A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

pitot tube down



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 3rd 04, 07:00 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Rick" wrote in message
hlink.net...
Tarver Engineering wrote:

Panic seems to be the reason people don't think their way out of these

kind
of single point failures. I have to winder if the pilot didn't expect

to
have to do more than raise the wheels and adjust the flaps.


One of your series connections is open circuit, Tarver,

As a congenital idiot who couldn't learn to fly an aircraft in a
thousand years your statment above pretty much defines the level of your
knowledge of aircraft operations ... zilch.


Since the FO's air data was correct, one can only believe you post from
ignorance, Rick. Robots fly 757 airplanes most of the time, but sometimes
the pilot has to operate.

I beleive UAVs are the way of the furture in the Military sense of the word
aviation.


  #12  
Old March 4th 04, 01:13 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"W. D. Allen Sr." wrote:

How did they even get the 757 off the ground?

WDA


Well, it WAS a pretty confusing readout on the CVR tape for sure,
lots of shouts of 'what's it doing that for' and like
stuff,...but most of it seemed to happen after they were almost
off the ground (ISTR). I had the CVR transcript at one time. I
believe that they got up to several thousand feet at one point.


--

-Gord.
  #13  
Old March 4th 04, 03:03 AM
C Knowles
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"Leadfoot" wrote in message
news:f4c1c.9887$Zp.3539@fed1read07...

"C Knowles" wrote in message
news
Not that familiar with the 757 but GPS displays GS. Add or subtract

winds
to
get TAS, then correct for density (divide by SMOE) to get IAS?CAS.

Heard
it
suggested you could also depressurize and use the cabin altimeter for
altitude. Or, convert cabin altitude into aircraft altitude if the chart

is
available.
Curt


Multiple redundant systems on Commercial jets. Figure out which one is

bad
and turn it off. The standby #3 system is analog and totally separate if
it's like a 747-400. The captain should have given control to the copilot
in the turkish aircraft incident.



Well, that's only if you follow the flight manual and common sense.
Just discussed this one in my quarterly refresher. The discussion turned to
"what if" you lost all airspeed and altitude indications. It was an exercise
in making us think. It would also be a handy method to double check the
primary instruments, or to have something to do on those long overwaters.
Curt


  #14  
Old March 4th 04, 05:28 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"C Knowles" wrote in message
. com...

"Leadfoot" wrote in message
news:f4c1c.9887$Zp.3539@fed1read07...

"C Knowles" wrote in message
news
Not that familiar with the 757 but GPS displays GS. Add or subtract

winds
to
get TAS, then correct for density (divide by SMOE) to get IAS?CAS.

Heard
it
suggested you could also depressurize and use the cabin altimeter for
altitude. Or, convert cabin altitude into aircraft altitude if the

chart
is
available.
Curt


Multiple redundant systems on Commercial jets. Figure out which one is

bad
and turn it off. The standby #3 system is analog and totally separate

if
it's like a 747-400. The captain should have given control to the

copilot
in the turkish aircraft incident.



Well, that's only if you follow the flight manual and common sense.
Just discussed this one in my quarterly refresher. The discussion turned

to
"what if" you lost all airspeed and altitude indications. It was an

exercise
in making us think. It would also be a handy method to double check the
primary instruments, or to have something to do on those long overwaters.


There would be no loss of airspeed indications. The airplane would seem
perfectly normal until there was no change in the altimeter. Get the
confusion about pitot tubes out of your head, as there is no relevence to
the discussion at hand. In fact, ignorance about transport air data
instrumentation may have contributed to the confusion the operator
displayed.


  #15  
Old March 4th 04, 05:41 PM
B2431
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

From: "Tarver Engineering"
Date: 3/4/2004 11:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"C Knowles" wrote in message
.com...

"Leadfoot" wrote in message
news:f4c1c.9887$Zp.3539@fed1read07...

"C Knowles" wrote in message
news Not that familiar with the 757 but GPS displays GS. Add or subtract

winds
to
get TAS, then correct for density (divide by SMOE) to get IAS?CAS.

Heard
it
suggested you could also depressurize and use the cabin altimeter for
altitude. Or, convert cabin altitude into aircraft altitude if the

chart
is
available.
Curt

Multiple redundant systems on Commercial jets. Figure out which one is

bad
and turn it off. The standby #3 system is analog and totally separate

if
it's like a 747-400. The captain should have given control to the

copilot
in the turkish aircraft incident.



Well, that's only if you follow the flight manual and common sense.
Just discussed this one in my quarterly refresher. The discussion turned

to
"what if" you lost all airspeed and altitude indications. It was an

exercise
in making us think. It would also be a handy method to double check the
primary instruments, or to have something to do on those long overwaters.


There would be no loss of airspeed indications. The airplane would seem
perfectly normal until there was no change in the altimeter. Get the
confusion about pitot tubes out of your head, as there is no relevence to
the discussion at hand. In fact, ignorance about transport air data
instrumentation may have contributed to the confusion the operator
displayed.


That depends on the amount of change in altitude. If the change is significant
your IAS will show a decrease in velocity since it will no longer be
compensating for altitude. That's the reason IAS requires both pitot and
static.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
  #16  
Old March 4th 04, 05:45 PM
Tarver Engineering
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"B2431" wrote in message
...
From: "Tarver Engineering"
Date: 3/4/2004 11:28 AM Central Standard Time
Message-id:


"C Knowles" wrote in message
.com...

"Leadfoot" wrote in message
news:f4c1c.9887$Zp.3539@fed1read07...

"C Knowles" wrote in message
news Not that familiar with the 757 but GPS displays GS. Add or subtract
winds
to
get TAS, then correct for density (divide by SMOE) to get IAS?CAS.
Heard
it
suggested you could also depressurize and use the cabin altimeter

for
altitude. Or, convert cabin altitude into aircraft altitude if the

chart
is
available.
Curt

Multiple redundant systems on Commercial jets. Figure out which one

is
bad
and turn it off. The standby #3 system is analog and totally

separate
if
it's like a 747-400. The captain should have given control to the

copilot
in the turkish aircraft incident.



Well, that's only if you follow the flight manual and common sense.
Just discussed this one in my quarterly refresher. The discussion

turned
to
"what if" you lost all airspeed and altitude indications. It was an

exercise
in making us think. It would also be a handy method to double check the
primary instruments, or to have something to do on those long

overwaters.

There would be no loss of airspeed indications. The airplane would seem
perfectly normal until there was no change in the altimeter. Get the
confusion about pitot tubes out of your head, as there is no relevence to
the discussion at hand. In fact, ignorance about transport air data
instrumentation may have contributed to the confusion the operator
displayed.


That depends on the amount of change in altitude. If the change is

significant
your IAS will show a decrease in velocity since it will no longer be
compensating for altitude. That's the reason IAS requires both pitot and
static.


Sure.


  #17  
Old March 6th 04, 11:37 PM
Leadfoot
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Not that familiar with the 757 but GPS displays GS. Add or subtract

winds
to
get TAS, then correct for density (divide by SMOE) to get IAS?CAS.

Heard
it
suggested you could also depressurize and use the cabin altimeter for
altitude. Or, convert cabin altitude into aircraft altitude if the

chart
is
available.
Curt


Multiple redundant systems on Commercial jets. Figure out which one is

bad
and turn it off. The standby #3 system is analog and totally separate

if
it's like a 747-400. The captain should have given control to the

copilot
in the turkish aircraft incident.



Well, that's only if you follow the flight manual and common sense.
Just discussed this one in my quarterly refresher. The discussion turned

to
"what if" you lost all airspeed and altitude indications. It was an

exercise
in making us think. It would also be a handy method to double check the
primary instruments, or to have something to do on those long overwaters.
Curt




 




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
Pitot tube question Doc Font Home Built 2 January 24th 05 04:28 AM
Pitot tube prices B2431 Home Built 2 May 16th 04 08:13 PM
Rag and tube construction and computer models? BllFs6 Home Built 24 April 12th 04 12:20 PM
Why 4130 tube? Leon McAtee Home Built 31 March 28th 04 03:04 PM
Chuck Yeager-pitot tube Ron Military Aviation 44 October 9th 03 03:13 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:01 AM.


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