AA RTO TPA

You don't even need weight. Or GPS. Just wheel speed.

Or just time from setting thrust to a known point on the runway.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Thinking about it for a minute, GPS and weight are all that you really need to compute acceleration, which is probably the only number we care about anyway. Time to write another iPhone app prototype on vacation tomorrow.
Click to expand...

dragy

www.godragy.com www.godragy.com

I’ve not used this app in particular, but I know someone that may have used one similar to calculate the horsepower and eighth/quarter/half mile times on an RJ
 
Minuteman said:
You don't even need weight. Or GPS. Just wheel speed.

Or just time from setting thrust to a known point on the runway.
Click to expand...

Time and distance are enough to compute acceleration and speed. But you also need weight to figure out the forces - power and drag numbers I suspect can be deduced from that. Besides, I don't think there is a good way to measure wheel speed on light aircraft.
 
drunkenbeagle said:
Time and distance are enough to compute acceleration and speed. But you also need weight to figure out the forces - power and drag numbers I suspect can be deduced from that. Besides, I don't think there is a good way to measure wheel speed on light aircraft.
Click to expand...
you could prob get the gps data out of the arinc bus if you have glass/experimental

for reno I tried gps datalogging with a g3x for data on the course/spacing off the pylons and found it only grabbed 1hz, but dynon system was somewhat more customizable and had better resolution for data capture
 
Why does the spotter sound like
maxresdefault.jpg
 
Autothrust Blue said:
Anyway, I had a "wait a minute" thought re: degraded acceleration and wondered if someone other than Super Mega Fifi had 'done' that already and it turns out not as far as I know.
Click to expand...
The Falcon 900 EASy had an accelerometer that was displayed for takeoff and there was a minimum value that you were supposed to cross reference for takeoff.

It’s been so long I don’t remember what any of the values were other than it was there and then it went away from the display after the landing gear was retracted. I think our call was airspeed alive acceleration checked, then 80, V1, rotate, but it has been almost 8 years so details about that stuff is a bit hazy.

Still my favorite airplane and going from it to the guppy was not pleasant for the flying but, but way worth it for the qol.
 
it kinda looked like fire trucks were flooding the pavement underneath and around the aircraft, in addition to directly spraying the landing gear fire.

Is that, like, an intentional strategy, or do some trucks just have a bad prostate?
 
Minuteman said:
it kinda looked like fire trucks were flooding the pavement underneath and around the aircraft, in addition to directly spraying the landing gear fire.

Is that, like, an intentional strategy, or do some trucks just have a bad prostate?
Click to expand...

If there was damage to some component that resulted in a combustible fluid leak, it could pool and then spread outwards and cause secondary ignition of other parts of the plane, or people exiting the plane. Covering the ground can smother that kind of issue before it starts.
 
My acceleration monitoring in the 73: 80kt call should be about the 1000 footers (taking into account displaced threshold/intersection departure). Wouldn’t help in this case.

Also this was just made clearer by this video: +1 for just stopping on the runway if an abort after 80. Debris closed the runway anyway.
 
Minuteman said:
it kinda looked like fire trucks were flooding the pavement underneath and around the aircraft, in addition to directly spraying the landing gear fire.

Is that, like, an intentional strategy, or do some trucks just have a bad prostate?
Click to expand...

It’s how foam solution is applied. You don’t shoot foam directly at a burning component with a straight stream.
 
I always vote for stop on the runway. Did you see the FOD spewing from the airplane? That runway is closed no matter what.

More room for the trucks. More room for the slides.

Great job by the crew. Hope they enjoyed a frosty beverage after.
 
CFIT99 said:
oh yeah...well in 1997 I watched a film from King videos that says that's correct....thinking back, it might have been a different "King" video...
Click to expand...

Arc it on, roll it on, or bank it on. Shooting foam solution directly into a fire straight stream degrades and/or destroys the foam as any kind of vapor barrier. In the video here, the crash truck at the left rear is rolling it on from the ground, placing finished foam atop the wheel and strut assembly. If it was a handline with firefighters manning it, they could attack directly with a slight fog pattern, but that would be more for suppression and cooling rather than for any kind of vapor barrier. Doesn’t appear the tire FOD punctured anything underneath the wing, so that’s good,
 
Cherokee_Cruiser said:
That didn’t have a wheel well fire indicator, right? The 737NG does.



While not full fatal, there’s been an accident where the tire-failure abort went bad. LAX to Hawaii retirement flight, DC10 1978
Continental 603

en.m.wikipedia.org

Continental Airlines Flight 603 - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org en.m.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

Problem is, you’d be airborne when that fire indicator activated. Perhaps not in a position to have time to make a landing back at an airfield depending on the severity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top