A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Science Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

earliest moon landing



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old January 3rd 05, 11:45 PM
Pat Flannery
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Neil Gerace wrote:

"Pat Flannery" wrote in message
...


Back in the early days of jet engines, thought was given to simply
clustering large numbers of small jet engines to power aircraft



I think that's because not much thought was given to building large engines;
the small ones being built were quite unreliable enough.



It's a pity I can't find a drawing of this thing on the web...if you
ever see a copy of "Project Canceled"; take a gander at the Short P.17D
VTOL platform that is supposed to carry the P.17A attack plane on its
back and up to the altitude where it will leave on its mission...this
thing looks straight out of "Thunderbirds", and is powered by forty-four
RB.108 fixed lift engines, sixteen RB.108 tilting lift engines, and ten
RB.108 or RB.145 propulsion engines with 60 degree jet deflection.
One aircraft..._seventy_ jet engines... :-D

Pat

  #52  
Old January 4th 05, 01:26 AM
Mary Pegg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jeff Findley wrote:

"Mary Pegg" wrote in message
news
There's a lesson, but it's a lesson in economics. It's cheaper to
have two than four. On the other hand, a 747 with two engines out
will get there, a 777 with two engines out is a glider. Hence the
ETOPS (Extended Twin OPerationS) regulations which apply to both
the aircraft type *and* the operator.


Compare a 747 with 1/2 its engines out to a 777 with 1/2 of its engines
out. For lots of fun, try a 747 with both of the left engines out and see
how it flies and lands.


If you pay for the sim time, I'd love to.

From an old pprune thread archived he

http://www.geocities.com/profemery/aviation/ferry.html

''I had a flight engineer once in the Air Force. Typical cigar smoking,
beer drinking, big handed kind of guy. When he heard I was leaving to
fly ETOPS airplanes he said "Sir, you know why I only ever fly four
engined airplanes over water? "No, Chief, tell me" I said. "CAUSE THEY
DON'T MAKE EM WITH FIVE!" ''

--
Nothing to be done.

  #53  
Old January 4th 05, 02:59 AM
Herb Schaltegger
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article ,
Mary Pegg wrote:

Compare a 747 with 1/2 its engines out to a 777 with 1/2 of its engines
out. For lots of fun, try a 747 with both of the left engines out and see
how it flies and lands.


If you pay for the sim time, I'd love to.


Do it in MS Flight Simulator - close enough for most people who aren't
multi-engine jet certified.

--
Herb Schaltegger, B.S., J.D., GPG Key ID: BBF6FC1C
"Pray: To ask that the laws of the universe be annulled in behalf of a single
petitioner confessedly unworthy." -- Ambrose Bierce
http://dischordia.blogspot.com
http://www.angryherb.net

  #54  
Old January 4th 05, 03:14 PM
Jeff Findley
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Mary Pegg" wrote in message
...
Jeff Findley wrote:
Compare a 747 with 1/2 its engines out to a 777 with 1/2 of its engines
out. For lots of fun, try a 747 with both of the left engines out and

see
how it flies and lands.


If you pay for the sim time, I'd love to.


A quick web search didn't turn up much of anything relevant to a 747 loosing
both engines on one side (besides flame wars and trolling). I'm sure Boeing
has some idea. ;-)

Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.

  #55  
Old January 12th 05, 11:54 PM
Greg D. Moore (Strider)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Jeff Findley" wrote in message
...
"Mary Pegg" wrote in message
...
Jeff Findley wrote:
Compare a 747 with 1/2 its engines out to a 777 with 1/2 of its

engines
out. For lots of fun, try a 747 with both of the left engines out and

see
how it flies and lands.


If you pay for the sim time, I'd love to.


A quick web search didn't turn up much of anything relevant to a 747

loosing
both engines on one side (besides flame wars and trolling). I'm sure

Boeing
has some idea. ;-)


Wonder what the engine failure pattern on the one that flew threw volcanic
ash was.



Jeff
--
Remove icky phrase from email address to get a valid address.


  #56  
Old January 13th 05, 12:34 AM
Rusty
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Jeff Findley wrote:
Compare a 747 with 1/2 its engines out to a 777 with 1/2 of its

engines
out. For lots of fun, try a 747 with both of the left engines out

and
see
how it flies and lands.


If you pay for the sim time, I'd love to.


A quick web search didn't turn up much of anything relevant to a 747

loosing
both engines on one side (besides flame wars and trolling). I'm sure

Boeing
has some idea. ;-)


Jeff


United Airlines flight 811 (Boeing 747) from Sydney to Los Angeles via
Honolulu on February 24, 1989

"....After leaving Honolulu, on a flight from Los Angeles to Sydney,
Australia, the loss of an improperly latched forward lower lobe cargo
door resulted in explosive decompression and loss of power in the No. 3
and 4 engines. Nine passengers were sucked out of the plane and lost at
sea. The plane landed safely. The cargo door opening was attributed to
a faulty switch or wiring in the door control system which permitted
electrical actuation of the door latches towards the unlatched position
after initial door closure and before takeoff..."
http://www.planecrashinfo.com/cvr890224.htm


- Rusty

  #57  
Old January 13th 05, 03:40 AM
Mary Pegg
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Greg D. Moore (Strider) wrote:

[747 engine failure]

Wonder what the engine failure pattern on the one that flew threw volcanic
ash was.


The most famous incident is this one:

"Ladies and gentlemen, this is your Captain speaking.
We have a small problem.
All four engines have stopped.
We are doing our damnedest to get them going again.
I trust you are not in too much distress."

- Captain Eric Moody, British Airways, on the passenger PA after
flying through volcanic ash in a B-747

[source: http://flatrock.org.nz/topics/flying...lass_isnt.htm]

The actual pattern was 4, 2, and then 1 & 3 almost simultaneously.

[source: www.aviationcentral.co.uk/
books-index-req-visit-bkid-46-orderid-2.htm ]

More on www.ericmoody.com, which doesn't play nicely with my browser.

--
Nothing to be done.

  #58  
Old February 8th 06, 03:00 PM posted to sci.space.moderated,sci.space.history
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Number of engines, was: earliest moon landing

On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 17:34:03 -0600, in a place far, far away, "Rusty"
made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such
a way as to indicate that:

"....After leaving Honolulu, on a flight from Los Angeles to Sydney,
Australia, the loss of an improperly latched forward lower lobe cargo
door resulted in explosive decompression and loss of power in the No. 3
and 4 engines. Nine passengers were sucked out of the plane and lost at
sea.


I hate when that happens.

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) Nathan Jones UK Astronomy 8 August 1st 04 09:08 PM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ (is not spam) :-) Nathan Jones Astronomy Misc 5 July 29th 04 06:14 AM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ darla Misc 10 July 25th 04 02:57 PM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ darla UK Astronomy 11 July 25th 04 02:57 PM
The Apollo Hoax FAQ Nathan Jones Astronomy Misc 5 November 7th 03 09:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:02 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.