747 low flyby
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
From: USA
Airfield knowledge
Runway slope
Met conditions
Radio altimeter
IVSI
Aircraft wingspan
Flying experience
Experience in type
Crew briefing
Minimum crowd exposure
Minimum occupants on board
Add it all up and how different is this to any other low pass at an airshow apart from the size of the metal? Watch the video again and catch the positive pitch change, pause and then bank and climb.
How beautiful it is!
Runway slope
Met conditions
Radio altimeter
IVSI
Aircraft wingspan
Flying experience
Experience in type
Crew briefing
Minimum crowd exposure
Minimum occupants on board
Add it all up and how different is this to any other low pass at an airshow apart from the size of the metal? Watch the video again and catch the positive pitch change, pause and then bank and climb.
How beautiful it is!
Joined: Apr 2004
Aviation Qualifications: LAME
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 189
From: Dorset UK
What about the South African Airlines 744 airshow.
I believe it is a well practised display.
I saw it at Yeovilton a couple of years ago and it looked very impressive, but I don't think any turns were made at very low level.
I believe it is a well practised display.
I saw it at Yeovilton a couple of years ago and it looked very impressive, but I don't think any turns were made at very low level.
Joined: Apr 2008
Aviation Qualifications: SLF
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 228
From: troposphere
The SAA flypast over the Wanderers Stadium just before the final of the Cricket World Cup in 2003 by a 744 and a 346 (just introduced) was very impressive.Low and slow.
A little higher being over a populated area but impressive nonetheless.
A little higher being over a populated area but impressive nonetheless.
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
From: wiltshire uk
have it both ways
On the one hand, this is proper flying with skill. On the other hand it is not total airmanship and some people say it is bad stuff that should never have been attempted.
Hmm.
It is not as low or as risky the TAP A310 near-wing scrape -that was really close and silly.
But -watch this video carefully and you can see the manoeuvre is planned. The control inputs seem planned and considered- notice how he sets the attitude, increases speed and everything is stable and the wing working.
BUT- did he really look at his altimeter, consult the radio altimeter, and compare and contrast those with the down turn side wingspan and then decide it was safe? Maybe he did/ or maybe it was blend of skill and luck.
This is not reckless flying, but it it is still in-advisable or will someone call a wimp...
Hmm.
It is not as low or as risky the TAP A310 near-wing scrape -that was really close and silly.
But -watch this video carefully and you can see the manoeuvre is planned. The control inputs seem planned and considered- notice how he sets the attitude, increases speed and everything is stable and the wing working.
BUT- did he really look at his altimeter, consult the radio altimeter, and compare and contrast those with the down turn side wingspan and then decide it was safe? Maybe he did/ or maybe it was blend of skill and luck.
This is not reckless flying, but it it is still in-advisable or will someone call a wimp...
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
The baro altimeter has nothing to do with that particular manoeuvre. The wingtip clearance at a given bank angle can be found from the manuals, or a 'worst case' clearance could be calculated with some basic geometry. So long as the rad alt stays at or above the calculated minimum and the bank angle stays at or below the calculated maximum it's not that complex a manoeuvre. If I asked you to fly the simulator at not below 200R and not greater than 30 degrees of bank do you think it would be beyond your skills?
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 3,832
Likes: 115
From: UK
Well, it looks like a very nice and well-planned fly past to me. As someone else commented, too many flight decks nowadays are populated by po-faced people who couldn't hand-fly themselves out of a paper bag.
I'm glad I've retired.
I'm glad I've retired.
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,124
Likes: 16
From: GC Paradise
Being honest, large passenger aircraft do not do "displays" well. They do not do anything "sexy"
These are some you-tubes of displays by the biggest pax aircraft in the world:
YouTube - Airbus A380 full display Farnborough 08
YouTube - Worlds first Airbus A380 Display, New Brighton, Wirral 12.7.
YouTube - A380 exhibition in Le Bourget
Warning Toxic!
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Disgusted of Tunbridge
Joined: Jan 2005
Posts: 4,011
Likes: 1
From: Hampshire, UK
Well done that man (or woman)! I'd have loved to see it at an airshow! What a load of old finger-wagging women there are here! Good one, and just ignore the miseries here! I had 10 years on that model, and this was someone who knew what he was doing.
Just another number
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 1,077
Likes: 0
From: UK
I agree with JW411. This looks like a well flown fly past to me.
I have only been involved with one fly past in a 747 (EGPK 20/8/88). We had to submit detailed plans to the CAA including calculations of minimum heights and bank angles. We then had to fly the agreed procedure in the simulator before obtaining CAA approval. All this for an event that lasted only a few seconds.
If it is flown with only the (consenting) crew on board and the event has been well planned then I can't see the harm in it.
Dave
I have only been involved with one fly past in a 747 (EGPK 20/8/88). We had to submit detailed plans to the CAA including calculations of minimum heights and bank angles. We then had to fly the agreed procedure in the simulator before obtaining CAA approval. All this for an event that lasted only a few seconds.
If it is flown with only the (consenting) crew on board and the event has been well planned then I can't see the harm in it.
Dave
Last edited by Captain Airclues; 13th August 2008 at 15:13. Reason: to correct spelling of aproval!
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
From: somewhere in Asia
We had to submit detailed plans to the CAA including calculations of minimum heights and bank angles. We then had to fly the agreed procedure in the simulator before obtaining CAA aproval. All this for an event that lasted only a few seconds.
If it is flown with only the (consenting) crew on board and the event has been well planned then I can't see the harm in it.
If it is flown with only the (consenting) crew on board and the event has been well planned then I can't see the harm in it.
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: US
"....and the event has been well planned then I can't see the harm in it."
Fair comment and provided nothing goes wrong there would be no harm.
The B-52 accident was probably practised in the sim and many times over in the aircraft, given the almost limitless resources of the US military and we all know the result of that display.
When it does go wrong, not only the aircraft is broken but also probably the whole airline company with mass redundancies, increased insurance premiums etc., all for a couple of seconds of "fun". I have trouble understanding why airlines allow this sort of display flying (assuming this display was authorized) to take place when it all could go wrong, with the resulting consequences.
The simulator is the place to get "yourself off" with this sort of flying if required, not in an expensive aircraft, with massive third party implications.
Fair comment and provided nothing goes wrong there would be no harm.
The B-52 accident was probably practised in the sim and many times over in the aircraft, given the almost limitless resources of the US military and we all know the result of that display.
When it does go wrong, not only the aircraft is broken but also probably the whole airline company with mass redundancies, increased insurance premiums etc., all for a couple of seconds of "fun". I have trouble understanding why airlines allow this sort of display flying (assuming this display was authorized) to take place when it all could go wrong, with the resulting consequences.
The simulator is the place to get "yourself off" with this sort of flying if required, not in an expensive aircraft, with massive third party implications.