Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on January 29, 2008, 09:09:21 AM
-
:aok
http://www.gillesvidal.com/blogpano/cockpit1.htm
-
Some sweet stuff there! It's a great plane but an UGLY fuselage! I'll scan a picture here around 12:00 ish central to show you what the original idea was for this plane.
-
I can understand flying on the right side, with the controller in my right hand. But Im wondering how long my brain would take to get used to flying with the left?
I know the Cirrus is setup like this too.
-
What????? No cupholder?
-
Originally posted by LePaul
I can understand flying on the right side, with the controller in my right hand. But Im wondering how long my brain would take to get used to flying with the left?
I know the Cirrus is setup like this too.
Anybody have any clue what those other 2 handles are to the left of the control stick? One looks like one of those FPS game controllers companies keep trying to sell, and the other looks like an oh-**** handle of some sort.
-
except for the takeoff and last few hundred feet of landing all their flying is done by pushing buttons and turning knobs.
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
What????? No cupholder?
Look in the back behind the laptop. I was disappointed about the lack of a pretty airhostess.
-
A HUD and a red trigger on the stick, is this "airbus" just a slightly larger jet powered jug?
-
Originally posted by DiabloTX
What????? No cupholder?
Saw plenty of em :D
Look under the outboard armrests and behind the laptop computer by the third seat.
-
No HUD for the FO?
-
Where is the inflatable auto pilot?
-
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
Look in the back behind the laptop. I was disappointed about the lack of a pretty airhostess.
Well, at least it will give the flight engineer something to do.
Pilot "Pierre, could you please hand me my Perrier?"
Engineer "Oui boss, oui."
-
Here is the picture I promised to scan. Took it out of the book, "Wissen mit Pfiff: Flugzeuge"
(http://603sqdrn.collectivelyspaced.com/Original-A380.jpg)
In my opinion the A380 we have now compared to the one in the picture is much uglier.
-
what, no bottle of vodka beside the seat?
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Here is the picture I promised to scan. Took it out of the book, "Wissen mit Pfiff: Flugzeuge"
(http://603sqdrn.collectivelyspaced.com/Original-A380.jpg)
In my opinion the A380 we have now compared to the one in the picture is much uglier.
What did they really change? the nose and cockpit location seem different but not much else. IMO they are both ugly as sin.
-
Yes, they put the pilot's life at risk by moving the cockpit down to the middle - lower level. If they decide to use this plane as a cargo hauler it could become dangerous. If any cargo gets loose and slides forward.... BAM, the pilots just got whacked. That was one of the safety features of the B747. It had a raised cockpit to prevent cargo from slamming into the cockpit and crushing the pilots.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Yes, they put the pilot's life at risk by moving the cockpit down to the middle - lower level. If they decide to use this plane as a cargo hauler it could become dangerous. If any cargo gets loose and slides forward.... BAM, the pilots just got whacked. That was one of the safety features of the B747. It had a raised cockpit to prevent cargo from slamming into the cockpit and crushing the pilots.
In all fairness, if cargo gets loose and doesn't whack the pilots, it wouldn't really matter anyway...the plane's skin (and spars) are aluminum and are no challenge for a heavy steel cargo container so the plane is going down either way. ;)
-
so the cargo misses the pilot but knocks a hole thought the nose cone of a 33,000ft 600mph jet.....still not seeing many plus sides to this loose cargo thing.
-
Batfink, it's highly unlikely that the cargo will slam into the forward parts of the aircraft at cruising altitude. Considering that you are neither climbing or descending, and your speed is equalized, the chances of cargo "sliding" forward in steady flight are slim. Even if it did, the amount of force required wouldn't be enough in steady flight.
Most likely the cargo would slam into the nose at lower altitudes when you are descending and braking. Either way, Boeing took into thought the fact that it can happen, and did something about it. Airbus didn't seem to care. Although it's highly unlikely to happen, it can. And the chances of surviving a lost nose are much greater when the pilots are alive and still inside the cockpit.
-
Ahhhhhh Hello....................wher es the gun rack?
Cool site!:aok
-
Originally posted by Denholm
Batfink, it's highly unlikely that the cargo will slam into the forward parts of the aircraft at cruising altitude. Considering that you are neither climbing or descending, and your speed is equalized, the chances of cargo "sliding" forward in steady flight are slim. Even if it did, the amount of force required wouldn't be enough in steady flight.
Most likely the cargo would slam into the nose at lower altitudes when you are descending and braking. Either way, Boeing took into thought the fact that it can happen, and did something about it. Airbus didn't seem to care. Although it's highly unlikely to happen, it can. And the chances of surviving a lost nose are much greater when the pilots are alive and still inside the cockpit.
Eventually that plan has to land though, and that involves changing the pitch. If the cargo is loose in the first place it seems unlikly that it would be able to resecured in flight, as the mechanism that hold it in place are likely to be damaged.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
It had a raised cockpit to prevent cargo from slamming into the cockpit and crushing the pilots.
Wrong. 747 has raised cockpit to maximize the floor area and to make nose cargo door, and with that loading and unloading of large cargo, possible.
(http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/boeing747-400f/images/Boeing747Freighter_4.jpg)
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
(http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/boeing747-400f/images/Boeing747Freighter_4.jpg)
FEED ME
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
(http://www.aerospace-technology.com/projects/boeing747-400f/images/Boeing747Freighter_4.jpg)
"Say AHHHH"
-
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t92/Airscrew/HAL.jpg)
HAL? oooohhhhh nnooooo
-
Originally posted by indy007
Anybody have any clue what those other 2 handles are to the left of the control stick? One looks like one of those FPS game controllers companies keep trying to sell, and the other looks like an oh-**** handle of some sort.
Well the one immediately to the left of the control stick looks like a control called a tiller which is used in a lot of transport aircraft to steer the airplane on the ground.
-
Originally posted by 2bighorn
Wrong. 747 has raised cockpit to maximize the floor area and to make nose cargo door, and with that loading and unloading of large cargo, possible.
If you think I was wrong then Boeing hired bad designers. When one of the multiple designers was interviewed he mentioned that. Either the designer interviewed wasn't an actual designer of the plane, or he was telling of one of the multiple security features which led to the design of the B747.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
If you think I was wrong then Boeing hired bad designers. When one of the multiple designers was interviewed he mentioned that. Either the designer interviewed wasn't an actual designer of the plane, or he was telling of one of the multiple security features which led to the design of the B747.
Tell that to Joe Sutter. Better yet, read his book.
On the side note, do you think C-130's design is unsafe, or C-17 and A-400 for that matter? Or just about any of commercial passenger airliners (other than 747) converted to freighter?
-
I was congratulating Boeing (An American company) for their work in pilot safety. I was criticizing Airbus (A European company) for missing that step in pilot safety. I don't see why you came to conclusions on me disliking C-130's, C-17's, A-400's, or any other passenger airliner that doesn't have the same design and safety feature of the 747.
Simple fact, Boeing thought, and that's what I like.
-
Originally posted by Denholm
I was congratulating Boeing (An American company) for their work in pilot safety. I was criticizing Airbus (A European company) for missing that step in pilot safety. I don't see why you came to conclusions on me disliking C-130's, C-17's, A-400's, or any other passenger airliner that doesn't have the same design and safety feature of the 747.
Simple fact, Boeing thought, and that's what I like.
Simple fact is, raised cockpit was not the result of safety consideration but practicality of handling the cargo (loading, unloading).
Besides, the more usual cockpit placement is not less safe.
-
If you look at it from a different perspective it is less safe. If cargo did get loose without the crew knowing it. On touchdown when the autobrakes kick in and the reversers fire the plane begins to slow down at about 10 MPH every 3 seconds. The cargo could gain enough momentum to smash through the cockpit walls and crush the pilots on the A380. If the cargo tried the same thing on the 747 it would simply hit the nose and stop or protrude through the nose and get stuck.
Now, in which situation do the pilots not get crushed?
-
Originally posted by Denholm
The cargo could gain enough momentum to smash through the cockpit walls and crush the pilots on the A380.
Why are you discussing matter you don't know anything about?
But I'll answer anyways. A-380F main deck floor (even though much stronger than pax version) would not be able to support cargo of such high density.
But, lets say it can. Cargo would have to go through two walls and the cockpit floor, since cockpit is between main and upper deck.
That would be possible only at very rapid deceleration (braking on the runway wouldn't do it), means plane would have to collide with something at very high speed. In that case, pilots would probably die before cargo could hit them.
-
Now that I know there's a block, I'll remain silent. I was discussing the matter as if there wasn't a block. Since I don't get into too detailed information about these airliners I wouldn't know. However that doesn't mean that I'm not entitled to an opinion.
-
No HAT Switch on the stick...WTF
-
Originally posted by MotleyCH
No HAT Switch on the stick...WTF
They probably use trackir.