ADVrider

Go Back   ADVrider > Fluff > Shiny things
User Name
Password
Register Inmates Photos Site Rules Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 375 votes, 4.98 average. Display Modes
Old 02-26-2011, 07:07 PM   #1561
Klay
dreaming adventurer
 
Klay's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Location: right here on my thermarest
Oddometer: 100,119
Quote:
Originally Posted by dfwscotty View Post
As the discussion about flight controls was going on a few posts above the pic of hte plane going into the trees was in my head.

Edit: duh, 205


Klay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2011, 07:14 PM   #1562
No False Enthusiasm
a quiet adventurer
 
No False Enthusiasm's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2009
Location: Small Town, Texas
Oddometer: 4,346
Quote:
Originally posted by dfwscotty:

As the discussion about flight controls was going on a few posts above the pic of hte plane going into the trees was in my head.
Post #1559 by chazbird wrote, "There have been a few, very few, instances where the logic has been fooled (typically during low approaches or landing) and "things have happened"."

The video I posted (thanks, Klay, for embedding) showed an early example of a tragic event inside the parameter chazbird described.

The Wiki article describes the low pass where the pilot could not advance the throttles, and the aircraft settled into the trees. This event occurred with passengers on board (unthinkable in US), and three passengers were killed.
No False Enthusiasm is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2011, 07:44 PM   #1563
vspeed
Gnarly Adventurer
 
vspeed's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Appalachia
Oddometer: 429
With regard to the Boeing/Douglas vs. Airbus debate I thought this was pretty funny, and true too.



vspeed screwed with this post 02-26-2011 at 07:56 PM
vspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-26-2011, 11:04 PM   #1564
chazbird
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Oddometer: 3,371
But in reality an Airbus is X times more complex than the DC-9. For instance, in the Airbus manual the auto-flight chapter is about 125 pages, vs about 10 pages in the original DC-9.
chazbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2011, 03:47 PM   #1565
XR650L_Dave
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Apr 2006
Location: Near Cortland NY
Oddometer: 3,703
Cirrus sold to China!

February 28, 2011
Cirrus Acquired By Chinese Company
By Russ Niles, Editor-in-Chief





Cirrus Industries Inc., parent company of Cirrus Aircraft, has been sold to China Aviation Industry General Aircraft Co. (CAIGA) of Zhuhai, China, but it appears the company will continue to build parts in Grand Forks, N.D., and assemble airplanes in Duluth, Minn. It has long been rumored that a Chinese company would acquire Cirrus and the final announcement was made Monday morning. CAIGA is a subsidiary of Aviation Industry Corporation (AVIC), the state-owned aviation company of China that makes everything from military jets to airliners. In a news release, Cirrus CEO Brent Wouters says the deal will be a shot in the arm for the company and for its employees in Grand Forks and Duluth. "CAIGA understands the strength and the talent of Cirrus's workforce and the prominence of the Cirrus brand in general aviation," Wouters said. "Through this transaction, CAIGA will invest in our employees in both Minnesota and North Dakota by committing to the continued use of our world-class production facilities."

Although it was not specifically mentioned in the news release, the transaction could result in an immediate acceleration of Cirrus's long-awaited Vision jet program. The single-engine jet project has stalled in recent years due to a lack of funding but Wouters has maintained throughout that an injection of investment capital would revive the jet. For its part, CAIGA says its focusing on the piston market with Cirrus. "We are very optimistic to begin our partnership with Cirrus and add Cirrus's strong brand as the cornerstone in our aviation product portfolio," said CAIGA President Meng Xiangkai. Cirrus was founded by Alan and Dale Klapmeier about 12 years ago and Dale Klapmeier is the current chairman. He said he was "thrilled" to make the announcement. "With this transaction, Cirrus will continue to develop and build the best, most exciting aircraft in the world," Klapmeier said. "The original dream remains alive and well at Cirrus. We are just embarking on our next chapter on a global stage."






WTF?
__________________
---->>Thanks for the rotor, guys!<<----
XR650L_Dave is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2011, 05:52 PM   #1566
muskeg
Gnarly Adventurer
 
muskeg's Avatar
 
Joined: May 2009
Location: Coconino N.F.
Oddometer: 288
Quote:
Originally Posted by XR650L_Dave View Post
"The original dream remains alive and well at Cirrus. We are just embarking on our next chapter on a global stage."
Bullshit.

China. At this point the term global ceases to be accurate.
muskeg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-28-2011, 08:28 PM   #1567
chazbird
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Oddometer: 3,371
I really doubt production will stay in the USA. Remember, it takes two to tango - someone buys and someone sells, and we know who is whom.
chazbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 12:12 AM   #1568
moist
Thaumaturgist
 
moist's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Location: pungent sound
Oddometer: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by chazbird View Post
But in reality an Airbus is X times more complex than the DC-9. For instance, in the Airbus manual the auto-flight chapter is about 125 pages, vs about 10 pages in the original DC-9.
I would caution anyone counting pages to measure complexity. Air bus manuals and test procedures suck. The verbiage is overly redundant and things like "turn the on light off" and "turn the off light on" Replaced "turn it off" or turn it on".
I am not arguing which is more complex. But to use the manual to measure complexity of the airframe is as if I use the emergency equipment cards to compare survivability statistics.

I do not like Airbus products in general, some reasons are prejudice, some are quality experienced in a 40 plus year career. The DC9 is a POS and always was a POS. It logged many millions of miles, successfully. But as the guy who was maintaining it, it was a POS. Maintaining the Airbus A319's, A 320 and A330's is much easier than the 9, however the 9 was hammer simple and when old, the 9 will prove to be loads cheaper per mile than the least expensive airbus.
__________________
moist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 01:34 AM   #1569
Ricardo Kuhn
a.k.a. Mr Rico Suave
 
Ricardo Kuhn's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Salt lake city, Utah
Oddometer: 12,253
Okay I confess I know very little about planes even if I like them very much..

But I did work (1984/1985) for a small "Experimental" plane manufacture doing Composite work and from time to time illustrating possible new projects and also current planes.

Here are a few rendering I did, sadly I only have small cheesy photos of them since I left the artwork at the factory




I hope you guys like them, If you want to see them in more detail Here is the LINK
__________________
Wanted: worn, ugly, cheap motorcycle cover for a big GS 1200
Ricardo Kuhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 08:05 AM   #1570
Lornce
Lost In Place
 
Lornce's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Location: Way Out There.
Oddometer: 17,822
Interesting stuff, Ricardo.

Did any of these designs become a flying production aircraft?


Lornce is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 08:16 AM   #1571
vspeed
Gnarly Adventurer
 
vspeed's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Location: Appalachia
Oddometer: 429
Quote:
Originally Posted by moist View Post
I do not like Airbus products in general, some reasons are prejudice, some are quality experienced in a 40 plus year career. The DC9 is a POS and always was a POS. It logged many millions of miles, successfully. But as the guy who was maintaining it, it was a POS. Maintaining the Airbus A319's, A 320 and A330's is much easier than the 9, however the 9 was hammer simple and when old, the 9 will prove to be loads cheaper per mile than the least expensive airbus.
Sadly, the DC-9's days are numbered at my company. I guess the economics of operating an older, higher maintenance, less fuel efficient airplane have finally caught up to the old gal. I'm glad I got the opportunity to fly it. The "9" may not be fun to work on, but it's a cool plane to fly.

The A320 may be my next plane, don't know yet. Never flown anything Airbus, but I've ridden the jumpseat on the 319/320 several times. The cockpit layout is very roomy, the absence of a control yoke in your lap seems to add to this perception. The automation is also pretty amazing, definitely light years ahead of the DC-9, and it makes the pilot's job much easier.

A lot of pilots I've known have expressed some reservations about Airbus products, specifically the autopilot/flight control setup. They are mostly the older guys who grew up on Boeing/Douglas products. That said, I have never met an Airbus pilot who didn't like the airplane.

vspeed screwed with this post 03-01-2011 at 10:29 AM
vspeed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 10:47 AM   #1572
chazbird
Beastly Adventurer
 
Joined: Jul 2009
Oddometer: 3,371
Never worked on a 9, or a 'bus, so I don't know whether they are a POS in that regard or not...but the 'bus is much more complex. That's what happens when you have more inter-related systems and high levels of automation. Fly-by-wire, auto-throttle, flight management systems (none of which were on the 9, the -80 did, a few of them, eventually get a FMS)...those systems make flying, in practice, (and when you are familiar with them) simpler, but it still a more complex machine. The 9 is a simple mental math airplane and with a HSI, RMI, DME ADI (maybe with a FD) and you're set. I could just as easily make crossing restrictions in just as an elegant fashion as a FMS equipped airplane. I know in a Boeing you can dispatch sans the CDU but don't know what that would be like on the Airbus. That would be an interesting one.
chazbird is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 11:30 AM   #1573
Ricardo Kuhn
a.k.a. Mr Rico Suave
 
Ricardo Kuhn's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2001
Location: Salt lake city, Utah
Oddometer: 12,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lornce View Post
Interesting stuff, Ricardo.

Did any of these designs become a flying production aircraft?


Sure I don't have pictures of them (I did not have a camera most of the time, but you can see in the link some fabrication shoots), but we produce a good number of kits in three different configurations and I got to see a few of them ensemble and even flying.

Really fun times, plus I learn a lot about a lot of stuff including my own self
__________________
Wanted: worn, ugly, cheap motorcycle cover for a big GS 1200
Ricardo Kuhn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 02:26 PM   #1574
VictorBravoMikeIndia
Low Altitude Flyer
 
VictorBravoMikeIndia's Avatar
 
Joined: Jul 2008
Location: Sarf Ingerland
Oddometer: 141
I work on both Boeing and Airbus ........as a Licensed Aircraft Engineer.
B737 both Classic and NG, B757, B767 and B777, and A318-A321 and A330/A340. All have their plus points and their minus as well...Used to work on the Trijets as well.......L1011 and DC-10s...... Dunno about the DC-9 but just going on the -10 it seem that Douglas certainly liked using a good number of cables............. Slat Rigging anyone ?

Line and Casualty maintenance on all the types up to repairs and major component changes ( Engines and Landing gears etc )...have to say that the job is getting easier, in as far as the aeroplane (OK, airplane for most of you !) will tell you what is wrong with it and even suggests what to replace....together with much more reliable and far reaching Fault Isolation .....you just have to filter what are nuisance messsages and what are real faults.


Get real hacked off with the B737 doors and also Flaps
VictorBravoMikeIndia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2011, 06:13 PM   #1575
PaulRS
Dutch fool
 
Joined: Apr 2008
Location: Holland, land of tulips and wooden shoes
Oddometer: 743
Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorBravoMikeIndia View Post
Slat Rigging anyone ?
Yep.

4 or 5 cables on one pulley, iirc.
DC-9 left our company in the mid '80's, never worked on the 10 or 11.

Adjust the first cable, cycle system, adjust the second, cycle, adjust the first and second again, adjust the 3rd, and so on.

Mayor pita.

I'm much more into the 320, line maintance;

Pilot reports a fault message, or fault light and asks for a ground engineer.

Pilot; I've got this light on.
GE; checks cfds and perform a test and reset.
Pilot; still got this light.
GE; pull certain cb's and wait, push and perform test.
Pilot; still got the light.
GE; ok, I'll do a total reset, switch off ext pwr and batt, goes outside to remove ext pwr connector and goes off for a smoke.

After Mr GE has had his smoke, he returns to the a/c, connects ext pwr, goes up into the cockpit, switch on batt and ext pwr and hey, presto, fault lt is off.

Pilot is happy and GE signs off the atl, yob well done.

Paul.
__________________
Geht net, gibbet net.
PaulRS is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Share

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


Times are GMT -7.   It's 06:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ADVrider 2011-2014