The plane enthusiasts thread

[figbat]

Mare of mine had an interesting theory. Flights UK to Aus for instance, way over 12 hours and an extraordinary amount of fuel.
So why not develop an 'aircraft' that can just make geostationary orbit...then sit wait for Aus to come to it..in 12 hours

(Not serious but....)

If it was in geostationary orbit then it would remain over its takeoff site!

 

[Andy in Germany]

If it was in geostationary orbit then it would remain over its takeoff site!

Honestly, there's always someone who has to spoil everything with that "Science" stuff...

 

[Punkawallah]

Honestly, there's always someone who has to spoil everything with that "Science" stuff...

Technically, that’s an error in language rather than science . . .
I’ll see myself out.

 

[ebikeerwidnes]

Honestly, there's always someone who has to spoil everything with that "Science" stuff...

Damn facts getting in the way of a perfectly good theory!!!

 

[gbb]

A distant Chipmunk today. Used to see them all the time in the 70s, living on an airbase, dad used to work on them.

Also a (I believe) NAmerican T6 Texan, often doing the rounds around here, heard but not seen. Radial.engines are quite distinct so a good chance it was him on the other side of a treeline.

 

[gbb]

Lots of military stuff out today..mostly herd not seen..
This morning, two Typhoons high up, too high to see. Shortly after, two A400Ms headed out easyt, a fairly common flightpath from Brize Norton.
Just now , something different sounding, turned out to be a A320, fueller perhaps, shortly after, the two A400Ms headed back....and i notice a B52 incoming, just over Mablethorpe headed west

 

[Conrad_K]

AT least they made an attempt and got the front wheel off the ground

B52s don;t even try!!!

they just keep going in a straight line

Bicycle landing gear meant they couldn't 'rotate' the angle of attack for takeoff, so the USAF had special runways built (or older ones extended) to let them build up enough speed to take off in level flight. There used to be a "JATO" rocket-assisted takeoff package that could be installed to allow them to use shorter runways, but those were abandoned long ago. So it's entirely possible for a B-52 to safely land on a runway it can't then take off from.

 

[classic33]

Bicycle landing gear meant they couldn't 'rotate' the angle of attack for takeoff, so the USAF had special runways built (or older ones extended) to let them build up enough speed to take off in level flight. There used to be a "JATO" rocket-assisted takeoff package that could be installed to allow them to use shorter runways, but those were abandoned long ago. So it's entirely possible for a B-52 to safely land on a runway it can't then take off from.

T'weren't mine but @ebikeerwidnes who's post you quoted.

 

[DaveReading]

So it's entirely possible for a B-52 to safely land on a runway it can't then take off from.

That's true of the majority of aircraft.

Though not recommended ...

 

[Punkawallah]

That's true of the majority of aircraft.

Though not recommended ...

‘A good landing is one you can walk away from. A -great- landing is one where you can use the aircraft again’.

 

[Jameshow]

That's true of the majority of aircraft.

Though not recommended ...

Think that's true if Leeds Bradford airport, big planes 747 etc that landed need to fly out empty.

 

[classic33]

Think that's true if Leeds Bradford airport, big planes 747 etc that landed need to fly out empty.

Not forgetting Concord!

 

[Jameshow]

Not forgetting Concord!

I thought I'd heard of people doing local sightseeing trips on Concorde but perhaps they were with limited fuel??

 

[classic33]

I thought I'd heard of people doing local sightseeing trips on Concorde but perhaps they were with limited fuel??

Possibly limited fuel, but land, and take off it did.

https://yorkshirespotters.blogspot.com/p/concorde.html

 

[Jameshow]

Possibly limited fuel, but land, and take off it did.

https://yorkshirespotters.blogspot.com/p/concorde.html

Thanks I had heard social history of the events!