View Full Version : Errm....Yeah?!?

24th Aug 2010, 17:28
Was just "YouTubin'" and saw this video and thought I would share this with the rest of you. I believe the crew were simulating an uncontrolled cabin fire; hopefully with no pax on board. Somehow I don't think this "exercise" would have worked with a shorter/limiting runway...then again?!?


Loose rivets
24th Aug 2010, 19:04
That's the thing about practicing. I believe it's very important . . . but banging one on - even once, is really a career-ender. Them's that go out on a limb really do have to assess how thick it is.

The little 42 was so maneuverable, would side-slip bringing the speed back and allowing a good vertical rate. The point is that when approaching the concrete, getting the slip off seemed to kill the vertical speed stone dead, and leaving one with a very contained forward speed.

Given the tail, there was good reason not to stand on the rudder, but quite modest amounts of slip would have the desired affect. Although I would always put the igniters on, I could never detect the slightest fluctuation on engine parameters with them off - even with the aircraft at an ugly angle.

tony draper
24th Aug 2010, 20:37
I remember seeing a thing about the way NASA trains Shuttle Pilots to fly very steep approaches in a normal modified commercial aircraft that dummies the Shuttle landing characteristics, and it was suggested a lot of time and money could be saved if all commercial passenger aircraft came down in a similar manner,I'm sure you prune airyplane drivers would be up for that,turn orf the engines and come in like a glider.

24th Aug 2010, 20:47
Interesting, with humble respects, LR, were they in training for something bigger and better?? :)


tony draper
24th Aug 2010, 20:50
Oh dear! wonder if they docked the chap pay for that.:uhoh:

24th Aug 2010, 21:35
Well apparently they didn't break anything, unlike the G222. So it ended well. It pretty much seemed like a typical skydive aircraft approach which in fact resembles a shuttle approach. I've been one mile final carrying 120 kts in an aircraft that needs 60kts over the threshold. The key is to aim for the undershoot and shed speed late on finals. They had plenty of runway, that works too. Use ground effect to lose speed. It's amazing how long you can keep it flying ten feet off the ground.

Ah happy days.

24th Aug 2010, 22:26
Haven't these pilots heard of sideslipping.


24th Aug 2010, 23:31
Here ya go Mr. D, Space Shuttle landing training at Edwards AFB. This is a simulation, but they use a modified Gulfstream GII outfitted with all kinds of goodies to train on. In order to get the descent rates experienced in the shuttle, they unlock the thrust reversers and actually use reverse thrust in flight. Least wise that was the way it was explained to me years ago at the Gulfstream facility in Savannah.

Space Shuttle landing training. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KTbd8cRzrJ8)

For some reason this POS HP computer will no longer allow me to embed YouTube. :confused:

Loose rivets
24th Aug 2010, 23:59
I went into Lynham one night having had the rudder on full lock for some seven minutes. Nobody said anything at all after the checks and it became a kind of unspoken bet. If I'd had to overshoot...sorry, go around, I'd have had some explainin' to do - with no tea, and definitely no bikkies.

tony draper
25th Aug 2010, 00:41
I had a Shuttle landing simulator on me machine years ago that I downloaded for nowt twer very good as well, I could put it down ok about fifty percent of the time ,I knew which key to press to open the airbake and which deploy the chute but never found the freckin key for wheel brake so I always ran orf the end of the runway buggrit.

25th Aug 2010, 01:48
"Shuttle landing"

Flying bricks. They do not so much fly as plummet.

"I always ran orf the end of the runway"

That's why they use the Edwards Air Force Base. Miles and miles of salt flats...

25th Aug 2010, 13:53
Awful lot of runway disappeared under the nose. The military guys do the steep, so-called Khe Sanh, approach but get it on or very close to the numbers. Not that they don't get it wrong sometimes.

I'd file that under the: "Hey, watch this" category of the Darwin run ups.

25th Aug 2010, 14:18
Always mightily impressed by the Shuttle landings.
But never realized how LATE the landing gear comes down.
Mind you, you couldn't do another circuit if it didn't.

tony draper
25th Aug 2010, 15:23
Do they have ejector seats in yon Shuttle?:uhoh:

25th Aug 2010, 15:30
Daren't have ejector seats in the Shuttle.
If one of them ejected the pilot while in orbit it would
be a B*gger of a job trying to catch up with him.

tony draper
25th Aug 2010, 16:23
Plus the vacuum would flood in througn the hole in the roof as well I suppose.

25th Aug 2010, 16:45
Vague recollection that the first one, the one that didn't get pinged into space, had bang seats fitted, but only for the first few flights. Might be thinking of Buran though, the Russian one.

25th Aug 2010, 17:38
I think that was one of the considerations after the exploding shuttle disaster (or maybe it was when one of them went 'tech' in orbit?).

AFAICR it was deduced that it wouldn't be possible in the current design - but it would be considered as part of any future design . . .

25th Aug 2010, 20:49
Didn't the shuttle have that telescopic pole to assist with the crew's escape (presumably only when it was subsonic)? The idea was that they clipped themselves to a runner along the pole then were dragged out and clear by the airstream.

Found a pic:


25th Aug 2010, 21:03
Space Shuttle abort modes - Ejection escape systems (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Shuttle_abort_modes#Ejection_escape_systems)