Aircraft Videos and Images

[JG52Krupi]

Sadly it has nothing to do with safety but is all to do with making money, you do realise comercial pilots are taken into the simulator just twice a year, and for some it's the only time they even come close to manual flying and even then not all emergencys are practiced, this is all about saving money for the airlines, unlike the military who get continuous training.
No........ real safety will come from properly trained pilots who are well practiced, but because humans are slightly less efficient than computers and burn slighly more fuel (seriously) the airlines discourage hand flying.

Of course its do with safety, the money side of things is pretty much what is expected when you design a system based on what a airliner requires... :!: :confused:

But aren't you seriously over generalizing a bit on the training... sure some airliners don't train nearly of often as they probably should but the "top" airlines have a good record for a reason.

[bongodriver]

Of course its do with safety, pretty much what is expected when you design a system based on what a airliner requires... :!: :confused:

But aren't you seriously over generalizing a bit on the training... sure some airliners don't train nearly of often as they probably should but the "top" airlines have a good record for a reason.

I just happen to work in the industry....what do I know

[JG52Krupi]

I just happen to work in the industry....what do I know

As do I, so what do I know... ;) :-P

[bongodriver]

As do I, so what do I know... ;) :-P

:grin: well for a start you know what a crock of **** the whole industry is, I hate it with a passion now and am changing career.......lap dancing perhaps

[JG52Krupi]

:grin: well for a start you know what a crock of **** the whole industry is, I hate it with a passion now and am changing career.......lap dancing perhaps

Unfortunately I work on the engineering side of things rather than the pilots (where I wanted/wish to be) side ;)

[bongodriver]

Unfortunately I work on the engineering side of things rather than the pilots (where I wanted/wish to be) side ;)

Lucky, they will always need engineers to reboot the bloody things, sadly if you want to sit at the front looking all important then days are numbered.

[JG52Krupi]

Lucky, they will always need engineers to reboot the bloody things, sadly if you want to sit at the front looking all important then days are numbered.

I actually had a discussion/argument with a fellow engineer in the office about this a few weeks back, he is all for the removal of a pilot while I still see it as a required position... even if the pilot is technically not doing that much.

Pilot less passenger aircraft are still a long way a way IMHO.

Luckily people are still wary of computer controlled vehicles and airliners won't want to go for something passengers are wary of, not yet at least.

[bongodriver]

I actually had a discussion/argument with a fellow engineer in the office about this a few weeks back, he is all for the removal of a pilot while I still see it as a required position... even if the pilot is technically not doing that much.

Pilot less passenger aircraft are still a long way a way IMHO.

Luckily people are still wary of computer controlled vehicles and airliners won't want to go for something passengers are wary of, not yet at least.

Don't be so sure, all they have to do is convince the public that all accidents are pilot error (growing trend) and bingo nobody will want pilots.

[David Hayward]

Future aircraft will be crewed by a pilot and a doberman. The pilot will be there in case there are problems with the automated flight systems. The dog will be there to bite him if he tries to touch anything.

[ATAG_Doc]

Shipping and trains are quickly headed that way. Google recenly created a driverless car in which a blind person sat in the drivers seat. BMW is already on top of this as well. See it in youtube.

[Sternjaeger II]

From what I have heard the latest Boeing is more towards an A320 set up than the 737.... (not sure if that's correct!)

Yes your right it was a designed by engineers but it was designed by engineers towards an airlines requirements rather than the pilots, so don't come out with the "engineers don't know this, that etc..." talk.

Its a proven concept and while I understand pilots might find an Airbus boring to fly the airlines like them and there the people who buy the aircraft ;)...

I know you're an engineer, and mine wasn't a take at the category (one of my best friend is a materials engineer for Airbus), my point was that the philosophy of Airbus is one of selling a product that meets a specific requirement: abating costs of all, pilot training as well.
Back in the days every machine had its quirks and syllabus, and getting a rating for a pilot was often a costly business: Airbus thought of a modular integration of the same systems on all their machines, with the intent of a cheaper training and an easier pilot type rating, so that an airline company can use their pilots' organic in a more cost effective manner.
There's nothing wrong in this, but they had to take certain shortcuts that are potentially very dangerous.
As I said before, the ultimate decisional power should stay with the pilot, not with the aircraft, because no matter how "smart", flight computers and their integrated systems lack of a very important thing: a complete situation awareness.


Agreed... but a mute point as several accidents have shown that if the aircraft had an "Airbus" system the accident might not have happened... unfortunately there is no fool proof system its entirely situational as to which one "Trumps" the other :-x....

The accident of the Air France Airbus is a typical example of a chain of events which is all peculiar to Airbus.

The 737 holds probably the saddest record in aviation: it's the civilian aircraft with the highest number of unexplained air accidents. A study made by the FAA in the late 90s estimated that the majority of the inexplicable accidents were in fact caused by the crew, not by the aircraft. As you know, any structural issue found on an aircraft nowadays almost immediately grounds all the same models in the whole world until a fix is found. Considering the longevity of the 737, it is safe to assume that virtually pretty much every aspect of fatigue and design flaws has been monitored and fixed, so what really makes it a dependable aircraft is its operational life.

The weak link is not the machine per se then, but the quality of training and pilots. Taking decisional power off the crew though is not the way forward.

What emerges from the black box of the Airbus flight is scary not only because of the content per se, but because it emerges that the flight computers were following a cycle of action and none of the three trained pilots were situation aware, they did not understand what was happening.

[bongodriver]

<tin foil hat on>

I am almost of the belief it's the intention to design these things to be beyond the comprehension of the pilots so they can be blamed for anything that goes wrong and therefore may be eliminated....

<tin foil hat off>

[Sternjaeger II]

<tin foil hat on>

I am almost of the belief it's the intention to design these things to be beyond the comprehension of the pilots so they can be blamed for anything that goes wrong and therefore may be eliminated....

<tin foil hat off>

lol you know what's the first procedure in case of computer malfunction on startup in an Airbus? Reboot.

Last time I've read something so sadly funny was on the Martin-Baker ejector seat instructions on the Hawk: to eject pull ejection lever, if ejection fails re-pull... well thanks for that! :rolleyes:

Nope, not a fan of modern stuff ;)

[David Hayward]

Nope, not a fan of modern stuff ;)

Like the internet? :-P

[Madfish]

The first procedure for human malfunction is often to collect leftover parts and look for the black box.

Airspace is a controlled sphere. Comparing flight to cars is futile e.g. There aren't many kids or streetracers popping up unpredictably. Most things up there happen in ballistic curves. And unless the pilot is a math genius with a quantum computer as a brain he'll be only second best in many cases.

Also there's a lot of automation going on anyways. In space travel obviously - the human margin of error is very expensive and deadly up there. But I also expect cargo flights to be automated soon.

As for passenger planes they might keep some puppets just for fun and giggles. On the other hand side it's questionable how much authority a pilot will have over his plane in 20 years or so.

Pilots are supposed to be the safety net if the machine fails - but in many cases the pilot is not capable to comprehend what's going on anyways. In fact it's doubtable that a "pilot" who's literally just a passenger 99% of the time is very helpful as his "flight exerience" is mostly just sitting there and drinking coffee.


So I'd estimate this order of automation:
Cargo planes with almost full automation: soon
Passenger flights with almost full automation: will take a while
Cars which can navigate and drive almost autonomously: will take a while



In the end it's not about if anything can happen. That's always the case. The real problem the industry faces is that they need to offer something that can be sued IF anything goes wrong. (Something other than their company)
A pilot was a good thing to have: if he messes up and survives he can be sued. And if not he's dead anyways. A computer? Not so much. The value of it's destruction is not important.

[JG52Krupi]

I know you're an engineer, and mine wasn't a take at the category (one of my best friend is a materials engineer for Airbus), my point was that the philosophy of Airbus is one of selling a product that meets a specific requirement: abating costs of all, pilot training as well.
Back in the days every machine had its quirks and syllabus, and getting a rating for a pilot was often a costly business: Airbus thought of a modular integration of the same systems on all their machines, with the intent of a cheaper training and an easier pilot type rating, so that an airline company can use their pilots' organic in a more cost effective manner.
There's nothing wrong in this, but they had to take certain shortcuts that are potentially very dangerous.
As I said before, the ultimate decisional power should stay with the pilot, not with the aircraft, because no matter how "smart", flight computers and their integrated systems lack of a very important thing: a complete situation awareness.



The accident of the Air France Airbus is a typical example of a chain of events which is all peculiar to Airbus.

The 737 holds probably the saddest record in aviation: it's the civilian aircraft with the highest number of unexplained air accidents. A study made by the FAA in the late 90s estimated that the majority of the inexplicable accidents were in fact caused by the crew, not by the aircraft. As you know, any structural issue found on an aircraft nowadays almost immediately grounds all the same models in the whole world until a fix is found. Considering the longevity of the 737, it is safe to assume that virtually pretty much every aspect of fatigue and design flaws has been monitored and fixed, so what really makes it a dependable aircraft is its operational life.

The weak link is not the machine per se then, but the quality of training and pilots. Taking decisional power off the crew though is not the way forward.

What emerges from the black box of the Airbus flight is scary not only because of the content per se, but because it emerges that the flight computers were following a cycle of action and none of the three trained pilots were situation aware, they did not understand what was happening.

+1 I agree it is shocking.

P.S.

I was under the impression that they could have survived once they eventually realized what was happening but then one of the pilot started to pull up again?

[JG52Krupi]

Pilots are supposed to be the safety net if the machine fails - but in many cases the pilot is not capable to comprehend what's going on anyways. In fact it's doubtable that a "pilot" who's literally just a passenger 99% of the time is very helpful as his "flight exerience" is mostly just sitting there and drinking coffee.

EERRR.... if it wasn't for experienced pilots a lot of recent aircraft incidents would have become major aircraft accidents FACT!


So I'd estimate this order of automation:
Cargo planes with almost full automation: soon
Passenger flights with almost full automation: will take a while
Cars which can navigate and drive almost autonomously: will take a while


Space Cargo is already automated, but its going to take a lot to convince me that we will see any of the others any time soon (Luckily).

[Madfish]

EERRR.... if it wasn't for experienced pilots a lot of recent aircraft incidents would have become major aircraft accidents FACT!It's easy to say something is a fact but sadly it's not like that.

What you're doing is like comparing the number of fires put out by firemen to those of automated systems when it's a real fact that not every area, object or building is even outfitted with automated systems to begin with.

Planes today aren't even designed to compensante for many of the incidents you speak of. Not to mention that many of these incidents would've still ended up as crashes if it hadn't been for the support through computers and modern systems or even just the improvements in design and building quality.

[bongodriver]

It's easy to say something is a fact but sadly it's not like that.

What you're doing is like comparing the number of fires put out by firemen to those of automated systems when it's a real fact that not every area, object or building is even outfitted with automated systems to begin with.

Planes today aren't even designed to compensante for many of the incidents you speak of. Not to mention that many of these incidents would've still ended up as crashes if it hadn't been for the support through computers and modern systems or even just the improvements in design and building quality.


So do you think the airbus in the Hudson would have had a happy outcome without pilots?

[JG52Uther]

Noob questions: Just how 'flyable' are modern passenger jets, given all the computerised systems?
As in, if everything went wrong, can a pilot take over and fly completely manually, or would he/she be fighting against the computer?
Have pilots become far too dependant on aircraft systems, rather than just flying?
Got to admit, I have always felt safer in a prop plane than a modern jet airliner!

[AndyJWest]

Future aircraft will be crewed by a pilot and a doberman. The pilot will be there in case there are problems with the automated flight systems. The dog will be there to bite him if he tries to touch anything.

Er, no. The pilot is there to feed the dog.

[bongodriver]

Noob questions: Just how 'flyable' are modern passenger jets, given all the computerised systems?
As in, if everything went wrong, can a pilot take over and fly completely manually, or would he/she be fighting against the computer?
Have pilots become far too dependant on aircraft systems, rather than just flying?

lets put it this way....if there were no means to provide elctricity to the systems i.e. no batteries functioning, no ram air turbine or APU then it's going to end badly, there is just no physical link to the flight controls even in a reversionary capacity, some aircraft perhaps still give elevator trim and rudder control undr those circumstances but the pilot will be earning his money.

[David Hayward]

So do you think the airbus in the Hudson would have had a happy outcome without pilots?

That depends of the programming of the flight system. In theory, the flight system should be able to quickly determine the energy status of the aircraft and whether it can get to a nearby airfield. It should be able to do that much faster than a pilot could possibly do it.

[bongodriver]

That depends of the programming of the flight system. In theory, the flight system should be able to quickly determine the energy status of the aircraft and whether it can get to a nearby airfield. It should be able to do that much faster than a pilot could possibly do it.

the point is if the computer determined it couldnt make the airfield would it have gone for the hudson?....probably not is the answer and it would have gone blue screen and said 'youre on your own.....I don't feel pain so I don't give a damn'

[SG1_Lud]

Don't worry kids, you'll find work. After all, my machine will need strong chess player-programmers. You will be the first. *-* (to Karpov & students, 1965) *-* Mikhail Botvinnik

[David Hayward]

the point is if the computer determined it couldnt make the airfield would it have gone for the hudson?....probably not is the answer and it would have gone blue screen and said 'youre on your own.....I don't feel pain so I don't give a damn'

Whether or not it landed in the Hudson would have depended on who advised the programming team. If Capt Sully was on the design team it would land in the Hudson. That's the great thing about computerized controls. You can put the most experienced pilot in the air in every cockpit.

Of course, that all falls apart if the sensors are not working. Unfortunately, human pilots don't appear to do much better when the sensors aren't working.

[Sternjaeger II]

what really surprises me is that this concept of "dual input" actually made it to production planes, what is the sense of it?! The position of your controls is the first information that gets shared between pilot and co-pilot, this is the kind of engineering solution that proves fatal in the wrong scenario :confused:

[Sternjaeger II]

Whether or not it landed in the Hudson would have depended on who advised the programming team. If Capt Sully was on the design team it would land in the Hudson. That's the great thing about computerized controls. You can put the most experienced pilot in the air in every cockpit.

Of course, that all falls apart if the sensors are not working. Unfortunately, human pilots don't appear to do much better when the sensors aren't working.

humans have something that computers don't have, sense of judgement.
A computer could be told to ditch a plane in a river, but would it take obstacles (i.e. boats) into account? Nope, we can't really rely on computers, because the process behind the decision making takes more than fast calculation.

[bongodriver]

Whether or not it landed in the Hudson would have depended on who advised the programming team. If Capt Sully was on the design team it would land in the Hudson. That's the great thing about computerized controls. You can put the most experienced pilot in the air in every cockpit.

Of course, that all falls apart if the sensors are not working. Unfortunately, human pilots don't appear to do much better when the sensors aren't working.

Well the problem there is there are no 'sensors' for that kind of thing, and there is no data available telling the computer there is a river, all the computer knows is basic nav data i.e. waypoints navaids and airports and some basic terrain data of which rivers do not feature, they are not coupled to the weather radar so cannot use the GND function of said radar, you must remember that design principles account for single engine ops, a double engine failure is considered so rare that it is practically dismissed.

and on a final note, no amount of computers will ever replace the human experience, computers and brains work too differently.

[David Hayward]

humans have something that computers don't have, sense of judgement.
A computer could be told to ditch a plane in a river, but would it take obstacles (i.e. boats) into account? Nope, we can't really rely on computers, because the process behind the decision making takes more than fast calculation.

It will take the obstacles into consideration if it has the sensors to detect them. That has nothing to do with judgement.

[bongodriver]

It will take the obstacles into consideration if it has the sensors to detect them. That has nothing to do with judgement.

they don't have the sensors you describe, remember they are all about saving costs so they aren't likely to get them either.

[David Hayward]

Well the problem there is there are no 'sensors' for that kind of thing, and there is no data available telling the computer there is a river, all the computer knows is basic nav data i.e. waypoints navaids and airports and some basic terrain data of which rivers do not feature, they are not coupled to the weather radar so cannot use the GND function of said radar, you must remember that design principles account for single engine ops, a double engine failure is considered so rare that it is practically dismissed.

I'm not talking about the current systems, I'm talking about the sort of system that would be needed to replace a human pilot. It would need better sensors to detect obstacles and terrain. It would also need a very detailed mapping system.

and on a final note, no amount of computers will ever replace the human experience, computers and brains work too differently.

That just is not true. Computers can give a single aircraft crew the combined experience of every pilot in the sky. In a situation like the Hudson crash the computer could inform the pilot immediately whether he can reach a nearby airfield. It could let him know about alternative places to land. It could do all of that much faster than any human could do it.

[David Hayward]

they don't have the sensors you describe, remember they are all about saving costs so they aren't likely to get them either.

Obviously, they would have to add them if they wanted to replace the pilot.

[bongodriver]

I'm not talking about the current systems, I'm talking about the sort of system that would be needed to replace a human pilot. It would need better sensors to detect obstacles and terrain. It would also need a very detailed mapping system..

In which case you have a point, if the need was desparate enough to eliminate the pilots then I guess they would take it into consideration


That just is not true. Computers can give a single aircraft crew the combined experience of every pilot in the sky. In a situation like the Hudson crash the computer could inform the pilot immediately whether he can reach a nearby airfield. It could let him know about alternative places to land. It could do all of that much faster than any human could do it.

Remember Jim Lovells anecdote about the bioluminescent algae helping him find his carrier, that's the experience a computer won't have.

[David Hayward]

Remember Jim Lovells anecdote about the bioluminescent algae helping him find his carrier, that's the experience a computer won't have.

It would if anyone on the design team has read "The Right Stuff".

[bongodriver]

It would if anyone on the design team has read "The Right Stuff".

Almost certainly someone on design teams since 'the right stuff' was written has read it.........where are these marvellous systems?

[David Hayward]

Almost certainly someone on design teams since 'the right stuff' was written has read it.........where are these marvellous systems?

We haven't decided that we need them, yet.

[bongodriver]

We haven't decided that we need them, yet.

Ok...so weve arrived at that point, it's time for full automation and me and you have now designed this lovely jet with front facing window seats for the really classy passengers, we have successfully eliminated the need for pilots who are so rubbish because they became over dependant on lovely systems, and we have replaced it with a shiny new computer which is also dependant on lovely systems but it doesn't need to drive a sports car and have affairs with sterwardesses, innaugural flight on the megajet 2000 and thers a 'fzzzzt' and all those lovely systems go down, now we have a computer without even a head to scratch.

[David Hayward]

Ok...so weve arrived at that point, it's time for full automation and me and you have now designed this lovely jet with front facing window seats for the really classy passengers, we have successfully eliminated the need for pilots who are so rubbish because they became over dependant on lovely systems, and we have replaced it with a shiny new computer which is also dependant on lovely systems but it doesn't need to drive a sports car and have affairs with sterwardesses, innaugural flight on the megajet 2000 and thers a 'fzzzzt' and all those lovely systems go down, now we have a computer without even a head to scratch.

All that means is we have 2 fewer dead people in the wreckage. If all the systems go down the pilot and co-pilot are just (literally) dead weight.

[bongodriver]

All that means is we have 2 fewer dead people in the wreckage. If all the systems go down the pilot and co-pilot are just (literally) dead weight.

Well if they had some form of controll you might call them the world's best paid glider pilots.

[David Hayward]

Well if they had some form of controll you might call them the world's best paid glider pilots.

You just said that all the systems are down. If the systems are down then they don't have any way to control the aircraft.

[bongodriver]

You just said that all the systems are down. If the systems are down then they don't have any way to control the aircraft.

read it again

[David Hayward]

innaugural flight on the megajet 2000 and thers a 'fzzzzt' and all those lovely systems go down

If the systems are down you don't have control of the aircraft now. How is that any different from the megajet 2000?

[bongodriver]

If the systems are down you don't have control of the aircraft now. How is that any different from the megajet 2000?

one more time

[David Hayward]

one more time

I can read it 100 more times and it won't change anything. When the systems go 'fzzzzt' everyone dies now, and they'll die in the megajet 2000.

[bongodriver]

I can read it 100 more times and it won't change anything. When the systems go 'fzzzzt' everyone dies now, and they'll die in the megajet 2000.

Ok I just went to the kitchen and explained this to a root vegetable....and it got it.

The megajet has 'no' pilots, you then took us out of the megajet and put us back into a hypothetical jet that does have pilots, therfore not the megajet, the systems I was talking about are the systems the megajet computer relied on to function...its virtual eyes and ears, systems are not controls in this case, a computer that doesn't know where it is isn't going to solve its way out of anything without the super shiny systems you and me designed to help it, a pilot with a window and a yoke and rudders is much better.

[David Hayward]

Ok I just went to the kitchen and explained this to a root vegetable....and it got it.

The megajet has 'no' pilots, you then took us out of the megajet and put us back into a hypothetical jet that does have pilots, therfore not the megajet, the systems I was talking about are the systems the megajet computer relied on to function...its virtual eyes and ears, systems are not controls in this case, a computer that doesn't know where it is isn't going to solve its way out of anything without the super shiny systems you and me designed to help it, a pilot with a window and a yoke and rudders is much better.

If a modern jet loses power everyone is dying. That is as certain in a jet with pilots as it is in the megajet 2000.

[Jumo211]

Another well known fight with Airbus computers and input responses ,
embarrassing for both , pilot and Airbus design :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QBD-OeNmz0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ILWeL3ZS6GI&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Onwn8Pj2Png&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4ygBWGFzNg&feature=relmfu

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYgPVOOZVjM&feature=relmfu

Cheers.

[bongodriver]

If a modern jet loses power everyone is dying. That is as certain in a jet with pilots as it is in the megajet 2000.

So Cpt Sully never put an airbus into the hudson?

[David Hayward]

So Cpt Sully never put an airbus into the hudson?

I'm pretty sure the APU was still functioning on that aircraft.

[BadAim]

It's no use having a battle of whits with an unarmed man, Bongo. He has no way of knowing when you've won.

[bongodriver]

I'm pretty sure the APU was still functioning on that aircraft.

So was the RAT Thank goodness, would have been a disaster if there was nothing for the pilots to controll it.

[David Hayward]

It's no use having a battle of whits with an unarmed man, Bongo. He has no way of knowing when you've won.

Colgan Air Flight 3407

I win!!!!!!!!!!!

[David Hayward]

If we ever do get rid of pilots we're not going to replace them with systems which could go 'fzzzzzt". The systems will be redundant. There will probably be a backup remote control system. And it isn't going to happen for many, many years.

[Osprey]

I have several friends who switched from Boeing or MDD to Airbus, and they all tell me the same thing: you need to change your mentality when flying one, because in fact you're not flying it, you're telling the computers your intention and they let it happen in the safest (according to their parameters) way.

IMHO there's one major design fault in the Airbus mentality: it dramatically limits the pilot's emergency decisions.

Airbus is a concept designed by engineers, and most of them don't think with a pilot's mentality.

Another issue is that many of the modern pilots don't have experience with conventional large jetliners or smaller aircraft, and consequently don't have a full grasp of unusual flight envelopes and how to recognise/deal with them.

A 737 will give you a totally different feedback when you fly it, the intention of Airbus is to cut the pilot's error off of the risk equation, but it's been demonstrated by several accidents how sometimes the cause of the accidents is because de facto the pilot is put in a secondary decisional position.

To give you an example: if your TCAS has a malfunction (or the other plane's TCAS does) and you have a visual contact that you need to avoid, the flight computers will not allow you to go beyond certain parameters in your avoiding manoeuvre. This is meant to safeguard the plane's structural integrity (which has redundant structural parameters anyways), but the computer doesn't think about the possibility of an unusual manoeuvre or going beyond the preset limits just for the sake of collision avoidance.

The whole idea of letting a machine do the thinking job that a pilot should is insane to me :confused:

Not being funny, but if your instruments are showing a very low airspeed, you have a nose up attitude but are falling like a brick then anybody who has any idea about flight would know that pulling back on the stick is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Even worse is to tell the other pilot that you've relinquished control when in fact you haven't and are still pulling back the stick all the way down into the sea. God knows what the junior pilot was thinking.

[JG52Krupi]

So was the RAT Thank goodness, would have been a disaster if there was nothing for the pilots to controll it.

Bongo you are talking to a wall of pure denial he won't ever admit he is wrong...

David....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tM-iyRAUYcs&feature=related

[bongodriver]

If we ever do get rid of pilots we're not going to replace them with systems which could go 'fzzzzzt". The systems will be redundant. There will probably be a backup remote control system. And it isn't going to happen for many, many years.


All great until the remote systems go 'fzzzt', then we just have machines and a world full of backup systems which weigh just as much as a pilots wallet.

[David Hayward]

All great until the remote systems go 'fzzzt', then we just have machines and a world full of backup systems which weigh just as much as a pilots wallet.

If everything goes 'fzzzzt' you could have a dozen pilots on board and you are still going to die.

[bongodriver]

If everything goes 'fzzzzt' you could have a dozen pilots on board and you are still going to die.

Not unless you have a system in place that allows pilots manual control, hence the reason a human 'should' be in the cockpit and the megajet consigned to this forum only.

[David Hayward]

Bongo you are talking to a wall of pure denial he won't ever admit he is wrong...


You want to talk denial. They're not all Capt Sully. Colgan Air Flight 3407

[bongodriver]

Bongo you are talking to a wall of pure denial he won't ever admit he is wrong...

David....


Yeah I should know better, tell you what David Hayward.....I will rip up and burn my pilots license right now, you are completely right, you win enjoy your victory....I'm sure it will be very sweet for you to do a victory jig wherever you are.....all alone......very very alone.

[David Hayward]

Not unless you have a system in place that allows pilots manual control, hence the reason a human 'should' be in the cockpit and the megajet consigned to this forum only.

Let's assume they eventually put together the megajet 2000. How long do you think it will take them to realize that all the pilot is doing is turning on the computer?

[David Hayward]

Yeah I should know better, tell you what David Hayward.....I will rip up and burn my pilots license right now, you are completely right, you win enjoy your victory....I'm sure it will be very sweet for you to do a victory jig wherever you are.....all alone......very very alone.

That is a very odd reaction to something that probably isn't going to happen until long after you are dead.

[bongodriver]

That is a very odd reaction to something that probably isn't going to happen until long after you are dead.

hey at the rate I smoke thats gonna be soon.....

[bongodriver]

Let's assume they eventually put together the megajet 2000. How long do you think it will take them to realize that all the pilot is doing is turning on the computer?

Don't forget we designed the megajet to not have pilots, so now nothing can go wrong.

[David Hayward]

Don't forget we designed the megajet to not have pilots, so now nothing can go wrong.

It doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be better than the average pilot.

[bongodriver]

It doesn't have to be perfect, it just has to be better than the average pilot.

Absolutely, and like you said, the pilots are dead weight and just extra meat to pick out of the wreckage.......you saved my life dude.

[5./JG27.Farber]

There is a saying, "German Generals, French Officers and British Soldiers...". This just shows the mental determination of the French officer class. - I believe him!

[David Hayward]

Absolutely, and like you said, the pilots are dead weight and just extra meat to pick out of the wreckage.......you saved my life dude.

Only if this discussion convinced you to stop smoking.

Do you think they would implement a system like this without testing in a simulator and comparing the results to human pilots?

[Sternjaeger II]

..sometimes I wonder whether David is doing some sort of university research and using this forum as his research playground :rolleyes:

david, no matter how powerful and sensor-loaded you make a computer, if it doesn't have a conscience or a human-like self awareness it won't ever perform like a real pilot.

The control of an aircraft was developed to be piloted by humans, the route that Airbus has been advocating so far is unnatural and in many ways incompatible with the human operators.

[bongodriver]

Only if this discussion convinced you to stop smoking.

Do you think they would implement a system like this without testing in a simulator and comparing the results to human pilots?


How can they, your design involves sensors that detect ships on the water, they can use a simulator all they like it just ain't the real world, I have no idea what they would do to go down that road, my guess is they will leech the tech from the military and their unmanned programmes.

[Sternjaeger II]

Not being funny, but if your instruments are showing a very low airspeed, you have a nose up attitude but are falling like a brick then anybody who has any idea about flight would know that pulling back on the stick is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Even worse is to tell the other pilot that you've relinquished control when in fact you haven't and are still pulling back the stick all the way down into the sea. God knows what the junior pilot was thinking.

For the average airline pilot the climbing/descent is controlled primarily by the throttle, not by the nose attitude. When you're used to a system that keeps your speed constant and you just input the angle of climb/descent with the joystick, you can easily forget about the common laws of physics.
The very first thing they teach you when you learn to fly is that your climb is given not necessarily by your pitch, but firstly by your throttle.
The scenario the young pilot found himself in was one where he was applying full throttle and the aircraft wasn't behaving the way he expected it to. He probably panicked and just kept on pulling on the stick because in his Airbus-trained mind that doesn't mean "keep the nose up" but "gain altitude".
That's the flaw of the system: you haven't lost control of the plane, because if you apply the right input the plane will come out of the stall, you're applying an input and expecting the plane to do something different.
Notice how the whole thing went on for several minutes, it wasn't just a fraction of a second wrong move. The guy really thought he was doing the right thing, and in a way he was, it's the whole malicious way in which Airbus aircraft can behave that is a major cause here, other than the fatal combination of ineptitude of the whole crew.

[David Hayward]

david, no matter how powerful and sensor-loaded you make a computer, if it doesn't have a conscience or a human-like self awareness it won't ever perform like a real pilot.

I would not expect it to perform like a real pilot. I would expect it to perform much, much better than a real pilot. It doesn't need a conscience or self-awareness to do that, it needs situational awareness and the ability to quickly calculate aerodynamic related equations. All you need from the pilot is to point to a spot on a map to tell the aircraft where to go.

[David Hayward]

How can they, your design involves sensors that detect ships on the water, they can use a simulator all they like it just ain't the real world, I have no idea what they would do to go down that road, my guess is they will leech the tech from the military and their unmanned programmes.

They would need terrain mapping radar. The simulator would not test that. The simulator would be used to test how the computer handled emergencies.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Just like people flying online and expecting miracles - just blaming the machine. Will and physical movement are two different things. Except he WAS trained!

[Osprey]

There is a saying, "German Generals, French Officers and British Soldiers...". This just shows the mental determination of the French officer class. - I believe him!

I don't know this saying, what does it mean? Here's a nice quote though

"The Hun is either at your throat, or at your feet" :D

[5./JG27.Farber]

To make the best army. ;)

[RedToo]

http://www.flickr.com/photos/royalairforcemuseum/

RedToo.

[danjama]

Nice, thank you. I'm sure i searched for them on there before, but found nothing. Baffling.

[Sternjaeger II]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VDs1xdWkhBI&feature=related

some of the details shown were very interesting, i.e. the canopy release system, adjustable seat and last but not least the fact that the Revi 16 could be moved out of the way!

[raaaid]

oh to make the 262 a bomber instead of a fighter

nahh i dont believe the nazis to be that stupid thats probably histroy wriiten by the winners

or were they tryully that dumb to give the 262 a bomber role?

[swiss]

Not "they" it was "him".

[Sven]

oh to make the 262 a bomber instead of a fighter

nahh i dont believe the nazis to be that stupid thats probably histroy wriiten by the winners

or were they tryully that dumb to give the 262 a bomber role?

It wasn't dumb at all, it was needed on the West-front in case on an invasion, the fast jet fighters could evade flak and fighters to strike down on the ships.
That was the plan. The me-262 appeared too late in action to achieve that, by the time they appeared in larger numbers a lot of me-262s were already in the fighter role.

Thanks for posting that video!

[swiss]

It wasn't dumb at all, it was needed on the West-front in case on an invasion, the fast jet fighters could evade flak and fighters to strike down on the ships.
That was the plan. The me-262 appeared too late in action to achieve that, by the time they appeared in larger numbers a lot of me-262s were already in the fighter role.

Thanks for posting that video!

Great plan, especially when 1000s of bombers flatten your homeland.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Gröfaz had a great vision about the Me262 for being a "Verteidigung Waffe" aka Weapon of Retaliation thus it was to be a bomber. But too late did Gröfaz approve the fighter role and so on. Nevertheless the world's first operational jet fighter.

[Sven]

Great plan, especially when 1000s of bombers flatten your homeland.

Hence Hitler changed his minds ;)

[Kongo-Otto]

Hence Hitler changed his minds ;)

You need mind to change the same! ;)

[Kongo-Otto]

oh to make the 262 a bomber instead of a fighter

nahh i dont believe the nazis to be that stupid thats probably histroy wriiten by the winners

or were they tryully that dumb to give the 262 a bomber role?

http://fc08.deviantart.net/fs71/f/2011/053/a/f/internet_trolls_by_vanisher72-d3a5cd9.jpg

[15.Span_Valalo]

great video... great plane...

[raaaid]

oh i just thought stern might be anoyed at my threads getting so many answers and his ignored so i tried to help him

does that really make me a troll or a nice guy

whos really the troll here?

[Sternjaeger II]

oh i just thought stern might be anoyed at my threads getting so many answers and his ignored so i tried to help him

does that really make me a troll or a nice guy

whos really the troll here?

lol that's the true nature Raaaid, not too different from the rest of us after all.. u r such a smarty-pants ;)

[swiss]

S!

Gröfaz had a great vision about the Me262 for being a "Verteidigung Waffe" aka Weapon of Retaliation thus it was to be a bomber. But too late did Gröfaz approve the fighter role and so on. Nevertheless the world's first operational jet fighter.

Verteidigung or Vergeltung?

[badfinger]

It wasn't dumb at all, it was needed on the West-front in case on an invasion, the fast jet fighters could evade flak and fighters to strike down on the ships.
That was the plan. The me-262 appeared too late in action to achieve that, by the time they appeared in larger numbers a lot of me-262s were already in the fighter role.

Thanks for posting that video!

I think there could have been enough 262's for both roles, if the Germans had stopped building other aircraft, such as the ME-109, HE-111, ME-163, HE-162, FW-190D (although it is my favorite) and stop working on all of those wild "1946" paper airplanes. They also needed to concentrate on getting the jet engines more reliable.

The just had too many irons in the fire.

Even then, with the P-51 escorting the bombers to Berlin and back, they couldn't have stopped the massive bombing raids.

binky9

[CadMan]

Restored Avro Anson bomber ready to fly 1

Link to engine test

http://www.stuff.co.nz/nelson-mail/news/6880557/Restored-Avro-Anson-bomber-ready-to-fly

[Sternjaeger II]

Nice! Now I'm by no means an Anson expert, but if memory serves the undercarriage rear arm was a bit beefier than that? It always struck me as resembling a steel beam, whilst this one has thing bracing?

[WTE_Galway]

Interesting, most people focus on Galland's comments about the 262 where he talks about Hitlers mistake using it as a bomber.

Galland also believed its use as a fighter could only prolong the war and cause more suffering, he did not believe it would have brought a victory to Germany.

http://www.historynet.com/interview-with-world-war-ii-luftwaffe-general-and-ace-pilot-adolf-galland.htm

Galland: I had been telling Hitler for over a year, since my first flight in an Me-262, that only Focke Wulf Fw-190 fighter production should continue in conventional aircraft, to discontinue the Me-109, which was outdated, and to focus on building a massive jet-fighter force. I was in East Prussia for a preview of the jet, which was fantastic, a totally new development. This was 1943, and I was there with Professor Willy Messerschmitt and other engineers responsible for the development. The fighter was almost ready for mass production at that time, and Hitler wanted to see a demonstration. When the 262 was brought out for his viewing at Insterburg, and I was standing there next to him, Hitler was very impressed. He asked the professor, 'Is this aircraft able to carry bombs?' Well, Messerschmitt said, 'Yes, my Führer, it can carry for sure a 250-kilogram bomb, perhaps two of them.' In typical Hitler fashion, he said 'Well, nobody thought of this! This is the Blitz (lightning) bomber I have been requesting for years. No one thought of this. I order that this 262 be used exclusively as a Blitz bomber, and you, Messerschmitt, have to make all the necessary preparations to make this feasible.' This was really the beginning of the misuse of the 262, as five bomber wings were supposed to be equipped with the jet. These bomber pilots had no fighter experience, such as combat flying or shooting, which is why so many were shot down. They could only escape by outrunning the fighters in pursuit. This was the greatest mistake surrounding the 262, and I believe the 262 could have been made operational as a fighter at least a year and a half earlier and built in large enough numbers so that it could have changed the air war. It would most certainly not have changed the final outcome of the war, for we had already lost completely, but it would have probably delayed the end, since the Normandy invasion on June 6, 1944, would probably not have taken place, at least not successfully if the 262 had been operational. I certainly think that just 300 jets flown daily by the best fighter pilots would have had a major impact on the course of the air war. This would have, of course, prolonged the war, so perhaps Hitler's misuse of this aircraft was not such a bad thing after all.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pORI8K3w0sw

[Sternjaeger II]

Good ol' Dolfo...

sometimes I wonder what these folks went through deep inside, it must have been such a hard experience going through rise and fall and still keep your chin up despite knowing you had fought for one of the cruelest, most sanguinary dictators ever.

[AndyJWest]

I think that the undercarriage may have been substantially revised over development. According to Wikipedia, the Mk I had manually operated gear "which required no less than 140 turns of the hand crank by the pilot"! Later marks had hydraulic retraction.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avro_Anson

Actually, describing the Anson as a 'bomber' is a little optimistic...

[WTE_Galway]

Ansons, Halifaxs, Stirlings, Hampdens, Whitleys ... so many bombers that saw WWII service that are forgotten these days in favor of the one or two that made it into the movies :D

[ElAurens]

Very cool.

It's one of the planes I have wanted to fly in Clod since the beginning.

I have a 1/72 scale Airfix model of one that I purchased when I was in London, ahem, 40 years ago this summer.

[Bobo]

Here's a clip of some fly-by stuff, not BoB but purty darn cool!
Crank it up to 1080 HD full screen
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtVaacHWQ1c

[ACE-OF-ACES]

I grew up just a few miles away from Chino..

As a kid I would be out feeding the horses and a P51, F4u, B25, P38, etc would fly over my house all the time.. As a kid I just figured eveyone had WWII planes flying over thier house.. I use to ride my bike over to Chino and watch the guys restore the planes. It wasnt until I was much older that I realised how lucky I was! As a mater of fact, when I decided to move in 2006, one of the biggest reasons to not move was Chino! ;) It is about the only things I miss about CA! ;)

[MB_Avro_UK]

Many thanks for posting.

NZ also is the home of Peter Jackson's WW1 aircraft creations.

He of movie fame and Dam Buster remake. And something to do with Lord of the Rings...:cool:

Has the NZ Air Force been disbanded?


Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[RickRuski]

They might as well do just that Avro, there's no fighter wing now hasn't been for a number of years since they mothballed the Skyhawks. A lot of the pilots I believe went and joined the Australian Air Force. About the only thing NZ Air Force has now is a Transport wing and maintainence unit, if the pilots want single engine flying they fly their own or pilot for someone else at air shows( apart from their red checkers display unit which I believe is also used for pilot training). Our A/F is mainly used now for transporting troops, coastal servailance, search and resque and transporting VIP's. But yes they are finally mothballing their Hewey's and getting some modern helicoptors. On the bright side we do have a couple of very good air shows, one at Wanaka and the other at Omaka (both in the South Island). Both run every 2 years, Wanaka was at Easter this year and Omaka Easter next year. Omaka is very WW1 orientated (son and I went last year and enjoyed it enough to book our accommodation again for next year) here's the web site for you to have a look at.

http://www.classicfighters.co.nz/classic-fighters-news.php

[WTE_Galway]

At one stage the running joke was that the most effective fighter force in NZ was the Alpine Fighter Collection's bevy of restored Polikarpov I-16's :D

In reality New Zealand has no aircraft carrier and no immediate local threats requiring any sort of fighter commitment.

[RickRuski]

Your'e right there Galway, but we've got a few Spitfires a hurricane,Corsair,Yak3,P51,P40's and a collection of WW1 stuff. We can still frighten the hell out of a lot of seagulls.

[WTE_Galway]

Your'e right there Galway, but we've got a few Spitfires a hurricane,Corsair,Yak3,P51,P40's and a collection of WW1 stuff. We can still frighten the hell out of a lot of seagulls.

You guys also have two flying de Havilland Vampires.

[RickRuski]

Very true, also about 4 -SE5a's , Mosquito, Fw190. By the way the Fw190 was supposed to have flown in the 2011 Omaka Classic Fighters but had trouble practice day, It took off and we thought good it will come back across the Airfield with a high speed run shortly but no. It dissapeared into the distance and was over 30min before it came back and landed. The word was that it had landing gear problem and there was a possibility that it might have to have wheels up landing. From what the rumor was is that a relay operating the landing gear solonoid was faulty and after the pilot had called for help on the issue the relay was able to be by-passed and he got the gear down and locked. That was the end of the Fw190 display for the weekend. They have everything going sweet now and are all set for Easter 2013.

Yippee I'll be there

[Richie]

I grew up just a few miles away from Chino..

As a kid I would be out feeding the horses and a P51, F4u, B25, P38, etc would fly over my house all the time.. As a kid I just figured eveyone had WWII planes flying over thier house.. I use to ride my bike over to Chino and watch the guys restore the planes. It wasnt until I was much older that I realised how lucky I was! As a mater of fact, when I decided to move in 2006, one of the biggest reasons to not move was Chino! ;) It is about the only things I miss about CA! ;)



Oh brother! I can just see my mother having a bird because I would be living down there at those hangars from the age of 5. I would be asking every day, "When ya gunna get a 109 Mr.?"

[KG26_Alpha]

Nicknamed the Tiffy in RAF slang, the Typhoon's service introduction in mid-1941 was also plagued with problems,
and for several months the aircraft faced a doubtful future.However,
in 1941 the Luftwaffe brought the formidable Focke-Wulf Fw 190 into service:
the Typhoon was the only fighter in the RAF inventory capable of catching the Fw 190 at low altitudes and, as a result,
secured a new role as a low-altitude interceptor.
Through the support of pilots such as Roland Beamont the Typhoon also established itself in roles such as night-time intruder and a long-range fighter. From late 1942
the Typhoon was equipped with bombs; from late 1943 ground attack rockets were added to the Typhoon's armoury.
Using these two weapons, the Typhoon became one of the Second World War's most successful ground-attack aircraft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qexMo-2ZLos&feature=related

Interesting documentary.

Hope you enjoy it as much as I have.

[Das Attorney]

Very interesting. Thanks for posting this up.

[checkmysix]

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i121/obergren/P-40DesertWreck.jpg

The almost perfectly preserved Kittyhawk P-40 is an aviation time capsule that has remained unseen and untouched since it came down in the Sahara in June 1942.
It is thought the pilot survived the crash and initially used his parachute for shelter before making a desperate and futile attempt to reach civilisation by walking out of the desert.
The RAF airman, believed to have been Flight Sergeant Dennis Copping, 24, was never seen again.
The single-seater fighter plane was discovered by chance by Polish oil company worker Jakub Perka exploring a remote region of the Western Desert in Egypt.
The location is about 200 miles from the nearest town.
Most of its cockpit instruments are intact and it still had it guns and ammunition before they were seized by the Egyptian military for safety reasons.
There are also signs of the makeshift camp the pilot made alongside the fuselage.
No human remains have been found but it is thought the pilot's decomposed body may lay anywhere in a 20 mile radius of the plane.
The RAF Museum at Hendon, north London, has been made aware of the discovery and plans are under way to recover the aircraft and display it in the future.
A search will also be launched in the slim hope of finding the remains of the lost airman.
The defence attache at the British embassy in Cairo is due to visit the scene in the near future in order to officially confirm its discovery and serial number.
But there are fears over what will be left of it after locals began stripping parts and instruments from the cockpit for souvenirs and scrap.
Historians are urging the British government to step in sooner rather than later and have the scene declared as a war grave so it can be protected before the plane is recovered.
Andy Saunders, a military aviation historian, said: "The aviation historical world is hugely excited about this discovery.
"This plane has been lying in the same spot where it crashed 70 years ago. It hasn't been hidden or buried in the sand, it has just sat there.
"It is a quite incredible time capsule, the aviation equivalent of Tutankhamun's Tomb. It is hundreds of miles from anywhere and there is no reason why anyone would go there."
Mr Saunders said there was evidence the Ft Sgt Copping survived the crash as there evidence he used the plane for shelter and tried to restart it.
But inevitably he would have walked to his death.
"Once he had crashed there nobody was going to come and get him," he said.
"It is more likely he tried to walk out of the desert but ended up walking to his death. It is too hideous to contemplate."
Flt Sgt Copping was the son of a dentist and came from Southend, Essex.
In 1942 he was a member of the RAF's 260 Squadron, a fighter unit based in Egypt during the North Africa campaign.
By June of that year the Allies were retreating from 'Desert Fox' Erwin Rommel and his German forces.
On June 28 Ft Sgt Copping and another airman were tasked with flying two damaged Kittyhawk P-40 planes from one British airbase in northern Egypt to another for repair.
During the short flight Ft Sgt Copping lost his bearings, went off course and was never seen again.
Ft Sgt Copping's name appears on the El Alamein war memorial. It is not thought that there are any immediate family members of his left in the UK.
Captain Paul Collins, the British defence attache to Egypt, confirmed there will be a search carried out of the area around the plane in the hope of finding his remains.
The Kittyhawk was an American manufactured plane used by the RAF in its desert campaign.[The Telegraph]

[Buchon]

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31255

[WTE_Galway]

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4309662/Crash-landed-RAF-warplane-found-in-Sahara.html

http://i.imgur.com/rF52T.jpg

[swiss]

you're kidding, right?

[Ze-Jamz]

At least it wont need sandblasting before the paint

[smurf-oly]

Just another mainstream press coverage piece... http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/11/world-war-ii-airplane-kittyhawk-p-40-sahara-crash-photos-video_n_1507828.html

[zodiac]

Here's a youtubemovie I've found with a lot of new photo's of the desert P40.

Such an interesting find, but sad to hear about it's pilot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=wQepSizX26o

[baronWastelan]

Love Missile F1-11

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NiNguu_fGd8

[F16_Neo]

With actual pilots singing too if I'm not too desinformed... :)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hh97ixM1fv8

[Skoshi Tiger]

Cheers!

Drakens are a cool looking plane!

[Richie]

If you're a Mig 21 fan as I am you'll love this. Music is perfect for the subject!!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zL6iONasIM

[TomcatViP]

nice found !

The 21 is one of my fav too

[TomcatViP]

With all those talking about perf measurement downto half a knot and arguing about how many feet wider was that type of plane turn radius, here is a wonderful document of how it really happens when all the talking is over...

http://youtu.be/mB9KvZ-Y5nM

[TomcatViP]

Another nice one if you like big sticks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3wvEzhyY9F4&feature=related

[ElAurens]

Ah yes, the "aluminum overcast".

If you have not stood next to (or rather under) one you cannot get a real grasp of the scale of that aircraft.

It is simply amazing.

[baronWastelan]

One of the very few USAF aircraft that has the piston engines are facing the right way. :)

[He111]

Please share here,

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v369/RedToo/Hampden-Office.jpg

Hampden cockpit

I want .. I want .. so BAD! .. a true fighter - bomber.

.

[TomcatViP]

High above the horizon... in the dark of space*


http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=VBnkbeGLGk4



One though to J.Adams

The best book I have read on this story is this one from Thompson, one of the test pilot of the NASA (ex-Bell) . In this book you have the detailled retranscrition of radio com during the last tragic flight of Adams. A thrilling read when his plane departed at hypersonic flight during re-entry (I am in a spin... I am in a spin) - nothing he could hve done with such primary flight ctrls

~S

*far far away from our digressions...

EDIT: good source of info online : http://history.nasa.gov/SP-60/toc.html

EDIT bis: Milton Thompson at 16min25sec here : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y1BmHsv-hs&feature=plcp

[Skoshi Tiger]

With all those talking about perf measurement downto half a knot and arguing about how many feet wider was that type of plane turn radius, here is a wonderful document of how it really happens when all the talking is over...

http://youtu.be/mB9KvZ-Y5nM

Thanks for posting that link! Really interesting commentary.

[CadMan]

Avro Anson test Flight after 10 year restore, Nelson, New Zealand


http://www.3news.co.nz/Takeoff-for-vintage-warplane/tabid/367/articleID/261769/Default.aspx

[CadMan]

A few P-40 goodies

http://nzff.org/forum/index.php?showtopic=17913

[Tavingon]

http://images.wikia.com/ruse/images/1/16/Ju52Tom2006.jpg

Isn't she lovely! I would be over the moon if she was to be announced for BOM/BFM.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Isn't she lovely!

No. Ugly. Very very ugly. ;)

[JG52Krupi]

No. Ugly. Very very ugly. ;)

Its looks like my neighbours shed, minus the swastika of course ;)

[Anders_And]

This might be old news to some, nevertheless I thought I should share...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQepSizX26o

[Toni74]

http://images.wikia.com/ruse/images/1/16/Ju52Tom2006.jpg

Isn't she lovely! I would be over the moon if she was to be announced for BOM/BFM.


At least they've started to build a model back in 2005:

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-content/ju-52_01.jpg
http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-content/ju-52_03.jpg

[zakkandrachoff]

p40 bip
http://farm2.staticflickr.com/1415/540043125_2568a6293d_b.jpg
cessna
http://www.flickr.com/photos/dimitropoulos/2729248463/sizes/l/in/photostream/

[Tavingon]

I really do think BOM will have ju52

[jf1981]

As to the reversion from "NORMAL" law to "ALTERNATE" law this is a very (imo) subtle indication. All you see is a small amber X in each corner of the attitude indicator. A better cue imo would be another voice alert like "ALTERNATE LAW" to leave you in no doubt that you are in a mode with reduced protections.

There is another subtelty as well, the elevator was in alternate while the ailerons were not, if I have correctly understood, which makes the complete mechanism understanding more complex under stressfull conditions.

[juanjo]

I saw this video on youtube by chance...i was a bit sad when I saw how it looks nowadays, this place with so much history. Perhaps they restore it one day...who nows.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOQ_rGdMNic&feature=related

[Tavingon]

Rare American fairey battle
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/bomber/fairey-battle-bomber/fairey-battle-bomber-wright-field-1942-01.png

Gunners.
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/bomber/avro-lancaster-bomber/avro-lancaster-bomber-rose-rear-turret-1944-01.png
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/bomber/avro-lancaster-bomber/avro-lancaster-bomber-fraser-nash-rear-turret-1944-01.png

Blenhiem bombadier
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/bomber/bristol-blenheim-bomber/bristol-blenheim-bomber-06.png

Vickers Warwick (1944)
http://www.wwiivehicles.com/unitedkingdom/aircraft/air-sea-rescue/vickers-warwick/vickers-warwick-transport-with-boac-1943-1944-01.jpg

[He111]

@juanjo, yes very sad, mainly because noones allowed to touch it, to fix it up, probably has huge hertiage listing timebomb attached.

@Tavington, excellent pictures, never seen that dual prop battle before.

.

[TomcatViP]

The Fulmar is awesome ! Thx Tavingon. I only hope that no one in the il2 mod community will attempt to make out of it one of those stupid Godzilla FM.


Ok here is a new fascinating video on the B29:

Part1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7PuxJMD_h4&feature=related

Part2: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WyA3GJUrSAg&feature=relmfu

Part3: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DevQYeht74U&feature=relmfu

Part4: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WUzY5AWGFzM&feature=relmfu


~S!

[badfinger]

"Rare American fairey battle"

With counter-rotating props, I might add.

binky9

[TomcatViP]

ooops Fairey... Fulmar... Watching this props rotating oposite way mix my words.

Humm but what's the engine. Coupled V12 ?

[TomcatViP]

High speed lawnmower in Argentina:

From the cockpit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDDxU5sB-SI&feature=related
View from the ground:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZxecONPNWY&feature=related

:grin:

[TomcatViP]

Hi,

for those still in interest with Aircraft Vid and able to pull out their eyes out of the visor of their favorite mount, here is the original COLOR video of the Memphis Belle story.

This footage was filmed during the doomed days of 1943 where the Mighty eight soared to its legendary status as we know it today. The film gets you aboard the Memphis Belle during a mission over Germany without fighter escort.

Enjoy the shear beauty of the Belle and the gruesome terror of the Luftwaffe's Bête (beast).

17and 24 against strays of attacking 190 and 109. All this in COLOR for REAL and during 37 min!

Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML_uUT05QT4&feature=related

[Meusli]

Hi,

for those still in interest with Aircraft Vid and able to pull out their eyes out of the visor of their favorite mount, here is the original COLOR video of the Memphis Belle story.

This footage was filmed during the doomed days of 1943 where the Mighty height soared to its legendary status as we know it today. The film gets you aboard the Memphis Belle during a mission over Germany without fighter escort.

Enjoy the shear beauty of the Belle and the gruesome terror of the Luftwaffe's Bête (beast).

17and 24 against strays of attacking 190 and 109. All this in COLOR for REAL and during 37 min!

Enjoy!]

Thank you!

[zakkandrachoff]

High speed lawnmower in Argentina:

From the cockpit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDDxU5sB-SI&feature=related
View from the ground:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ZxecONPNWY&feature=related

:grin:
nice vid.
anyway the pampa jet is not so fast. max 750kmh. (at altitud ) so, in the vid maybe 600kmh (and is a very light aircraft). I see tomcats and mirage f1 passing at match1 at the same distances of people-

[TomcatViP]

nice vid.
anyway the pampa jet is not so fast. max 750kmh. (at altitud ) so, in the vid maybe 600kmh (and is a very light aircraft). I see tomcats and mirage f1 passing at match1 at the same distances of people-

Humm you should have a close look at the HUD... ;)

[[URU]AkeR]

Hi,

for those still in interest with Aircraft Vid and able to pull out their eyes out of the visor of their favorite mount, here is the original COLOR video of the Memphis Belle story.

This footage was filmed during the doomed days of 1943 where the Mighty eight soared to its legendary status as we know it today. The film gets you aboard the Memphis Belle during a mission over Germany without fighter escort.

Enjoy the shear beauty of the Belle and the gruesome terror of the Luftwaffe's Bête (beast).

17and 24 against strays of attacking 190 and 109. All this in COLOR for REAL and during 37 min!

Enjoy!



WOW. Thank you! GRacias! piel de gallina!!!

[He111]

http://i71.photobucket.com/albums/i121/obergren/P-40DesertWreck.jpg

The almost perfectly preserved Kittyhawk P-40 is an aviation time capsule that has remained unseen and untouched since it came down in the Sahara in June 1942.
It is thought the pilot survived the crash and initially used his parachute for shelter before making a desperate and futile attempt to reach civilisation by walking out of the desert.
The RAF airman, believed to have been Flight Sergeant Dennis Copping, 24, was never seen again.
The single-seater fighter plane was discovered by chance by Polish oil company worker Jakub Perka exploring a remote region of the Western Desert in Egypt.
The location is about 200 miles from the nearest town.
Most of its cockpit instruments are intact and it still had it guns and ammunition before they were seized by the Egyptian military for safety reasons.
There are also signs of the makeshift camp the pilot made alongside the fuselage.
No human remains have been found but it is thought the pilot's decomposed body may lay anywhere in a 20 mile radius of the plane.
The RAF Museum at Hendon, north London, has been made aware of the discovery and plans are under way to recover the aircraft and display it in the future.
A search will also be launched in the slim hope of finding the remains of the lost airman.
The defence attache at the British embassy in Cairo is due to visit the scene in the near future in order to officially confirm its discovery and serial number.
But there are fears over what will be left of it after locals began stripping parts and instruments from the cockpit for souvenirs and scrap.
Historians are urging the British government to step in sooner rather than later and have the scene declared as a war grave so it can be protected before the plane is recovered.
Andy Saunders, a military aviation historian, said: "The aviation historical world is hugely excited about this discovery.
"This plane has been lying in the same spot where it crashed 70 years ago. It hasn't been hidden or buried in the sand, it has just sat there.
"It is a quite incredible time capsule, the aviation equivalent of Tutankhamun's Tomb. It is hundreds of miles from anywhere and there is no reason why anyone would go there."
Mr Saunders said there was evidence the Ft Sgt Copping survived the crash as there evidence he used the plane for shelter and tried to restart it.
But inevitably he would have walked to his death.
"Once he had crashed there nobody was going to come and get him," he said.
"It is more likely he tried to walk out of the desert but ended up walking to his death. It is too hideous to contemplate."
Flt Sgt Copping was the son of a dentist and came from Southend, Essex.
In 1942 he was a member of the RAF's 260 Squadron, a fighter unit based in Egypt during the North Africa campaign.
By June of that year the Allies were retreating from 'Desert Fox' Erwin Rommel and his German forces.
On June 28 Ft Sgt Copping and another airman were tasked with flying two damaged Kittyhawk P-40 planes from one British airbase in northern Egypt to another for repair.
During the short flight Ft Sgt Copping lost his bearings, went off course and was never seen again.
Ft Sgt Copping's name appears on the El Alamein war memorial. It is not thought that there are any immediate family members of his left in the UK.
Captain Paul Collins, the British defence attache to Egypt, confirmed there will be a search carried out of the area around the plane in the hope of finding his remains.
The Kittyhawk was an American manufactured plane used by the RAF in its desert campaign.[The Telegraph]

OMG! poor guy .. how in the hell did he get lost when flying with a wingman, if the wingman returned ok ? (I assume he and the 2nd pilot flew together)

.

[ElAurens]

This was covered when the aircraft was first discovered earlier this year.

The aircraft was flying alone on a ferry flight to a repair depot to fix it's landing gear, which were stuck in the down position. It was seen to fly off course and was never heard from or seen again till this year.

The aircraft has since been looted and vandalized by local Arabs and is probably now a total loss.

[TomcatViP]

Hi all,

Here is one the best story telling on the subject I have seen so far. Color footage, complete description of the events and mention of the sociological roots and background that led the Japan toward this extreme measure.

The only thing that I can think against it is the fact that they seemed to have choose deliberately to put aside the atrocities committed by the JA that marked a trend toward the disrespect of human life among their Generals as a way to speed up their career.

Anyway, fantastic footage and a very mature comment. You can see color archive of a flight of Betty carying Aka being intercepted by F6 Hellcat !!

part 1 :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Vzz_QUl-7Y&feature=related

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRjG9V4t1k


Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=endscreen&NR=1&v=yxss-MGLDPk


Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=P6ClLyVHF6g


Enjoy !

~S

PS: To all that keep posting their encouragements or simply thanks, please be sure that I do appreciate your encouragement even if I do not reply :)

[banned]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3sgUL4qBk8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

This may have been posted before but just in case. There's some good stuff in there.

[TomcatViP]

Here is a new one, slightly different from all the others.

The story tells us the fascinating project of the Daedalus flight in 1988, a recreation of the legendary flight across the Aegean see by man powered flight.

You can find inside good stuff about lifting theory, easily explained and the importance of modern computer sciences (Computational Fluid Dynamics - CFD) in the quest for the most efficient design.

Myth : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daedalus

Part 1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cZjHcjyLprw&feature=relmfu

Part 2:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dhlt1fsnhVE&feature=relmfu

Part 3:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kdwLB0yoGmE&feature=relmfu


Enjoy !

[brownbaby799]

An aircraft is a vehicle that is able to fly by gaining support from the air, or, in general, the atmosphere of a planet. It counters the force of gravity by using either static lift or by using the dynamic lift of an airfoil, or in a few cases the downward thrust from jet engines.

Although rockets and missiles also travel through the atmosphere, most are not considered aircraft because they do not have wings and rely on rocket thrust as the primary means of lift.

The human activity that surrounds aircraft is called aviation. Crewed aircraft are flown by an onboard pilot, but unmanned aerial vehicles may be remotely controlled or self-controlled by onboard computers. Aircraft may be classified by different criteria, such as lift type, propulsion, usage, and others.

[TomcatViP]

Hi all,

here is a new video about the how to fly and fight in the P-39.

I selected this one as there is a good share of info about tight turning an airplane, fly in formation, stall, spin, rudder use during acrobatic flight, firing pass etc...

Enjoy !

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t125_D5MoSY&feature=plcp

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hz82ZWc1ty0&feature=plcp


~S

[dlovato300]

http://www.webcam-steamate.com/cookies/44/k/blabla.gif

An aircraft is a vehicle that is able to fly by gaining support from the air, or, in general, the atmosphere of a planet. It counters the force of gravity by using either static lift or by using the dynamic lift of an airfoil, or in a few cases the downward thrust from jet engines.

Although rockets and missiles also travel through the atmosphere, most are not considered aircraft because they do not have wings and rely on rocket thrust as the primary means of lift.

The human activity that surrounds aircraft is called aviation. Crewed aircraft are flown by an onboard pilot, but unmanned aerial vehicles may be remotely controlled or self-controlled by onboard computers. Aircraft may be classified by different criteria, such as lift type, propulsion, usage, and others.

[JG52Krupi]

http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4103/5016541980_4de38260b4.jpg

We are going to have to wait two or three more years for this beauty :|

[Sokol1]

Hi all,

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SRRjG9V4t1k



What is the big explosion at 13:01 in this video?
A ammo ship?

Sokol1

[Katkatman]

What is the big explosion at 13:01 in this video?
A ammo ship?

Sokol1

listen the speaker on the video you'll get your answer

[Sokol1]

listen the speaker on the video you'll get your answer

Don't help, I don't speak English, so I am not able to hear and understand... :)

Sokol1

[GraveyardJimmy]

Don't help, I don't speak English, so I am not able to hear and understand... :)

Sokol1

The video says it was the USS John Burke, an ammunition ship. It was hit by a kamikaze and destroyed in seconds with no survivors.

[engadin]

The outstanding engineers at Meier Motors are the sort of guys many of us, of course including me, would love to visit at their hangars to let them show us what's their job about. Anyway, any of us can make an educated guess :)

109s, a 190 with a 'chromed' engine fairing, a DeHavilland Tiger Moth, a Chance Vought F4U Corsair, a Boeing Stearman, North American's Harvard IV, AT-16 Texan and P-51 Mustangs, single and double cockpit Supermarine Spitfires, Hispano Aviación HA-1112 Buchón, etc.

You'll love this place as much as I do, for sure ;) :

http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=104523&page=16

AA_Engadin

[TomcatViP]

Today I suggest to come down with an F16 pilot above the Serbian air defence hit by what appear to be a SA3 (modernized).

There is not much to see in this vid but more to ear. Please take attention to the radio chatter and the remarkable markmanship of Hammer3. Understand also the nervous tension of his wingmen with some of the voices switching to little girl tone as much depicted during WWII.

Copying and pasting two good comments, here is the resumé of the action... Enjoy !

Originaly posted by Tani:

In this video Crack 73 is a SEAD (suppression of enemy air defense) escort and Hammer flight appears to be a interdiction or BAI flight

SoA:
1:36 Crack 73 fire AGM-88 at an SA-6 bearing 100
2:05 Crack 73 detects anti-aircraft artillery radar on RWR
3:08 Enemy Radar/emitter in active mode warning
3:10 Hammer 3 detects SA-3 north
3:20 Hammer 3 taking evasive against SA-3 launch, heading 060, gets hit, probably left
3:33 Crack 3 taking evasive
3:58 Crack 3 fires an AGM-88 at the SA-3 which ambushed the package, at, bearing 154 for 24 miles
4:02 SA-3 launch on Hammer 2, Hammer one tells his wingman to brake (probably seeing the missile)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=orv8-siraJM&feature=related

[Mi7ch3a2el]

I hope that tomorrow is a good day
http://www.qmmv.info/12.jpg
http://www.qmmv.info/13.jpg
http://www.qmmv.info/14.jpg

[VO101_Tom]

TomcatVip suggested that I should post this video here too.
If anyone has not seen it:

Unusual Do-28 landing :shock: 8-) http://vimeo.com/51737114

[ElAurens]

Great video, but that tune was only interesting in the first 100,000 or so other aviation videos I've seen...

[major_setback]

TomcatVip suggested that I should post this video here too.
If anyone has not seen it:

Unusual Do-28 landing :shock: 8-) http://vimeo.com/51737114

I land like that in FB/1946 with an La7, but I didn't think it was possible in real life, nor believe that anyone would be daring enough to do it. It's a big plane too.

[ElAurens]

It's a typical BlitzPig landing.

We have done it that way for years in IL2, and now in CloD.

It's called a combat landing.

Come in hot and sometimes under fire, usually out of ammo too, dragging your foe behind you. He thinks he is going to get an easy kill.

MUHAHAHAHA!!!!

Either the flak pops him or it's a great set up for a drag and bag as the bad guy dumps a bunch of speed to try to get a hit on his "easy" target and suddenly finds himself being the trophy in the cross hairs.

[Marco37]

Not sure if this has already been posted here, a good watch for all Blenheim enthusiasts.

An episode of 'Heroes of Aviation' about the Bristol Blenheim...

Part 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g8uJmnpW9c

Part 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NzLMwmQQYoY

Part 3:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LWfGpDwKkVw

Part 4:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bkCteZ-W2s4

My apologies if this has already been posted.

~S~

[Miss Shilling's orifice]

Not sure if this has already been posted here, a good watch for all Blenheim enthusiasts.

An episode of 'Heroes of Aviation' about the Bristol Blenheim...

Part 1:


Part 2:


Part 3:


Part 4:


My apologies if this has already been posted.

~S~

Thanks for sharing. Was a good watch. I was in two minds about the flying of these restored planes (I read that this one had a second crash) until I heard the great poem at the end. Beautiful.

[TomcatViP]

Didn't hve time to watch all episodes but I ve enjoyed what I hve seen so far.

Nice to see a doc devitod to what is still relatively an unknown stry.

Thx for posting!

[Marco37]

Here is a collection of clips featuring De Havilland Mosquito KA114, recently restored by the folks at Avspecs (Warbird Restorations).

Had to post it, the mossie is one of my favorite aircraft... :-P

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wxi9qPtw2I4&t=1s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgxTD1DULKU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YEyDlgJYIF8

This last one is shot in the cockpit. I recommend you watch it on Youtube in HD full screen and the engines are awesome! :cool:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rGfQQWOsoB8&hd=1

~S~

[slm]

Drone for aircraft carrier use:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=gHtMowd8eWc

[KG26_Alpha]

Bf109's Black Six at Duxford about an hour and a half long.

Probably been seen before by a few :)

Great craftsmanship @ 6.15 made me laugh..............urghhhh..... hmmmm.........scchhlooopppp.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IbeRn1rgoIo

[Marco37]

Thanks for sharing this Alpha, I had not come across it before.

Great that the plane was allowed to 'speak' for itself - headphones on, volume up! Lovely landing at 52' 10".

~S~

[KG26_Alpha]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wDlN8zMwKJs&NR=1&feature=endscreen

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWdmNX6kjxg

[RedToo]

I land like that in FB/1946 with an La7, but I didn't think it was possible in real life, nor believe that anyone would be daring enough to do it. It's a big plane too.

Do 28 landing from the ground:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1NEOwDwapk

RedToo.

[JG52Krupi]

Do 28 landing from the ground:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1NEOwDwapk

RedToo.

Bloody hell!

[TomcatViP]

Hi all,

here is a new one to probably end the serie : the story of the F105 Thunderchief in Vietnam, the most exposed plane to NVAF and AAA in history. Dramatic footage include a double canon Mig kills in color.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KTe4lHLlcs

There is also somewhere the original footage from where many of the sequences shown in this episode of Wings were extracted (look on Youtube for USAF doc There Is a Way - F-105 Jets _ United States Air Force 1967 Educational Documentary). The original score is thrilling as is the atmosphere of the movie for those that hve read Ed Rasimus or Robin Olds memory (Ed rasimus can be seen on some sequences).

here it is :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKJ_tkYu4Uo

Enjoy !

~S!

[TomcatViP]

Another one depicting P38 in color ETO (include a rare sequence of a P61 Black widow all in ... black :rolleyes: and a B26).

Enjoy !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e64O_6XXk-M

[TomcatViP]

Same source: 354th Grp Pioneer Mustang 1945 in color.

Include several guncam with D9

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi9i6k5NBTY

[Dark_P]

I really enjoyed that Tom, Thanks for sharing :)

[TomcatViP]

In color, raw unedited footage of 25G's in the Gilbert islands

- Comment from ZenosWarbirds:

Nine 75mm cannon firing B-25Gs of the 48th Bomb Squadron, 7AAF, based on Apamama in the Gilbert Islands, conduct a hair raising tree top level strike on the Japanese air base on Mille. Also features amazingly well preserved and very rare color footage of daily life of air crew and ground personnel stationed on the islands. As a bonus, you'll watch Sea Bees using heavy equipment to transform these hard won tropical atolls into fully functioning air bases and ground crews maintaining the Mitchell's massive canons

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGjGJHrQxy8

Enjoy!

[TomcatViP]

So for years, those flying IL2 Pacific had the disgrace to land on motionliess, lifeless flatops sitting like yellow ducks in the middle of a beautifully rendered and textured nowhere (But I hve to admit that the Midways Island where the best rendered in Aviation Sim World).

But what was really like about landing on those big carriers during WWII ? Who were those yellow dogs, young men wearing red or blue outfits and the comics dressed like Batman ?

May be you would have an interested look to the video bellow (again from user ZenosWarbirds on Youtube)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bfkwjU8k6W4


Enjoy !

[KG26_Alpha]

Mossie mayhem

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLdVIKyx7RE

[Trumper]

:) FLYING MACHINES TV http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1bJmCkH7rFw

This is the FULL official film of the 2008 Flying Legends Airshow that we produced. It is presented here with no commentary so you can enjoy the sounds of the aircraft, however we may post an alternate version with the commentary on shortly. You can buy this on DVD at www.FlyingMachinesTV.co.uk. You can follow us on Twitter at https://twitter.com/flyingmachines1

[JG1_Wanderfalke]

I love you

[Trumper]

I love you
:) I love you to --but i didn't take the video LOL :)

[TomcatViP]

What about the tale of Man flight without that of the space adventure ?

Truly linked to the legendary flights of a Bleriot, a Lindberg or les aventuriers de l'aeropostale, the space flight program bear the foot print of our legendary heroes: each step still stand on the pioneering side.

Columbia was a disaster that still have much to tell on that. You might hve some interest watching this 50+ min documentary of her last flight...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhoAisKO6ZM


PS: regarding Alpha's post on the Mosquito, one of my best read on that subject was this one :

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Night-Flyer-Fighter-pilots-Brandon/dp/0907579779/ref=pd_sim_b_2

Highly recommended!

[TomcatViP]

Hi,

For those that didn't get a chance to view that classics, here it is. The footage is stunning (heroic and real), in color, with on board camera. You will see USN planes during strafing, dive bombing and also some well known guncam.

My favorite sequence might be the shooting down of a Japanese H8K by a horde of hellcats (who's talking abt Dogfights)!!

Here is the most interesting comment I hve found on this documentary:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0036823/reviews?ref_=tt_urv

It's 1hr long. So seat-back, relax and enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkOOIWIn39s

~S

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wTZjYGyl-4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Mm5Uyz4RI

[Trumper]

A couple of videos i took recently
P51,P47,Spit and Hurri at Duxford
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBphMsLQhGI


American Cemetery Madingley Cambridgeshire flypast B17,P47,Hurri,Spit,P51

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DUBLy4GKi6k

[swiss]

I didn't know this is even possible.
No trace of a missile...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2taWKPWyZEI

[Trumper]

I didn't know this is even possible.
No trace of a missile...



But you don't know what the cause of the explosion was? - not necessarily a missile.It could be leaking fuel,fumes,weapons on board the helicopter.
Saddest thing is that people died :(

Hopefully happier stuff,another video from me from Old Warden http://www.shuttleworth.org/
last weekend.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bu33RdMykA4

[Ventura]

Thanks for that link.
I've always wondered what really happened and of course, the industry (and news) finds revelations all too boring and would rather report on what Miley C. is wearing.

Now, I'm hoping that the industry 'self-corrects' to avoid this. Though apparently, current events say otherwise, unfortunately.

[Trumper]

Pre flying legends
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yZ3ykY85h4w&feature=c4-overview&list=UUDA4JvpJ5bbTvB_sc8PyQcA

[Wea0versd]

I just found this and think it looks awesomehttp://fulton.acswomen.com/01.jpghttp://fulton.acswomen.com/02.jpghttp://fulton.acswomen.com/03.jpghttp://fulton.acswomen.com/04.jpghttp://fulton.acswomen.com/05.jpg

[engadin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sTs7G9teJ-M

Listen to the engine after the first turn, a hair raising experience indeed, given the low alt the pilot is flying at. He landed it on the belly, wheels up, to minimize the damage.

No news about pilot's health, but looking at the photos, it doesn't seem he got injured as the aircraft is mostly intact. Hope his back is as new as well.

AA_Engadin

[swiss]

LOL,

looks like the typical Clod belly landing.

Btw, what made you pick engadin as your username?

[engadin]

Visited the valley some 8 years ago, loved it, learned the name, sound good to me for a nickname and here we are :)

AA_Engadin

[MB_Avro_UK]

Wooden propeller? That would help save the engine.

Best Regards,
MB_Avro

[bongodriver]

They just need to find out what porked it to cause the failure.

[Robert]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WPdMd3M0Z_E



Sweet Supermarine. I usually don't see these so it's a rare treat to me.

[TomcatViP]

One in many day of operation aboard the Lancaster.

Commented color footage of an exceptional archive. 1hr long document. Seat back and relax.

Target for today: BERLiN!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-cVw7Xb6Nk

~S & Enjoy!

[KG26_Alpha]

http://www.takeofftube.com/

[shelby]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d1a_1385299477

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VSOm0PVlioz

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0-Tp_SEFwg

[K_Freddie]

.. at the SAAF's museum does it's regular ground run.
My camera audio is not that good.. but those engines, when they synchronised, made the ground under my feet shake - what a buzz it was.. 50m from that thing at full tilt.
This is a small sample of 15 minutes or so at max...!!??
Propellerheads.. enjoy with loud speakers

https://www.dropbox.com/s/wripw7c1095l9qa/Shackleton1722.mp4(63MB)

[Tempest123]

I know we can all search youtube but I thought this was cool because its rare, a different feeling than other warbirds, enjoy the whine of the gearbox and driveshaft.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F54jcEFECck

[Treetop64]

Lol, that thing needs some lube. :P

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc7T4I6NzS0

[shelby]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=551_1412684496

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YeHrXrDRhGo

[shelby]

https://www.flickr.com/photos/farinihouseoflove/2209780521/in/set-72157603572752617

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BT5iVhyZGxA

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfvQnlYB3IE

[rakinroll]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfvQnlYB3IE

Beatiful Birds...

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73cgxdpPDwg

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MM9FkjD7CDc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJzN-uOxk34

[KG26_Alpha]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=73cgxdpPDwg

Not anymore unfortunately. :(

Date: 10-JUL-2003
Time: 1310
Type: CASA 2.111
Owner/operator: American Airpower Heritage Flying Museum
Registration: N72615
C/n / msn: T8-B-124
Fatalities: Fatalities: 2 / Occupants: 2
Other fatalities: 0
Airplane damage: Written off (damaged beyond repair)
Location: 2 miles SE of Cheyenne airport, WY. - United States of America
Phase: Approach
Nature: Ferry/positioning
Departure airport: Midland, TX (MAF)
Destination airport: Missoula, MT (MSO)
Narrative:
The airplane, a Spanish-built version of the WW2 Heinkel 111 bomber, was en route to an air show and was making a refueling stop at Cheyenne. The tower controller cleared the pilot to land.
The airplane was observed on a 3-mile straight-in final approach when it began a left turn. The controller asked the pilot what his intentions were. The pilot replied, "We just lost our left engine."
The pilot then reported that he wasn't going to make it to the airport. Witnesses observed the airplane flying "low to the ground and under-speed for [a] good 4 minutes."
The right propeller was turning, but the left propeller was not .
There was no fire or smoke coming from the left engine.
The pilot was "obviously trying to pull up.
" The airplane "dipped hard left," then struck the ground left wing first.
It slid through a chain link fence, struck a parked automobile, and collided with a school bus wash barn.
The ensuing fire destroyed the airplane, parked car, and wash barn. Disassembly and examination of both engines disclosed no anomalies that would have been causal or contributory to the accident.
According to the Airplane Flight Manual, "Maximum power will probably be required to maintain flight with one engine inoperative.
Maximum power at slow air speed may cause loss of directional control."

CAUSE: A loss of engine power for reasons undetermined, and the pilot's failure to maintain aircraft control.
Contributing factors were the unsuitable terrain on which to make a forced landing, low airspeed, the fence, automobile, and the school bus wash barn.

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ItUdTM0fhD4

www.youtube.com/watch?v=usvJNuoxiRQ

www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPK-sR5pnjQ

www.youtube.com/watch?v=H9HDXGrGclA

www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsGrEl4uEQM

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kj-xkobaRuE

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xEbFCgCVnHw

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kivI5JFZxs

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFDj97vulwg

[shelby]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hD60aJ9I9LI

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOnWmMuKfcc

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEV5i-Kw4qI

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbzoCKKCQvE

[ucanfly]

Not sure if this has been posted already since video is a couple of years old and I haven't been around for awhile. Havent seen an in cockpit video in 190 before.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4V3TlPYL8Sw

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TwNmakFMEqg

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=Chhx1slfjA0#t=30

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTLO9wOj_Bg

www.youtube.com/watch?v=j7W6ot1QBoQ

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBRVF5Io1KU

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSEy6qiGZlU

[shelby]

http://www.nmusafvirtualtour.com/full/tour-std.html

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=BNYuq67uf4E

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=QvYvy3fKcM8

[shelby]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XAPqoC3_hqA

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=JxicbKMvG3E

[KG26_Alpha]

Spitfire EP122 flew for the first time this morning.



https://www.facebook.com/BigginHillHeritageHangar/?fref=photo





.

[Xilon_x]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5SUrzIEYHA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5SUrzIEYHA[/URL]

italian to tobrouk

[Xilon_x]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R19i_Pg7MQM (www.youtube.com/watch?v=R19i_Pg7MQM)

HISTORY of REGGIANE FARM INDUSTRIES


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4lqcBbFfeQ (www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4lqcBbFfeQ)

[Xilon_x]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN2nsG_BzzA (www.youtube.com/watch?v=cN2nsG_BzzA)

FIRST FLY TEST OF REGGIANE 2001

www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuUfzybXsvw

[shelby]

http://aviacaoemfloripa.blogspot.gr/2011/01/um-p-47-naval.html

[shelby]

www.youtube.com/watch?v=At88Fcdgv0g