U.S. Air Aborted Takeoff PHL

MikeD said:
Boeing and Airbus both build a nice product. So do Lockheed and MdD...Convair too for that matter.

All good in their own individual ways.
Click to expand...

Oh I agree. I was j/k with the Airbus better than a Boeing comment of reason #1,253. Just taking Seggy's fight back to him ;)
 
There are things I do miss about the Airbus.

However, overall, the Boeing is superior, in my mind.

That work for you @SteveC?
 
Cruise said:
It seems I'm late to the party.....@Autothrust Blue already covered it nicely. Direct law blending into Normal law shortly after takeoff. So if you yank on the stick during rotation (there's a joke in there somewhere) the end result will be less than desirable (wait, is there another joke here too).
Click to expand...

One thing I remember is if your playing horse jockey during takeoff, at about 100 feet, just chill because it's probably you at that point.
 
Also, since I have no idea how to use photoshop, my wife did this:

lulz.jpg
 
Autothrust Blue said:
The purpose of the bypass in the Brasilia's engine intake is so that FOD - you know...birds, ice, and Canadair Regional Jet parts - do not enter the engine's compressor section...
Click to expand...
The purpose of the engine intake bypass on the Q400 is so that you have something to write in the MX log when either the light doesn't work, the door doesn't work, the heater doesn't turn on, or any combination of light/door/heater stupidity.
 
pete2800 said:
Also, since I have no idea how to use photoshop, my wife did this:

lulz.jpg
Click to expand...


God, I love this website. Not only is this pic hilarious, it also shows that there seems to have indeed been a tail strike (if this is the same airplane)
 
Seggy said:
We were told it was a fly by demonstration. It might have gone into Alpha Floor though.....
Click to expand...

Paper work called for the fly by at 500 AGL. CA elected to do it at 100AGL. In reality they went even lower. 50.... 30.... recorded on CVR. Simple systems knowledge would let them know AFloor protections below 100AGL would not kick in because the airplane thinks you're landing. But none of that matters. The point is given their AGL, the height of the trees ahead, low airspeed, and attitude, the airplane did exactly what it was designed to do. If it was a Boeing in that EXACT same situation, it would have stick shaked straight to a pusher into the ground. It doesn't matter what airplane you're in when you're on the back side of the power curve at a very low altitude with trees ahead of you that are higher than your aircraft height.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top