16
General Chat / Re: Guess the aircraft!
« on: July 05, 2015, 05:32:01 pm »
Yes!
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
17
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: July 02, 2015, 06:00:14 pm »
3893
Negative. Only the short humped versions look normal. The long-humped versions are not nice. And the -400 has not nice winglets and engines too.
Negative. Only the short humped versions look normal. The long-humped versions are not nice. And the -400 has not nice winglets and engines too.
18
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: July 02, 2015, 09:44:02 am »
3891
It sits on stilts, the wings are tiny, the front fuselage is a different diameter from the rear fuselage and the nose looks like an anteater. And the engines look old fashioned.
It sits on stilts, the wings are tiny, the front fuselage is a different diameter from the rear fuselage and the nose looks like an anteater. And the engines look old fashioned.
19
General Chat / Re: Guess the aircraft!
« on: July 02, 2015, 09:42:11 am »So helicopter?
It is a plane
Helicopters aren't planes
They are just annoying 
20
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: July 01, 2015, 08:33:16 pm »
3889
I really don't get it. Why do some people find the Tristar nice? Ugly nose, hideous S-duct, short stubby fuselage, strange tail and so on. Just a weird aircraft. And incredibly, the 757 is beginning to receive the same admiration today, despite the fact that it is equally weird looking 
I really don't get it. Why do some people find the Tristar nice? Ugly nose, hideous S-duct, short stubby fuselage, strange tail and so on. Just a weird aircraft. And incredibly, the 757 is beginning to receive the same admiration today, despite the fact that it is equally weird looking
22
General Chat / Re: Guess the aircraft!
« on: June 30, 2015, 08:56:04 pm »
Okay, a hint then. It is a plane, but it isn't.
23
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: June 29, 2015, 08:41:36 am »
3885
All Boeings made today except the 737 have completely artificial feel, meaning that it is the computer that decides how much feedback the pilot feels (or doesn't feel).
All Boeings made today except the 737 have completely artificial feel, meaning that it is the computer that decides how much feedback the pilot feels (or doesn't feel).
24
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: June 22, 2015, 10:54:54 pm »
3882
Vastly overrated, and force feedback can be integrated into a sidestick as well.
Airbus has significantly better systems, both safety and handling wise. The 737 is a 1960'era design that has been updated with a patchwork of updates, and is really rather basic. The 737 lacks a great deal of basic safety systems, and still suffers from a number of dangerous flaws. Boeing has only really caught up with the 787. From a pilots view, the age of the 737 really shows. The 737 is still very much a hands-on aircraft, and that is not necessarily a good thing when flying IFR at 30.000 ft and passing through turbulent conditions.
One example of the 737 being inferior to the A320 is when performing a go-around. In the A320 you press the "Take-off/Go-around" button, the aircraft applies max thrust and retracts gear, flaps on schedule and speedbrakes on it's own, and flies the entire missed approach procedure by itself unless the crew interferes. The 737 gives you take-off power and initial missed approach only. In severe cases, 737s have crashed because the speedbrakes weren't retracted. Why hasn't it been solved? Boeing avoided a massive lawsuit against it in the 80s and 90s, involving the lack of this function. Fitting the function today would be akin to admitting the fault, and facing new lawsuits. It would have been avoided had they done a clean sheet replacement of the 737, rather than the 737MAX.
The A320 is far more intuitive to fly. Any pilot can learn how to fly an A320 within a single day, it is that easy to fly. The downside being that the systems are a bit complex. Should a single minor system fail enroute, a reset may cause the system to not restart properly when the aircraft has landed and is being prepared for departure. In that case, you need to get a mechanic on the phone to solve the issue. It's minor maintenance issues, not any that affect flight safety.
Vastly overrated, and force feedback can be integrated into a sidestick as well.
Airbus has significantly better systems, both safety and handling wise. The 737 is a 1960'era design that has been updated with a patchwork of updates, and is really rather basic. The 737 lacks a great deal of basic safety systems, and still suffers from a number of dangerous flaws. Boeing has only really caught up with the 787. From a pilots view, the age of the 737 really shows. The 737 is still very much a hands-on aircraft, and that is not necessarily a good thing when flying IFR at 30.000 ft and passing through turbulent conditions.
One example of the 737 being inferior to the A320 is when performing a go-around. In the A320 you press the "Take-off/Go-around" button, the aircraft applies max thrust and retracts gear, flaps on schedule and speedbrakes on it's own, and flies the entire missed approach procedure by itself unless the crew interferes. The 737 gives you take-off power and initial missed approach only. In severe cases, 737s have crashed because the speedbrakes weren't retracted. Why hasn't it been solved? Boeing avoided a massive lawsuit against it in the 80s and 90s, involving the lack of this function. Fitting the function today would be akin to admitting the fault, and facing new lawsuits. It would have been avoided had they done a clean sheet replacement of the 737, rather than the 737MAX.
The A320 is far more intuitive to fly. Any pilot can learn how to fly an A320 within a single day, it is that easy to fly. The downside being that the systems are a bit complex. Should a single minor system fail enroute, a reset may cause the system to not restart properly when the aircraft has landed and is being prepared for departure. In that case, you need to get a mechanic on the phone to solve the issue. It's minor maintenance issues, not any that affect flight safety.
26
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: June 21, 2015, 10:06:45 am »
3879
All pilots fly using one hand on the yoke only. One hand on the yoke/stick, and one hand on the throttle, regardless of the aircraft. This has been beaten into every single pilot from the very first flight we took. In other words, half the yoke on a Boeing, Cessna, Piper, Embraer, Tupolev etc. is purely for cosmetic purposes, and has never been used.
I'm hoping for a major Irish airline actually. I am willing to take most offers in the beginning however.
I would prefer Boeing's yoke than Airbus' sidestick as a passenger. I understand the sidestick was designed to minimise fatigue, but I just can't trust my life on one person's one hand.
All pilots fly using one hand on the yoke only. One hand on the yoke/stick, and one hand on the throttle, regardless of the aircraft. This has been beaten into every single pilot from the very first flight we took
. In other words, half the yoke on a Boeing, Cessna, Piper, Embraer, Tupolev etc. is purely for cosmetic purposes, and has never been used. Who will you get to fly with, VS?
I'm hoping for a major Irish airline actually. I am willing to take most offers in the beginning however.
27
General Chat / Re: Guess the aircraft!
« on: June 08, 2015, 10:25:51 pm »
Coz I'm a pilot! BTW, did I mention that I am a pilot?
29
General Chat / Re: Count to 10,000
« on: June 05, 2015, 01:55:22 pm »
3825
I'm done! I'm officially a commercial pilot with instrument and multi-engine ratings. Currently doing a multi crew course. I hate the 737 - the yoke sucks. You only ever use 1 hand to fly it anyway, might as well not have half of it anyway. And it's heavy, awkward, stupid and much better if replaced with a simple non-force-feedback sidestick.
I'm done! I'm officially a commercial pilot with instrument and multi-engine ratings. Currently doing a multi crew course. I hate the 737 - the yoke sucks. You only ever use 1 hand to fly it anyway, might as well not have half of it anyway. And it's heavy, awkward, stupid and much better if replaced with a simple non-force-feedback sidestick.
30
General Chat / Re: The corrupted wish game.
« on: March 24, 2015, 11:43:34 am »
Wish granted. Now Norway can into poverty like Denmark.
I wish for the above to become true.
I wish for the above to become true.
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk