Jump to content
Chewey

Just cause we have a bunch of airplane lovers

Recommended Posts

15 hours ago, TexasPilot71 said:

SWEEEEEEEEEEEEEET!  I watched the Blue Angels from our boat last week in Pensacola.  SO COOL!

Good to see someone else is still active on this thread there, TP.  And an old-school aviation pilot/enthusiast to boot. . :)  Also someone who appreciated all the hard work of uploading those photos lol!

There were a lot of cool birds at this show, including the F-16 block 50 and a super, shiny, all metallic P-51 Mustang that flew a heritage flight with the F-35.  And it was only nice to see the F-35 for the first time because of all the hype that program has been through and the fact that Lockheed Martin touts this bird as the current, top end platform out there that has all the bells and whistles (including artificial intelligence) that no other aircraft in the world has or is capable of doing.  But the program most certainly has had its issues and detractors which makes it even more intriguing.

Here's a set of pics of the F-22 I took that we turned into a gif.

giphy-gif.431627 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very cool!  I have less and less time these days to upload photos and deal with all the crap.  The facebook page is far easier and that's where I spend a majority of my time.  Really well run page by some forum members from here!  Good to hear from you again!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎6‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 11:20 AM, TexasPilot71 said:

Very cool!  I have less and less time these days to upload photos and deal with all the crap.  The facebook page is far easier and that's where I spend a majority of my time.  Really well run page by some forum members from here!  Good to hear from you again!

I had no idea you replied.  I think you have to actually quote the post you're replying to, TP, so I get the notification.  I just happen to check in and saw your post.

Great to see you too, my friend.  After a year sabbatical, we splashed two days ago and man was it awesome.  Forgot how much fun it is.

Now we just need to get @jmiska back into the fold here.  I was thinking of heading down to FLA and maybe hooking up with him.  I think he's still in Tampa and he still has his Chap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@SST, check out this sideways landing of a TUI Boeing 757/200 coming into Bristol Airport in southwest England yesterday.  He's coming in with 40knts crosswinds from a nasty storm they've been enduring that has caused traveling chaos there the last few days.  But what's particularly strange about this landing is that he kicks the rudder after he touches down sideways.  I'm pretty sure that 99.99999% of the time this trick is performed, the pilot kicks the rudder a second or two before touchdown to straighten the aircraft so that it's parallel to the runway and the rear wheels aren't sideways.  he might've timed it incorrectly and got lucky because the runway was wet and slick from the rain and has been praised for it.  But I think that had the runway been dry, it might've been a bit more treacherous on those tires.  What think?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 Check out the Q400 xwind videos. Mostly the first two. Who says there is a landing gear problem. And, if you're not tossing your cookies while sitting in the last row your as tough as nails.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just an observation. If you listen to these pilots talk about that trick of the trade, they usually say that they kick the rudder at the last second before touchdown to straighten out the aircraft and not after it touches because if you think about it, I doubt you really want the wheels to be sideways once they impact the runway.  I don't think that's really good for the landing gear, and in that video of the TUI, the runway was wet and slick from the rain and I suppose that helped.  I'm sure timing that rudder action must not be a very easy thing to do, either. 

Those heavy crosswind landings must be stressful as heII.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heavy crosswinds are a pain for sure, especially as they get close to the max for your particular airplane. What those pilots are doing is called landing in a crab. Flying with your nose into the wind while tracking side ways is called crabbing (for what are hopefully obvious reasons). As a C-130 pilot, our planes don't like landing in a crab because of the sideways stress on the gear like Hatem mentioned. What we do is fly in a crab towards the runway and kick it out as we get close. Depending on the pilot and their technique it can be after they are over the runway or further out. I prefer to do it further out (about a mile or so) so I could be stable as I get close to the runway. If you watch this guy,

he comes in with his left wing low because the wind is from his left to his right. Starting at about the 0:32 mark you can see him kick the nose around to the right and put his left wing down a bit. He's essentially in a turn to counteract the wind, but he applies right rudder to keep the plane pointed straight down the runway. He touches down on his left mains first, then gives up on the landing and gets lazy and lets the nose and right mains down at the same time. You'll see he then adds a lot of left aileron to counteract the wind. All in all not a good job handling the wind. Ideally, after touching down on the left mains, the right mains would be next and then he would lower the nose to the ground. He added too much aileron as the wings should be level (held that way with the ailerons) and the nose should track straight down the runway which is controlled with the rudder. Looking from the outside, the only difference you should see in a crosswind landing in a C-130 and a calm day is that the planes touches down on the upwind gear first, then the downwind gear.

Add to the level of difficulty the fact that when it is windy, it is typically gusty, so you are constantly adjusting to the winds instead of them just being a steady state correction. It is definitely a skill. Try doing all of this while flying in bad visibility also!

Other airplanes are meant to be landed in a crab like the examples y'all showed. You just let the airplane touch down in a crab and once on the ground put in the same crosswind controls (steer into the wind and use the rudder to track straight down the runway).

Fun stuff!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back when I was first learning how to fly, I was taught to use the side slip for x-wind landings.  I never really like doing it that way but that's what I was instructed to do so I did. Bank into the wind and opposite rudder to maintain direction to the runway.

One day, long before 9-11, I was at the fence and I watched a UA 737-200 land in a moderate x-wind. I was standing directly underneath the center line as he past over me. I suddenly realized that he kept the plane in a crab all the way but just feet from touch down. If UA can do it.....I'm gonna do it. From then on, I crabbed all the way to the threshold. My crosswind approaches and landings were much more stable instead of fighting it to touchdown.

Does the 757 have adjustable main landing gears to assist in crosswind landings?  In regards to the video above, I wonder if the pilot deliberately delayed kicking out the crab until the tires were on the runway to prevent getting blown off the runway.

 

Happy Landings! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎10‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 5:10 PM, Chewey said:

As a C-130 pilot, our planes don't like landing in a crab because of the sideways stress on the gear like Hatem mentioned. What we do is fly in a crab towards the runway and kick it out as we get close. Depending on the pilot and their technique it can be after they are over the runway or further out. I prefer to do it further out (about a mile or so) so I could be stable as I get close to the runway.

Crabbing!  That sounds perfect for that technique.  So I remember you had another tour in Afghanistan a few years ago, but never knew you were a C-130 pilot, Mike.  That's awesome.  Are you done with your tours?  Some nice F-15s in the background there.

On ‎10‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 5:10 PM, Chewey said:

Looking from the outside, the only difference you should see in a crosswind landing in a C-130 and a calm day is that the planes touches down on the upwind gear first, then the downwind gear.

I noticed that about the C-130!  It's very dramatic in it's approach, also.  It's almost like you guys have to push nose down just to decrease altitude.  I see that with almost all cargo planes even, from the C-130 to the C-17 to the C-5 and even the Embraer and C-295s and of course, all the Russian IL-76/78 and so on and so forth.  It must be a product of the aerodynamic design on them simply because they all seem to do it.  Usually you see some angle of attack where nose is up and rear is down, but not in this case and very obvious with the C-130.  That must be wild touching down with your front gear first.

1:25 - 1:33 you can see that nose-down approach just until that last millisecond he lifts it up to get the rear wheels down first. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SST said:

 From then on, I crabbed all the way to the threshold. My crosswind approaches and landings were much more stable instead of fighting it to touchdown.

That's where personal preference and technique come in. I'm comfortable flying wing down so in my mind setting that about a mile out and maintaining it through the flare til touchdown feels more stable because I'm not making a major change at the last minute. Other folks don't consider it a major change and just another step to the landing, no different than a flaring. I never dinged guys for doing it that way, but we did have a discussion on why it was thei preferred technique and I always made my students try both.

 

2 hours ago, SST said:

Does the 757 have adjustable main landing gears to assist in crosswind landings?  In regards to the video above, I wonder if the pilot deliberately delayed kicking out the crab until the tires were on the runway to prevent getting blown off the runway.

Nope. The B-52 is one of the few tat does that. That's because its wingspan is so long that if it landed wing down it would scrape the engine pods on the ground. that's why they can dial in a certain amount of crab into the gear.

 

2 hours ago, Hatem said:

I noticed that about the C-130!  It's very dramatic in it's approach, also.  It's almost like you guys have to push nose down just to decrease altitude.  I see that with almost all cargo planes even, from the C-130 to the C-17 to the C-5 and even the Embraer and C-295s and of course, all the Russian IL-76/78 and so on and so forth.  It must be a product of the aerodynamic design on them simply because they all seem to do it.  Usually you see some angle of attack where nose is up and rear is down, but not in this case and very obvious with the C-130.  That must be wild touching down with your front gear first.

Not sure if I'm done deploying or not. The only folks who know they won't deploy again are the folks that retire or get out!

That video shows what we call an assault landing. It's used for getting into very short fields with an enemy threat close. So you come down at a steep glideslope and stop as quick as possible. A C-130 should never land on its nosewheel because it's not built strong enough for that. The reason an airplane goes more nose down in an approach is either to descend quicker or because it is has extended it's trailing edge flaps more. A C-130 descends just a little nosedown with 50% flaps, but with 100% flaps extended, it comes down much more nosedown. For that reason, guys like to land the C-130 with 50% flaps vs 100% (plus it's not as much of a flare with a 50 % flap landing).

The Herc is a great plane. I've flown the EC-130H Compass Call and AC-130H Spectre Gunship. I grew up with C-130s flying overhead into the local Air National Guard base so it has been pretty cool to get to spend my career in them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm in the minority, but like SST, I was taught to side slip into a crosswind.  It always felt more natural to me because that keeps you lined up with the runway.  It just takes a bit more power to keep your rate of descent under control.

 . . . . Any landing you walk away from is a good landing . . .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I found it was easier to fly the ILS with a crab. To me anyways, the side slip added to the work load.

Another thing I noticed with mainliners is the flap settings. Almost every time I see a mainliner land with a strong x-wind, they have almost full flaps. I was taught to keep flap setting at 10 degrees. Obviously a 172 is not a 737. I just figured with jet engines taking their time spooling up, they would have the flaps setting less extended to overcome the drag of full flaps.

Or is the full flap setting the reason to cause more drag and therefore needing higher engine settings so that in the event of an aborted landing, the engines are already set higher.

This comes to mind because the MD80 series a/c is now entering the forest fire fighting fleet. I believe the FAA has mandated that the MD80 expend its landing gear while ejecting the retardant. The gear extension causing more drag and therefore higher power settings so in the event of an abort, the engines are already set for go-around.  I think there was concern by the FAA of the spool up time for the MD80.

I love talking planes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's interesting how there are two ways to accomplish basics.  I'm beginning to believe that I was taught the less popular way on a couple, but they feel completely natural to me.

Approach speed is a constant.  I think most learn to point the nose at the landing point and control airspeed with the throttle(s).  I learned to control the airspeed with the elevators and the rate of descent/glide slope with the throttle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any of you fellas ever see this video?  This has to be one of the best documented departures and it's of a Lufthansa A380.  It's 21+ minutes long but it's basically commemorating the captain's retirement who's been flying for 40+ years.  It's his last flight out of San Francisco but it shows all the details they go through once passengers are on board from the towing of that behemoth of an aircraft to the starting of the engines to the checklist which is of course, automated to all the incredible technology put into these MASSIVE aircraft that frankly, look easy to fly!  Obviously there is no more yolks these days and everything is computerized and digital to the point where switching to automated means they can adjust speed, altitude and even heading simply by turning a dial!  So many neat things in this clip and it's a wonder how such a massive aircraft seems so easy to operate. 

359 tons of fuel plus 500+ passengers and luggage they figure out their take off weight is a total of 495.8 tons so they can compute the aircraft's center of gravity for take-off and I suppose that has to do with how they compute thrust in the engines and flight controls.  But what's amazing about this is how it takes off with absolutely no effort, at least it seems that way and what I wanted to ask Mike @Chewey , when it's time to rotate, most of the nose-up action is caused by raising the horizontal stabilizers -- or elevators in this case -- and I can't believe how little bit of movement it takes in those control surfaces to pull the nose up.  Did you have the same sensitivity in the Hercules?

No yolk and just a tiny little joystick lol, but very cool start-up with the engines and the monitor, with runway radio talk and all that awesome stuff, coupled by a very cool takeoff and a quick spin over San Fran and the Golden Gate bridge and Alcatraz etc.  Well worth the 21 minutes.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw my first A380 last week at LAX. They are certainly monstrous.

The Herc is certainly not a sensitive girl. She requires some manhandling to get her to get what you want her to do sometimes! The biggest difference in reason why is because the Herc has hydraulic assisted cables to control the control surfaces (ailerons/elevators/rudder) where the A380 and other new aircraft are fly by wire. The fly by wire systems are just like using a joystick on your computer...the joystick determines the position of the input and sends an electrical signal to the computer which sends a command to the control surface to move. Since there is no mechanical connection to the control surface there's no feedback pressure on the stick. Some systems have artificial feedback built in to the control stick, but not all. I like the idea of the feedback...but then again that's all I've ever known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Chewey said:

I saw my first A380 last week at LAX. They are certainly monstrous.

The Herc is certainly not a sensitive girl. She requires some manhandling to get her to get what you want her to do sometimes! The biggest difference in reason why is because the Herc has hydraulic assisted cables to control the control surfaces (ailerons/elevators/rudder) where the A380 and other new aircraft are fly by wire. The fly by wire systems are just like using a joystick on your computer...the joystick determines the position of the input and sends an electrical signal to the computer which sends a command to the control surface to move. Since there is no mechanical connection to the control surface there's no feedback pressure on the stick. Some systems have artificial feedback built in to the control stick, but not all. I like the idea of the feedback...but then again that's all I've ever known.

It's ridiculous how easy-looking it is to fly that behemoth.  That video series is awesome.  There's several parts to it which also shows them landing in Frankfurt etc., and it's so smooth.  At the end he talks about how agile that aircraft is, despite being short of 600 tons lmfao!  What gets me is the auto pilot adjustments that are simply done by turning those dials.  Heading, altitude and speed!  But I just found out that isn't necessarily something new and that technology was pretty much there in previous aircraft. 

And the technological shift from mechanical to fly by wire is pretty much the same shift that has happened in boating.  Not necessarily in the steering aspect (although I'm not completely sure about that) but definitely in the throttle control with the DTS.

And back to the C-130, got a funny little story for you.  Being active in several military forums and having a long-standing interest in military aircraft, I was part of a discussion regarding MAWS (I know you know what that is but for other readers, it's Missile Approach Warning System) and how they seem to be putting that in almost every single aircraft these days including helicopters.  So trying to learn about it and when I went to this past summer's Quonset air show, there were a couple of Blackhawks that had MAWS on them and I was genuinely curious as to how extensive is this system.  Whether it only warns the pilot with a beep or does it actually go as far as automatically deploying counter-measures etc.  So I asked one of the Blackhawk pilots who was there showing the stuff to all the people and he said this: "uh...yeah, sorry, that stuff is classified" lol!  That did take me by surprise at first but then I totally understood where he was coming from.  Of course he can't divulge that information lol.  But then I noticed that they even have them on the C-130s!

Here's the BH.

v8n2Jfb.jpg

vKxlILX.jpg

RI National Guard C-130.  Thought I had some close-ups of them but apparently not, but you can see them right under those squarish, glass panels under the main windshield.

Unless those are something else?

FkhoTVR.jpg

These guys are great, too.  They fly these things!  Looks brand spanking new, Mike.  What model Herc is this?

6Uy68U9.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, that technology has been around for awhile. I flew an airplane in pilot training in 2000 that we could change the altitude by dialing in what we wanted and hitting 'go'. It's awfully nice. It takes some of the pilotage away from you though. Flying is a perishable skill. The less you do it, the worse you are at it.

The pieces you are looking at are antennas for the AAR-47 system. If you look up that system on google, there's plenty of unclassified data on it out there. There are 2 ways of operating it. One is in automatic where it will send a signal to the ALE-47 to punch flares whenever it detects a threat, or you can put it in manual and it will alert you so you can decide whether or not to dispense the flares. That data is unclassified, but when you get into too much more than that, the classification level rises.

 

That's a J model C-130 (or C-130J). You can tell because of the 6 bladed props. It's a great plane. It looks like a Herc, but it flies higher, faster and farther than previous versions. Rather than the same airframe with upgraded components, Lockheed largely started over when they designed it. It's a nice machine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Chewey said:

The pieces you are looking at are antennas for the AAR-47 system. If you look up that system on google, there's plenty of unclassified data on it out there. There are 2 ways of operating it. One is in automatic where it will send a signal to the ALE-47 to punch flares whenever it detects a threat, or you can put it in manual and it will alert you so you can decide whether or not to dispense the flares. That data is unclassified, but when you get into too much more than that, the classification level rises.

That's great, Mike.  See, that's what I thought.  He was a really young pilot, looked fresh out of the academy so he wasn't taking any chances by divulging any info.  I was just curious and didn't push it.  A lot of those fellas are like that, very careful about what they say and it's understandable.  At another show, one of the soldiers on guard detail had a really cool modified M4 and I was eyeing it from afar and went up to him and asked him about it and he wouldn't say a word LOL!  I said it's not OPSEC is it?  He just shook his head and turned slowly to walk away as if to tell me to take a hike, not interested. :D 

14 hours ago, Chewey said:

That's a J model C-130 (or C-130J). You can tell because of the 6 bladed props. It's a great plane. It looks like a Herc, but it flies higher, faster and farther than previous versions. Rather than the same airframe with upgraded components, Lockheed largely started over when they designed it. It's a nice machine.

Very cool.  I have a couple of family members in the air force with an ME country that are operating several US built platforms.  One is in an Apache and two others in F-16s.  A new one is trying to get into the new Russian helicopter they just bought 50 units of and only half of them have been delivered.  The Ka-52 Kamov Crocodile.  This thing is pretty cool with it's duo counter rotating props, kinda like our Volvo and Merc propellers I would think.

8431767_original.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, some guys down't even want to go down that road because they can't remember what is secret an what isn't. It's easier to just not say anything sometimes.

 

That's a wild looking Helo, I haven't seen it before

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah it's pretty cool.  No tail prop needed with the counter-rotating props and it's super agile.  Deadly attack helo and even has ejection seats.  There's a video out there where it shows the sequence.  Top rotor blades blow off, followed by the lower blades and then the canopy which houses 2, side by side pilots and they get blasted out.  You'd think that's a process but it happens really fast.  Crazy, but no other helo has ejection seats until this one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread has over 22K views.  That's pretty cool considering the topic and on a boat owner's forum.

On ‎10‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 5:10 PM, Chewey said:

As a C-130 pilot

So, Mikey, ever pull off one of these stunts in your C-130? :)

I believe this is the new LM-100J which is obviously part of the C-130 Hercules family that Lockheed Martin just came out with and this demo was performed at the Farnborough International air show in France just this past summer and it either has new engines or something to make it perform like a fighter jet, or the new Full Authority Digital Engine Control System gives it the power and agility to perform like this.  This is truly incredible for a C-130.  Look at how short the take-off run is and also how short the landing is.  But specifically is the takeoff angle and how it climbs with those consecutive nose-up pulls and then does the unthinkable @ minute 1:45 - 2:15.

Here's the link for the article: https://fightersweep.com/10897/maverick-c-130-pilot-goes-inverted-watch-this-massive-plane-do-a-loop/

Notice when he comes to a full stop after landing, he brakes so hard that the nose wheel come up off the ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No...although I've tried to in the simulator. The new C-130J has more power, and is lighter than the ones I have flown. The original (C-130A) flew in 1954. Since then there has been the B, E and H model. The J model is a complete redesign of the aircraft and its systems. There are very few parts that it shares with previous version. The most notable visible difference are the 6 bladed propellers vs the 4 bladed props of the E and H model. It's a significant improvement as you can see in that video!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love airplanes and the history behind them!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×