Aviation MegaThread!!!!

It's airborne...that's usually a good sign.


Seriously though. If the computed C.G. was farther aft than the actual C.G, it makes a big difference at rotation. Meaning some pitch trim adjustments had to be made on the fly...meaning more runway was used than was calculated in the T/O data...which can lead to alot of excitement on the flightdeck in short order, especially once you reach "go" speed...you either fly it or take an off-runway excursion on the far end.

Years ago my father worked with a WWII/Korea vet that talked about how after one of the two conflicts was over he was leaving on a globemaster off of one of those islands in the pacific with the build a block runways. They were trying to take as many people, equipment and fuel as possible with them and just barely got up enough speed to drop off a little cliff next to the beach and stay aloft in ground effect over the water for a few miles before they could get up enough speed to climb to altitude.

Said it was the most nerve racking experience of the entire war for him.

:eek1

I should have written that if anyone could tell one way or another whether it was within W&B?

Most likely, or just maybe, there was adequate runway remaining but the depth of field and angle of the photo make it appear clearing the fence by a meter or less. (I would think people wouldn't be sitting around waiting to get creamed....

If not: Even if within CG/WB they could have taken a intersection takeoff, (boo boo for sure) or taken the wrong runway, or used reduced takeoff power when they needed full power, or had a significant tailwind, or were real slow or distracted putting the power in, or actually been in.

Or, it could be just what the picture appears to make it....the jet blast/wake probably would cause some significant damage and thrown those people around like the proverbial rag dolls. Oh, well, who knows?

Maybe they just had a load of fat people with heavy carry-on bags.

:eek1 Yeah, I could see having to pry a few seat cushions loose afterwards...

Scariest takeoff I ever experienced was at Cubi Point, in the Phillipines.

Hot day, right at max takeoff weight (769,000 lbs). Runway length was 9000 feet. We back-taxied and used almost all of the overrun before turning a 180 for lineup. Max effort, bleeds off, TRT standing.

Our mains lifted at about 8500 feet.

We were thankful no ships were entering Subic Bay at that time.

Alot of what if's, definitely.

It isn't uncommon at all to see vehicles and people out past the fences off the ends of runways at airports/military bases in Europe. Alot of aviation buffs there.

Cool photo.

If that is the end of the runway I wonder how the pilots got the seat cushions un-stuck from their rear ends.

Reactin' in time

Passengers on a plane are waiting for the flight to leave.
The entrance opens, and two men walk up the aisle, dressed in pilot uniforms.
Both are wearing dark glasses.
One is using a seeing-eye dog, and the other is tapping his way up the aisle with a cane.
Nervous laughter spreads through the cabin, but the men enter the cockpit, the door closes, and the engines start.
The passengers begin glancing nervously, searching for some sign that this is just a little practical joke.
None is forthcoming.
The plane moves faster and faster down the runway, and people at the windows realize that they're headed straight for the water at the edge of the airport.
As it begins to look as though the plane will never take off, that it will plow into the water, screams of panic fill the cabin.
But at that moment, the plane lifts smoothly into the air.
Up in the cockpit, the co-pilot turns to the pilot and says, "You know, Bob, one of these days, they're going to scream too late, and we're all gonna die."

oser

Yeah...definitely gonna wander down to the pilots office and share that one.


Right after I clean off this keyboard, bastard.

Looks more dramatic then it was.

From that spotters place to the end of the runway is still a few 100 meters.

Check googlemaps for 36L at AMS, there's a roundabout just left (west), opposite of entry 2 to the runway, that's from where the pic is taken, me thinks.

Paul.

Looking at googlemaps and the runway layouts, I am inclined to agree with you on this.

I imagine it's just the angle and use of a telephoto lens on the camera that make it so dramatic.

Still, impressive photo!

That's what I was thinking. Telephoto compresses the appearance of distance to create a lot of dramatic views taken at the end of runways.

But, as you say, still a remarkable image.


As previously asked: Does anyone have thoughts/opinions on the appearance of wrinkling on the fueselage skin above the wing?

Looks like it recieved the $99 special at Earl Scheib.

I'll hazard a guess here. Most large aircraft have wrinkles in the skin. Like humans, the older they are, the more they have. On some of the aircraft here at my base, you can clearly see the outlines of the supporting structure underneath. Age, coupled with repeated pressurizing and un-pressurizing, can result in what you see.

I suspect the reason it looks so severe in this particular image is a result of compression of the image due to the telephoto lens.

My two cent's anyhow.

I'd bet the "wrinkles" are caused by sunlight reflecting off rivulets of water running down the fuselage. Look at how the lines arc. They aren't just over the wing but in front of the horizontal stab as well. Look at all the water that is being blasted off the runway at rotation.

Excellent observation, PI. Arc approximates the expected pattern of displaced air over the top of the wing, too.

I think you're onto something.

Another shot at the same airport, from a slightly different vantage point:


It would indeed appear that these photos are the result of angle, lens and the fact the road bed is somewhat higher than the runway.

That will teach me to assume an e-mail contains all the facts!

As for the wrinkles, yes, it would seem to be water. If you look you can see quite a bit of water vapor and spray behind the jet rising up in its thrust and wake. Must have had some recent showers at that airport.

Yes, telephoto distortion. But that doesn't mean stuff like this hasn't happened. I recall an A340 in ANC using a taxiway for takeoff (nstead of the runway they were cleared to takeoff on) and taking out the lights on the end, including a few yards of compacted snow with tire tread. They merrily went off to points further west without further ado. Then there is case of me finding some fresh conifer twigs in the main landing gear on a pre-flight turn around walk around...but I am little hazy on that one.

Just a cool photo I thought




www.murraymitchell.com

Great shot!

Although he gets it wrong by saying the bomber is flanked by Spitfires. I can pick the Mustang, but not the other one.

Thanks for the link to the website, theres some great stuff on there. I reckon he has a bit of a thing for Natalie Portman...