

Flying in Concorde is an experience I would have liked to have had.
 
Last edited:
I remember the televised protests in the States when Concord was a thing (not having a pop at the US, it was what it was). Later years driving around Heathrow on the M25 when it was taking off and it looked had a purpose even within a few hundred feet off the ground, could have sworn I saw afterburners. Other airliners would be labouring up in comparison (it appeared so I know it was not so) and Concorde was off like a rat up a drain pipe.

Then at the right time of day (further to the west off the UK) you would get the thumps in the distance as the sound barrier was passed a few times out to sea.

Oh well. Bring on its successor where ever it is.
 
  • Like
Reactions: arkitect
Airshows in the OP bullet points.
Really would like to get to a good air show in the US with a mix of military and civilian sometime before I am 6' under.

Spent a few years chasing the Vulcan around the UK airshows before it was retired for good (in private ownership and not used by the RAF for some years) and that was always a big draw at the shows. For those that know not, it is a bomber built by the same people that built the Lancaster but 10 years apart and thinks it is a fighter. Seems the Airbus A400 has taken its mantle for showy takeoffs (RIAT 2018 for example).
 
Airshows in the OP bullet points.
Really would like to get to a good air show in the US with a mix of military and civilian sometime before I am 6' under.

Spent a few years chasing the Vulcan around the UK airshows before it was retired for good (in private ownership and not used by the RAF for some years) and that was always a big draw at the shows. For those that know not, it is a bomber built by the same people that built the Lancaster but 10 years apart and thinks it is a fighter. Seems the Airbus A400 has taken its mantle for showy takeoffs (RIAT 2018 for example).

The Vulcan was an amazing plane.

I've actually flown in one of those three engined, tail mounted engine planes - returning from Russia in the early 1990s (when they still used Soviet era, Soviet planes on the European runs).
 
Last edited:
This post was edited to remove an irrelevant remark.

@Huntn Having finished the re-watch of The Right Stuff last evening I became enamored all over again of the X-planes for their simple beauty.

I remain an admirer of Chuck Yeager, and --all things considered including the inherent risks in test flights of experimental aircraft-- I am amazed that he's managed to reach the age of 95. He must think at least sometimes that we've become too risk averse (regarding human flight prospects anyway) to take full advantage of innate desire to explore the skies. On the other hand maybe in his advanced age he figures he's been living under at least a few so-called "lucky stars".
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Scepticalscribe
Puddle Jumpers (piston powered smalls birds, Cessna's, Pipers, Beechcraft, Grumman, Light-Sport, etc)

Well an Ercoupe 415-D is not something you see every day, at least not landing in front of you in traffic on Lakeshore Drive in Chicago....


OopsRanALittleLowOnFuel.jpg




The pilot of “an Ercoupe 415-D aircraft, which is a fixed wing, single-engine aircraft, reported an emergency to air traffic control and landed on Lake Shore Drive in Chicago,” said Elizabeth Isham Cory, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration’s Chicago office, in an email. “The point of departure and intended destination are still being determined.”

The two were in the plane when it began to lose power and the pilot was directed by air traffic control to land on Lake Shore, according to a police media notification.

A man and woman had been flying along the shore of Lake Michigan from Wisconsin to Cleveland when they realized they were low on fuel, said Ald. Sophia King, 4th.

The plane is registered to Olson Products Inc., an insect-control product manufacturing company in Medina, Ohio, south of Cleveland, according to the FAA plane registry.
 
Well an Ercoupe 415-D is not something you see every day, at least not landing in front of you in traffic on Lakeshore Drive in Chicago....


View attachment 773244



That is one of the nice things about small aircraft, it’s easier to locate forced landing spots and successfully land. I remember practicing this in a Cessna 172. Just about any field will do. As you can imagine forced landings in a larger aircraft with higher glide speeds is more challenging. But every commercial pilot was reminded by Sully, of what a good option landing in a body of water can be versus finding a suitable unprepared landing space in downtown NYC. It’s not technically difficult. I remember years ago, a Southern Airways flight that flew though a thunderstorm, flaming out both of its engines, and was forced to land on a road. I seem to remember something about hitting power lines that messed up the plan, but that was not mentioned in this link, unless I missed it. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Airways_Flight_242.
[doublepost=1532870855][/doublepost]
Interesting... for anyone who did not notice, that was a 1/2 scale, unmanned radio control aircraft. Real airplanes would not come apart like that. I wonder how much it cost?
 
Last edited:
- Comets did disintegrate.
- Check out Tu-144 Le Bourget video
I can’t say emphatically, not ever, but on a real military jet flying at such slow speeds, the tail would not rip off like that, and if it did, the fuselage would not then break into little pieces. They are just not made like RC models. :)
 
I can’t say emphatically, not ever, but on a real military jet flying at such slow speeds, the tail would not rip off like that, and if it did, the fuselage would not then break into little pieces. They are just not made like RC models. :)
Surely a real plane would not break apart in such little pieces and under such light conditions.

It is a nice exaggerated structural failure model, though.
 
Well an Ercoupe 415-D is not something you see every day, at least not landing in front of you in traffic on Lakeshore Drive in Chicago....

Saw that!
I bet he was looking for Meigs Field, the airport that was illegally closed by mayor in 2003.


Kidding, but read like pilot ran out of fuel. Had Meigs been there he could have safely landed.

Also happened in 2013 when a Light Sport reported control issues.
r

r


I believe on evidence a better chance to survive a small plane crash than large one. Less mass and fuel, smaller area needed to land.

[doublepost=1532972646][/doublepost]

That is GIGANTIC! :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
[doublepost=1532972877][/doublepost]
Interesting... for anyone who did not notice, that was a 1/2 scale, unmanned radio control aircraft. Real airplanes would not come apart like that. I wonder how much it cost?

They would, to varying degrees.
This wooden model would shred more than real, but depending on speed, violence of departure from normal flight, and cause, it can be just as dramatic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat
Speaking of big planes, have we not discussed the new Airbus Beluga?

1F68FA2D-2640-4F7F-8ECE-C70CDB0B0851.jpeg


I read it is supposed to be used for transporting huge cargo. I wonder how long of a runway this thing needs to take off when fully loaded...
 
  • Like
Reactions: LizKat
Saw that!
I bet he was looking for Meigs Field, the airport that was illegally closed by mayor in 2003.


Kidding, but read like pilot ran out of fuel. Had Meigs been there he could have safely landed.

Also happened in 2013 when a Light Sport reported control issues.
r

r


I believe on evidence a better chance to survive a small plane crash than large one. Less mass and fuel, smaller area needed to land.

[doublepost=1532972646][/doublepost]

That is GIGANTIC! :eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
[doublepost=1532972877][/doublepost]

They would, to varying degrees.
This wooden model would shred more than real, but depending on speed, violence of departure from normal flight, and cause, it can be just as dramatic.
I was referencing a real plane flying around like this one was, they don’t come apart like that under those conditions.
 
I was referencing a real plane flying around like this one was, they don’t come apart like that under those conditions.

I was talking about full size metal airplanes. The can and do shred very similar to that.
Scale up the vehicle, scale up the forces.
 
Speaking of big planes, have we not discussed the new Airbus Beluga?

View attachment 773632

I read it is supposed to be used for transporting huge cargo. I wonder how long of a runway this thing needs to take off when fully loaded...

Apparently it's meant to take big but not very heavy stuff. So it's more about airport regs than runway requirements in most cases. Guess can take off in 2k most airports have 2.5 anyway.

 
  • Like
Reactions: mobilehaathi
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.