[vreihen16]

Originally Posted by 3.0L

Very small, personal airplane. Maybe the world’s smallest twin engine
airplane. Takeoff at 4:00.

Here's some more info on the Cri-Cri, as well as several other piloted tiny flying airplanes, helicopters, jets, etc:

.

[M5Rick]

The strange case of a Brit F-35B stealth fighter trapped at Thiruvananthapuram airport in southern India continues after it was forced to land there on 14 June in bad monsoon weather. The pilot landed it intact and various explanations of low on fuel but more likely a malfunction have been put out. Despite the efforts by 14 engineers from UK they say it probably can't be fired up safely and some experts say it may have to be dismantled and taken away in a cargo plane. It has become the butt of some jokes in the halls of power by the river here.

[Llarry]

NATO's multirole tanker/transport force is scheduled to grow from the current 10 Airbus A330 MRTTs to 12 aircraft.

The NATO transport/tankers operate from Eindhoven in the Netherlands with a forward operating base in Cologne, Germany. With the further expansion for the force, another FOB is planned for Denmark.

Note that the NATO aircraft are configured for both boom/receptacle and probe and drogue aerial refueling.

[Llarry]

One of the last Navy Sea Kings photographed in 1991 or so. Naval Air Reserve squadrons HS-75 and HS-85 formerly flew the ASW version SH-3H but converted to UH-3Hs with ASW equipment removed and were redesignated as HC-75 and -85.

After the demise of these two squadrons in the 2000s, the H-3 was only flown by the Marine Corps to transport the president.

[Llarry]

Italy is currently not operating maritime patrol or antisubmarine aircraft but is considering a buy of six such aircraft based on the Bombardier Global 6500 by Leonardo.

[Llarry]

While the B-1B bomber is scheduled to be the first USAF bomber to be replaced by the new stealth B-21A Raider, last year a new pylon was developed for the B-1B by Boeing that would enable carrying of large weapons, including hypersonic missiles by the Bone.

The new pylon can accommodate weapons weighing up to 7,500 pounds. So far it has been used to carry 2,000-lb bombs and 5,000-lb GBU-72 guided penetrating bombs. There is the potential for a single bomber to carry multiple pylons with weapons.

The B-1B is already the heavyweight lifter of U.S. Air Force bombers and is the only supersonic bomber in service. Notwithstanding the stealth qualities of the forthcoming B-21, the B-1B's capabilities will be missed.

The GBU-72 is carried by both the B-1B and the F-15E Strike Eagle (see photo). The bomb became operational in 2022 and has been used by Israeli F-15s in recent operations.

[flybigjet]

So. The preliminary Air India crash report was released today.

It brings up more questions than it answers.

Here's a link to the PDF so you can read it yourself:

https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphic...6090a-full.pdf

And here's a pretty reasonable synopsis on the 'Tube-- the guy doing it is an Ex-USAF pilot and current Commercial Airline pilot:

The video's pretty good, but a couple of things he points out may or may not be errors, depending on Air India's SOP's for takeoff.

At my airline, the SOP (assuming that the FO is the Pilot Flying and the CA is the Pilot Monitoring) is that after stating “Check Thrust” (when the engines stabilize at takeoff N1), the FO takes his hands off the throttles and the CA puts his hand on them. At V1-5 knots, the PM (the CA if the FO is flying) calls “V1” and takes his hand off the throttles. From that point until the “Positive Rate, Gear Up” callout, NOBODY has their hands on the throttles— this is intentional so that in the event of an engine failure/fire/red warning light after V1, you won’t inadvertently pull the motors back to reject the takeoff (you’re past V1, so you’re going, no matter what). Once the Pilot Flying hears “Gear Up”, they’ll put their hands on the throttles until 2500’ AFE as a minimum.

One other thing is that he may be referencing the OLD 737 throttle fuel switches— on THOSE switches, there’s a little metal protrusion that fits into a slot to prevent the lever from being moved from the idle detent (see picture below since I've never figured out how to embed pictures):

You can see the slot just even with the “Idle” words in the picture. Yes, you can miss the detent or not get it fully seated— it’s happened to our crews before. (As a matter of fact, years ago, a LCA wrote about this in one of our safety bulletins— his IOE FO didn’t catch it and he caught it at cruise— if you had bumped that particular switch, it would/could have moved enough to kill the motor.)

The newer 737's (e.g. the Max) have the same switches as the 787-- On these, you have to pull the lever out, lift over a metal (internal) gate and then release into the slot. COULD you have missed BOTH of them and shut down BOTH engines if the CA bumped the switches rolling down the runway?

Maaaaaaybe? But man, is that a stretch- at least from where I’m sitting. I teach my New Hires to give the lever/switch a good “jiggle” when moving it to idle to make sure that it’s seated in the detent (regardless if it’s the old lever or the newer switch). It’s a technique, but I think it’s a good one and I’ve been doing it like that on Boeing’s since I was a New Hire FOR EXACTLY THIS REASON.

So. From what it sounds like (at least from the CVR transcript), both pilots were surprised that the fuel switches were in the cutoff detent. Huminawha? HOW did they get there? We’ll never know for sure. I’m not 100% certain that I’m buying the “FO missed BOTH detents when starting the motors, followed by the CA hit BOTH switches as he was pulling his hands off at V1” theory— that just seems like too many outliers that would have to line up perfectly.

But, I wasn’t there, so I can’t say.

That’s my 0.02.

Either way, it's pretty sobering-- it looks like if they had juuuuuusst a little more time, they might have pulled it off. Apparently the #1 motor had lit off after the restart and was moving towards producing forward thrust.

R.

[3798j]

.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by 3798j

.

Incredible shot -- just about every USAF type from the early 1960s, except for the F-106... and an ICBM on the right as well.

[snowbimmer]

Originally Posted by 3798j

.

Originally Posted by Llarry

Incredible shot -- just about every USAF type from the early 1960s, except for the F-106... and an ICBM on the right as well.

An absolutely stunning collection - now inside 5 hangars!!


The XB-70 is something else again. Only two produced. This one survived.


Lot of action in this photo......

[shannon1]

Just don't realise how big the XB-70 Valkyrie was until you see it in a picture like that with reference to all those other aircraft, especially the B-52 in the back. Wow.

[M-technik-3]

Originally Posted by Llarry

One of the last Navy Sea Kings photographed in 1991 or so. Naval Air Reserve squadrons HS-75 and HS-85 formerly flew the ASW version SH-3H but converted to UH-3Hs with ASW equipment removed and were redesignated as HC-75 and -85.

After the demise of these two squadrons in the 2000s, the H-3 was only flown by the Marine Corps to transport the president.

Was an easy upload for Banner missions vs say doing MH-53's

[M-technik-3]

Originally Posted by 3798j

.

What airshow was that? To see an XB-70 must have been something!! Thinking Edwards or Palmdale?

[3798j]

Originally Posted by M-technik-3

What airshow was that? To see an XB-70 must have been something!! Thinking Edwards or Palmdale?

"Taken at Carswell Air Force Base (AFB), Texas in 1966 the cool photo in this post was taken during Combination Open House which had the honor of being the only public airshow in XB-70 Valkyrie history."

"Although the iconic XB-70 was on display at several events at Edwards AFB, actually the Mach 3 bomber was not available to general public at Edwards but just the military according to XB-70 documents in the National Archive."

"As this amazing picture shows, some of the coolest aircraft ever built took part in the airshow which was held on Mar. 24-26, 1966 in conjunction with the Air Force Association (AFA) 20th anniversary convention. However, aircraft ID captions need some work- Flight line above the hangar – Aircraft (no tag) between the F-4 and F-102 is an F-106 – Third aircraft from right is an F-106, not an F-102 Lower left – that is a YF–12A, not an SR–71 — on the lower right the aircraft is a B-26K, not an A-37 — the X-15 is a full-scale mockup — The non-captioned rocket is a Thor Able"

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/the-...ft-ever-built/

[snowbimmer]

Strategic Air Command & Aerospace Museum - Near Omaha

The B-1 is a supremely elegant design - still looks great after 50 years.


SR-71 - Always a winner.


Great museum.

[Llarry]

Originally Posted by snowbimmer

Strategic Air Command & Aerospace Museum - Near Omaha

The B-1 is a supremely elegant design - still looks great after 50 years.

Great museum.

Concur on the B-1! Of the 100 originally built, only 46 B-1Bs remain active. Despite supersonic capability and being the bomber with the heaviest weapons load, the B-1B will be the first of current bombers to be retired -- planned for 2032.

Based solely on the paint scheme, I suspect your photo of the museum B-1 is of the B-1A model, of which only 4 were built until the program was cancelled in 1977. But the program was revived and the B-1B became operational in 1986.

Awesome aircraft and it will be a pity to see it go.

[Llarry]

Tomcat Thursday! Two photos of the ultimate F-14 version: The F-14D:

VF-213 "Blacklions" aircraft number 213 carrying a laser-guided bomb and a LANTRIN pod (originally an Air Force item) that gave the Tomcat precision strike capability.

VF-31 "Felix" CAG aircraft with an air-to-air weapons load consisting of both AIM-9 Sidewinder infrared homing and AIM-7 Sparrow III semi-active radar-guided missiles. The AIM-7 was replaced beginning in 1991 with the AIM-120 AMRAAM active radar-guided missile with superior capabilities, but to my knowledge the F-14s never carried AMRAAMs. The Sparrow III may still be in use with other forces but has been retired from U.S. service.

[flybigjet]

Originally Posted by Llarry

Based solely on the paint scheme, I suspect your photo of the museum B-1 is of the B-1A model, of which only 4 were built until the program was cancelled in 1977. But the program was revived and the B-1B became operational in 1986.

You are correct. It's in front of the SAC Museum near Offut AFB, NE. I was there a few years ago.

There were four built, but only two survive. One is at the Denver Museum of Flight-- but it doesn't have the super-secret variable intakes anymore. The other (pictured above) is at the SAC Museum near Offut AFB, NE-- that one used to be at the USAF Museum in Dayton, but was given to Offut in the early 2000's.

The big giveaway between the B-1A and B-1B was the variable-geometry intakes (not particularly stealthy and terrifyingly expensive and a maintenance nightmare) and the crew ejection system. The A had a crew ejection pod similar to the F-111 while the B has individual ejection seats.

Honestly? It's sort of an airplane in search of a mission. When Carter cancelled the B-1A and it was resurrected by Reagan, the cost overruns were crippling, so a lot of changes were made. The variable intakes were scrubbed, the high-speed dash (M2.2+) was scrubbed (the B can barely do M1.25 at altitude and is subsonic at low altitude), the crew capsule went away, and a lot of "extra" stuff was stripped (like tossing one of the generators off of the engines). And? They kept the variable geometry wings, which really weren't all that needed if the jet wasn't going to do M2+.

Basically, Reagan wanted it, so it was a compromise, and not all that great of a jet (although it looks cool pulling closed in the pattern). Maintenance is terrifyingly expensive-- which is why new copilots were flying T-37/T38 ACE-- they couldn't get the flying hours to be proficient any other way.

Iirc, it was the only major weapons system that didn't partake in Gulf War, Part I-- at the time, it didn't have the capability of conventional weapons, and dropping a nuke on Saddam would probably have been overkill.

R.

[Llarry]

I suspect that the maintenance man-hours per flight hour on all three current bombers are extremely high, leading to a very high cost of operating the USAF's bomber capability.

[Llarry]

A slightly tardy Phantom Phriday -- the final chapter in the U.S. F-4 story. The last active USAF and Navy Phantoms were used as full-scale targets and designated as QF-4s. They could be flown by a pilot or by remote control. Here's a selection; a Navy QF-4B and Air Force QRF-4C and QF-4Es.

[Llarry]

In the 1930s, the UK's Royal Navy considered a crew of two as standard for carrier fighters, presumably to assist with the problem of navigation over the ocean. The U.S. Navy, by contrast, stuck with a single pilot. There was an exception, though, and it was the very first carrier fighter from Grumman. The FF-1 featured two forward-firing .30 cal machineguns and a flexible gun for the backseat crewman. Largely due to its retractable landing gear, it also had a respectable turn of speed for the time

There were not many FF-1s purchased: Only enough (27 aircraft) for a single fighter squadron were delivered in 1932. Within a couple of years, they were converted to dual-control FF-2s and assigned to various units in small numbers. Sales to other countries were more successful and notably included Spain, where they saw action in the Spanish Civil War (and did not fare well) and Canada, which assembled Grumman-built components to make the G-23 Goblin. By the time that the RCAF got their hands on the G-23s they were obsolescent, but Canada faced a critical shortage of fighters and took 15 G-23s into squadron service in 1940-41.

The FF was how Grumman got into the Navy fighter business -- many thousands of aircraft later, the line ended with the F-14 Tomcat.

[M_Six]

Originally Posted by Llarry

One of the last Navy Sea Kings photographed in 1991 or so. Naval Air Reserve squadrons HS-75 and HS-85 formerly flew the ASW version SH-3H but converted to UH-3Hs with ASW equipment removed and were redesignated as HC-75 and -85.

After the demise of these two squadrons in the 2000s, the H-3 was only flown by the Marine Corps to transport the president.

I got to fly in one of these back in the 80's when I was on flight status as an aeroscout observer with the 6th Air Cav Brigade at Ft. Hood, TX. I was on leave and home for a couple of weeks, but I brought my flight gear with me. While I was home, I went over to the NAS in So. Weymouth, MA and asked if I could hitch a ride on one of their birds so I could log my 4 hours of flight time I needed to qualify for flight pay that month. It was a bit of BS, but it worked. They had me join a crew that was doing an extended flight test after some maintenance. We flew out past Boston and up into NH around Mt Washington, then over into ME where the pilot's parents lived. We buzzed their house and then headed back to the NAS. The pilot offered to let me fly for a bit, but then we discovered that while our helmets were the same, the audio connections weren't. Mine had a single jack and theirs were double jacks. So I couldn't communicate. Hence, no stick time for me. I was bummed. But it was still a cool experience.