Re: [MBZ] 747

n via Mercedes > Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2017 3:53 PM > To: Mercedes Discussion List > Reply To: Mercedes Discussion List > Cc: Mountain Man > Subject: Re: [MBZ] 747 > > > Rick wrote: > > ‎... > > Is one of these the slo-mo Peter mentioned? > Thanks.

Re: [MBZ] 747

Regular speed, but a large aircraft tumbles slowly. Watch them all. Rick Original Message From: Mountain Man via Mercedes Sent: Sunday, November 26, 2017 3:53 PM To: Mercedes Discussion List Reply To: Mercedes Discussion List Cc: Mountain Man Subject: Re: [MBZ] 747 Rick wrote: > ‎... Is

Re: [MBZ] 747

Rick wrote: > ‎... Is one of these the slo-mo Peter mentioned? Thanks. tin.man ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change delivery options go to: http://mail.okiebenz.com/mailman/listinfo/merc

Re: [MBZ] 747

‎https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AUboPQQk6r0&sns=em ‎https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTXDalv7kNQ&sns=em https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AlkRE3Jsefo&sns=em https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoTk5670rmQ&sns=em Rick ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list arch

Re: [MBZ] 747

Peter wrote: > ...If you haven't watched the video in slo-mo of the crash, you should. Please provide a link for this slo-mo? Anyone? Very nice discussion, thanks Peter. tin.man ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archi

Re: [MBZ] 747

In the days before the first 707 jets the Electra (?) turbo props were the deluxe models. There seemed to be a crash every few months so I was quite nervous on my first flight at the age of 9 IIRC. On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 6:11 PM, Peter Frederick via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > Th

Re: [MBZ] 747

The worst scare I've had riding in a plane was a landing in 1974 at Louisville, KY in thunderstormy weather. We were in an Eastern 727 making a normal approach when we flew into what I assume was a vertical downdraft, aka wind shear. Plane essentially fell out of the air very close to the runw

Re: [MBZ] 747

I don't know. It started the landing straight on and then turned sideways. First one way and then the other a couple of times. Reminded me of the skids I had done in the car at one time or another. It was mid Dec in New York so I figure the runway was a bit icy. It was quite cold out when we wa

Re: [MBZ] 747

Good summary Peter. Two additional points - 1. there were four pilots on board and no one called out the throttles and 2. the TRACON cleared them for the approach but instructed them to maintain 180 knots until 5 miles from the runway and they were actually at 192/193 until 4 miles out. (norma

Re: [MBZ] 747

Yeah they got that one guy's name long, it is Ho Ree Fook To be fair that was the weekend news babe stand-in, she dint no nuffin, and the newswriter was probably messin with her too. --FT On 11/24/17 3:59 PM, Randy Bennell via Mercedes wrote: You would think that the news people would have l

Re: [MBZ] 747

Yup. The cause of the accident is fairly complex though. The principle cause, although this is not widely addressed, is that air traffic control at SF is notorious for giving final landing authorization long after the aircraft is past the initial point in the glide slope. It's bad enough that

Re: [MBZ] 747

You would think that the news people would have looked at the "names" and seen the joke but they apparently did get the infomation from what should have been a good reliable source so they just paid no attention. It is very easy to be complacent and fail to check things out for yourself. RB On

Re: [MBZ] 747

I practically soil myself laughing every time I see this. From a professional standpoint, these people will never, ever get to live this down. -D > On Nov 24, 2017, at 2:58 PM, Rick Knoble via Mercedes > wrote: > >> ‎‎Is that the one that hit the seawall? > > > Yep. > Bang Ding Ow > Wi T

Re: [MBZ] 747

>‎‎Is that the one that hit the seawall? Yep.  Bang Ding Ow Wi Tu Low Sum Ting Wong Ho Lee Fuk Were the crew.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jtxds204ZMI&sns=em Rick ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Un

Re: [MBZ] 747

Because the pilots on board seemed to only be trained to use automation to land and lacked basic flying skills. I just watch an air disasters episode about this flight. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 24, 2017, at 11:10 AM, Mountain Man via Mercedes > wrote: > > Peter wrote: >> ...You can even

Re: [MBZ] 747

Wilton once wrote that the landing gear on a BUFF could be turned so the plane could land partially sideways. I wonder if the 747 might have the same feature? Wilton might know. Gerry MG wrote: > Hah! I got to go down the runway sideways on one during a > landing. That was fun! --- This email

Re: [MBZ] 747

Peter wrote: > ...You can even slam it into a runway pier at 180 mph and nearly flip it over > and still save all but a couple passengers, and was demonstrated > un-intentionally at SF. Is that the one that hit the seawall? tin.man ___ http://www.okiebenz.com

Re: [MBZ] 747

Hah! I got to go down the runway sideways on one during a landing. That was fun! Curley McLain via Mercedes wrote: I got to fly back from Entebbe, Uganda to London on one. British Airways. It was a full house. Very snug. I wanted to see the upper deck, but no dice. Dan Penoff via Merce

Re: [MBZ] 747

The new 737 is pretty much a total re-design. Stronger fuselage, better flight controls, probably new wing cross-section (although that may have been already done). The "old" fuselage is the original 707 design, and has been considered far under strength for some time now. New one should be a

Re: [MBZ] 747

Satellites, and drones, and every single email and phone call. And your smart phone. -- Max Dillon Charleston SC '87 300TD '95 E300 On November 22, 2017 5:40:27 PM EST, Rick Knoble via Mercedes wrote: >I've always wondered, if they designed the SR-71 with slide rules and >drafting tables in t

Re: [MBZ] 747

I would be more of a C-47 guy. I was trying to get a handle on how much interior space it had. It would obviously be a two story, but how many bedrooms upstairs, how many rooms downstairs, etc? There are so many millionaires/billionaires in this country, there are probably quite a few who would

Re: [MBZ] 747

How about a former pan am clipper 727? Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 23, 2017, at 10:34 AM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes > wrote: > > With the fuselage gutted, maybe you could use one of those heavy lift > helicopters to fly it to the site? > > -D > > >> On Nov 23, 2017, at 11:31 AM, G Mann via

Re: [MBZ] 747

With the fuselage gutted, maybe you could use one of those heavy lift helicopters to fly it to the site? -D > On Nov 23, 2017, at 11:31 AM, G Mann via Mercedes > wrote: > > Let me know when you are ready, I'll set you up with one.. moving costs > will however clean your clock. Wings off, it'

Re: [MBZ] 747

Let me know when you are ready, I'll set you up with one.. moving costs will however clean your clock. Wings off, it's still to big to take down the road without special permits and routing. Then again when you follow your dream, money has no object, does it.. ;)) Friend of mine mounted the f

Re: [MBZ] 747

I wonder how a scrapped and gutted 747 body would be as a house; how many rooms? Several other airliners over the years have been converted into homes and businesses. Gerry Dan Penoff wrote: > I’ve flown on most, if not all, of the variants. -200, -300, -400. As you > might expect, the -400s w

Re: [MBZ] 747

The engineers have a problem getting beyond the idiots in marketing or sales. Now the need is to make a “world” airplane. Build it all over the place, so as to capture too many disparate parts. Then, the whole, will result in mismatched parts that will need to be re-eningeered so that an ai

Re: [MBZ] 747

--R wrote: > Got to fly a brand new 777 once, was on its 3rd flight from US to UK. That > was really nice too. We rode a close to maiden flight for the 777 at T-Day. It was day before T-Day years ago and riding to work the radio announced they were giving $50 RT anywhere leaving T-Day morning, r

Re: [MBZ] 747

On our flight from IND to TPA back in October we got to make one of the first flights on a SWA 737-MAX. You can read more about them here: https://thepointsguy.com/2017/10/first-look-southwest-737-max-8/ Really nice, very comfortable for someone over 6 foot tall. Cabin lighting was funky. Th

Re: [MBZ] 747

Got to fly on 747s several times BOS-LHR and back on BA. Usually business or first class over then cattle class back. That was hard. BA first class was VERY nice, starting in the lounge. Rode the upper deck a coupla times, back then the pilots left the door open so it was possible to wander in

Re: [MBZ] 747

in 1993, it was all 3d virtual reality. A friend of mine is an engineer at Boeing. He cut his teeth reducing weight on the tail section of the 757. I think he has been involved with the 767, 777 and 787 as well as several years in the "black hole." They musta thought he was valuable, beca

Re: [MBZ] 747

>‎What a tribute to the guys in white shirts, >skinny black ties, and  pocket >protectors I've always wondered, if they designed the SR-71 with slide rules and drafting tables in the late '50s and early '60s with no or very limited computing power, what do they have now...? Rick __

Re: [MBZ] 747

"Too many small parts flying in close formation". On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 2:14 PM, Kaleb C. Striplin via Mercedes < mercedes@okiebenz.com> wrote: > I was at an airport somewhere a while back and one was parked at a gate > and standing in the terminal I was about nose on nose with it thru the > wi

Re: [MBZ] 747

I was at an airport somewhere a while back and one was parked at a gate and standing in the terminal I was about nose on nose with it thru the window. Huge airplane. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 22, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes > wrote: > > I’ve flown on most, if not all, of the

Re: [MBZ] 747

I only flew in the main cabin on a -400 once. DTW to KSI, a 14+ hour flight. Wow. That was ugly. I had to be in Seoul on short notice for a three letter agency, and it was the quickest way to get there. Business and first class seats were sold out. Military transport would have taken too long

Re: [MBZ] 747

Just about a completely different aircraft I would imagine at least from an engine and cockpit standpoint Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 22, 2017, at 1:56 PM, Andrew Strasfogel via Mercedes > wrote: > > How did the new 737s differ from the first ones? > > On Nov 22, 2017 2:52 PM, "Curley McLa

Re: [MBZ] 747

I got to fly back from Entebbe, Uganda to London on one. British Airways. It was a full house. Very snug. I wanted to see the upper deck, but no dice. Dan Penoff via Mercedes November 22, 2017 at 1:56 PM I’ve flown on most, if not all, of the variants. -200,

Re: [MBZ] 747

I’ve flown on most, if not all, of the variants. -200, -300, -400. As you might expect, the -400s were the nicest. Got to make the trip across the Pond to the UK in the bunk room on the top deck one time because my business class seat back broke. Upper deck was full and I wasn’t about to go s

Re: [MBZ] 747

How did the new 737s differ from the first ones? On Nov 22, 2017 2:52 PM, "Curley McLain via Mercedes" wrote: > I think the 747 is still being delivered to japan and china. They jam > over 500 small seats in em. > > During golden week there used to be 12000 JAL passengers a day leaving > Honolu

Re: [MBZ] 747

I think the 747 is still being delivered to japan and china. They jam over 500 small seats in em. During golden week there used to be 12000 JAL passengers a day leaving Honolulu. That is 24 flights a day, all 747s, all jammed full. Plus however many the other carriers hauled... According

Re: [MBZ] 747

On 22/11/2017 1:40 PM, Kaleb C. Striplin via Mercedes wrote: It’s a shame all the airlines are retiring them. Too expensive to fly. Newer planes use less fuel. I see that A380's are already being retired. RB ___ http://www.okiebenz.com To search list archiv

Re: [MBZ] 747

I have always wanted to fly on one but does not look like I will get to. I guess they are probably used by some of the overseas airlines. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 22, 2017, at 1:42 PM, Dan Penoff via Mercedes > wrote: > > Still a lot of them in long haul air freight, and probably will be

Re: [MBZ] 747

Still a lot of them in long haul air freight, and probably will be for many years to come. -D > On Nov 22, 2017, at 2:40 PM, Kaleb C. Striplin via Mercedes > wrote: > > It’s a shame all the airlines are retiring them. > > Sent from my iPhone > >> On Nov 22, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Curley McLain

Re: [MBZ] 747

Indeed. ATTABOYS to all of 'em! W - Original Message - From: "Curley McLain via Mercedes" To: "Mercedes Discussion List" Cc: "Curley McLain" <126die...@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, November 22, 2017 2:37 PM Subject: [MBZ] 747 Next year m

Re: [MBZ] 747

It’s a shame all the airlines are retiring them. Sent from my iPhone > On Nov 22, 2017, at 1:37 PM, Curley McLain via Mercedes > wrote: > > > Next year marks the 50th year since the introduction of the Boeing 747. The > 737 is already over 50. > > What a tribute to the guys in white shirt

[MBZ] 747

Next year marks the 50th year since the introduction of the Boeing 747. The 737 is already over 50. What a tribute to the guys in white shirts, skinny black ties, and pocket protectors running slipsticks, that the KC135, the B52, the 737 and the 747 are all still viable airframes. (Grante

[MBZ] 747 D check

http://thelexicans.wordpress.com/2012/11/21/british-airways-boeing-747-400-victor-x-ray-undergoes-d-checks/ Roughly 72,000 man hours, according to the one poster who had worked on one. About 2.2 million greenies plus parts. ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For

Re: [MBZ] 747 empty weight

The original full up takeoff weight in 1969 was about 750,000, so 400,000 empty is about right. Peter ___ http://www.okiebenz.com For new and used parts go to www.okiebenz.com To search list archives http://www.okiebenz.com/archive/ To Unsubscribe or change

Re: [MBZ] 747 empty weight

> ...Basic weight about 400,000 lbs?... > I'm not going to take the VanCleef approach and try to claim that all this data is in my brain, so I went to the Boeing website. And you are right. The average weight is right around 400,000 pounds. Which I'm assuming , like other aircraft, this means n