Life-long avgeek here...
Aviation Geeks unite?! Anybody else care about planes here?
- Thread starter { Emilia }
- Start date
A few years back Discovery Channel had series called Mighty Planes with full episodes devoted to each aircraft covered, the Guppy being one.
oh yeah I actually saw that one! they're doing reruns on some German documentary channel
But isn't it significantly less sexy than a Constellation built in the same era?
The shape of its fuselage and tail was so unique. Great design, even though it had quite a few engine problems at first. For a while it was known as: "The best trimotor ever built, because sometimes it even had a fourth working engine."
The DC-3 was quite the workhorse of course.
Oh I think the Lockheed Connie might be the most beautiful vehicle ever made, period. It surpasses classics like early Chris Craft boats, tea clippers, and the Benz Patent Motorwagen. There might never be anything built for the air quite like it, again.
But in my head, for whatever reason, since I was a kid if someone asked me what an airplane looked like, i think the image that pops up in my head is the stubby DC-3. Maybe I just like the utility of it.
Former naval aviator (P-3's, don't be fooled by the av) Did a stint as a primary instructor in the T-34C at NAS Corpus back in the late 90's before I got out.
Corporate pilot for the past 20 years, having flown the Citation V Ultra, Citation XL/XLS, and currently flying Challenger 350's. On again, off again combat simmer- primarily DCS and heavily modded IL2 most recently, and other flights sims from the Janes classics going all the way back to the original F-15E Strike Eagle by Microprose on an Apple IIe when I was in HS.
I also have a degree in aerospace engineering, although it's 30 years stale these days. (I'm getting old). I never worked as an engineer- I went straight to Navy flight training right out of college. (NROTC commission)
Anyway, lifelong Trek fan, Wars fan, and space/astronomy/aviation nut. The one thing I don't really engage in is real-life recreational flying, oddly enough. I've got less than 15 hours of 'flying for fun' my entire career, more's the pity. It's all been military/professional stuff. I guess I 'get enough' of it at work.
My favorite aircraft of all time is the F-14. P-51D, Spitfire, and Hurricane are all close runners up.
Corporate pilot for the past 20 years, having flown the Citation V Ultra, Citation XL/XLS, and currently flying Challenger 350's. On again, off again combat simmer- primarily DCS and heavily modded IL2 most recently, and other flights sims from the Janes classics going all the way back to the original F-15E Strike Eagle by Microprose on an Apple IIe when I was in HS.
I also have a degree in aerospace engineering, although it's 30 years stale these days. (I'm getting old). I never worked as an engineer- I went straight to Navy flight training right out of college. (NROTC commission)
Anyway, lifelong Trek fan, Wars fan, and space/astronomy/aviation nut. The one thing I don't really engage in is real-life recreational flying, oddly enough. I've got less than 15 hours of 'flying for fun' my entire career, more's the pity. It's all been military/professional stuff. I guess I 'get enough' of it at work.
My favorite aircraft of all time is the F-14. P-51D, Spitfire, and Hurricane are all close runners up.
Yeah, I guess I am.
I was a huge flight sim games (both fixed and rotary wing) late 80s to late 90s and made a load of aircraft models too.
My first love was the Mosquito and Hurricane, but for jets, it had to be the Tomcat when I first came across that. Love the A-10 too.
At one point, I was sure I was going to go that way for a living, but life doesn't always go the way you planned.
My first flight was at an airshow on a DC3, then a Dragon Rapide and Jet Ranger before the usual airline types.
I was a huge flight sim games (both fixed and rotary wing) late 80s to late 90s and made a load of aircraft models too.
My first love was the Mosquito and Hurricane, but for jets, it had to be the Tomcat when I first came across that. Love the A-10 too.
At one point, I was sure I was going to go that way for a living, but life doesn't always go the way you planned.
My first flight was at an airshow on a DC3, then a Dragon Rapide and Jet Ranger before the usual airline types.
Last edited:
Okay - DC-3, insanely sturdy and at the time (1930's folks) revolutionized the air travel industry. The Connie came about a decade later and yes, gorgeous aircraft but, yep - engine problems were common.
My favorites go all the way back to Sopwith Camels/Tripes/Pups, Albatros D-II/III/Vs, Fokker Dr.1/F.1/VIIs (aka WWI stringbags) through classic interwar aircraft like the Hawker Fury - Curtis P6-E Hawk and on and on.
Many of the aircraft that served on both sides of WWII were also incredible - including such mundane things as the Junkers JU-52 Tanta Ju (corrugated aluminum!) and one through just about everything else (even aircraft that are considered kinda failures).
After that, it's the Classic airliners and military/civil aircraft from the end of the war onward.
I'm beginning to think that modern aircraft engineers are becoming way too dependent on computers to design aircraft since so many seem to have increasing performance and reliability issues. The 737 Max being a dangerous example of overreach by Boeing (trying to create a brand new aircraft and claiming it as merely a variant).
Remember that the B-52 BUFF (Big, Ugly Fat Fucker) was designed in the 1950's using brains and slide rules and it's still flying - and will until somewhere in the middle of this century. Grandfathers, Fathers and theirs Sons have actually flown the same individual aircraft... Meanwhile, the B-2 is already obsolete...?
My favorites go all the way back to Sopwith Camels/Tripes/Pups, Albatros D-II/III/Vs, Fokker Dr.1/F.1/VIIs (aka WWI stringbags) through classic interwar aircraft like the Hawker Fury - Curtis P6-E Hawk and on and on.
Many of the aircraft that served on both sides of WWII were also incredible - including such mundane things as the Junkers JU-52 Tanta Ju (corrugated aluminum!) and one through just about everything else (even aircraft that are considered kinda failures).
After that, it's the Classic airliners and military/civil aircraft from the end of the war onward.
I'm beginning to think that modern aircraft engineers are becoming way too dependent on computers to design aircraft since so many seem to have increasing performance and reliability issues. The 737 Max being a dangerous example of overreach by Boeing (trying to create a brand new aircraft and claiming it as merely a variant).
Remember that the B-52 BUFF (Big, Ugly Fat Fucker) was designed in the 1950's using brains and slide rules and it's still flying - and will until somewhere in the middle of this century. Grandfathers, Fathers and theirs Sons have actually flown the same individual aircraft... Meanwhile, the B-2 is already obsolete...?
And I won't say it's one of my favorites, but I enjoy the tales about it after reading MiG Pilot. Yes, a nickel-steel brick, one that used vacuum tubes instead of transistors. The builders welded by hand and didn't bother riveting flush with the surface anywhere they didn't have to. And the plane STILL spooked the hell out of the West for years, until they knew what they were dealing with.Another one of my favorites is the Mig 25.. really awesome that a nickel steel brick with engines can reach Mach 2.8 without and even Mach 3.2 while destroying the engines..
I won't say that it's pretty though...
I should probably say up front that I'm an aviation novice, not a geek. I'm also afraid of heights and don't get up in a plane if I don't have to. I know the basics of a few planes. The specifics of even fewer ... but willing to learn more.
Admiral Benson said:
must have been something about the engines at the time (thought you'd think after all the war time experience they'd have gotten the things right
Came across a video on the B-36 and that sucker was infamous for the engine issues (and it had 10 of them - 4 jet, 6 radials) with the propeller engines have a tendancy to catch fire.
Back to the Connie, never got to see one fly but saw one on the ground (ex-QANTAS that was restored and return to Australia) while traveling between terminals at Sydney airport.
Another one of my favorites is the Mig 25.. really awesome that a nickel steel brick with engines can reach Mach 2.8 without and even Mach 3.2 while destroying the engines..
I won't say that it's pretty though...
the aircraft it was designed to catch on the other hand was a great looking piece of machinery.....
I'm not sure I'd blame the engineers here. By all accounts they raised red flags about issues with the MAX but the bean counters were running the show (hence the a lot of the software design being outsourced).
I think however they did intend the MAX to be a variant not a new aircraft. Their marketing to the airlines why they could move pilots from the NGs into the Max with no need to up skill and re certify.
Again it was driven by the bean counters. Airbus had revamped the A320/321 with the Neo range, Bombardier had the C series (now the Airbus A220) and the 737 was getting the squeeze from both ends of the market. Rather than develop a complete new aircraft they reworked the 737 design (which is over 50 years old) because it was a cheaper option.
Boeing also tried all sorts things to try and kill the C series such as claiming Bombardier was benefiting from government subsidies etc etc. Given Boeings behaviour over the years, the hypocrisy was rather breathtaking.
I haven't been to an organised airshow for a while. The one I used to go a lot unfortunately stopped hosting them
.
The good thing about it at the time (especially as a kid) was that the aircrew seemed to love showing them to you (the static displays I mean).
Off the top of my head, at those shows I'd sat in the following:-
F104 Starfighter (Italian Airforce if I recall),
F4-J (UK) Phantom,
Bae Hawk, (though that one was for charity)
A7 Corsair.
Also sat in the back of a C-130 Herc.
On one holiday, they also had a Jaguar GR1 and Harrier GR7 in the local park for people to try.
The actual flight displays were fairly good too though were a lot smaller than the big airshows..
When he was young, my Dad and his school class mates got a tour of one of the Avro factories. I'd have loved that, but our school didn't do that.
.The good thing about it at the time (especially as a kid) was that the aircrew seemed to love showing them to you (the static displays I mean).
Off the top of my head, at those shows I'd sat in the following:-
F104 Starfighter (Italian Airforce if I recall),
F4-J (UK) Phantom,
Bae Hawk, (though that one was for charity)
A7 Corsair.
Also sat in the back of a C-130 Herc.
On one holiday, they also had a Jaguar GR1 and Harrier GR7 in the local park for people to try.
The actual flight displays were fairly good too though were a lot smaller than the big airshows..
When he was young, my Dad and his school class mates got a tour of one of the Avro factories. I'd have loved that, but our school didn't do that.
Yeah the XB-70 is awesome looking.
I'm also very fond of the oddball designs like the Leduc 022 ramjet fighter prototype or the Saunders Roe SR.A/1 flying boat fighter.
As for the whole computer stuff, yes too much computer stuff going on, aircraft are becomming fragile and plain stupid to use, there was a Dutch journalist who came to Russia just after the collaps of the Soviet Union, they were letting people hitch a ride with a Mig 25 trainer and fly as high as possible with the jet as a way to make money, the guy arrived in Siberia and he was looking around and couldn't see any aircraft, he asked a maintenance guy about that who just pointed at a heap of snow, the Mig 25 had been standing outside for afew days and nights and was frozen solid, it took the crew 20 minutes to dig it out while he and the pilot prepared themselves, by the time they came out the Mig had been dragged out of the heap of snow and cleaned up a bit, they did some checks and the thing took off and functioned fine.
I want to see anyone try that with a modern aircraft, bet the thing would be totally unusable.
I'm also very fond of the oddball designs like the Leduc 022 ramjet fighter prototype or the Saunders Roe SR.A/1 flying boat fighter.
As for the whole computer stuff, yes too much computer stuff going on, aircraft are becomming fragile and plain stupid to use, there was a Dutch journalist who came to Russia just after the collaps of the Soviet Union, they were letting people hitch a ride with a Mig 25 trainer and fly as high as possible with the jet as a way to make money, the guy arrived in Siberia and he was looking around and couldn't see any aircraft, he asked a maintenance guy about that who just pointed at a heap of snow, the Mig 25 had been standing outside for afew days and nights and was frozen solid, it took the crew 20 minutes to dig it out while he and the pilot prepared themselves, by the time they came out the Mig had been dragged out of the heap of snow and cleaned up a bit, they did some checks and the thing took off and functioned fine.
I want to see anyone try that with a modern aircraft, bet the thing would be totally unusable.
the Foxbat was built for pure straightline speed to intercept the B-70 so it didn't need the maneuverability and could get away with being built of riveted metal but good thing it wasn't intended for aerial combat otherwise it wouldn't last 30 seconds.
4th and 5th gen fighters need the computers because their maneuverability comes at the price of aerodynamic stability so they need the computers to help them fly.
Sure you could make them nice and stable so computers aren't needed but they couldn't dog fight in a modern combat environment for shit.
LOL yeah at more than 35tons (!!) Foxbat isn't a nimble aircraft however, they're tough as hell, even more impressive if you take in account of what the thing is capable of.
I know a thing or two about fly by wire and why it is needed, dynamic stability, or better no stability which makes an aircraft more maneuverable, but there are downsides to that.
Foxbat is for about 49% welded together because it is made out of a nickel steel alloy they rivited the parts where there is no chance of the area to suffer from heat stress or where it could hamper aerodynamics.
Pity they never upgraded the engines, the ones they use on Mig 31 are far better.
I know a thing or two about fly by wire and why it is needed, dynamic stability, or better no stability which makes an aircraft more maneuverable, but there are downsides to that.
Foxbat is for about 49% welded together because it is made out of a nickel steel alloy they rivited the parts where there is no chance of the area to suffer from heat stress or where it could hamper aerodynamics.
Pity they never upgraded the engines, the ones they use on Mig 31 are far better.
I hear you and GA flying is even more expensive over here in Europe.
Funny enough there's a bit of a changing trend when it comes to commercial flying. When in recent years training was incredibly expensive and then you'd get a meh-paying job at a regional carrier for years, the pilot shortage is now really rearing its head and airlines are becoming more desperate.
Aww, sorry to hear that it's even more expensive. I guess with Murica being so spread out there's more impetus huh?
Aww, that's a shame. I gotta say, I love how they gave me a free little blanket... and toothpaste and toothbrush, and a little deodorant and liquid soap.
Oh wait, that's because I had to stay in the airport overnight on a cot in Philadelphia because the hotel was full because I had missed my international flight due to delays out of Atlanta.
Gotta love the Mad Dog for sure.Although the callouts/warnings must be some of the most irritating in the industry: "MREEEEEEEEHP STABILIZER." The plane is so steampunk compared to an Airbus or even a 737.
You know, speaking of 737, I bet they wish they'd had some warning like that for the MAX...
But isn't it significantly less sexy than a Constellation built in the same era?
The shape of its fuselage and tail was so unique. Great design, even though it had quite a few engine problems at first. For a while it was known as: "The best trimotor ever built, because sometimes it even had a fourth working engine."
Now that's a beautiful plane!
I read some articles about that, how everything went downhill from an engineering perspective once they merged with McDonnell-Douglas and moved the corporate HQ to Chicago. How basically MD took over Boeing with Boeing's own money and they've been too focused on penny-pinching ever since.
The Concorde and the 144 are on display next to each other in Sinsheim, and you can enter both and walk around inside!
Well, one of my last dead-tree magazine subscriptions is to Air and Space, so....I guess I like them some.
Edit to add: IIRC, the last sim I played was probably IL-2 Sturmovik. I remember geeking out at the time because the rear gunner* could shoot up the tail a la Henry Jones, SR.
*(it had a co-op mode where you could sit in the rear seat)
Edit to add: IIRC, the last sim I played was probably IL-2 Sturmovik. I remember geeking out at the time because the rear gunner* could shoot up the tail a la Henry Jones, SR.
*(it had a co-op mode where you could sit in the rear seat)
Last edited:
Next to the Connie, my fav is the TU-95
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/b...r-us-f-22s-just-intercepted-near-alaska-58887
Manned hypersonics?
https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1229829750081966086
Stratolauncher looks to fly again at least.
All light aircraft need these
https://twitter.com/DrChrisCombs/status/1624580202876620801
Last edited:
