|
Plane Appreciation thread! (pg. 10)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Protege |
| lol I went to ERAU. youre totally right clovis. |
|
|
| Clovis |
| quote: | Originally posted by curleyq992
Dang, Failsafe is the expert. How long will it take the forum to recognize his credentials instead of being stupid as normal? A little bit I reckon.
;) |
Still not banned you ing retard? |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
Still not banned you ing retard? |
lol he got banned a few times in the last 3 hrs. |
|
|
| failsafe |
| quote: | Originally posted by Clovis
What exactly in his post was wrong? As far as I can tell he hit the nail on the head. Thunderstorms and aircraft don't mix. No matter how sophisticated, how large and how expensive your weather radar is. I could pull up hundreds and hundreds of accident examples.
Also, a large majority of pilots (ESPECIALLY those flying GA aircraft) are, in fact, stupid. I worked at a flight school in Van Nuys CA, (busiest GA airport in the United States) for 2.5 years and got to witness the stupidity first hand. Really, it scares me to death who they give pilots licenses to these days. |
His gross misinterpretation by talking about general aviation planes having wings ripped off and such was just out to lunch. Most trainer aircraft are certified in the Utility category, which no transport category jets are certified to. So based on that the acceptable G loading before failure in a cessna 172 is far higher than that in a 747 or 777 (almost twice the G loading infact). The larger planes have far more weight to be moved around, but they also enter the vertical air columns far more quickly which in turn causes more stress on the airframe. The Cessna 172 would never get into the really crazy parts of the storm either, microburts yes, but never into the extreme hail, up and down drafts associated with the stuff around 20,000 - 30,000ft.
I never argued that Thunderstorms aren't hazardous to aircraft. I just disagreed with the blatant over dramatization of "ripping wings off". How many of the posters here have flown at 35,000 feet and had to dodge cells, or how many have used weather radar to pick their way through a squall line? I'd dare say few if any, yet you're all talking as if you've been there and done that.
Also Van Nuys isn't the buiest GA airport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoeni..._Valley_Airport
Maybe the busiest airport carying porn stars in and out of the area.
I've flown into LAX a few times and the TCAS is sure a lot busier in many other areas. The New York Trecon airspace is absolutely insane to work under with arrivals for La Guardia, JFK, Newark, white plains, etc etc all funneling through the same space.
The second part that I found amusing was that he said that certain planes couldn't fly in weather beyond a sky condition of FEW or SKC, which means few or sky clear for clouds. Those planes certainly can fly in overcast and broken conditions. Certainly Broken 25,000 is a lot nicer weather than few @ 200, few @ 500, few @ 700.
I guess to close, I just took offense to the stupid pilot comment, coming from someone that had posted many inaccuracies.
Anyway, maybe some real world experience would open your eyes to what things are actually like. Let me know when you've got a couple of years flying in the flight levels in large aircraft under your belt and we can exchange war stories then.
:toothless |
|
|
| Protege |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
The New York TRACON |
fixed |
|
|
| Jackson |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
His gross misinterpretation by talking about general aviation planes having wings ripped off and such was just out to lunch. Most trainer aircraft are certified in the Utility category, which no transport category jets are certified to. So based on that the acceptable G loading before failure in a cessna 172 is far higher than that in a 747 or 777 (almost twice the G loading infact). The larger planes have far more weight to be moved around, but they also enter the vertical air columns far more quickly which in turn causes more stress on the airframe. The Cessna 172 would never get into the really crazy parts of the storm either, microburts yes, but never into the extreme hail, up and down drafts associated with the stuff around 20,000 - 30,000ft.
I never argued that Thunderstorms aren't hazardous to aircraft. I just disagreed with the blatant over dramatization of "ripping wings off". How many of the posters here have flown at 35,000 feet and had to dodge cells, or how many have used weather radar to pick their way through a squall line? I'd dare say few if any, yet you're all talking as if you've been there and done that.
Also Van Nuys isn't the buiest GA airport
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoeni..._Valley_Airport
Maybe the busiest airport carying porn stars in and out of the area.
I've flown into LAX a few times and the TCAS is sure a lot busier in many other areas. The New York Trecon airspace is absolutely insane to work under with arrivals for La Guardia, JFK, Newark, white plains, etc etc all funneling through the same space.
The second part that I found amusing was that he said that certain planes couldn't fly in weather beyond a sky condition of FEW or SKC, which means few or sky clear for clouds. Those planes certainly can fly in overcast and broken conditions. Certainly Broken 25,000 is a lot nicer weather than few @ 200, few @ 500, few @ 700.
I guess to close, I just took offense to the stupid pilot comment, coming from someone that had posted many inaccuracies.
Anyway, maybe some real world experience would open your eyes to what things are actually like. Let me know when you've got a couple of years flying in the flight levels in large aircraft under your belt and we can exchange war stories then.
:toothless |
*Sigh*....My Hero!! :rolleyes: |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by failsafe
The second part that I found amusing was that he said that certain planes couldn't fly in weather beyond a sky condition of FEW or SKC, which means few or sky clear for clouds. Those planes certainly can fly in overcast and broken conditions. Certainly Broken 25,000 is a lot nicer weather than few @ 200, few @ 500, few @ 700.
|
i was referring to the pilots that are in training, not the actual aircraft. those stationed @ Columbus AFB, Vance, AFB, Altus AFB, Laughlin AFB, Tyndall AFB, and Eglin AFB are a lot of pilots in training, and are not allowed to fly in anything more than a SCT deck for thier own safety/training.
as the best pilot in the world, i'm sure you went through some kind of restrictive training, yes? or did they just give you the keys and say, "ok, go man go!" and you were like, "oh yeah, i'm the best out there!" and had no problems at all in your first flight. in fact, you were so good that they wanted you to start training people only after you had like 10 hours of flying. man, i wish i was that awesome. :rolleyes:
also, overdramatization of thunderstorms is necessary to really bring a point of how powerful a storm is.
so have you personally flown through a squall line in a cessna? or a supercell? i'm not talking about generalized ordinary plain old thunderstorms with echo tops of 20k and no vils. i'm talking about severe weather here. (even tho general thunderstorms still are not really the best idea to be flown in anyway, regardless of airframe). |
|
|
| Zewad |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jackson
Will works around aircraft full time, as do you. |
he does? i thought he just sits in an office all night watchign the weather channel and then just typing up what they say in militaristic manner.. and jotting ideas of what his commentary of his next c0r cribs is supposed to go like... |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zewad
he does? i thought he just sits in an office all night watchign the weather channel and then just typing up what they say in militaristic manner.. and jotting ideas of what his commentary of his next c0r cribs is supposed to go like... |
dude, don't be a dick. granted i don't physically touch aircraft, everything we do revolves around aircraft flying or not. whether its TAFs, dash-1s, or talking to the pilots themselves. ffs, we briefed the ing white house if they could fly a "distinguished guest" to Crawford or not. |
|
|
| Zewad |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
dude, don't be a dick. granted i don't physically touch aircraft, everything we do revolves around aircraft flying or not. whether its TAFs, dash-1s, or talking to the pilots themselves. ffs, we briefed the ing white house if they could fly a "distinguished guest" to Crawford or not. |
no.. im not.. you actually do AF stuff in the US... when i was in the Army we just praticed and played war games... stupid i tell ya...
although you gotta train, but there is only so much running around the forest with laser tag and shooting blanks one can handle... |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zewad
no.. im not.. you actually do AF stuff in the US... when i was in the Army we just praticed and played war games... stupid i tell ya...
although you gotta train, but there is only so much running around the forest with laser tag and shooting blanks one can handle... |
you didn't use paintballs? we did that in ROTC a few times. it was fun! of course, we were just playing AF back then too, lol |
|
|
|
|
