Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 1/9/2002 9:01:17 AM EDT
It's my understanding that airplanes are designed to fly within a certain envelope; a set of parameters. If you fly the plane out of those parameters, it may result in catastrophic damage to the airframe, correct? In the case of flight 93, assuming the passengers were able to get the pilot or co-pilot into the right-hand seat and buckled in, if the terrorist pilot placed the plane in a 90 degree dive before being subdued, could the co-pilot regain control from such a dive?
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:10:54 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2002 9:11:54 AM EDT by Aviator]
If they had enough altitude, I would say yes. You can't just pull the yoke back on a big airplane like that and expect it to respond like an F-16. You try that, and most likely you would have some kind of airframe failure. I have never flown anything like that, but I would think you need to ease something that big out of a vertical dive. that takes a lot of altitude. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:20:13 AM EDT
Thanks, the reason I ask is because every now and then I watch those PBS shows about airline disasters, and in virtually every case if the airplane gets pushed beyond its design limits, the pilots are unable to recover.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:25:16 AM EDT
I am thinking a lot of those are when the plane is flying horizontally, and you get forces that slam the airplane up or down vertically. I've been in Hueys that hit a strong updraft and we got shoved up 2,000 feet in just a couple of seconds. Scared the shit out of me. Those wings can take a lot of force. I am not sure if there is anything a pilot can do to tear the wings off, but mother nature is a whole other story. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:33:02 AM EDT
The 757(flt 93) that crashed in Pennsylania was said to exceed 500mph when it hit. The "Barber Pole" or max indicated airspeed is about 350. The markings on the indicator stop at 400. If 500 knots was the actual speed, I doubt if the airplane could have been saved, even with an experienced pilot at the controls.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:38:24 AM EDT
Ninety friggin degrees!?! [:D] From FL-two-five-oh, I'd rather have to pull out (which the plane is already starting to do by the time I read THAT chit) than try to hold the damned thing in that attitude.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:43:42 AM EDT
Originally Posted By jsragman: The 757(flt 93) that crashed in Pennsylania was said to exceed 500mph when it hit. The "Barber Pole" or max indicated airspeed is about 350. The markings on the indicator stop at 400. If 500 knots was the actual speed, I doubt if the airplane could have been saved, even with an experienced pilot at the controls.
View Quote
I don't know much about the Big Iron, but with over-engineering and safety margins built in I would think that an airframe like that could stand much more than VNE without a failure. Just my thoughts. Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:46:48 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2002 9:49:52 AM EDT by Planerench]
Usually the tail is the weak point. A wing will flex and bleed its load much like the coning of a rotor blade. It is a question of when during the dive a recovery was attempted. If early with sufficient altitude, as aviator noted, purhaps. If later, as jsragman stated, when airflow separation on the tailplane occurs no. A standard configured aircraft is designed with the center of gravity or balance point forward of the wing (center of lift). To counter the nose down force the tailplane acts downward and pitch adjustments are made by changing the "downward" lift of the tail. When the speed of sound is near the airflow around the aerodynamic surfaces can separate from the surface rendering the surface useless and recovery impossible. Drag can be induced to aid in speed reduction and recovery by deploying some flap, speed brake and landing gear. It still comes down to when is recovery initiated. Planerench out.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:48:07 AM EDT
Vne plus ten percent for certification anyway.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:54:34 AM EDT
150kias over red line is so far out of the "envelope" that any airframe failure is possible, even with an outstanding airplane like the 757.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:03:04 AM EDT
All of the photos of the crash site that I have seen indicates a straight down nose in approach. If this is true, and if the speed was actually at 500kts, then the time from FL 25,000 to the ground(assuming 1000 ft above sea level) was only 32.74 seconds. You could add a few seconds to account for the time needed to accelerate from cruise speed to terminal velocity. An adjustment of 10 seconds may be in order. Now to factor in how long it may have taken from the time the aircraft was under control to the change in attitude to a vertical dive. Lets assume another 30 seconds for this last factor. This puts our very speculative time frame at about 72.74 seconds. Not a lot of time to pull a plane out of a vertical dive at speed. The time was even shorter if you figure the time needed to regain control of the flight deck. This time line gets very short when you figure out how much altitude(time) is needed to return the aircraft to straight and level flight. I have no clue how much altitude a 757 needs to recover from a vertical dive. At terminal velocity, the aircraft was losing 733 ft. per second! I would assume that this speed was way outside the Vn speed or 'never exceed' speed for this aircraft. Do any of you Commercial A/C's have any concrete numbers regarding the altitude needed to return to level flight after a vertical dive for a 757? Also, could you tell us what the never exceed speed is for this aircraft? My suspicion is that there was no way to recover that aircraft once it had entered a vertical dive and exceeded the Vn. If this is true then the 'heros of flight 93' really rings true.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:11:36 AM EDT
The "Barber Pole" does move a bit but you can be assured the max is never over 350kias or so. I also have another question. Why hasn't the flight data recorder info been released?
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:22:17 AM EDT
There are no concrete numbers for a full verticle dive recovery. Kind of like spin recovery proceedures in the Concorde, you just don't get in those conditions on purpose. I suppose the altitude required would be similar to the recovery from an inverted dive in the space shuttle from low orbit. LOL. Once the control surfaces are blanked I don't know if full thrust reverse + gear down + airbrake + all the flap/slats available would be capable of returning airspeed to a level necessary to manuver. (I can't remember how the reversing circuit is locked out so the biggest brake on the aircraft may not be available.) Planerench out.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:51:55 AM EDT
wiggy762: ...never exceed speed is for this aircraft?
View Quote
VECTOR NEVER EXCEDE for the Boeing 757 (200 & 300 series) isn't fixed. It's marked at 513 kts (IAS), 459 kts MOS - IAS. But the Vne @10,000ft (clean) is 248kts![xx(]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:52:22 AM EDT
It was my understanding that at those speeds in a vertical dive the airflow over the control surfaces would prevent activation (compressability?)even with the hydrualic boost in an airliner. Also if a fight started outside the cockpit door and The terr at the controls started a terminal dive everyone in the dog pile would have a hard time tearing themselves off of the windscreen if they were still concious at all as well as anything in the aisle or unsecured falling to the front of the aircraft as well It would also seem that people who had this thing as well planned as they did also had a contingency plan in case things started to come apart
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 10:59:55 AM EDT
okay, now i know this is about as useful as hypothetics anyway. but, i was playing aroung in flight sim 2002 and heres what i found. in a 747 at 25000ft and 375mph the time it took from initiation of dive to the ground was thirty one seconds. right before impact, speed was registering in the high 500's and attitude was about 85degrees nearing ninety. mind you i was not manipulating anything except the flight yoke. throttle, flaps, etc remained in postition for normal level cruising at 25k. in this short of a time frame, it almost seems like i would have to start pulling back, dropping speed, lowering flaps after about the first ten to fifteen seconds to recover. ill try that and see what happens. wow its scary how fast that thing drops!
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 11:02:07 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1: VECTOR NEVER EXCEDE for the Boeing 757 (200 & 300 series) isn't fixed. It's marked at 513 kts (IAS), 459 kts MOS - IAS. But the Vne @10,000ft (clean) is 248kts![xx(]
View Quote
Thats not a 757 thing, its an FAA reg. Sort of a "speed limit" for all airdraft below 10,000' Aviator [img]www.milpubs.com/aviator.gif[/img]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 11:22:41 AM EDT
1: Where did you find the 513kias number? The airspeed indicator does have any numbers on it higher than 400.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 11:23:57 AM EDT
should have been 'does NOT have...'
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 11:55:32 AM EDT
Aviator:
1: VECTOR NEVER EXCEED for the Boeing 757 (200 & 300 series) isn't fixed. It's marked at 513 kts (IAS), 459 kts MOS - IAS. But the Vne @10,000ft (clean) is 248kts![xx(]
View Quote
Thats not a 757 thing, its an FAA reg. Sort of a "speed limit" for all airdraft below 10,000'
View Quote
I know. I posted that because someone mentioned flaps. You work on 'em, so you know how nice & neat flaps/brakes would get "cleaned off" at the kind of velocity that poor plane came in at.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 12:09:49 PM EDT
Drag is added sequentially. Gear first (the gear doors will leave immediately), airbrake second, small flap deploy 10 degrees max, maybe slight cross control, then if possible, thrust reverse (only as necessary to reduce airspeed). No matter what is done like any crash auto, boat, etc. there is a point of no return. This is all just speculation about what if anything could be done. Like spin recovery in a Concorde, your going to die if you don't do something so give it a whirl! Planerench out.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 12:20:16 PM EDT
Planerench, we're on the same page. They were dead for quite awhile.... before they were dead.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 12:33:48 PM EDT
Everybody is talking like the hijackers would just push it over into negative G and hold the nose down. Once the nose was down, and the pilot made irrelevant (cutting his throat)the airplane would immediately commence a recovery on its own. Aircraft do have inherent speed stability - Take it faster than it is trimmed for, and it will try to pull up when pressure on the controls are relaxed. Now, did the hijacker just push over or did he do something inherently more difficult to recover from? I do not know, and would be interested to hear what the manuever was. The hijackers seem to have done a bunch of thinking on this topic. I know what I would do, and I even know what would tend to happen automatically during a struggle in the cockpit. The hijacker would step on a rudder and deflect the yoke to that side. The airplane would roll inverted while accelerating into a descent. Then, controls released, it would commence the second half of a loop, probably hitting ground before completion. This does fit the near vertical impact. To recover, the passengers would had to have pulled a hijacker from his seat, and gotten a pilot into the seat. The pilot would have to execute an aerobatic manuever to level flight, either pulling the throttles to idle and finishing the loop or roll back to right side up. With the airplane in very unusual attitudes, getting the new man in the seat in time would have been tough... Imagine fighting and then extracting a man from the seat with the floor rotated around to the 10:30 position... Based upon the cell phone conversations to loved ones, I suspect that they knew it was a lost cause at the outset, but heroically decided that their airplane was NOT going to be used as a missile too. No honor is high enough for those brave folks...
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 12:37:23 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2002 12:47:00 PM EDT by DarkHelmet]
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 1:00:17 PM EDT
Listen up guys! I fly this airplane for a living. The max indicated aispeed is approximaely 350 knots. This is at sea level. The Mach number at 350kias at 10k ft(the legal altitude at which we can exceed 250kias) is about .60. As we climb, the indicated redline starts to drop and the Mach number starts to rise, for any given indicated. The best a 757 will do is about .84M at ANY altitude or indicated airspeed, period. A 757 will redline at about 350kias at any altitude, period!
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 1:28:00 PM EDT
it is impossible to say.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 6:27:38 PM EDT
From my Boeing 757-200/300 CFM (company flight manual) Vmo=350kts@ seal level pressure altitude Mmo=.860m up to certified altitude of FL420 Flaps 1'=240kts (FL200 max) No offense to anyone, but flying the real deal aint like MicroSoft 2001 or whatever. I don't know what altitude this whole thing started at, but it doesn't take very long for things to get out of hand. We do unusual attitude upset recoveries every year in the sim. It's not uncommon to loose a good 6000-8000' of altitude depending on the scenerio given. These idiots were flying on autopilot and using the FMC/MCDU (flight management computer) to guide this thing as they had no real flying skills per-se. I would imagine that the autopilot was either tripped off by force or disconnected somewhere along the line. The 757 has a very sophisticated autothrottle/flight director system that limits the speed to what is set in a "window" on the glareshield panel or MCDU. The aircraft would reach the selected speed then the throttles would retard to keep that speed.....even in a dive......to a certain extent of course. The chances of anyone without an aviation background being able to recover is slim to none. My vote is with the guy who said the horizontal stab failed followed by the upward failure of the wings. Anyway it happened....Godspeed...Rest Their Souls. Jim ATP B757-200/300
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 6:32:19 PM EDT
Originally Posted By jsragman: Listen up guys! I fly this airplane for a living. The max indicated aispeed is approximaely 350 knots. This is at sea level. The Mach number at 350kias at 10k ft(the legal altitude at which we can exceed 250kias) is about .60. As we climb, the indicated redline starts to drop and the Mach number starts to rise, for any given indicated. The best a 757 will do is about .84M at ANY altitude or indicated airspeed, period. A 757 will redline at about 350kias at any altitude, period!
View Quote
Who you drive for buddy??? Me....TZ B757..."It's like a mistress....Long legs, Big jugs, and expensive to maintain."
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 6:59:02 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2002 7:00:01 PM EDT by Winston_Wolf]
Originally Posted By 1:
wiggy762: ...never exceed speed is for this aircraft?
View Quote
VECTOR NEVER EXCEDE for the Boeing 757 (200 & 300 series) isn't fixed. It's marked at 513 kts (IAS), 459 kts MOS - IAS. But the Vne @10,000ft (clean) is 248kts![xx(]
View Quote
... Simply a constructive correction, VNE is defines the aircrafts [b]velocity never to exceed[/b]. Not vector. Sure can learn a lot from this bunch. It amazes me how many aviators we have on board. ... I love it!
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 7:12:46 PM EDT
Originally Posted By Winston_Wolf:
Originally Posted By 1:
wiggy762: ...never exceed speed is for this aircraft?
View Quote
VECTOR NEVER EXCEDE for the Boeing 757 (200 & 300 series) isn't fixed. It's marked at 513 kts (IAS), 459 kts MOS - IAS. But the Vne @10,000ft (clean) is 248kts![xx(]
View Quote
... Simply a constructive correction, VNE is defines the aircrafts [b]velocity never to exceed[/b]. Not vector. Sure can learn a lot from this bunch. It amazes me how many aviators we have on board. ... I love it!
View Quote
I caught that also. Going back to my airframe mechanic days I would imagine the controls would fail to respond before the airframe failed.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 8:41:37 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/9/2002 8:43:13 PM EDT by Benjamin0001]
The procedure would be to throttle the engines back to idle and loose some airspeed while trying to get out of the dive, assumming no yaw or roll has entered into the equation. I would say there was probably no one at the controls in this aircraft. But you could only pull up at a certain velocity as you can stall a plane while in a dive as well as when climbing, you can also power on stall, etc. All that is needed is to make the angle of attack greater then the wing can handle so that there is no real airflow across the control surfaces. A 757 probably handles like a FAT BIG in a dive, and if you are loosing 1000 fps (which is small for a jet) of altitude but your plane is comming out of the dive at only 5 degrees per second then you ass is grass if you are anywhere less then 20,000 feet. If you have to correct yaw and pitch it only makes matters worse. And for people who have never flown before there is no chance in hell. If you could throttle back and get the airspeed down to say 200 kias I don't know but I would try at that point some amount of thrust reversal (which would probably tear the wings off at that speed) and if I had time and was about 45 degrees or less comming up to the horizon I would also let the flaps down to full. It a somewhat knowledgable OPINION. EDITED TO ADD: OPINION but if I was flying we would all still be dead. Benjamin
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 9:51:59 PM EDT
The 757 in a 90 degree dive is terminal. For those that would add drag,flaps, the aircraft has a flap load limit system, the flaps would never come out. The aircraft design limit is 2.5 g with struct failure at 5g. the terminal velocity no thrust is about 600kts. At this speed things would start to break up, and the amount of altitude required to recover from this angle with out exceeding 5 g was not available. When the wing starts to flex and the fusalage starts to twist and nothing is in line any more and your have 500+ kts airspeed the thing is going to come unglued very quickly. And it aint going to be pretty.
Link Posted: 1/9/2002 11:02:12 PM EDT
When I was teaching the 747-400, I used to show my students a tape on the China Airline flight that dropped from FL410 to (I believe) 9000 feet due when one engine ended up taking all of the pneumatic load (at least that was the way it was explained to me). The result was a nose down attitude with a roll...yea, a roll in a 747. I don't remember the total lapse time, but I want to say it was in the neighborhood of 90-120 seconds total. The airplane lost 32-36 feet of horizontal stabilizer, the outboard elevators, and I believe there was extensive APU damage. I did see the pics of the damage. If I remember correctly, the airplane pulled something like 5 G's. As far as untrained passengers pulling an overspeeded aircraft out of a dive...I am not sure they would understand just how gentle you would have to be to keep from pulling the airframe apart. This 747 airframe was impressive...in fact, I was told it was put back into service. - Anarki
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 9:04:41 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/10/2002 9:12:10 AM EDT by gunnutt]
Like was said before...THINGS HAPPEN VERY FAST. Normal decent rate at idle is about 1800-2200fpm. It's SLIGHTLY higher with the speed brakes out. This is a very slippery, efficient airplane. It does not loose energy like older types. When we do R/D (rapid decompression) and "high dive" drills in the sim, the VSI is pegged at 6000fpm with throttles idle, speedbrakes out, and airspeed of Vmo/Mmo -10kts. Like I said, stuff happens too fast. In addition, unless you take out the bank before you raise the pitch, you GREATLY increase the load factor on the a/c. (remember....bank before you yank!) Some one mentioned 2.5g's as a design limit. This is correct. Nothing is guaranteed beyond that. Add to the fact that the OVERSPEED SIREN ( a very loud, annoying high/low tone) was blasting in the cockpit, they were fighting the "g" forces imposed at the time, not to mention the sheer pandimonium that must have been going on in what is really a pretty small cockpit...... God Bless them for what they did, but they didn't stand a chance. Oh, BTW a roll done correctly is a 1g manuver....just ask Tex Johnson! (someone will know what I mean!!!) BTW/BTW....There is a link I have buried somewhere entitled "36 Seconds". It's about the Kennedy crash a couple years back. They took an similar time private pilots into a sim and gave them the same conditions. "36 Seconds" was the average time from onset of vertigo to impact.
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 9:41:40 AM EDT
gunnut: I drive for US. Just before I checked out on the 75, I rode the jumpseat on one to PIT. I asked the Capt what it was like to fly it. He said "Son, it's like f-ing Miss America"! Pretty much sums it up! Also, almost everyone I work either hunts or shoots.
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 10:11:59 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/12/2002 11:18:20 PM EDT by 1]
Winston_Wolf: VNE is defines the aircrafts [b]velocity never to exceed[/b]. Not vector. It amazes me how many aviators we have on board. ... I love it!
View Quote
So,,, what's your point? I think everyone knows what the V literally stands for, it's a given. FWIW, vne [b][u]IS[/b][/u] a vector. -- [:\]
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 10:29:57 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gunnutt: Oh, BTW a roll done correctly is a 1g manuver....just ask Tex Johnson! (someone will know what I mean!!!)
View Quote
Wasn't this the guy who rolled a 747 during development, just to see if he could? Was politely told, "Please don't do that again." [:D]
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 10:31:37 AM EDT
Originally Posted By gunnutt: Oh, BTW a roll done correctly is a 1g manuver....just ask Tex Johnson! (someone will know what I mean!!!)
View Quote
Isn't he the Boeing test pilot that did a roll in the 747 during project development?
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 10:34:52 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/10/2002 10:37:15 AM EDT by cnatra]
Originally Posted By gunnutt: B757..."It's like a mistress....Long legs, Big jugs, and expensive to maintain."
View Quote
You seen the new 757/300 series. It's stretched, looks like an MD80 on steroids. I think it may actually (finally) be classified as a Heavy. I know the wing profile on the 200 series has caused wake turbulance issues for years yet the gross take off weight wasn't up there with the other heavy jets. (300,000+ lbs. right?)
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 12:06:01 PM EDT
Originally Posted By cnatra:
Originally Posted By gunnutt: Oh, BTW a roll done correctly is a 1g manuver....just ask Tex Johnson! (someone will know what I mean!!!)
View Quote
Isn't he the Boeing test pilot that did a roll in the 747 during project development?
View Quote
Almost, but it was the famous flying testbed for the 707, not the 747. This aircraft was known as 'dash 80' and IIRC was tested to failure never entering service.
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 12:23:41 PM EDT
Yesssirrr wiggy, the 707! He was definitely one of the giants! He went to the boat races, & rolled the $16 million dollar prototype 367-80 (Dash 80) 200 feet off the deck in 1955,,, then immediately did it again! Boeing! They didn't call 'em 707s (707-120) yet. His achievements are too many to list (In 1952 he rode the first B-52 - rolled that one too!).
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 5:58:19 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 1/10/2002 6:01:44 PM EDT by gunnutt]
Originally Posted By cnatra:
Originally Posted By gunnutt: B757..."It's like a mistress....Long legs, Big jugs, and expensive to maintain."
View Quote
You seen the new 757/300 series. It's stretched, looks like an MD80 on steroids. I think it may actually (finally) be classified as a Heavy. I know the wing profile on the 200 series has caused wake turbulance issues for years yet the gross take off weight wasn't up there with the other heavy jets. (300,000+ lbs. right?)
View Quote
cnatra, ...not only seem 'em, but my company was the North American launch customer. We have 6 in service now with more on the way. The MGTOW is 270,000lbs. A "heavy" is been re-classified to include anything above 255,000. Since our 757-200's are equipped for ETOPS (Extended Range Operations...ie; oceanic) ours tip the scale at 255,500. They just squeak in. The 757 has proven to have a vicious wake, however, so that 500lbs really don't mean squat. The -300 is a different animal though. Don't try to get above FL350 in it.....it just poops out. The -200 is JUST GETTING WARMED UP at FL350. It's kinda hard on the girls in the back galley too. I had one call up front one day during some "moderate chop" and say "were holding on for dear life back here....what the f@&k are you tryin' to do to us????? [:)] Jim edited because they told me math and/or grammar was not a prerequisite to push metal
Link Posted: 1/10/2002 6:06:56 PM EDT
Originally Posted By jsragman: gunnut: I drive for US. Just before I checked out on the 75, I rode the jumpseat on one to PIT. I asked the Capt what it was like to fly it. He said "Son, it's like f-ing Miss America"! Pretty much sums it up! Also, almost everyone I work either hunts or shoots.
View Quote
BWWWAAAAHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!! You see, this makes total sense, because on my type ride, the APD told me..."You're not gonna' be judged on you're flyin' skills tonight....just how fast you can move your fingers." Oh, it's all so clear now. Hey BTW, can I adopt that one? Jim
Link Posted: 1/11/2002 1:20:34 AM EDT
Originally Posted By 1: Yesssirrr wiggy, the 707! He was definitely one of the giants! He went to the boat races, & rolled the $16 million dollar prototype 367-80 (Dash 80) 200 feet off the deck in 1955
View Quote
Sounds like you may have read Tex's book too 1. The part I liked was when the Boeing CEO (maybe the president) calls him into his office after the roll over the boat race...CEO is real annoyed with Tex...not because he did the roll, but because he didn't take the CEO with him. Apparently, Tex sold a lot of "707's" with that roll right there at the race where a bunch of the airline execs had been invited for the day. - Anarki
Link Posted: 1/11/2002 6:28:22 AM EDT
Just another useless story... A couple years back I was part of a Company evaluation team looking at Airbus vs. Boeing. I had the HONOR of doing some flying out of the Boeing Test Center. The halls/walls of that place are practically living history. Pictures of people and aircraft dating back to the 1930's. I was in awe. I'm looking at a pic of our eval team and the Boeing 737 Chief Test Pilot right now. That one hangs on MY wall!
Top Top