It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

787 like you haven't seen before

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:04 PM
link   
a reply to: buddah6




The bad part is there isn't small engines for the homebuilders just the deep pocket commercial guys.


Oh, but there is.....






posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

The first full motion sim that I every used was the Saab SF 340. My instructor was new too and we spent the first hour doing things that were too risky to do in the real plane. The hard part for me was the sim acted like a car on ice while on the ground but when airborne it acted OK. My instructor was inclined to make you fly all instrument approaches to difficult airports. His favorites were Roanoke, Va and Charleston. WV. both with unusual approaches or displaced runways. Roanoke had a runway that the end of the runway was 100 feet lower than the middle...fun! At Charleston, the airport was made by pushing two hilltops together. It's like landing on an aircraft carrier...lol!



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

That's for RC airplanes. I was talking about the size you can fly yourself. I was thinking of engines in the 500 to 1000 pounds of thrust category with the same fuel efficiency as the the 777 or 787. Just sitting here dreaming of something like a homebuilt version of the Cessna T 37.
edit on 16-7-2014 by buddah6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:01 PM
link   
Now that's what I call a short take off.

It's looks very agile and has a lot of power. I wonder if it could do a roll or a full loop?



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: buddah6

I've always loved the wing break myself.


I'm with Buddah, there is something inherently creepy about the moment any wing goes snap.



It always reminds me of this...




posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 05:20 PM
link   
now what we want to see now is the video with the passenger friendly settings turned off



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 10:54 PM
link   
Oh how lame. After the 787 performance, the airshow authority banned touch and goes during the performances. They said that they were too low then the did the turn afterwards (they had 15 feet between the tip and the ground, plenty of room), so now it's no longer allowed.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 11:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Sammamishman

He absolutely planted that touch and go.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 11:10 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

The moment has arrived people are not sure anymore if something is animated or real...

My impression .. its a simulation. The camera angles do plea in my advantage.

btw never knew that Jimmy Steward is an aviator.



posted on Jul, 16 2014 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: zatara

It's quite real. Farnborough has some amazing cameras set up to follow the flight displays. They're automatic tracking, as well as IR (which is pretty interesting to watch). They spend millions in cameras and webcast equipment every year, as it's one of the biggest shows of the year.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 12:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Zaph, This is the exact reason why certification flights should be made public. I would venture to say 90% of the public wouldn't believe what these planes can do! When they see the mild stuff they are left in disbelief.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

Yeah he did. Lol. Who would have thought it would be a Boeing commercial airliner to get touch and goes banned.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 02:58 PM
link   
The first "beautiful" American Passenger Jet since the [sic] SST.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 03:02 PM
link   



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 03:05 PM
link   
Never go ANYWHERE near a 787. they are just like the F-35. They burn on contact with the air!
The 787 is like the modern day "comet", it's a plastic plane that WILL come apart in mid air. Wanna know why? It was built by union workers that sabotaged the entire program. It's tmaintained by union workers who want the 787 to fail. acutally, it being built by unions should ALREADY scare you. GM comes to mind! the 787 is the US version of a scare bus and boieings swan song in civil airliner programs. just remember, you heard it on ATS first !



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 05:08 PM
link   
a reply to: tencap77

I don't know how to reply to this! I might be stupid or something but I can't believe that anyone would do these things. I think that there's enough checks and inspections to prevent sabotage even if it actual happened. I don't know but I have enough faith in my fellow man to think they wouldn't deliberately hurt anyone like what you suggest. I've belonged to a union (ALPA) and believe they wouldn't ever ask you to do anything that would jeopardize safety.

GM is an unique situation with problems from top to bottom. They seem to be their own worst enemy with all of the recalls and turning out a bad product for 50 years. The only thing that saved them was the competition from Japan in the 1970's and 80's.



posted on Jul, 17 2014 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: tencap77

BMW and Lexus are also built by union workers, making 2x that of GM, with full medical benefits and a rock solid pension.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 08:31 AM
link   
a reply to: mbkennel

I was a member of ALPA as a pilot and it was anything but supportive to it's members. Flight attendants made more money that new pilots at my airline and the national office assessed our pay to support the Eastern Airline strike but wouldn't reciprocate when we needed support for more pay. It seems that we were too small and not lucrative enough to help but not small enough to assess our pay.

The average line worker at GM made a better salary that me flying a 26 million dollar airplane with 70 passengers. They have superior benefits and retirement which I had very little benes with no retirement. We could fly at a reduced rate twice a year (nothing free) as a major bene but with little money not many took advantage. Can we say "Golden Handcuffs?"

The owners of my airline also use our pilot to leverage 50% pay cuts from their pilots then closed us down. Thank You ALPA.



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 08:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
Oh how lame. After the 787 performance, the airshow authority banned touch and goes during the performances. They said that they were too low then the did the turn afterwards (they had 15 feet between the tip and the ground, plenty of room), so now it's no longer allowed.


it is rumored that airbus complained about the display and thus it was banned.

the plane never saw anything over 2G in any of those maneuvers. and of course the plane was empty so weight was not a limiting factor, only the massive thrust from the engines.

you may not believe this, but many of you have been in a plane that did a greater than 45 degree bank at one time or another



posted on Jul, 18 2014 @ 08:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sammamishman
a reply to: Drunkenparrot

I've seen the vid. Lol. Unfortunately I'm much too young to have seen it first hand. Still waiting for someone to repeat that in a current jetliner though.




there is no plane that cannot do that. it is a 1g barrel roll.

the pilots of alaska air flight 261 did everything they could think of to keep the plane from crashing, including trying to fly inverted in a plane that was not designed for inverted flight




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join