| Airbus | 37% | 37% - 89 | ||||
| Boeing | 62% | 62% - 146 | ||||
| Total: 235 | ||||||
Hehehe mind telling us the name of this byplane im normally up in C152's they can do quite some acrobatics before falling apart hehehe. I have however flown a PC-12 that airplane is great and quite a luxury for a prop aircraft. Which field are you based out of im primarily outta Jandakot (YPJT). Sorry if I mis understood your intentions but it is amazing how much I normally have to go into the defence of my own country because of racial slurs (other forums) and even though I was not born in this great country of Australia I learned English so I could persue my dream of being a pilot. What I am bad at in English I cover up with my skill of flying (ok im not going to boast lets just say my passion for flying is so great 90% of the time im awake im doing something on aircraft whether it is reading this thread or virtually flying or flying in real life.blisteringsilence wrote:
By the way, I fly a Waco biplane. Open cockpit. Candy apple red with yellow pinstriping. I even have a leather helmet for it.
We got a radio for it two years ago. I'll be honest, it took some of the fun away.
Differential thrust ain't gunna do shit for you if your damn vertical stab is blown off........differential thrust certainly would not have saved that A300 in NYC even if they had altitude.spray_and_pray wrote:
I am aware of that but the 747 did'nt do it they maybe had stuff against them such as mountains... Are you aware of the program set up after the crash of the 747 which was supposed to be an autopilot for differntial thrust where the aircraft could do all flying operations without control surfaces then land at -300 fpm (kinda on the rough side but still good) its all good until -400/-500 fpm when you break your landing gear.lowing wrote:
Hats off to the pilots for ther flying skill. Any airplane, however, can use differential thrust when the engines are mounted on the wings it is phsyics, not because it was an airbus, besides a DC-10 did it first.spray_and_pray wrote:
22 November 2003: European Air Transport OO-DLL, operating on behalf of DHL, was hit by an SA-7 'Grail' missile after take-off from Baghdad International Airport. The aeroplane rapidly lost all hydraulic pressure and thus controls. The crew found that after extending the landing gear to create more drag, they could pilot the plane using differences in engine thrust and managed to land the plane with minimal further damage. The plane was later repaired and offered for sale
EDIT: Amazing what composite materials can do aye?
It probably could the elevator and the tail fin are only for turning etc they produce little to no lift. You can see WW2 pictures where an aircraft has had its tail blow off and has still got home. Heck there was even an F15 which lost half a wing and landed by using differential thrust. As long as the flaps and the wings still operated the pilot could have at least attempted to keep going and might have made it. But no such thing has happend in modern days where a A300 was caught in jet wake and lost its vert stab and attempted to use differential thrust. Its one of the things we will probably never know.lowing wrote:
Differential thrust ain't gunna do shit for you if your damn vertical stab is blown off........differential thrust certainly would not have saved that A300 in NYC even if they had altitude.spray_and_pray wrote:
I am aware of that but the 747 did'nt do it they maybe had stuff against them such as mountains... Are you aware of the program set up after the crash of the 747 which was supposed to be an autopilot for differntial thrust where the aircraft could do all flying operations without control surfaces then land at -300 fpm (kinda on the rough side but still good) its all good until -400/-500 fpm when you break your landing gear.lowing wrote:
Hats off to the pilots for ther flying skill. Any airplane, however, can use differential thrust when the engines are mounted on the wings it is phsyics, not because it was an airbus, besides a DC-10 did it first.
Last edited by beerface702 (2006-12-12 06:48:55)
lol....I am not getting heated over seats. You keep saying the Airbus seats are more comfortable, I am just trying to correct your misunderstanding.spray_and_pray wrote:
Which aircraft was it and didnt you see my post hinting sarchasm i guess not people on this forum get heated about seats way too much .usmarine2007 wrote:
Wrong. We purchased a plane from Virgin, took out their seats and put it our own, from our choice of vendor. Not new covers, new seats.spray_and_pray wrote:
Course it does all aircraft have default seats the airlines just put on covers and change the positioning for classes hehehe airbus seats the ones which are best for your ass (sounds like a good add campaign). And i will stick by the fact that the A340 is one of the most comfortable jetliners available it has been said by a large quantity of people and i wont even argue about it. As well as the fact the aircraft is a money cow on international flights.
What A380's? Where are they?Bernadictus wrote:
A380 > BOEING.
I think some people are just natural conspiracists even though there was probably 1 person on here who wasn't what he claimed I beleive everyone else is speaking truth its not that hard to become a pilot at all these days or an engineer. Everyone who has claimed to be something has proven their knowledge at least from what we have discussed... And im sure 50% of the people responding to this thread havent claimed being involved in aviation its more closer to 10% which I would find normal for a topic like this as AvsB is occasionally a large argument in the aviation industry and it means a lot. I say talk to some of us who you are accusing of lying through pm's it will take you less then a few seconds to figure it out and you already should have when someone came on saying he knew more about aviation then anyone else. He posted a link and within half an hour of checking it out I debunked everything without barely even needing to do an internet search except for in the case of the Airbus caught in jet wake.beerface702 wrote:
Boeing.
ok so when did 50% of the people responding to this thread out of the blue become pilots, mechanics, share holders in airline stock, CEO's of airline companies???!lol
i think some people are way into FS, and just imagine these exoctic lives on here
I assume you are being funny right?Bernadictus wrote:
Boeings have the tendency to crash into buildings (9-11 / Bijlmer Amsterdam etc.. etc..)
Hate to burst your bubble, but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust. Also, differential thrust is hardly effective, especially for sustainable aircraft control, when your engines are right next to each other instead of on opposite sides of the aircraft such as the wing mounted.spray_and_pray wrote:
It probably could the elevator and the tail fin are only for turning etc they produce little to no lift. You can see WW2 pictures where an aircraft has had its tail blow off and has still got home. Heck there was even an F15 which lost half a wing and landed by using differential thrust. As long as the flaps and the wings still operated the pilot could have at least attempted to keep going and might have made it. But no such thing has happend in modern days where a A300 was caught in jet wake and lost its vert stab and attempted to use differential thrust. Its one of the things we will probably never know.lowing wrote:
Differential thrust ain't Guenna do shit for you if your damn vertical stab is blown off........differential thrust certainly would not have saved that A300 in NYC even if they had altitude.spray_and_pray wrote:
I am aware of that but the 747 did'nt do it they maybe had stuff against them such as mountains... Are you aware of the program set up after the crash of the 747 which was supposed to be an autopilot for differential thrust where the aircraft could do all flying operations without control surfaces then land at -300 fpm (kinda on the rough side but still good) its all good until -400/-500 fpm when you break your landing gear.
All jets have a verticle stab whats your point? Take note to the other aircraft the A300 which landed using differential thrust. I dont know if you are tired and just wrote a lotta jibberish bring the old lowing back. BTW an A310 has its 1 engine on each wing... Were you thinking of a fokker 70 by any chance? If you somehow got mixed up the vertical stabilizer is also known as a the tail to the aircraft for those who dont know it and is on the back section of the aircraft called the (empennage) and it normally houses a rudder which controls yaw. The horizontal stabilizer is the elevators (the things on a right angle onto the tail) and they control up and down pitch. Without hydraulics control cables such as in the A300 shot at by an AA missle all these components of the aircraft become obsolete. This leaves the wings which house the ailerons which control roll the wing is made in a special shape called an airfoil this type of wing generates lift when it has enough speed. The ailerons wouldn't work but the engine would and the wings would still create lift more lift at higher speeds. This is what you will basically learn in 10 weeks of year 8 or 9 aviation (i think havent been to high for a while) This is not trying to explain it to you lowing im sure you know about it but its for anyone else. The pilot could have recovered the aircraft but why didnt he?lowing wrote:
Hate to burst your bubble, but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust. Also, differential thrust is hardly effective, especially for sustainable aircraft control, when your engines are right next to each other instead of on opposite sides of the aircraft such as the wing mounted.spray_and_pray wrote:
It probably could the elevator and the tail fin are only for turning etc they produce little to no lift. You can see WW2 pictures where an aircraft has had its tail blow off and has still got home. Heck there was even an F15 which lost half a wing and landed by using differential thrust. As long as the flaps and the wings still operated the pilot could have at least attempted to keep going and might have made it. But no such thing has happend in modern days where a A300 was caught in jet wake and lost its vert stab and attempted to use differential thrust. Its one of the things we will probably never know.lowing wrote:
Differential thrust ain't Guenna do shit for you if your damn vertical stab is blown off........differential thrust certainly would not have saved that A300 in NYC even if they had altitude.
Thrust differential I am sorry to say is not the be all and end all to all aircraft emergencies. You put wayyyyyyyyy too much stock in its effectiveness. Lets not forget, ya still need to land the damn thing not just fly up right.
My comment on the engine position was based on your comment of the F-15.spray_and_pray wrote:
All jets have a verticle stab whats your point? Take note to the other aircraft the A300 which landed using differential thrust. I dont know if you are tired and just wrote a lotta jibberish bring the old lowing back. BTW an A310 has its 1 engine on each wing... Were you thinking of a fokker 70 by any chance? If you somehow got mixed up the vertical stabilizer is also known as a the tail to the aircraft for those who dont know it and is on the back section of the aircraft called the (empennage) and it normally houses a rudder which controls yaw. The horizontal stabilizer is the elevators (the things on a right angle onto the tail) and they control up and down pitch. Without hydraulics control cables such as in the A300 shot at by an AA missle all these components of the aircraft become obsolete. This leaves the wings which house the ailerons which control roll the wing is made in a special shape called an airfoil this type of wing generates lift when it has enough speed. The ailerons wouldn't work but the engine would and the wings would still create lift more lift at higher speeds. This is what you will basically learn in 10 weeks of year 8 or 9 aviation (i think havent been to high for a while) This is not trying to explain it to you lowing im sure you know about it but its for anyone else. The pilot could have recovered the aircraft but why didnt he?lowing wrote:
Hate to burst your bubble, but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust. Also, differential thrust is hardly effective, especially for sustainable aircraft control, when your engines are right next to each other instead of on opposite sides of the aircraft such as the wing mounted.spray_and_pray wrote:
It probably could the elevator and the tail fin are only for turning etc they produce little to no lift. You can see WW2 pictures where an aircraft has had its tail blow off and has still got home. Heck there was even an F15 which lost half a wing and landed by using differential thrust. As long as the flaps and the wings still operated the pilot could have at least attempted to keep going and might have made it. But no such thing has happend in modern days where a A300 was caught in jet wake and lost its vert stab and attempted to use differential thrust. Its one of the things we will probably never know.
Thrust differential I am sorry to say is not the be all and end all to all aircraft emergencies. You put wayyyyyyyyy too much stock in its effectiveness. Lets not forget, ya still need to land the damn thing not just fly up right.
The B2 and the F117 are both flying wings hardly commercial airliners the V-Tail bonanza is basically a one of a kind aircraft which has a Vertical stab/Horizontal stab joined together they operate together and oposite each other depending on what command you give them. Read my post high up above if you dont know what a C152 is its a cessna 152 "Aerobat" its a non pressurised aircraft and im a flght instructor. Im pretty sure that puts my knowledge of flight above yours and that will also put me to knowing what an aircraft can do. You can fly an aircraft without an elevator or rudder yes its true both componenets are only for moving the aircraft position on an axis and nothing else. If you have a flight simulator or anything load it up. I dont recomend FS2004 but IL2 if possible that models the stall characteristics the best and take lets say a La-5fn now you wont be able to yaw the aircraft but you will be able to pitch it by just using your engines and flaps dont touch the stick you will see that the aircraft can fly even get your tail shot off (it might take a while or get someone to disable your rudder and elevators and you will see you can still fly the aircraft just using thrust. Now id extend my invitation to you to come down to Perth if you would pay for it and id show you exactly how effectively you can fly an aircraft without the use of elevators or rudder. You attack my credibility after you said " but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust." This is wrong and as in jet the jetliner category comes in here you also named a V tailed beech bonanza a jet aircraft and named 2 extremely rare aircraft. Now other then V tailed aircraft and Flying wings all others have vertical stabs and all jetliners have vert stabs. You are saying that every single jetliner in the world cant fly using differential thrust. Like i said before id take my own knowledge of actually flying aircraft over yours of just fixing them up over flight dynamics.lowing wrote:
My comment on the engine position was based on your comment of the F-15.spray_and_pray wrote:
All jets have a verticle stab whats your point? Take note to the other aircraft the A300 which landed using differential thrust. I dont know if you are tired and just wrote a lotta jibberish bring the old lowing back. BTW an A310 has its 1 engine on each wing... Were you thinking of a fokker 70 by any chance? If you somehow got mixed up the vertical stabilizer is also known as a the tail to the aircraft for those who dont know it and is on the back section of the aircraft called the (empennage) and it normally houses a rudder which controls yaw. The horizontal stabilizer is the elevators (the things on a right angle onto the tail) and they control up and down pitch. Without hydraulics control cables such as in the A300 shot at by an AA missle all these components of the aircraft become obsolete. This leaves the wings which house the ailerons which control roll the wing is made in a special shape called an airfoil this type of wing generates lift when it has enough speed. The ailerons wouldn't work but the engine would and the wings would still create lift more lift at higher speeds. This is what you will basically learn in 10 weeks of year 8 or 9 aviation (i think havent been to high for a while) This is not trying to explain it to you lowing im sure you know about it but its for anyone else. The pilot could have recovered the aircraft but why didnt he?lowing wrote:
Hate to burst your bubble, but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust. Also, differential thrust is hardly effective, especially for sustainable aircraft control, when your engines are right next to each other instead of on opposite sides of the aircraft such as the wing mounted.
Thrust differential I am sorry to say is not the be all and end all to all aircraft emergencies. You put wayyyyyyyyy too much stock in its effectiveness. Lets not forget, ya still need to land the damn thing not just fly up right.
I dunno what you fly, but from your posts I am positive it isn't for an airline, and not pressurized aircraft.
I am also convinced that you are probably a private pilot at the most, and your life isn't in aviation, but merely a hobby, with your profession something totally different from aviation or airplanes. I however live and breathe this shit for my livelihood, and I am telling you, you ain't gunna fly an airliner with your empennage blown off, be it Airbus, Boeing, or anyone else. and no, not all aircraft have verticle stabs., you look at a B-2 lately, or an f-117 or a v-tail bananza?
Last edited by spray_and_pray (2006-12-12 20:18:46)
Last edited by spray_and_pray (2006-12-12 21:08:54)
My flight instructor also delivered pizzas to make ends meat. What else do you do? What is your primary job?. How old are you and how many hours do you have in a 152 ? When did you get your license? I know you are not making a living as a flight instructor,( unless you still live at home, or have a wife that makes a shit load of money) just merely building hours. My guess is you are probably college age, just got your pilots license in the past few years and are now instructing on the side to build hours so you can go make 18,000 a year starting, flying for a commuter. I can also tell you think flying a 152 makes you an expert on airliners. Flying a 152 makes you an expert on nothing. Being a CFI on 152's makes you an expert on NOTHING related to commercial airliners. Hell you do not even operate under the same FAR's let alone know anything about the aircraft's construction.spray_and_pray wrote:
The B2 and the F117 are both flying wings hardly commercial airliners the V-Tail bonanza is basically a one of a kind aircraft which has a Vertical stab/Horizontal stab joined together they operate together and opposite each other depending on what command you give them. Read my post high up above if you dont know what a C152 is its a cessna 152 "Aerobat" its a non pressurised aircraft and im a flght instructor. Im pretty sure that puts my knowledge of flight above yours and that will also put me to knowing what an aircraft can do. You can fly an aircraft without an elevator or rudder yes its true both componenets are only for moving the aircraft position on an axis and nothing else. If you have a flight simulator or anything load it up. I dont recomend FS2004 but IL2 if possible that models the stall characteristics the best and take lets say a La-5fn now you wont be able to yaw the aircraft but you will be able to pitch it by just using your engines and flaps dont touch the stick you will see that the aircraft can fly even get your tail shot off (it might take a while or get someone to disable your rudder and elevators and you will see you can still fly the aircraft just using thrust. Now id extend my invitation to you to come down to Perth if you would pay for it and id show you exactly how effectively you can fly an aircraft without the use of elevators or rudder. You attack my credibility after you said " but a jet designed with a vertical stab will not maintain control, with or with differential thrust." This is wrong and as in jet the jetliner category comes in here you also named a V tailed beech bonanza a jet aircraft and named 2 extremely rare aircraft. Now other then V tailed aircraft and Flying wings all others have vertical stabs and all jetliners have vert stabs. You are saying that every single jetliner in the world cant fly using differential thrust. Like i said before id take my own knowledge of actually flying aircraft over yours of just fixing them up over flight dynamics.lowing wrote:
My comment on the engine position was based on your comment of the F-15.spray_and_pray wrote:
All jets have a vertical stab whats your point? Take note to the other aircraft the A300 which landed using differential thrust. I dont know if you are tired and just wrote a lotta jibberish bring the old lowing back. BTW an A310 has its 1 engine on each wing... Were you thinking of a fokker 70 by any chance? If you somehow got mixed up the vertical stabilizer is also known as a the tail to the aircraft for those who dont know it and is on the back section of the aircraft called the (empennage) and it normally houses a rudder which controls yaw. The horizontal stabilizer is the elevators (the things on a right angle onto the tail) and they control up and down pitch. Without hydraulics control cables such as in the A300 shot at by an AA missle all these components of the aircraft become obsolete. This leaves the wings which house the ailerons which control roll the wing is made in a special shape called an airfoil this type of wing generates lift when it has enough speed. The ailerons wouldn't work but the engine would and the wings would still create lift more lift at higher speeds. This is what you will basically learn in 10 weeks of year 8 or 9 aviation (i think havent been to high for a while) This is not trying to explain it to you lowing im sure you know about it but its for anyone else. The pilot could have recovered the aircraft but why didnt he?
I dunno what you fly, but from your posts I am positive it isn't for an airline, and not pressurized aircraft.
I am also convinced that you are probably a private pilot at the most, and your life isn't in aviation, but merely a hobby, with your profession something totally different from aviation or airplanes. I however live and breathe this shit for my livelihood, and I am telling you, you ain't gunna fly an airliner with your empennage blown off, be it Airbus, Boeing, or anyone else. and no, not all aircraft have vertical stabs., you look at a B-2 lately, or an f-117 or a v-tail bananza?
Oh and being a flight instructor id find that quite a major job for me so my life is based around aviation maybe you want to try proving points and being contructive instead of attempting to attack my credibility which i have already proven.
Last edited by lowing (2006-12-12 22:11:35)
and how many times did you do it with your fuckin vertical stab missing?spray_and_pray wrote:
I have performed a climb cruise and landing by just using flaps and thrust takeoff however shouldnt be attempted. I am trying to get it as realistic as what those pilots would have faced so i stop using all controls after a few seconds 10 or so after takeoff. I can then maintain altitude climb and land. However i have only had 1 succesful gear landing and have managed 2 belly landings. I got no work today so im going to be here for a very long time. Want me to make a video sure its a simulator but it will probably help you understand that it is possible quite easily me not even being a commercial large airline pilot and i can still do it. However for another peice of information with my flight hours i can easily pick up to flying commercial turbo props.
Ahh but dont take me for saying if it works in the sim it works in RL flight sims and RL is very different and its caused two airliners to collide before i think it was a KLM 747 and a Pan Am 747 the captain was the role model pilot (Chief Pilot) and he ignored ATC in his haste to get off the ground and hit another A/C on the runway.
Last edited by lowing (2006-12-12 22:12:15)
Fuck the vert stab means jack shit come down to Perth we will rip the tail of the 152 off just so you can see that it will still fly have you ever researched aviation history where B17's B29s etc have come in missing tails or almost the whole entire empennage and have managed to land you will get differential thrust off a 727 not as much but it will be effective the only thing is missing a tail on the 727 means you are fucked the tail holds 1 of the 3 engines the other 2 are located where the horizontal stab would be on a conventional tail aircraft but the 727 is a T tail. You think 5 years of highschool teaches me how cessna 152's operate only you are very wrong from about year 10 you learn military aircraft identification and more then ever how a turbofan engine works. You seem to ignore the facts i have posted before. Ive got more virtual time in heavies then real time in the 152 and have used a REAL simulator before so i have the knowledge on how a REAL jetliner works. Are you one of those mechanics that chuck pissy fits at pilots because they earn more and it seems like more of a credible job to have? Yeah id about think so. Do you even know what a vertical stab is and does? As for weight difference aircraft are very light for their size since the vert stab is on the back of the aircraft and in the middle it will make litlle to none weight difference. So lets see im going to fly an airplane 2 metres off the ground to rip off the tail then recover it so i can prove to you they can fly without a tail. Game on i had fun controlling the aircraft with an engine only this should be more fun. And i dont know if you suffer from memory loss or you are just lazy but i posted about me a page back if you want more details pm me.lowing wrote:
and how many times did you do it with your fuckin vertical stab missing?spray_and_pray wrote:
I have performed a climb cruise and landing by just using flaps and thrust takeoff however shouldnt be attempted. I am trying to get it as realistic as what those pilots would have faced so i stop using all controls after a few seconds 10 or so after takeoff. I can then maintain altitude climb and land. However i have only had 1 succesful gear landing and have managed 2 belly landings. I got no work today so im going to be here for a very long time. Want me to make a video sure its a simulator but it will probably help you understand that it is possible quite easily me not even being a commercial large airline pilot and i can still do it. However for another peice of information with my flight hours i can easily pick up to flying commercial turbo props.
Ahh but dont take me for saying if it works in the sim it works in RL flight sims and RL is very different and its caused two airliners to collide before i think it was a KLM 747 and a Pan Am 747 the captain was the role model pilot (Chief Pilot) and he ignored ATC in his haste to get off the ground and hit another A/C on the runway.
Boeing.. simply because it is not from Europe (GB exempted... love you guys)[pt] KEIOS wrote:
airbus is european / better than boeing
NOPE...surgeon_bond wrote:
Airbus is actually English, parts manufactured in england/germany/italy/france but assembled in france.ghettoperson wrote:
Boeing. Airbus are French. 'Nuff said.
Last edited by agwood (2006-12-13 00:25:40)
Most of the BBJ series are made in europe "gasp"agwood wrote:
Boeing.. simply because it is not from Europe (GB exempted... love you guys)[pt] KEIOS wrote:
airbus is european / better than boeing
i think there is a Boeing division in Canada, and that almost makes me puke, but what you gonna do??
Ag