January 18, 2025, 10:38:25 PM

1,531,386 Posts in 46,736 Topics by 1,523 Members
› View the most recent posts on the forum.


Flying in Puerto Rico

Started by Kair, April 23, 2008, 07:37:30 PM

previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Go Down

Kair

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 07:56:20 PM
Interesting, shouldn't this only happen at very high altitude and speed over pretty cold areas? I know that recently some 777s were having problems as their fuel was solidifying and turing slushy over very cold areas (Russia I think) and high altitude. When their fuel heaters in the wing failed it caused some of the engines to become unresponsive and shut down.
Yep. That happens more than you would think, actually. Those 777s are usually on trans-Asia routes (Singapore-London, that type of thing) and are cruising at very, very high altitudes (FL380 to FL430).

Hydraulic fluid, unlike fuel, can't just sit around. It needs to either be heated up or moved around, and our hydraulic lamps obviously weren't doing their job. Cessna has formally addressed the issue, but the replacements are something upwards of 40,000 dollars.

Socks

Quote from: Kair on April 23, 2008, 08:00:59 PM
That happens more than you would think, actually. Those 777s are usually on trans-Asia routes (Singapore-London, that type of thing) and are cruising at very, very high altitudes (FL380 to FL430).


When I departed JFK for Milano last December in a 777-200ER our route naturally took us near Iceland and Greenland, I think the highest altitude I saw on the monitor was FL410, glad nothing happened to our flight.

In any case, it makes me marvel at military grade engineering how some fighters (especially those at Eielson and Elmendorf) can cruise at FL555-600 and Mach speeds and still perform flawlessly.

Kair

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 08:06:14 PM
When I departed JFK for Milano last December in a 777-200ER our route naturally took us near Iceland and Greenland, I think the highest altitude I saw on the monitor was FL410, glad nothing happened to our flight.

In any case, it makes me marvel at military grade engineering how some fighters (especially those at Eielson and Elmendorf) can cruise at FL555-600 and Mach speeds and still perform flawlessly.
There's an old story about an SR71 asking for clearance up to FL650 and the controller laughing and saying "If you can get up there, pal".

Socks

I wonder how long it took that ATC to realize what he just said. In any case I've heard of a similar joke only this one involving a much higher altitude. It must be nice to fly at such altitudes and see the curvature of the Earth clearly.

Kair

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 08:15:12 PM
I wonder how long it took that ATC to realize what he just said. In any case I've heard of a similar joke only this one involving a much higher altitude. It must be nice to fly at such altitudes and see the curvature of the Earth clearly.
Definitely. I bet if they somehow had a dual engine failure over New York they could probably glide all the way to Florida.

Socks

Quote from: Kair on April 23, 2008, 08:22:26 PM
Definitely. I bet if they somehow had a dual engine failure over New York they could probably glide all the way to Florida.


If they were cruising above Mach 3 and at very high altitude where the the air resistance is minimal they could probably make it on altitude and inertia alone and still leave other aircraft in the dust.

I can't recall at the moment what it's max ceiling was in a zoom climb but I think it was near or above FL1200.

Kair

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 08:28:39 PM
If they were cruising above Mach 3 and at very high altitude where the the air resistance is minimal they could probably make it on altitude and inertia alone and still leave other aircraft in the dust.

I can't recall at the moment what it's max ceiling was in a zoom climb but I think it was near or above FL1200.
That's ridiculous. I've obviously never been afraid of heights...but think about that.

Socks

Quote from: Kair on April 23, 2008, 08:32:50 PM
That's ridiculous. I've obviously never been afraid of heights...but think about that.


For real, I doubt the USAF does not have an black and limited "Aurora" type hypersonic jet with performances even more mild blowing than that. No wonder the Black bird was never intercepted or shot down by SAMs. At such an altitude and speed even a change in velocity of a few degrees would leave most interceptors and missiles with bad end game NEZ kinematics and air to air missiles with a terrible F-Pole.

V

hey guys i heard the z65 bomber could fly at 657778383 altitude while the 57575jkksk jet engine could launch at 584783u8uijf degrees Celsius
baddood;


Socks

Quote from: V on April 23, 2008, 08:48:28 PM
hey guys i heard the z65 bomber could fly at 657778383 altitude while the 57575jkksk jet engine could launch at 584783u8uijf degrees Celsius


LoL, nice one V, that's some bomber.

V

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 08:49:51 PM
LoL, nice one V, that's some bomber.

the shit can also nosedive like a muthafucka.  baddood;

Socks

Quote from: V on April 23, 2008, 08:51:16 PM
the shit can also nosedive like a muthafucka.


This would be problematic as given the performance of your bomber it would not likely recover from such a dive.

V

Quote from: Socks on April 23, 2008, 08:52:31 PM
This would be problematic as given the performance of your bomber it would not likely recover from such a dive.
aw don't worry, the bomber has a secret thingy i like to call "the jesus juice amplifier" which allows it to recover from anything.  baddood;

Daddy


Socks

I see, in that case I'm sure the good folks at DARPA, the USAF, Lockmart, Boeing and NG would like to get in touch...

Go Up