Weber Forums • View topic - Flying aircraft carriers

Re: Flying aircraft carriers
by MAD-4A » Mon Aug 29, 2016 10:01 am
MAD-4A Captain of the List Posts: 719 Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2014 4:48 pm Location: Texas	jchilds wrote:It's a feature, actually. That's the political VIP runway... All the more reason NOT to have them fly into the engine, & dumber. That would be kinda stupid to waist all that weight (on a flying craft more-so), structure & money on a huge feature like that just for some 'VIP' who could land on the regular flight deck just as-well ... no better/safer. - Almost only counts in Horseshoes and Nuclear Weapons. I almost got the Hand-Grenade out the window does not count.
Top

Re: Flying aircraft carriers
by Tenshinai » Thu Sep 01, 2016 10:08 pm
Tenshinai Admiral Posts: 2893 Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2010 8:34 pm Location: Sweden	MAD-4A wrote:Actually, 2 minutes is considered "tailgating" in Air-traffic-controller terms. if 2 planes get within miles of each other it's counted as a "near-miss" situation. Its not because of some super vortices that somehow last 2 minutes, it's because of "near-miss" safety concerns/regulations. Actually, it´s both. Because yes, the vortices from a big aircraft CAN last an amazingly long time, and can be extremely devastating if you´re unlucky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence Wingtip vortices, on the other hand, are much more stable and can remain in the air for up to three minutes after the passage of an aircraft. So no, not 2 minutes, THREE minutes. Wow, you´re being sarcastic while being very, very wrong. In a way you could have checked up on and found out super easily. Why it´s especially bad around airports: Wake turbulence is especially hazardous in the region behind an aircraft in the takeoff or landing phases of flight. During take-off and landing, aircraft operate at high angle of attack. This flight attitude maximizes the formation of strong vortices. And then we have a lovely little list of incidents caused by it(not a complete list of course): 8 June 1966 - an XB-70 collided with an F-104. Though the true cause of the collision is unknown, it is believed that due to the XB-70 being designed to have an enhanced wake turbulence to increase lift, the F-104 moved too close, therefore getting caught in the vortex and colliding with the wing (see main article). 30 May 1972 - A DC-9 crashed at the Greater Southwest International Airport while performing "touch and go" landings behind a DC-10. This crash prompted the FAA to create new rules for minimum following separation from "heavy" aircraft. 15 December 1993 - a chartered aircraft with five people on board, including In-N-Out Burger's president, Rich Snyder, crashed several miles before John Wayne Airport. The aircraft was following a Boeing 757 for landing, became caught in its wake turbulence, rolled into a deep descent and crashed. As a result of this and other incidents involving aircraft following behind a Boeing 757, the FAA now employs the separation rules of heavy aircraft for the Boeing 757. 8 September 1994 - USAir Flight 427 crashed near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. This accident was believed to involve wake turbulence, though the primary cause was a defective rudder control component. 20 September 1999 - A JAS 39A Gripen from Airwing F 7 Såtenäs crashed into Lake Vänern in Sweden during an air combat maneuvering exercise. After passing through the wake vortex of the other aircraft, the Gripen abruptly changed course, and pilot Capt. Rickard Mattsson, got a highest-severity warning from the ground-collision warning system. He ejected from the aircraft, and landed safely by parachute in the lake. 12 November 2001 - An Airbus A300 crashed into the Belle Harbor neighborhood of Queens, New York shortly after takeoff from John F. Kennedy International Airport. This accident was attributed to pilot error in the presence of wake turbulence from a Boeing 747, that resulted in rudder failure and subsequent separation of the vertical stabilizer. 8 July 2008 - A US Air Force PC-12 trainer crashed at Hurlburt Field, Fla., because the pilot tried to land too closely behind a larger AC-130U Spooky gunship and got caught in the gunship’s wake turbulence. Air Force rules require at least a two-minute separation between slow-moving heavy planes like the AC-130U and small, light planes, but the PC-12 trailed the gunship by about 40 seconds. As the PC-12 hit the wake turbulence, it suddenly rolled to the left and began to turn upside down. The instructor pilot stopped the roll, but before he could get the plane upright, the left wing struck the ground, sending the plane skidding 669 feet across a field before stopping on a paved overrun.[18] 3 November 2008 - Airbus A380 wake turbulence event, Sydney Airport, Australia. Wake turbulence of an Airbus A380-800 causing temporary loss of control to a Saab 340 on approach to a parallel runway during high crosswind conditions.[19] 4 November 2008 - Mexican Government LearJet 45 XC-VMC, carrying Mexican Interior Secretary Juan Camilo Mouriño, crashed near Paseo de la Reforma Avenue before turning for final approach to runway 05R at Mexico City International Airport. The airplane was flying behind a 767-300 and above a heavy helicopter. The pilots were not told about the type of plane that was approaching before them, nor did they reduce to minimum approach speed.[citation needed] (This has been confirmed as the official stance by the Mexican Government as stated by Luiz Tellez, the Secretary of Communications of Mexico.)[citation needed] On 9 September 2012, a Robin DR 400 crashed after rolling 90 degrees in a wake turbulence induced by the preceding Antonov AN-2, three killed, one severely injured.[20][21] On 28 March 2014, Indian Air Force C-130J-30 KC-3803 crashed near Gwalior, India, killing all 5 personnel aboard.[22][23][24] The aircraft was conducting low level penetration training by flying at around 300 ft when it ran into wake turbulence from another aircraft in the formation, which caused it to crash.[25]
Top

MAD-4A wrote:Actually, 2 minutes is considered "tailgating" in Air-traffic-controller terms. if 2 planes get within miles of each other it's counted as a "near-miss" situation. Its not because of some super vortices that somehow last 2 minutes, it's because of "near-miss" safety concerns/regulations.

Actually, it´s both. Because yes, the vortices from a big aircraft CAN last an amazingly long time, and can be extremely devastating if you´re unlucky.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wake_turbulence
Wingtip vortices, on the other hand, are much more stable and can remain in the air for up to three minutes after the passage of an aircraft.

So no, not 2 minutes, THREE minutes. Wow, you´re being sarcastic while being very, very wrong. In a way you could have checked up on and found out super easily.

Why it´s especially bad around airports:
Wake turbulence is especially hazardous in the region behind an aircraft in the takeoff or landing phases of flight. During take-off and landing, aircraft operate at high angle of attack. This flight attitude maximizes the formation of strong vortices.

And then we have a lovely little list of incidents caused by it(not a complete list of course):

8 June 1966 - an XB-70 collided with an F-104. Though the true cause of the collision is unknown, it is believed that due to the XB-70 being designed to have an enhanced wake turbulence to increase lift, the F-104 moved too close, therefore getting caught in the vortex and colliding with the wing (see main article).
30 May 1972 - A DC-9 crashed at the Greater Southwest International Airport while performing "touch and go" landings behind a DC-10. This crash prompted the FAA to create new rules for minimum following separation from "heavy" aircraft.
15 December 1993 - a chartered aircraft with five people on board, including In-N-Out Burger's president, Rich Snyder, crashed several miles before John Wayne Airport. The aircraft was following a Boeing 757 for landing, became caught in its wake turbulence, rolled into a deep descent and crashed. As a result of this and other incidents involving aircraft following behind a Boeing 757, the FAA now employs the separation rules of heavy aircraft for the Boeing 757.
8 September 1994 - USAir Flight 427 crashed near Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. This accident was believed to involve wake turbulence, though the primary cause was a defective rudder control component.
20 September 1999 - A JAS 39A Gripen from Airwing F 7 Såtenäs crashed into Lake Vänern in Sweden during an air combat maneuvering exercise. After passing through the wake vortex of the other aircraft, the Gripen abruptly changed course, and pilot Capt. Rickard Mattsson, got a highest-severity warning from the ground-collision warning system. He ejected from the aircraft, and landed safely by parachute in the lake.
12 November 2001 - An Airbus A300 crashed into the Belle Harbor neighborhood of Queens, New York shortly after takeoff from John F. Kennedy International Airport. This accident was attributed to pilot error in the presence of wake turbulence from a Boeing 747, that resulted in rudder failure and subsequent separation of the vertical stabilizer.
8 July 2008 - A US Air Force PC-12 trainer crashed at Hurlburt Field, Fla., because the pilot tried to land too closely behind a larger AC-130U Spooky gunship and got caught in the gunship’s wake turbulence. Air Force rules require at least a two-minute separation between slow-moving heavy planes like the AC-130U and small, light planes, but the PC-12 trailed the gunship by about 40 seconds. As the PC-12 hit the wake turbulence, it suddenly rolled to the left and began to turn upside down. The instructor pilot stopped the roll, but before he could get the plane upright, the left wing struck the ground, sending the plane skidding 669 feet across a field before stopping on a paved overrun.[18]
3 November 2008 - Airbus A380 wake turbulence event, Sydney Airport, Australia. Wake turbulence of an Airbus A380-800 causing temporary loss of control to a Saab 340 on approach to a parallel runway during high crosswind conditions.[19]
4 November 2008 - Mexican Government LearJet 45 XC-VMC, carrying Mexican Interior Secretary Juan Camilo Mouriño, crashed near Paseo de la Reforma Avenue before turning for final approach to runway 05R at Mexico City International Airport. The airplane was flying behind a 767-300 and above a heavy helicopter. The pilots were not told about the type of plane that was approaching before them, nor did they reduce to minimum approach speed.[citation needed] (This has been confirmed as the official stance by the Mexican Government as stated by Luiz Tellez, the Secretary of Communications of Mexico.)[citation needed]
On 9 September 2012, a Robin DR 400 crashed after rolling 90 degrees in a wake turbulence induced by the preceding Antonov AN-2, three killed, one severely injured.[20][21]
On 28 March 2014, Indian Air Force C-130J-30 KC-3803 crashed near Gwalior, India, killing all 5 personnel aboard.[22][23][24] The aircraft was conducting low level penetration training by flying at around 300 ft when it ran into wake turbulence from another aircraft in the formation, which caused it to crash.[25]

Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Flying aircraft carriers