Interesting photo’s vutee
The Vulcan was XA903 and was at Farnborough, cos so was I and I took the engines out of it!
Rgds Cking
Has Mr Pittuck bought a scanner recently??? 😉
Seriously Robert, you have posted some great shots in the past week. PLEASE keep ’em coming!
Rgds Cking
P.S When I can persuade Mrs King to buy me a slide scanner, I’ve got some right gems for this site!!
Thank you Demitri for posting some very interesting pictures of and old war horse, The Canberra that is!!
Please don’t get dis hartened by a lack of response to your previous pictures we all appreciate the effort!
Rgds Cking
P.S. Keep your head down!
Andrewman, It wasn’t a ‘bus or a Boeing it was a 146/RJ. I assumed that the crew were switching off the engine bleed air in turn trying to isolate the offending engine. With four of the blessed things it took longer than they thought!
B.T.W. I thought that you were slightly pressurized when you took off to keep the doors shut and prevent the pressurization “bump” on rotation?
(On rotation the outflow valve, if open is faced into the airflow by the rotation of the fuselage. It is turned into a ram air duct that will slightly pressurize the cabin causing a sudden pressure rise, i.e. a bump. For this reason the cabim is slightly pressurized during the taxi out. Also it stops the fools trying to jump out!)
Since you are our man at Airbus and what I have just said was told to me on a B737 course perhaps there is a difference between Airbus and Boeing operating proceedures?
Rgds Cking
This story has been doing the rounds for a number of years now. With any aircraft that uses bleed air for pressurization the is a risk of atomized engine oil getting into the cabin air supply if an internal engine oil seal fails. The 787 by the way will be presurized by electrcaly powered compressors useing external air so this will not be a problem.
The terms “Allegedly, Anecdotal and cover up” are a bit strong as this information has been in the public domain for years. The airlines have very strict proceedures to deal with this, both in the air and on the ground and work very closly with the manufacturers to develop long term fixes.
Last year I had the un-fortunate experience of having this happed to me TWICE in TWO WEEKS!!!. I got on the first aircraft and noticed immediatly that it smelled like a back street garage. We took off and the smell got worse, to the point that I had a “tight” chest and my eyes were watering. In fact I thought that I was going to have to ask for help. Then for no apparent reason the smell just went away.
The next week I was on the same trip, same airline same type of aircraft but different registration. I got onboard and it had the same oily smell. This time though the smell went as soon as the aircraft pessurized. I got chatting to one of the cabin crew and mentioned the oil smell and she said that a month previously she had been so badly affected by the smell she had to go onto emergency oxygen and was unfitt for work for a week after.
Rgds Cking
They originate from the KC-135. They enable the pilot the see the underside of a tanker aircraft when they are flight re-fueling. On the 737? I hear you say! The KC-135, 707, 727 and 737 share the same structure for the cockpit area. Boeing never likes to radicaly change a design so the eyebrows have stayed. Finaly last year they removed them. They are a pain in the backside to change because it will take two men all shift to change one and it blocks up the flightdeck with a body too!
Also notice that they are fitted to the DC-8 as MDC tried to sell them USAF as transporters too. As the DC-9 and MD-80 share the same cockpit structure that explains them aswell.
Rgds Cking
Rgds Cking
by738. That’s the plan I’ve heard too. BUT, as all PIA flights are full and always have a large freight load. I should imagine with the first breath of a head wind over the pond they will be dropping in for fuel!.
Rgds Cking
Hear is the view from the other side, taken with the phone(Sorry I was busy)
Rgds Cking
O.K. chaps, is there anything interesting due in?. Apart from the weather being cr*p recently there has been nothing “Good” in for a long while. Bores me to tears!
Rgds Cking
It will be bright sunshine, scattered white clouds set against an azure sky How do I know? I’M OFF SHIFT!!!!!! 😡
Rgds Cking
It has Raked wing tips like the -300. There are other differences but they are “Visualy” minor.
Rgds Cking
The name plaques were all removed and adorn various BA engineers tool boxes around the country!!!. They were replaced by a plastic plaque with details of the “Ethnic” designs on the tail. These now have all been removed as the aircraft have been repainted. Keep an eye out on Ebay!
Rgds Cking
Billy Boeing tells us he’s got a repair scheme that’ll cope with any damage, so you have got to belive him!
The American pilots have tried to blame the AA airbus A300 accident at JFK on a dodgy repair to is composite fin. How are they going to cope with the entire fuselage and wings being composite?
Rgds Cking
I agree with Mr Murray, it is going to be VERY interesting when they drive a catering truck into the side of a 787!.
Repairing composite material is a specialist task. The only repairs I have been involved in were on fairings and flaps. They were horrible, messy things that, although done in accordance with the repair manual I would not say that I was proud of them!. Repairs are best done in the fibreglass shop were they do them all the time! I would not want to do a repair to a serious structural part without specialist guidence.
As for the fidelity of a repaired composite part, the repair and jointing area is stronger than the original part. The difficulty with any composite repair is cutting out all of the damage, you never get all of it out. In fact the cutting proccess will cause damage it’s self. Also you have to keep the damaged area dry because any moisture trapped in the repair will freeze at altitude and cause the composite to split. This is called De- lamination. This will weaken the item and can remain undetected as it is internal.
Rgds Cking
I wonder if the aircraft enginners of yesteryear were worried about repairing metal aircraft after years of looking after wood and canvas ones!!!
They have all been out in the weather for three years now. Manchester and Filton both made bids for the aircraft based on them being undercover within a few years. They were hollow words!!!!. The Manchester one will start to look a bit crabby and MAPLC will want B.A. to do something about it. B.A. will say “no” and then MAPLC will give B.A. notice to shift it!. It will end up being scrapped. I do know that there are a few volunteers looking after OAC (And Tridentman!) but it needs a hangar! Both the LHR one and Bristol one have the advantage of being near B.A’s maintenance base and BAe’s factory so they will recieve some sort of “Tarting up” when the corrosion starts to realy show.
The aircraft will never fly again. it was difficult enough for the combined forces of B.A, A.F and Airbus to try to keep the beasts in the air, so a charity does’nt stand a chance.
Now I don’t agree with Kev 35’s idear of scrapping them but I do belive that the organizations that put the bids in for them should honour thier obligations!!!
Rgds Cking
P.S. Instead og moaning to each other about this state of afairs how about writing to the local papers, M.P’s and such like ?