Jump to content


Photo

Aircraft Super Thread Mk.VII

jets warplanes fighters stealth

  • Please log in to reply
1135 replies to this topic

#106 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 25 April 2012 - 07:23 PM

National? As in merged-with-Pan-Am-in-1979 National? Do tell.

Anyways--interesting article/magazine on US carrier flightdeck ops/safety/notation: http://www.public.na...thEdition08.pdf

#107 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 25 April 2012 - 07:57 PM

National? As in merged-with-Pan-Am-in-1979 National? Do tell.


There are at least four different incarnations of National Airlines:

National Airlines (IATA: NA) (1934-1980) - The one swallowed-up by Pan Am.
National Airlines (IATA: none) (1983-1986) - Never got off the ground.
National Airlines (IATA: N7) (1999-2002) - Short-lived Las Vegas airliner.
National Airlines (IATA: N8) (2008-present) - Formerly Murray Air.

#108 Beltane70

Beltane70

    New Edwards Test Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lakewood, NJ, USA

Posted 25 April 2012 - 08:02 PM

Yep, that's the one, David. I don't really remember much about them, though. I was around 8 or 9 when I flew with my mother and sister to visit my grandparents in Florida. It took me forever to even find the name of them since it was that long ago. Luckily, I was able to remember its logo and was able to find it that way.

The only thing that I can remember about that airline is seeing Pete's Dragon as the inflight movie. That, and I remember my sister spilling her soda.

#109 kalvasflam

kalvasflam

    Global's Pipe Holder

  • Members
  • 933 posts

Posted 25 April 2012 - 10:56 PM

Pan Am... the second airline I ever flew on when I first came to the US. The first was a turboprop deathtrap in China, but as an 8 year old, I was fascinated.

I think the US airlines in general suck. My mileage is with United, and I'm not impressed with them. Heard good things about Virgin America, and have flown Jetblue in the early 2000s, back then, their service was pretty good.

I love flying on Asiana, Thai, and Singapore. Too bad, it's not that often any more.

#110 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 25 April 2012 - 11:05 PM

There are at least four different incarnations of National Airlines:


That's why I specified. (specifically, the only one that counts)

#111 F-ZeroOne

F-ZeroOne

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 27 April 2012 - 01:58 PM

I've often thought it would be cool if all nations agreed to ban things like guided missiles, radar, jet engines and stealth to reducing spiralling defense procurement cost.

Then I'd love to see with today's technology, how good of a prop driven fighter plane we could build, compared with the best WWII planes.eapons to be limited to machineguns, cannon, unguided rockets or unguided bombs.

Graham


We probably wouldn't do much better than the late-model WWII planes, I think. If you ban jet engines you could well be banning turboprops - which are, essentially, a jet engine with a propeller...! If you still allow CAD at the design stage, then there might be some interesting designs allowed and also if you allow composite materials and computerised flight controls which may have a significant effect on weight and handling. Electronics are in everything these days, so fuel effiency might be better due to electronic engine controls, but if you don't allow that - well, the late war fighters were pushing the limits of conventional prop design (arguably, the P-38 with its compressibility issues was doing that in 1940!), which is why everyone started moving to jets in the first place.

Regards UAVs in movies: actually, Sidewinders being used against ground targets is not completely unrealistic (leaving asides the fact that no current drone I know of mounts them); early Sidewinders reportedly often locked onto ground targets due to reflected heat, while recently the US carried out trials with the latest model 'winders for use against ground targets...

#112 Bowen

Bowen

    Sharon Apple Concert Attendee

  • Members
  • 276 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2012 - 02:52 AM

We probably wouldn't do much better than the late-model WWII planes, I think. If you ban jet engines you could well be banning turboprops - which are, essentially, a jet engine with a propeller...! If you still allow CAD at the design stage, then there might be some interesting designs allowed and also if you allow composite materials and computerised flight controls which may have a significant effect on weight and handling. Electronics are in everything these days, so fuel effiency might be better due to electronic engine controls, but if you don't allow that - well, the late war fighters were pushing the limits of conventional prop design (arguably, the P-38 with its compressibility issues was doing that in 1940!), which is why everyone started moving to jets in the first place.


We might get a nice discovery channel show about some hotrodders trying to tune fighter engines :P

Spoiler


#113 F-ZeroOne

F-ZeroOne

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 29 April 2012 - 03:31 AM

Just another small point about "banning" "cutting-edge technology" - World War II fighter aircraft were, by and large, cutting edge technology at the time. In fact, some pilots of the era used to complain about the new-fangled gadgets like retractable landing gear and cockpit canopies that they didn't need in the good ol' days... :) At least one historian has argued that this sometimes had a detrimental effect on aircraft design, when pilots in some countires were able to exert an undue amount of influence (the example used was Japan, where the pilots preference for light, agile fighters meant sacrificing armour and firepower, though its no doubt more complicated than that as available engine power was another factor... )

Edited by F-ZeroOne, 29 April 2012 - 03:32 AM.


#114 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 07:03 AM

Going back to the subject of airliners, how many of you are disoriented by United's current logo? I know that it's a result of the merger between United and Continental, but it's just not United. How long before they actually revert to the old "tulip" logo?

#115 Beltane70

Beltane70

    New Edwards Test Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lakewood, NJ, USA

Posted 29 April 2012 - 09:43 AM

Possibly never. I was actually pretty surprised that they decided using the name United instead of Continental. I was always under the impression that Continental was the more successful and financially stable airline.

#116 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 04:36 PM

Possibly never. I was actually pretty surprised that they decided using the name United instead of Continental. I was always under the impression that Continental was the more successful and financially stable airline.


Perhaps, but United is the name more people recognize.

#117 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 04:37 PM

Going back to the subject of airliners, how many of you are disoriented by United's current logo? I know that it's a result of the merger between United and Continental, but it's just not United. How long before they actually revert to the old "tulip" logo?


Not so much the logo, but the paintscheme. I absolutely hate United's name on CO's paint. To the point that I won't fly on them any more. UA is dead to me. (and I have more UA models in my collection than anything else)

CO already had among the oldest, most boring paint scheme in the industry---that scheme pre-dates United's PREVIOUS scheme. And United's final scheme was among the best to come out in the entire world in 20 years IMHO. Classic, with stripes and many shades of blue. CO is white with grey.

The scheme was chosen purely (and they have stated this) because it was cheaper and quicker to repaint UAL's fleet white and grey, than to paint CO's fleet with multiple shades of blue.

Still, they could have at least added another stripe or something, to break up the incredible blandness that is CO warm pale grey. (that *is* a color----CO actually has a special pale warm grey paint that only they use, for the belly and engines--it is not the "manufacturer" grey that is applied to the wings--close, but it is a unique color)

#118 Beltane70

Beltane70

    New Edwards Test Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,168 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Lakewood, NJ, USA

Posted 29 April 2012 - 09:25 PM

I'll still fly CO/UN since i already have quite quite a few frequent flyer miles with them.

#119 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 10:40 PM

Personally, I was never used to the last CO livery. I always thought the old "meatball" livery (1968-1991) was the definitive Continental Airlines. As for UA, I prefer the 1993 "battleship" livery.

#120 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 10:56 PM

I prefer UA grey too, to the final blue--but it's still 1000x better than current CO. (the BEST United scheme was the "revised" Saul Bass----lowered stripes and bigger titles, 1988-1992)

As for CO---again, the 'revised' version with bigger titles and narrower stripes, 1984-1991 or so.

#121 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 29 April 2012 - 11:11 PM

Once again, we have another company attempting to revive the Pan Am name. However, no one's sure if this one will actually fly. But with Pan Am regaining interest after ABC recently aired a TV drama about a group of 1960s stewardesses, who knows?

Pan American Airways

#122 Shadow

Shadow

    Skull Leader's Lackey

  • Members
  • 389 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ohio

Posted 01 May 2012 - 04:35 PM

Another day at the office. B))



#123 reddsun1

reddsun1

    New Edwards Test Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,263 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Virginia, USA

Posted 03 May 2012 - 10:10 AM

Another day at the office. B))


Now everybody gimme a big "hell yeah!"

On a somewhat related note, this is pretty cool: get yerself a flight helmet in a custom scheme...

http://www.gentexhelmet.com/#02-fixed

Hmm, now which would be cooler for swooshing around the living room in, Yammie VF in hand? Jolly Rogers, or an adaptation of the Skull sqn scheme?

Edited by reddsun1, 03 May 2012 - 10:30 AM.


#124 electric indigo

electric indigo

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,999 posts
  • Location:Olympic Carrier

Posted 03 May 2012 - 11:25 AM

Posted Image

IAI's Harop UAV. Looks like an aerial Klingon vessel.

#125 Graham

Graham

    Sheryl's panties....yum!

  • Admin
  • 13,000 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Hong Kong

Posted 03 May 2012 - 08:20 PM

Posted Image

IAI's Harop UAV. Looks like an aerial Klingon vessel.


Does it come with a cloaking device?

Graham

#126 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 07:18 AM

Since this TV series is aircraft related (though pretty loosely), I'll post my review here.

Posted Image
Pan Am
Jack Orman Productions/ABC Television/Sony Pictures Television, 2011-2012
Created by Jack Orman (ER, JAG)
Running Time: 43 minutes per episode
Rated TV-PG for mild language and mature situations.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ktkjIoemzB8&hd=1

Cast
Christina Ricci (Wednesday in The Addams Family, Katrina in Sleepy Hollow) as Maggie Ryan
Margot Robbie (Donna in Neighbours) as Laura Cameron
Michael Mosley as Ted Vanderway
Karine Vanasse :wub: as Colette Valois
Mike Vogel (Jason in Cloverfield, Johnny in The Help) as Dean Lowrey
Kelli Garner (Faith in The Aviator, Barb in Man of the House) as Kate Cameron
Annabelle Wallis (that blonde chick Charles was flirting with in X-Men: First Class) as Bridget Pierce
Jeremy Davidson as Richard Parks
Kal Parekh as Sanjeev
David Harbour (Gregg Beam in Quantum of Solace) as Roger Anderson
Goran Visnjic (Dragan in The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (2011), Mark Miller in Elektra) as Niko Lonza
Ashley Greene (Alice Cullen in The Twilight Saga) as Amanda Mason

Lowdown
Normally, I don't watch TV dramas because they're just not interesting, but one day, I wanted to read a little about the fabled airline known as Pan Am. And in the middle of my searches on Google and Wikipedia, I stumbled upon this TV series.

Set in 1963 during the Jet Age boom, Pan Am chronicles the adventures of the crew of Pan Am's Boeing 707 Jet Clipper Majestic. The main focus is on four stewardesses: Maggie (who will always be Wednesday, even in a sexy Pan Am uniform), Kate (who is also working for the CIA as a low-level courier), Laura (Kate's younger sister who struggles to grow up after having run away from her wedding) and Colette (a French girl who survived World War II, but still hates the Germans). There's also some emphasis on flight captain Dean (who's still coping with the mysterious disappearance of his fiance Bridget) and first officer Ted (a former naval test pilot whose hopes for entering the Space Program were diminished by an accident).

Storywise, it's a lot of things crammed up in a 43-minute episode - a soap opera, a spy thriller and a historical re-enactment on what commercial flight was like in the old days. Some viewers may have trouble keeping up with the multiple subplots, as each character has their own share of issues. The production crew spared no expense on recreating the 1960s atmosphere and depicting Pan Am in its former glory. The uniforms have been meticulously replicated to give viewers an idea of what real stewardesses looked like.

Posted Image

As for the cast, viewers will have their favorites, but there's no doubt that most guys who watch this show have easily fallen in love with Colette. To call her gorgeous is an understatement. She has that look reminiscent of Sophie Marceau.

In short, Pan Am is not a perfect series, but it's worth checking out, whether you're an airline afficionado or you just want to see more of Colette. The big question is whether or not ABC will renew the series for a second season.

Rating: B

Links
ABC's Official Pan Am Homepage
Sony Pictures' Official Pan Am Homepage

References
TV.com
Wikipedia

#127 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 11:34 AM

but it's worth checking out, whether you're an airline afficionado or you just want to see more of Colette.


Unless you're a huge airline buff, and can't stand the gross inaccuracies and anachronisms. (and the zillion of smaller ones). :P

PS---would have been nice if ABC used the right logo, for starters. That's not the "60's" PAA logo. "Meticulous attention to detail"--maybe if the show was set in 1984...

#128 Vifam7

Vifam7

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,812 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Long Island, NY

Posted 07 May 2012 - 01:49 PM

Unless you're a huge airline buff, and can't stand the gross inaccuracies and anachronisms. (and the zillion of smaller ones). :P

PS---would have been nice if ABC used the right logo, for starters. That's not the "60's" PAA logo. "Meticulous attention to detail"--maybe if the show was set in 1984...


I doubt the series was made with airline aficionados in mind. :)

I screened the first episode. I do like the period "feel" of the series. It's Hollywood so ya gotta let things like accuracy slide. :lol:

But I think the series might be a bit too light and escapist fantasy for today's crowd who seem to desire more gritty or somber tones in their drama shows.

#129 505thAirborne

505thAirborne

    SMS Squadron Leader

  • Members
  • 3,319 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:CIC BSG-75

Posted 07 May 2012 - 07:35 PM

http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html

Interesting article about some Raptor pilots & the F-22.

#130 kalvasflam

kalvasflam

    Global's Pipe Holder

  • Members
  • 933 posts

Posted 07 May 2012 - 09:12 PM

http://news.yahoo.co...topstories.html

Interesting article about some Raptor pilots & the F-22.


Kelly Johnson is probably rolling over in his grave. This is such a sad state for the F-22

#131 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 07 May 2012 - 09:24 PM

Some things don't need to be re-invented, like "how to supply oxygen to the pilot of a fighter jet". It was perfected decades ago. "But hey, let's increase the zillion-dollar development costs and delay the program even more by trying to invent a new system".

I wonder if the F-35's system is based more on the F-22, or F-16...

Boeing is noted for almost directly copying the 727's slat deployment system for the 777, despite decades of advances in aerospace technology---because there still hadn't been anything better. Point.

#132 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 08 May 2012 - 12:42 PM

Years ago, Jane's (and the DOD) would have paid SO much money for a shot like this:
http://www.airliners...G-31/2082356/L/

#133 eugimon

eugimon

    collect me all

  • Members
  • 13,272 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bay Area, California

Posted 08 May 2012 - 07:19 PM

Attached File  0512wallpaper-week-1-10_1600.jpg   535.14KB   10 downloads

#134 electric indigo

electric indigo

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,999 posts
  • Location:Olympic Carrier

Posted 08 May 2012 - 11:01 PM

Attached File  0512wallpaper-week-1-10_1600.jpg   535.14KB   10 downloads


Mothership?

#135 David Hingtgen

David Hingtgen

    Powerless Mod

  • Moderator
  • 14,689 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Iowa
  • Interests:Airplanes (especially airliners), trains, warships.

Posted 08 May 2012 - 11:37 PM

Aer Lingus A330, and I'd say a -200.

#136 areaseven

areaseven

    BOMBA!

  • Members
  • 9,867 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:48 4′ 2″ N, 12 51′ 49″ E
  • Interests:Anime, cars, movies.

Posted 09 May 2012 - 12:54 AM

I doubt the series was made with airline aficionados in mind. :)

I screened the first episode. I do like the period "feel" of the series. It's Hollywood so ya gotta let things like accuracy slide. :lol:

But I think the series might be a bit too light and escapist fantasy for today's crowd who seem to desire more gritty or somber tones in their drama shows.


It does get dark after the pilot, especially on episode 3, where the crew fly to Berlin during JFK's "Ich bin ein Berliner" speech.

#137 the white drew carey

the white drew carey

    Alaska Base Survivor

  • Members
  • 2,969 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Oxford, UK

Posted 09 May 2012 - 04:00 AM

Sukhoi Superjet-100 with 44 on board for a demonstration flight has dropped off of the radars in Jakarta.

#138 pfunk

pfunk

    New Edwards Test Pilot

  • Members
  • 2,306 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:MI
  • Interests:Macross of course

Posted 09 May 2012 - 05:24 AM

For those unfamiliar with the legend, here's what a Kai Tak landing looks like:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OtnL4KYVtDE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g-ArLYsloI

Now if Kai Tak were still around, imagine landing an Airbus A380 on it.

Im still amazed at the lift at low speed of those heavy birds

#139 electric indigo

electric indigo

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,999 posts
  • Location:Olympic Carrier

Posted 09 May 2012 - 06:15 AM

Sukhoi Superjet-100 with 44 on board for a demonstration flight has dropped off of the radars in Jakarta.


Let's hope it was a demonstration of their "active stealth" device.

#140 F-ZeroOne

F-ZeroOne

    Pineapple Eater

  • Members
  • 1,998 posts

Posted 09 May 2012 - 11:12 AM

Well, it seems a Prime Minister called Dave has decided that if the UK is going to have a plane called Dave - sorry, I mean, the F-35 - then its going to be the "B" variant after all. Just make it work, chaps, what? :)

Edited by F-ZeroOne, 10 May 2012 - 03:08 AM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: jets, warplanes, fighters, stealth

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users