T1B

Watching a report of commercial planes having close calls with drones. Sully Sullenberger says it is a matter of time when there is a bad accident. This is crazy! No one thought of this when they allowed them to take the air? What benefit do they really provide?

Google is your friend.

Wolfman wrote:commercial planes having close calls with drones.

And guys fishing off Crystal Pier

Papa Willie wrote:The funniest thing I've heard yet is how Amazon plans on using drones to ship items. Now how long do you think a drone carrying merch will last over the south side of Chicago?

What makes you think they'd be able to hit it?

Screw_Michigan wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:The funniest thing I've heard yet is how Amazon plans on using drones to ship items. Now how long do you think a drone carrying merch will last over the south side of Chicago?

What makes you think they'd be able to hit it?

Schlomo Ben Walmart would hit it.

Screw_Michigan wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:The funniest thing I've heard yet is how Amazon plans on using drones to ship items. Now how long do you think a drone carrying merch will last over the south side of Chicago?

What makes you think they'd be able to hit it?

Converging fires on a predetermined flight path. Assuming you have a white person mapping the ingress point of course.

Amazon drones = skeet with prizes

Mikey wrote:
Schlomo Ben Walmart would hit it.

What the...??? Michael, where the heck did that come from? What have I ever done to YOU?

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote: What have I ever done to YOU?

oh yeah...now I remember...

Diego in Seattle wrote:Amazon drones = skeet with prizes

gotta rack that one

order for papa willie

skeet with prizes

Skeet is its own reward!

--Melton

A facinating 7 minutes and 13 seconds of the sounds of an actual drone in flight. 3:34 into the vid will blow your mind.

mvscal wrote:

skeet with prizes

Skeet is its own reward!

--Melton

You don't know skeet about having fun... til you've spent a day in Omaha.







Sin,


The Mexican farm worker in Omaha

Why are people so worked up about drones? These are not new. We have had RC planes and helicopters for years.

Wolfman wrote:Watching a report of commercial planes having close calls with drones. Sully Sullenberger says it is a matter of time when there is a bad accident. This is crazy! No one thought of this when they allowed them to take the air? What benefit do they really provide?

When RC cars took to the sandboxes of children everywhere, did you grab your rifle and start shooting at the moon? When children started shooting off glorified bottle rockets designed as spacecraft in elementary schools, did you hunt down the nearest nig nog and lynch them? You backwards fuck!

You're one of those mother fuckers in the 18th century that declared tomatoes poisonous aren't you?

It's only been recently that we have a group of people spouting some sort of belief in the Islamic faith and committed to doing great harm to "infidels", even committing suicide to carry out their schemes. One of the commercial pilots interviewed commented that the model airplane folks were a bit more trustworthy. If we thought idiots with lasers were a problem, this is far worse.

Left Seater wrote:Why are people so worked up about drones? These are not new. We have had RC planes and helicopters for years.

Those are line of sight, yes? Drones can operate BVR. Quite a difference.

Yes most RC planes are line of sight. But there have also been some that are jet powered. I wasn't aware that the average drone from the hobby store is BVR.

Are they going to retrain their pit bulls to retrieve the loot?

R-Jack wrote:Are they going to retrain their pit bulls to retrieve the loot?

Wait...don't you have a pitbull?

Are you part moon-cricket? High Yellow? Red Bone Bruthah?

Wow! what a cool map. It's like an ISIS guide to prime targets in the USA

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:

R-Jack wrote:Are they going to retrain their pit bulls to retrieve the loot?

Wait...don't you have a pitbull?

Are you part moon-cricket? High Yellow? Red Bone Bruthah?

Nope. Just a good old fashioned Bean Dipper.

BarFlie wrote:Wow! what a cool map. It's like an ISIS guide to prime targets in the USA

They'd better add the airspace over my house. If I see any drone near my crib I'll bring it down with a high pressure stream of piss.

I had 7 or 8 different incidences of near misses with Predators or Reapers and dozens of near misses with the smaller Ravens and Scan Eagles back in Afghanistan. Many of them were within 50 yards or less and during one remarkable event, we actually had a Scan Eagle right under our rotor system on approach. It wasn't too much of a problem when their aspect to ours was perpendicular or in cross traffic, but when in a direct converging aspect, the small visual profile is so tiny and the relative motion in relation to the background is minimal, so those near misses were quite frightening. I was not on the controls when the Scan Eagle was just about within physical touching distance and when I spied it I was so shocked by its' proximity that I couldn't get the words out of my mouth. All I could manage was me pointing out the window at the bird and shout-stammering, "The-the-the-the-the-the!!!!" After a second or two of watching it I saw it was very slowly losing altitude and moving away from us at a rate of 2 or 3 feet per second, so I declined to take the controls from my SIC-- unless he started to turn in towards it. Once it was out from under our rotors I regained control of my mouth and explained what it was I was so agitated about. Nobody had seen it but me until I took the controls and told the crew where to look. They gave me a hard time about it every time I made a traffic call from that day forward.

I like to think that I am calm, cool, and collected when flying-- a veritable Chuck Yeager (yeah... right ) --but in that moment it was all I could do to form any words describing the situation. Thankfully, I had the presence of mind to NOT grab the controls since transferring stick would likely have jostled the rotor system and possibly have caused a blade strike.

It is just a matter of time before a drone gets ingested into an engine intake or hits another aircraft in a critical place causing an accident. Scary stuff.

BarFlie wrote:Wow! what a cool map. It's like an ISIS guide to prime targets in the USA

Yeah, it is very hard to find targets in the US. To even to an exact GPS coordinates.

Sin,

Google Earth

http://www.abc15.com/news/national/faa- ... han-double
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoeni ... to-phoenix

Papa Willie wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote:http://www.abc15.com/news/national/faa- ... han-double
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoeni ... to-phoenix

Yup. One will end up going through an engine on approach. Down goes plane, bye-bye drones.

Losing an engine on approach is bad. Losing one while taking off at near max weight on a hot day will cause the pucker factor to go up quickly.

Most of the time during approach the power setting is damn near idle so the engines aren't producing much thrust anyway. Still have to be ready to react, but it isn't nearly the emergency losing an engine on take off is.

Still haven't seen a single drone or heard a report of one in an area where I was flying. Guess it will happen someday.

Left Seater wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote:http://www.abc15.com/news/national/faa- ... han-double
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoeni ... to-phoenix

Yup. One will end up going through an engine on approach. Down goes plane, bye-bye drones.

Losing an engine on approach is bad. Losing one while taking off at near max weight on a hot day will cause the pucker factor to go up quickly.

Most of the time during approach the power setting is damn near idle so the engines aren't producing much thrust anyway. Still have to be ready to react, but it isn't nearly the emergency losing an engine on take off is.

Still haven't seen a single drone or heard a report of one in an area where I was flying. Guess it will happen someday.

If an engine is taken out, how much stopping power is lost on the runway?

Impossible to say exactly what the loss of reverse thrust is unless we know other factors including the breaking quality of the runway. On top of that commercial planes are still able to be dispatched with one reverser inop. Or in other words they can legally operate a flight knowing one of the reversers isn't working.

In today's planes with auto spoilers and auto brake settings the reversers help save wear and tear on the the brakes and help keep them cool which is important in quick turnaround applications. On a normal landing the auto spoilers would be armed and an acceleration setting selected for the brakes. Once the main gear compresses to a certain point and over a set period of time (in case of a bounce) the spoilers auto deploy. This has the effect of "dumping" most of the lift generated by the wing. This puts most of the weight of the plane on the wheels which helps increase the braking factor. The brakes then start slowing the plane at whatever setting was selected, ie 6 feet per second.

If reverse thrust is used, it doesn't add onto the braking speed, it reduces the effort of the brakes. Say a brake setting of 6 feet per second is selected. Without reverse thrust the brakes may need to work at a force of 10. However at that same setting of 6 feet per second and use of reverse thrust the brakes may only need to work at a force of 5. Or said another way the plane will never stop faster than the brake setting selected in the cockpit despite the use of or non use of reverse thrust.

On a long dry runway maybe most of the stopping effort normally comes from reverse thrust. On a shorter runway the brakes are doing much of the work.

So to bring this back to your question who knows. But the lack of reverse thrust isn't going to be the reason for a runway overrun on landing in 98% of cases.

Left Seater wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:

Atomic Punk wrote:http://www.abc15.com/news/national/faa- ... han-double
http://www.abc15.com/news/region-phoeni ... to-phoenix

Yup. One will end up going through an engine on approach. Down goes plane, bye-bye drones.

Losing an engine on approach is bad. Losing one while taking off at near max weight on a hot day will cause the pucker factor to go up quickly.

I was on a plane that lost an engine right at lift-off. Miami to Chicago, and it was pretty full.

And thanks to the skill of the pilots and the overbuilt nature of the plane non of the rest of us heard about it.

These things do happen, but if I were to have my choice I would rather have an engine quit turning on approach than on rotation.

I would think it isn't a big deal if you are in a situation where you can immediately level off and maintain airspeed. I suspect this is the case most everywhere. Even if there are nearby mountains, they generally aren't close enough to be an issue.

Can most commercial airliners climb on a single engine? I would think they could manage a slight climb.

Yup. All planes must be able to climb with an engine out. Huge difference though between that happening in Boston and Eagle Vail. Lots more lift at sea level than at 7900 feet. Plus not much in the way of terrain around Boston compared to 14,000 feet peaks around Eagle.

Plenty of mountains around ABQ, Vegas, Denver, SLC, PHX etc etc.

I have flown into or out of Eagle 7 times. Four take offs and three landings. I have also been a passenger in there a handful of times as well.

I guarantee everyone pays a little more attention to everything going on or out of there. Clouds add to the pucker factor as they do in many locations.

How much more airspeed do you need to land at a place like Eagle, or do you just use different flap settings>

We use the same flap setting of 39 degrees for most every landing.

But one thing to remember or understand is that the performance capabilities are related to standard atmosphere. (29.92 inches of mercury at sea level with an air temp of 15C.) At altitude (or warmer air) the density of the air decreases. Therefore our true airspeed is going to be faster than our indicated airspeed and our roll out will be longer.