General aviation thread

[Top_Cat]

Haha tbf iirc when you posted about the topic it was genuinely interesting and sightful. When hingston went on and on about it, it was like...what you described in your post. In fact most of his posts were very close to what you described actually.

Kiss me you fool.

 

[sledger]

Where?

 

[Top_Cat]

To get really nerdy, this guy's YT channel is great. Basically he's a warbird flyer who's gradually getting his jet rating, flying tough planes like the T6, tons of footage of Oshkosh and heaps of interactions and flying with other pilots.

I like this video because it introduces the test pilot who pranged his experimental aircraft in the Mojave boneyard last year-ish and it's cool to watch how he works.

 

[Top_Cat]

 

[Top_Cat]

FYI the comments on the crash video are actual cancer. Avoid.

"WHY WAS HE FLYING AN EXPERIMENTAL PLANE ON A WINDY DAY?! JUST ASKING FOR TROUBLE"

It's an experimental aircraft flown by a test pilot who draws a paycheck to, y'know, test planes. What's one great test for a plane? Crosswind. They probably waited specifically for it.

 

[Burgey]

For the aviation nerds who don't yet know, Chuck Yeager is on Twitter. Chuck. ****ing. Yeager. Occasionally regales with some pretty awesome stories. Bloke has balls like a dinosaur.

 

[Spark]

FYI the comments on the crash video are actual cancer. Avoid.

"WHY WAS HE FLYING AN EXPERIMENTAL PLANE ON A WINDY DAY?! JUST ASKING FOR TROUBLE"

It's an experimental aircraft flown by a test pilot who draws a paycheck to, y'know, test planes. What's one great test for a plane? Crosswind. They probably waited specifically for it.

Plus if a plane can't fly if there's any wind, it's not a great plane...

 

[Top_Cat]

For the aviation nerds who don't yet know, Chuck Yeager is on Twitter. Chuck. ****ing. Yeager. Occasionally regales with some pretty awesome stories. Bloke has balls like a dinosaur.

Have heard he’s the biggest arsehole in aviation. Achievements are unmatched, though.

 

[Top_Cat]

Plus if a plane can't fly if there's any wind, it's not a great plane...

If one gust at 20’ = flame out and stall, pilots should know that ahead of flying that plane so they can say no to ever flying that plane.

 

[Burgey]

Avalon Airshow is on this week, and coincidentally a BUFF is in town for it.

 

[Spark]

Another 737 MAX has crashed, this time in Ethiopia.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.d8a9fd1bd1d5

 

[Spark]

This particular plane is less than four months old. Worrying tstl.

EDIT: And at first glance, a lot about this crash feels far too familiar. Brand new planes of a type in service only very recently should not be crashing like this.

 

[Spikey]

tell me more about it

 

[Chewie]

Ethiopian Airlines is the most reputable African airline too

 

[Top_Cat]

Sounds like another one that lost vertical control too eh. You’ve got a chance when a lot of other things go but that, all over in most cases.

 

[Burgey]

China is apparently grounding all Max 8s

 

[StephenZA]

So how much trouble would Boeing be in if they have installed software that is causing these crashes? I mean we are talking over 300 dead that is a pretty massive ****up.

 

[Spark]

So how much trouble would Boeing be in if they have installed software that is causing these crashes? I mean we are talking over 300 dead that is a pretty massive ****up.

Speculation and scuttlebutt etc etc but the stuff I've heard has focussed on two lines of inquiry, neither of which are good for Boeing:

- They've brought the operation of the plane more into line with state-of-the-art jets like the 787 etc in terms of automation and software running things, but decided not to really tell people about it (at least fully). The 737 MAX only exists because Airbus surprised them with their own A320neo update, so they decided to throw a new engine on the pre-existing 737 design and push it out ASAP. So a big part of the business case for this plane that they push to airlines is that it doesn't need much in the way of expensive retraining etc etc for existing 737 operators... which, as the article in the OP suggests, is perhaps not true. There's precedent for this so it should get better over time, but IMO Boeing has much less excuse than Airbus did in the 1980s and 1990s.
- Even more concerning, them putting that ****off-big new engine on the 737 may have screwed up its aerodynamics a bit (I believe they've had to position them further forward compared to previous generation 737s), which is why all these new and hidden software fixes are needed in the first place. And if you follow that line of logic...

But this really is all just speculation, it's way too early to say

 

[StephenZA]

But this really is all just speculation, it's way too early to say

Yeah I get that. But after the Indonesian crash there appeared to be real culpability on the side of Boeing due to software or design (or combination thereof) problems on the plane (not to sure if that is the right language but you get my meaning). And normally these accidents are due to a cascade of errors. But if this was as serious a problem as it appears and Boeing did not handle it properly for business reasons that has cost 150 extra lives. I mean that goes from corporate stupidity to criminal culpability.

This is all speculation etc.... but it really does not look good when I think of these aviation companies as some of the pinnacle of engineering.

 

[Spark]

The big thing is that now in the 21st century, brand new planes - this type has barely been around a year - simply do not crash like this. Sure, there are teething problems, but two catastrophic accidents with brand new planes of a brand new type in the space of a few months? That just isn’t meant to happen, full stop.

And yeah in the aviation industry, a series of accidents are rarely due to one thing, there’s often a whole cascade of minor failures all the way to the corporate level that leads to things like this happening. I note that the 777X test flight has now been delayed; one hopes they did their due diligence on that program at least. I think there’s a public acceptance that smaller jets can be a bit of mixed bag when it comes to reliability/safety, especially given the sort of outfits which often fly them, but anything untoward on the big long-haul widebodies is a definite no-no.