717 certification stall test

PeanuckleCRJ said:
Nope! Reference FOM section something or another. ;) It's in there where it discusses the WDR.

After an A period and then doing special projects office work until 1600, my motivation to delve into DL manuals is quite low!
Click to expand...

I haven't worked for a month and don't even know where my Surface is.

That was the funniest thing about the Airbus program. Every couple weeks I find myself thinking, "Man, if everything was so modern and awesome before, why in the world were these jets ordered without ______________ ?"

I gotta tag-in @Richman.
 
Derg said:
I haven't worked for a month and don't even know where my Surface is.

That was the funniest thing about the Airbus program. Every couple weeks I find myself thinking, "Man, if everything was so modern and awesome before, why in the world were these jets ordered without ______________ ?"

I gotta tag-in @Richman.
Click to expand...

717 wet is wet

757-200 wet is dry on grooved

757-300 wet is wet

So, Alex, the Daily Double question is "what is 'it depends'"

Sometimes airplanes look all cool and groovy, like a tricked out '78 Trans-Am barn find with 3000 original miles, only to find out the original buyer didn't check the order box for "air conditioning"

Richman
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
When we're flying an A320 and following a 767 that is well ahead and clear, and we're given 190 kts, but the CA gets a little scared and dials back to 170kts when it's your leg, and you say hey it's suppose to be 190, and he says he doesn't want to get to close to a 767, even though that jet is far ahead, and then the EWR controllers jumps on the radio asking what is your speed! you were given 190! , then yeah.... Or worse, seeing a guy overreact to a wake encounter by rolling more than what's necessary to go level, and then having to go back the other way to re-correct that action. Just not a fan of PIO, that is all...
Click to expand...
You do realize this thread has nothing to do with wake turbulence, besides what you've posted, right?
 
DPApilot said:
You do realize this thread has nothing to do with wake turbulence, besides what you've posted, right?
Click to expand...


102-Animal-House-quotes.gif
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
?

Video title "in the wake"
Click to expand...

Wait... Seriously? I quoted you and everything...

inigo88 said:
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
And oh, this is a wake turbulence exercise? Pretty sure the NTSB came down harshly on at least one legacy airline for over-emphasizing the impact of wake turbulence on large transport category aircraft. If you're cruising along, you're not gonna flip on your back. This isn't a RJ or a Learjet.
Click to expand...

C'mon man, read the freaking comments of the video. It is NOT a wake turbulence encounter. These are trained Boeing test pilots doing stall certification testing. Clearly, they didn't expect the airplane to depart the way it did, and the jump seater gets up to check on the flight test Engineers in the back at the end of the video.

This literally has nothing to do with wake turbulence. If you read the comments, some 717 pilots at an airline in Australia posted it to make fun of each other.

The last few pages of this thread and all the wake turbulence arguments were totally pointless and off topic...
Click to expand...
 
UAL747400 said:
I always assume thread drift is a result of alcohol and that everyone posting after 10 ET is probably wasted or about to be. Haha

My ass OT posts are always fueled by lots of rum! Like today! :) I can only assume the same in this case. That or Virgin doesn't screen very well... Just joshing you @Cherokee_Cruiser :)
Click to expand...

Shoot, if you can't beat em join em?

* Insert beer toasting smiley that used to exist here *

:)
 
Hacker15e said:
Nor do many airline pilots...some of them right on this very forum.
Click to expand...

I'm reasonably certain that if someone were to intentionally roll their airliner past about 60 degrees on a whim they will likely not be employed for long if the FAA can find a source that isn't protected, as they will have their ATP's yanked ASAP.
 
jtrain609 said:
I'm reasonably certain that if someone were to intentionally roll their airliner past about 60 degrees on a whim they will likely not be employed for long if the FAA can find a source that isn't protected, as they will have their ATP's yanked ASAP.
Click to expand...

Completely not talking about doing that intentionally.
 
inigo88 said:
Wait... Seriously? I quoted you and everything...
Click to expand...

Well in my defense I stopped reading the comments section of aviation videos a long time ago. Too many flight simmers who claim to have known better and share how they would have saved the day. I saw the wake in the title and assumed they were doing recovering from being flipped by a wake. I don't know, I'll take your word for it in terms of what it really was.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top