User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 9/12/2010 7:05:23 PM EDT
[#1]
It almost seems alive to me
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/12/2010 7:11:19 PM EDT
[#2]
I can verify that the crosswinds in Keflavik can be quite challenging.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 6:49:08 AM EDT
[#3]
man every time I see a 787 I crack up at how much flex there are in the wings, almost looks like they are gonna start flapping like a bird, LOL.
Looks like (an I am no pilot) that they were able to straighten out of the "crab" before even touching down. Other crosswind vids I have seen the rear gear come down and then they correct prior to the nose touching down. Is this a "function" of the plane (desgined to be better in crosswind) or just the way the wind was blowing (less right at the runway surface)? J- |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 7:10:32 AM EDT
[#4]
Cool vid. Man, those wings have some serious dihedral (or however you spell it)! I only wish Boeing would have kept their classic cockpit style windows for this jet. Other than the cockpit windows, it sure is a sexy jet!
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 7:19:01 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
Cool vid. Man, those wings have some serious dihedral (or however you spell it)! I only wish Boeing would have kept their classic cockpit style windows for this jet. Other than the cockpit windows, it sure is a sexy jet! Sexy? That's like saying a new Greyhound bus is sexy. It reminds me of the iPad parody, showing an increasingly larger and larger iPad. "Look the new 707, 727,737,747,757,767,777,787 ... I get it. They really have no new ideas, nothing dramatically different in teh pipeline, no blended wings, no lifting bodies, no monolithic airframes, just another digit, and better fuel economy. I am sure it is a technical breakthough in many ways, but it is a scaled up design from 50 years ago. Imagine if the 'new F-15' was a larger, and more flexible P-51. TRG |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 9:05:28 AM EDT
[#6]
What caught my eye was the nav lights... Looks like LED's - not a rotating beacon or strobe to be seen anywhere...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 11:24:22 AM EDT
[#7]
I'm no pilot, but to my eye, that is one beautiful airplane.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 12:39:16 PM EDT
[#8]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Cool vid. Man, those wings have some serious dihedral (or however you spell it)! I only wish Boeing would have kept their classic cockpit style windows for this jet. Other than the cockpit windows, it sure is a sexy jet! Sexy? That's like saying a new Greyhound bus is sexy. It reminds me of the iPad parody, showing an increasingly larger and larger iPad. "Look the new 707, 727,737,747,757,767,777,787 ... I get it. They really have no new ideas, nothing dramatically different in teh pipeline, no blended wings, no lifting bodies, no monolithic airframes, just another digit, and better fuel economy. I am sure it is a technical breakthough in many ways, but it is a scaled up design from 50 years ago. Imagine if the 'new F-15' was a larger, and more flexible P-51. TRG You're mostly correct TRG, there are no significant jumps in airplane technology that are visible to the naked eye anymore. It's all refinement for efficiency in the airline world. You want to see cool, game changing ideas, go to Oshkosh and check out experimental aircraft. That plane is sexy as hell in my eyes. Every generation gets smoother, more organic. Your blended wing stuff will come to airlines when it's profitable to do so. J |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 4:37:30 PM EDT
[#9]
Quoted:
What caught my eye was the nav lights... Looks like LED's - not a rotating beacon or strobe to be seen anywhere... They are probably LED Nav lights on the wings. I could've sworn I noticed at least lower beacon during one of the takeoff shots. The C-17 has a very bright and crisp red beacon or strobe, I'd bet its LED as well (I've seen a few at night passing by me). I also saw one on the ramp last year and it looked to me like their landing or taxi lights may be LED but I'm not certain on that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 4:41:16 PM EDT
[#10]
I love it
 . its better than anything those airbus frog fucks have ever made
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 6:48:42 PM EDT
[#11]
Better than the Scarebus at Oshkosh last year.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 6:55:38 PM EDT
[#12]
My wife's cousin is on that plane during those tests! They were in Mojave a few weeks ago.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 8:10:34 PM EDT
[#13]
Quoted: Quoted: What caught my eye was the nav lights... Looks like LED's - not a rotating beacon or strobe to be seen anywhere... They are probably LED Nav lights on the wings. I could've sworn I noticed at least lower beacon during one of the takeoff shots. The C-17 has a very bright and crisp red beacon or strobe, I'd bet its LED as well (I've seen a few at night passing by me). I also saw one on the ramp last year and it looked to me like their landing or taxi lights may be LED but I'm not certain on that. Probably the last rotating anti-collision light to used in regular service......... Wait for it.......  As far as advances go, everything is under the skin. Basically it's going to boil down to who can make it lighter and more fuel efficient. I seriously doubt there will ever be another commercial SST or blended wing aircraft. Everyone has pretty much turned their backs on that train of thought. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 8:52:10 PM EDT
[#14]
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/13/2010 9:04:51 PM EDT
[#15]
Quoted:
I can verify that the crosswinds in Keflavik can be quite challenging. Big +1. Worst I ever saw however were in Stavangar, Norway. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 12:57:07 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
man every time I see a 787 I crack up at how much flex there are in the wings, almost looks like they are gonna start flapping like a bird, LOL. J- You mean, like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQI3AWpTWhM |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 6:10:26 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
As far as advances go, everything is under the skin. Basically it's going to boil down to who can make it lighter and more fuel efficient. I seriously doubt there will ever be another commercial SST or blended wing aircraft. Everyone has pretty much turned their backs on that train of thought. I just have a hard time believing that 60+ years ago the 'best' design for an airliner was discovered. 1950's design. http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/aircraft-1950-1959.asp TRG |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 7:14:46 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Who woulda thunk Delta would be flying DC-9s again? Looks like a -50 series. Not noted for quiet takeoffs.
Quoted:
Quoted:
What caught my eye was the nav lights... Looks like LED's - not a rotating beacon or strobe to be seen anywhere... They are probably LED Nav lights on the wings. I could've sworn I noticed at least lower beacon during one of the takeoff shots. The C-17 has a very bright and crisp red beacon or strobe, I'd bet its LED as well (I've seen a few at night passing by me). I also saw one on the ramp last year and it looked to me like their landing or taxi lights may be LED but I'm not certain on that. Probably the last rotating anti-collision light to used in regular service......... Wait for it....... http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/2/2/6/1762622.jpg As far as advances go, everything is under the skin. Basically it's going to boil down to who can make it lighter and more fuel efficient. I seriously doubt there will ever be another commercial SST or blended wing aircraft. Everyone has pretty much turned their backs on that train of thought. BTW....Delta is now flying to ARFCOM's favorite place........wait for it....... Monrovia Liberia!! That's right. Vacation in scenic Monrovia! |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 7:16:40 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
As far as advances go, everything is under the skin. Basically it's going to boil down to who can make it lighter and more fuel efficient. I seriously doubt there will ever be another commercial SST or blended wing aircraft. Everyone has pretty much turned their backs on that train of thought. I just have a hard time believing that 60+ years ago the 'best' design for an airliner was discovered. 1950's design. http://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/aircraft-1950-1959.asp TRG Why? Every one of the potential breakthroughs has some serious issues. Like everything in aviation, aircraft design is a tradeoff between the regalatory, human and engineering requirements. BWBs or SSTs just have too many hurdles to overcome, and don't promise savings or efficiencies to justify their adoption. Furthermore, in a deregulated environment, the payback for investment is shorter than it was 50 years ago, when you engineer ROI for the airlines into the fee structure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 7:17:41 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Who woulda thunk Delta would be flying DC-9s again? Looks like a -50 series. Not noted for quiet takeoffs.
Quoted:
Quoted:
What caught my eye was the nav lights... Looks like LED's - not a rotating beacon or strobe to be seen anywhere... They are probably LED Nav lights on the wings. I could've sworn I noticed at least lower beacon during one of the takeoff shots. The C-17 has a very bright and crisp red beacon or strobe, I'd bet its LED as well (I've seen a few at night passing by me). I also saw one on the ramp last year and it looked to me like their landing or taxi lights may be LED but I'm not certain on that. Probably the last rotating anti-collision light to used in regular service......... Wait for it....... http://cdn-www.airliners.net/aviation-photos/photos/2/2/6/1762622.jpg As far as advances go, everything is under the skin. Basically it's going to boil down to who can make it lighter and more fuel efficient. I seriously doubt there will ever be another commercial SST or blended wing aircraft. Everyone has pretty much turned their backs on that train of thought. BTW....Delta is now flying to ARFCOM's favorite place........wait for it....... Monrovia Liberia!! That's right. Vacation in scenic Monrovia! At least the US can have one international airline. The good news is we have one. The bad news is that we're where we started in 1940. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 10:33:57 AM EDT
[#21]
Quoted: BTW....Delta is now flying to ARFCOM's favorite place........wait for it....... Monrovia Liberia!! That's right. Vacation in scenic Monrovia! Yep that's a -50. All the -30's are supposed to be retired by now, and the -40's will be by the end of March '11. As far as the BWB design goes, well you won't see one from Boeing or Airbus. It'll take another Howard Hughes or Jack Northrop to see a BWB design enter service. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 10:54:28 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted:
Quoted:
BTW....Delta is now flying to ARFCOM's favorite place........wait for it....... Monrovia Liberia!! That's right. Vacation in scenic Monrovia! Yep that's a -50. All the -30's are supposed to be retired by now, and the -40's will be by the end of March '11. As far as the BWB design goes, well you won't see one from Boeing or Airbus. It'll take another Howard Hughes or Jack Northrop to see a BWB design enter service. And human factors people figuring out how to evac one in 90 seconds, and how to keep people from puking everytime it turns (most people are not dive bomber pilots) and engineers to figure out how to board one efficiently at the existing gates. BWB have promise as trashhaulers, bombers and airborne refuelers. As pax airplanes, they've got a ways to go. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 10:57:10 AM EDT
[#23]
Quoted: man every time I see a 787 I crack up at how much flex there are in the wings, almost looks like they are gonna start flapping like a bird, LOL. Looks like (an I am no pilot) that they were able to straighten out of the "crab" before even touching down. Other crosswind vids I have seen the rear gear come down and then they correct prior to the nose touching down. Is this a "function" of the plane (desgined to be better in crosswind) or just the way the wind was blowing (less right at the runway surface)? J- I was always taught to dump the crab just before touchdown, and land both main gear at the same time.... Of course, that's Cessnas, not airliners.... |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 11:25:19 AM EDT
[#24]
Dave_A
I was always taught to dump the crab just before touchdown, and land both main gear at the same time.... Of course, that's Cessnas, not airliners.... Different procedures for swept winged airplanes and planes with engines mounted on pylons underwings. There isn't as much margin for landing with a wing low in a swept wing aircraft due to possibility of wintip strike or engine pylon strike. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 11:46:10 AM EDT
[#25]
Quoted:
787 Crosswind Landing Test Apparently tests run this past week. Nothing particularly dramatic. Looks like they kick the airplane around just before touchdown to line up with the runway C/L. Both mains appear to hit the ground at the same time. Contrast the 787 video with similar tests for the 777 and 747 where they appear to leave the airplane in full crab during touchdown. Sorry for the audio 777 and 747 crosswind landing They no speka engrish! LOL Thanks for the vids, there is definately a difference in the cross wind landings between the 777/747 and the 787. J- |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 1:51:33 PM EDT
[#26]
Is it just me or in the 777 vids does the gear actually articulate to more effectively line up with the runway?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 1:53:29 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted: Contrast the 787 video with similar tests for the 777 and 747 where they appear to leave the airplane in full crab during touchdown. Sorry for the audio 777 and 747 crosswind landing Aye yai aaaye |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 2:44:26 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Is it just me or in the 777 vids does the gear actually articulate to more effectively line up with the runway? The 777 uses a six-wheel truck for each MLG. The gear positions itself so that the aft two wheels on each truck hit the ground first. That's evidendt from the pictures. The rotational motion of the truck on the MLG beam serves to help cushion the landing. I "believe" that the aft two wheels on each truck are allowed castor a few degrees to cut down on tire scrubbing during on-the-ground turns. I don't think the aft two wheels are "steerable". For sure (I think) the entire truck is not steerable. The few degrees of castoring on the aft two wheels could alleviate landing gear loads a bit during a cross-wind landing. I could be completely FOS on this, but believe I read it somewhere. Note that the 787 uses a four-wheel truck on each MLG. The B-52 was/is the only aircraft I now of that permits the MLG to be positioned independently of the A/C direction of flight to ease the trauma of a cross-wind landing. There weren't that many runways capable of handling a loaded B-52 "back in the days" and any feature to make cross wind landings easier was welcomed. I belileve the steerable main landing gear was formally classified "Secret" when the airplane was introduced. |
|
|
|
Posted: 9/14/2010 2:45:01 PM EDT
[#29]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Contrast the 787 video with similar tests for the 777 and 747 where they appear to leave the airplane in full crab during touchdown. Sorry for the audio 777 and 747 crosswind landing Aye yai aaaye If I had looked out the window and saw the runway drifting past at 45 degrees... that is about the sound of my scream. Except more piercing, and with 'little girl' overtones. TRG |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
