The Airplane Thread

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

You can't make this stuff up! Germany actually had a proposed ramjet interceptor plane that was powered by COAL and could potentially go supersonic!

Lippisch P.13a

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lippisch_P.13a

Allied engineers went to Germany at the end of the war in 1945 to investigate advanced German concepts. The delta wing studies by Alexander Lippisch were a particular area of interest.

Douglas Aircraft developed a modified delta Navy fighter without horizontal stabilizers in the late 1940s. Propulsion was to be by a Westinghouse J40 turbojet with afterburner. The prototypes were designated as XF4D-1s and first flew in 1951. There were plenty of stability problems to be worked out and only in 1953 did the Navy get its hands on the airplane.

In 1953, the XF4D was used to set world speed records at low altitude over 3 km (753 mph) and 100 km courses -- the first time a carrier-capable airplane had done so. The record was short-lived, though, as the North American YF-100A broke the F4D's record just 3 months later.

With all that wing area, the F4D was an obvious choice for record-setting climb as well and a modified production F4D-1 set a number of climb records in 1958. As with the speed records, those were soon broken by other aircraft.

Westinghouse's aircraft engine division was in trouble, though. There were several aircraft relying on J40 power and the J40 engine turned out to be a failure. Fortunately for Douglas they selected the Air Force's excellent Pratt & Whitney J57 as a substitute. 419 J57-powered F4D-1s were delivered to the Navy and Marine Corps.

Carrier suitability in the low-speed environment was not an F4D strong suit. The internal fuel capacity was also minimal, so range and endurance were limited. The F4D almost always carried a pair of external fuel tanks to compensate. But the climb rate was very high, making the F4D an excellent interceptor.

The F4D-1 was radar-equipped and equipped an all-weather fighter squadron on several carriers from the mid-1950s. Marine squadrons were designated VMF(AW).

The last operational F-6A (former F4D-1) squadron retired their aircraft in January 1964. The F-6As hung on for a few more years in reserve units and in the Navy's Test Pilot School, where it served as an example of what not to do.

Douglas tried again with the tailless delta. The F5D-1 flew in 1956 and featured a much thinner wing and greatly increased fuel. Using the same J57 engine, top speed increased from just under Mach 1 to Mach 1.4 plus. But by 1956, the competition between the McDonnell F4H-1 and the Vought F8U-3 was starting, and those aircraft promised much better performance. Four F5D-1 prototypes were turned over to NACA (soon to be NASA) and flew for test until retirement in 1970. The F5D never got a weapons system and never saw an aircraft carrier deck.

[flybigjet]

Interesting thing happened today:

I got a message from Dispatch directing me to immediately descend from FL360 to FL310 or below due to an "S4 Radiation Storm" when flying MIA-DEN.

It went out to everybody from what we could see-- the FO and I watched the migration of jets downward on SkyPath. I looked it up on WSI PilotBrief-- an S4 event can increase radiation at altitude tens or hundreds of times what you get on the ground.

I'm pretty sure that if we'd stayed high, we could have cooked S'mores on the glare shield. Time to start wearing a dosimeter, I guess! ��

R.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

Interesting thing happened today:

I got a message from Dispatch directing me to immediately descend from FL360 to FL310 or below due to an "S4 Radiation Storm" when flying MIA-DEN.

There is a G4 (major) solar storm going on tonight, and the northern lights may be visible as far south as Alabama. It is claimed to be the strongest one in 20 years.....

[spazzyfry123]

Long night. I’m a bit of a light sleeper. Good as the “protector” of the household. Bad as a human that requires sleep. I digress.

I was abruptly woken up at about midnight to the sound of Robert Duvall flying overhead searching for the next best surf spot. Searched through flight details and found the culprit: a heli registered to the DOJ that was seemingly about 150 feet over my tree line based on the altitude listed. Directly over my house cruising at about 140 mph. Christ.

We’ve got a small, local airport just down the road that’s used pretty much exclusively for the hobbyist. So it’s not atypical to see a dude site seeing in his Cessna or the occasional plane doing some kind of aerobatics. We’re certainly not in a flight path, but I’ve never had anything remotely that low fly overhead. Is that even remotely typical?

EDIT: Further digging shows that it was a Huey. No wonder I thought it was Apocalypse Now...

[spazzyfry123]

Originally Posted by spazzyfry123

Long night. I’m a bit of a light sleeper. Good as the “protector” of the household. Bad as a human that requires sleep. I digress.

I was abruptly woken up at about midnight to the sound of Robert Duvall flying overhead searching for the next best surf spot. Searched through flight details and found the culprit: a heli registered to the DOJ that was seemingly about 150 feet over my tree line based on the altitude listed. Directly over my house cruising at about 140 mph. Christ.

We’ve got a small, local airport just down the road that’s used pretty much exclusively for the hobbyist. So it’s not atypical to see a dude site seeing in his Cessna or the occasional plane doing some kind of aerobatics. We’re certainly not in a flight path, but I’ve never had anything remotely that low fly overhead. Is that even remotely typical?

EDIT: Further digging shows that it was a Huey. No wonder I thought it was Apocalypse Now...

And now further digging, it turns out the heli that flew over last night was one in the same as the one that delivered Maduro to New York - N813FK

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by spazzyfry123

Long night. I’m a bit of a light sleeper. Good as the “protector” of the household. Bad as a human that requires sleep. I digress.

I was abruptly woken up at about midnight to the sound of Robert Duvall flying overhead searching for the next best surf spot. Searched through flight details and found the culprit: a heli registered to the DOJ that was seemingly about 150 feet over my tree line based on the altitude listed. Directly over my house cruising at about 140 mph. Christ.

We’ve got a small, local airport just down the road that’s used pretty much exclusively for the hobbyist. So it’s not atypical to see a dude site seeing in his Cessna or the occasional plane doing some kind of aerobatics. We’re certainly not in a flight path, but I’ve never had anything remotely that low fly overhead. Is that even remotely typical?

EDIT: Further digging shows that it was a Huey. No wonder I thought it was Apocalypse Now...

During Desert Storm we got a 0430 wake-up almost every morning from a C5 taking-off from the old Norton AFB. Couldn't have been more than 1500' AGL when it went past our house.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by ezaircon4jc

During Desert Storm we got a 0430 wake-up almost every morning from a C5 taking-off from the old Norton AFB. Couldn't have been more than 1500' AGL when it went past our house.

My "alarm clock" during my senior year in high school in 1965 was an EC-121 Super Constellation that took off from the air station in the Philippines where we lived to go survey the weather in the Gulf of Tonkin. Our house was right next to the taxiway, and it would putter by with four big radial engines idling and brakes squeaking every morning at something like 5:30 AM. My signal to get up and get ready for school.

[flybigjet]

Cleared for the Cat-III Approach......

[Llarry]

The U.S. NASA has three WB-57F high-altitude research aircraft in their inventory. Unfortunately, one of them suffered damage in a belly landing today (Jan 27th) in Houston, Texas. Hopefully it can be repaired and fly again.

[flybigjet]

NTSB investigation details about the civil RJ and helicopter at DCA are out.....

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...CA25MA108.aspx

[vreihen16]

I have a question. A few months ago, I watched a YouTube video about a questionable small regional airline captain who was bounced between different aircraft types. Each time he had to change to a different plane, his scheduling seniority rank went back to zero on that new type after he completed certification.

With UPS making the decision to permanently ground their entire MD-80 fleet (27 planes) and replace them with new-purchase 767's, what happens to those flight crews when they are reassigned? Do they all start back at the bottom of the scheduling seniority ladder if they go through training for the new 767's? I didn't dig any deeper to see if UPS was also grounding their newer tri-motors, but also wonder if they lose scheduling seniority if they qualify on one of the newer MD jets?

FedEx has still not decided what they are going to do with their grounded MD-80's.

Are all of these flight crews grounded right now, or are they working on qualifying (or already flying) newer planes already?????

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

NTSB investigation details about the civil RJ and helicopter at DCA are out.....

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/...CA25MA108.aspx

An unsustainable airport arrival rate, increasing traffic volume with a changing fleet mix, and airline scheduling practices at DCA, which regularly strained the DCA ATCT workforce and degraded safety over time;

This made me chuckle a bit. When I first got to LAX our mix was everything from slow twin & single engine unpressurized, reciprocating aircraft (E110, C208) to normal jet aircraft; like the DC8 that takes forever to slow down. Our AAR (airport arrival rate) at LAX was 68, plus/minus 10% (it was never minus), when the WX was IFR (ceiling less than 1000' or 3 miles visibility) and 84 when the WX was VFR ("good") on 4 parallel runways. We regularly exceeded both rates. We did an 84 rate with bad WX once; we had a good mix of types for that hour. I believe I've mentioned it before, but I got to work the busiest arrival hour LAX ever had, or ever will have. My coworker and I put down 135 arrivals (yeah, less than 1 minute between arrivals) on the 4 runways (I had about 95 of those). Last I heard, LAX's AAR was 60, regardless of WX. I could to 60 an hour in my sleep! BORING, which is a controllers worst session. Errors happen most when it's slow.

[e90335e36m3]

MiG 25. Broke several aviation records.

[Llarry]

Production of the F-18E and F-18F Super Hornet (also known as the F/A-18E and F/A-18F) is nearing completion as production of major components draws to a close. Deliveries of fully assembled aircraft will stretch into next year. The similar electronic attack version EA-18G Growler has already completed production.

By my reckoning, the U.S. Navy has purchased 698 F-18Es and Fs. These aircraft are used by 31 deployable strike fighter squadrons (VFAs), one adversary squadron (VFC) and 2 training squadrons (VFA; one on the East Coast and one on the West Coast).

The USN has also purchased 163 electronic attack/electronic warfare EA-18G variants, which are flown by 14 deployable electronic attack squadrons (VAQs), a single training squadron and a reserve squadron. The EA-18G is unique in that a number of squadrons are used as land-based expeditionary squadrons supporting USAF, Marine Corps or allied nations rather than deploying on aircraft carriers. The EA-18G is also unique in that the Air Force provides a number of personnel to the force of Growlers. The Air Force retired the EF-111A "Spark Vark" EW aircraft many years ago and is keeping electronic warfare alive by cooperating with the Navy.

While the Super Hornet is not a stealth aircraft, it does include some features designed to reduce its radar signature.

Foreign sales of the Super Hornet and Growler have been limited. The RAAF bought 24 two-seat F-18F aircraft and followed that up with the purchase of 12 EA-18Gs.

The only other country to buy the Super Hornet is Kuwait, which bought 28 aircraft (22 Es and 6 Fs.)

The Super Hornet is being joined on carrier decks by F-35C stealth strike fighters, but the Navy has been slow in buying these -- so far just 3 VFAs fly the F-35C. The Marine Corps is also buying the carrier version F-35C and I think that 3 VMFAs have transitioned so far -- 6 VMFAs are planned.

The Navy has begun a program -- the F/A-XX -- to develop a replacement for the Super Hornet. I predict it will be quite a while before an actual airplane materializes.

[M-technik-3]

Originally Posted by Llarry

The U.S. NASA has three WB-57F high-altitude research aircraft in their inventory. Unfortunately, one of them suffered damage in a belly landing today (Jan 27th) in Houston, Texas. Hopefully it can be repaired and fly again.

Will have to ask buddy about it he does a lot of their sensors and such.

[flybigjet]

From what I understand from my "other" pilot forum, this is a very accurate representation of what just happened at AOPA.

If you're an AOPA member, it's very much worth a watch.....

..... and maybe worth losing your mind over.

R.

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

From what I understand from my "other" pilot forum, this is a very accurate representation of what just happened at AOPA.

Out of curiosity, has the problem been diagnosed as "the graying of the AOPA" yet?

Other legacy national organizations that I've been a member of have used this term to describe their membership getting older and inability to target/recruit new members, and from the video's description it sounds like the AOPA is going through this same membership crisis.

Just curious, because it sounds from the video like the now-former CEO was on the correct mission to change the organization with a path to fix this difficult membership recruitment/retention problem.....

[Llarry]

The time-tested traditional way to get either a person or a package to a ship at sea is to rendezvous at sea and transfer via small boat -- which could be quite hazardous -- or, in more recent times, transfer between underway ships on a cable connecting the two ships.

When aviation arrived in the fleet, at least small numbers of people or small cargo loads could be sent to ships at sea by seaplane if the seas permitted. The arrival of the aircraft carrier in the 1920s brought a further step forward, as an aircraft could land aboard.

All this was informal until the latter 1940s. There were plenty of aircraft left over from the huge number that had been produced during World War II and the large Eastern TBM torpedo bomber had enough space to be useful for the carrier onboard delivery (COD) mission, as it came to be known. Some TBMs were modified to delete combat equipment and maximize passenger and cargo space and designated TBM-3R (R for transport). Spare parts had not been much of a concern in the Old Navy, but with increasing electronic equipment, those became a requirement as well. As time went on, mail to and from the aircraft carrier was added into the mix.

The TBM-3Rs served through the Korean War and well into the 1950s. With the advent of nuclear bombs on aircraft carriers, the Navy wanted something larger that could transport a weapon to a carrier at sea. The answer was the Grumman TF-1 (new C-1A), which was a modified S2F (new S-2) antisubmarine plane with a roomier interior and a double cargo door for loading bulky loads. The TF-1 could transport 9 passengers at a time.

The gas turbine era came, and Grumman built the turboprop E-2 radar plane with a skinny fuselage. The Navy bought a derivative with a fuller fuselage as the C-2A. The C-2A had a cargo ramp and could hold much bulkier loads or up to 28 passengers.

There were periodically studies or proposals to use much larger aircraft for the COD mission. A C-130 was experimentally landed on a carrier at sea and later proposals featured Fokker F28 or Douglas DC-9 airliners. These alternatives had a fatal flaw: U.S. carriers could not fit their entire air wing below in the hangar deck and these larger COD alternatives would require a clear flight deck, which was impracticable.

The C-1As and C-2As served side by side for a number of years until the C-1As were retired. The C-2As became old and tired, although they were improved with 8-blade props in mid-life.

The Navy finally decided to replace the C-2As. There were two contenders: An updated C-2 with greater cargo capacity or a version of the MV-22B used by the Marine Corps. One key performance parameter was the ability to transport an F135 engine (as used in the F-35) and the fit was better in the MV-22B. Accordingly, the Navy started buying CMV-22Bs and began phasing out the remaining C-2As. A couple of V-22 accidents slowed the process, and the current force is a CMV-22B squadron on the West Coast and a C-2A squadron on the East Coast, which is scheduled to be disestablished later this year. The ultimate force will be one squadron per coast and a small training unit.

[M-technik-3]

CV-22 scares the bejebus out of me.

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by vreihen16

Out of curiosity, has the problem been diagnosed as "the graying of the AOPA" yet?

Other legacy national organizations that I've been a member of have used this term to describe their membership getting older and inability to target/recruit new members, and from the video's description it sounds like the AOPA is going through this same membership crisis.

Just curious, because it sounds from the video like the now-former CEO was on the correct mission to change the organization with a path to fix this difficult membership recruitment/retention problem.....

I wouldn't have the foggiest idea.

The only thing I know about GA is to not hit them! (and I'm looking at you, Mr. 172 who thought it was a good idea to fly VFR today right into the departure corridor that the jets use out of PSP). My TCAS did NOT like you. And I wan't thrilled with the "Climb VIA but stop climb at 8000 to avoid GA traffic" clearance that I got.)

Just because you CAN doesn't mean that you SHOULD.

On the plus side, it made the new CA I was giving a Qual Check to sweat-- which was good for her.

She passed, btw.

R.

[ezaircon4jc]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

I wouldn't have the foggiest idea.

The only thing I know about GA is to not hit them! (and I'm looking at you, Mr. 172 who thought it was a good idea to fly VFR today right into the departure corridor that the jets use out of PSP). My TCAS did NOT like you. And I wan't thrilled with the "Climb VIA but stop climb at 8000 to avoid GA traffic" clearance that I got.)

Just because you CAN doesn't mean that you SHOULD.

On the plus side, it made the new CA I was giving a Qual Check to sweat-- which was good for her.

She passed, btw.

R.

We used to call the knuckleheads that thought it was a good idea to cross the arrival corridor into LAX, 25-35 miles out, 500' below and 500' above the TCA the Beverly Hills Airforce.

I never understood the "climb via except maintain" instruction. I taught, and did, everybody gets a heading, altitude and speed until the flight is in a position to resume their own nav. I also always gave a heading until proceeding direct. My job title was "controller," not "monitor."

[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by flybigjet

(and I'm looking at you, Mr. 172 who thought it was a good idea to fly VFR today right into the departure corridor that the jets use out of PSP).

I thought that Palm Springs was supposed to be one of the most stress-free airports in the USA?

Speaking of 172's and KPSP, I saw this news article about one making a rather steep arrival on the main runway in 2020 that shut the airport down for hours:

https://www.nbcpalmsprings.com/2020/...prings-airport

FWIW, the only thing that I know about GA is that driving by car was usually faster than the plane flying VFR...and somehow I was always handicapped by carrying everyone in the plane's luggage for the week as ballast in my car.....