[badidea]

Originally Posted by Weyland-Yutani

I would say that an engineer who works *for* Airbus *today* would be even more qualified than your uncle - with *full* respect to your uncle. I know there is at least one such person who is a member of this forum. Perhaps you didn't know, I can hardly expect that you would consider your uncle to be a better expert on Airbus than an actual Airbus engineer? Nah.

Since I am pretty sure that you are talking about me, I'll have to admit that SkyCaptain might very well be correct that his uncle is a better expert in design issues than I am!
It's true that I am an engineer working for Airbus on the A380 but I have almost nothing to do with the aeronautic design!

[Sky Captain]

The C-5 and C-141 are some of my uncle's planes.
As is the many structural parts of the 130.
And he did work for the SR-71. Quite a presrigious resume.

As for the first plane, I truly believe the French beat us. We just documented it first.
In fact the French made the biggest aviation leaps in the early years.
The Aileron(little wing) was FAR SUPERIOR technology over the Wirghts wing warping technology.
Though the Taube was a wing warping plane.

Hey badidea, what systems do you engineer? Hyduaulic, electrical, plumbing?
Are you in Cananda or Europe?

[badidea]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Hey badidea, what systems do you engineer? Hyduaulic, electrical, plumbing?
Are you in Cananda or Europe?

I am in Hamburg and working in the DMU Integration department - especially on German-French electrical Interfaces and furthermore I kick some designers asses when I find German-French clashes in the DMU (all FAF-NCF systems)!

[Sky Captain]

Man, I considered getting my A&P after leaving the AirForce but things just didn't work out that way.
Now I just fly what you build.
After going from Dad's Piper into the Airforce Flight training and into a C130, I though MAN THIS THING IS BIG! But I got the hang of the Herc.
I can't imagine how big the 380 is from the flightdeck!

[badidea]

I always wanted to become a pilot but never even got the chance because I am partially green blind!

[turtle777]

Originally Posted by badidea

I always wanted to become a pilot but never even got the chance because I am partially green blind!

I never understood the problem with that. There ain't no green in the sky

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Ado

Maybe because the Write Bros were British immigrants and immigration played a large role in developing countries like America and Australia.

Henry Ford and Adolf Hitler were friends.
I look at what they bought humanity technology wise and not politically, cause every country is hypocrytical in their humantarian treatment.

The Wright Brothers were native to Ohio-Dayton to be specific. They were of European stock to be sure, but they were Americans first and foremost.

And while Henry Ford thought highly of Hitler early in Hitler's regime, he was not "a friend.' Ford (who was something of a loon to begin with) thought that the German success in climbing out of the Depression was noteworthy, and credited Hitler with "providing the discipline" to make it possible. I have to agree with both statements. But Ford also saw (though this doesn't get a lot of press anymore) that Hitler's beligerent actions were bad for business, so no matter what his personal sentiments (Ford was apparently one of the "Protocols of Zion" believers), he put his industrial efforts into a war footing early on, supporting contracts for Britain well before Lend-Lease.

Taking the position that everybody in an historical situation should have the same sensibilities that we do today is not helpful or useful. At the time, it was culturally appropriate to feel that certain ethnic groups were superior in one way or another, however incorrect and stupid we find such issues today. And in most cases, particularly when discussing the period of history called the 20th century, you have to pay attention to specific priorities; national survival trumps external humanitarianism every time. As for advances in technology and science before and during WWII, they were spurred almost entirely by the need to defeat an enemy, nothing else.

[Sky Captain]

He can fly as a civillian but not a soilder.
And he would have a restriction noting color blindness on his medical certificate.
No big deal.

So learn to fly the private aircraft.
I'm sure Airbus has some sort of private pilot program for it's employees.
Boeing and Rayethon(Beechcraft) does. As does Cirrus.
Seriously, see if they'll teach you to fly!

[badidea]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

He can fly as a civillian but not a soilder.
And he would have a restriction noting color blindness on his medical certificate.
No big deal.

Please tell me that this is only true for US airlines because the doctor back then told me that I don't even need to apply because Lufthansa won't take me with my color blindness!

Private flying is too expensive for me...

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

He can fly as a civillian but not a soilder.
And he would have a restriction noting color blindness on his medical certificate.
No big deal.

So learn to fly the private aircraft.
I'm sure Airbus has some sort of private pilot program for it's employees.
Boeing and Rayethon(Beechcraft) does. As does Cirrus.
Seriously, see if they'll teach you to fly!

No Sky Captain! Don't tell him that!

Seriously there are a lot of pilots chasing few jobs these days.. thanks to great electrical engineers like badidea who've taken the average airline cockpit from 4-5 men in the 50's to 2 today... Plus you had a fake drummed up "pilot shortage" that the ATA was going on about in the 80's... combined with a loosening of regulations for vision, and height to weight, etc.. and finally the affirmative action that was literally dragging women (qualified or otherwise) into aviation .... and you get a basic economics 101 lesson.. Supply is far greater than demand.. and entry level jobs turn into career jobs, and before you know it you getting paid $60K/yr to captain a 72 pax ATR-72! :wall:

Keep your current job... Go fly for fun, not to get paid!

btw.... I find it funny that many people instantly assumed that Badidea was an aerospace engineer... It's true that an airplane project will have some aerospace engineers, but the brunt of aerodynamics are done by P.hD level scientists, and the brunt of the engineers are mechanical, electrical, and materials etc... it's a gigantic project that requires all kinds of skill sets, and most everyone isn't a "jack of all trades, and a master of none" but rather a master of one skill and the senior engineers of the project pull it all together thru the heads of the various depts.

I too had a relative work for Boeing/Douglas for 30 years in engineering (he was actually aerospace).

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by badidea

Please tell me that this is only true for US airlines because the doctor back then told me that I don't even need to apply because Lufthansa won't take me with my color blindness!

Private flying is too expensive for me...

A good friend lost his job due to very minor color blindness, even though his medical was still valid, he demonstrated color blindness in actual training during his sim. The "Glass cockpits" of today require color vision, and it's not many companies that will hire you with it... Certainly not the 1st tier major airlines everyone wants to work for.

[Sky Captain]

As a fr8dog(freight dog - freight carrier) he can fly as a first officer with color blindness. Especially with the old steam gauge planes.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

As a fr8dog(freight dog - freight carrier) he can fly as a first officer with color blindness. Especially with the old steam gauge planes.

That's good to hear SkyCaptain.. is is a full color blindness, or just certain colors?

It was sad to see this guy (I met him in ground school for MD-11 at supplemental operation) lose his job. He couldn't tell the magenta needles from the green.... and the difference is long range nave vs. short range nav... so he's wind up trying to fly an ILS while still in LNAV, and even though his PFD said he was not in LOC he would continue to fly thru the ILS course... the end result after several tries is the training guys started to quiz him on the colors of the various needles and he couldn't tell them the difference between the magenta and green, and the blue and green.. :wall: They never even offered to put him into one of their DC-10's.. With in a few months I go my job at American and heard he was selling real estate in Atlanta.

[Sky Captain]

His name wouldn't be Dave would it?
Was he training on the old Litton systems?
Did y'all have an IR or commercial ticket yet?

Oh and checklist checklist checklist!

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

His name wouldn't be Dave would it?
Was he training on the old Litton systems?
Did y'all have an IR or commercial ticket yet?

Oh and checklist checklist checklist!

His name I recall was Robert... but it's been about 6 years, and I never staid in touch. It was Honeywell stuff and we were both ATP with types (from ASA)..

from md11info

[Sky Captain]

ASA?
I had interviewed for ASA.
You in Atlanta?
I see his problem. It's all glass. Bummer.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

ASA?
I had interviewed for ASA.
You in Atlanta?
I see his problem. It's all glass. Bummer.

I guess we've got a bit off topic by now.. what the heck! Feel free to email me if anyone bitches about our post whoring..

I sat on a few interviews back in early late '99.. I lived in ATL for a while, now in Phoenix... flying CE750 (citation X) on contract while I build a small real estate empire!

Here is my last pic at ASA before I retired a 29 year old ATR-72 captain! those were the days!

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

from md11info

How do you learn what all those knobs and buttons do? Is it through sheer memorization or do most planes have the same basic types of instrumentation?

Also, do you use all of them regularly in a flight or ar they there for emergencies when you need to run the plane in full manual mode?

[badidea]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

thanks to great electrical engineers like badidea

I'm actually a civil engineer!

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

I guess we've got a bit off topic by now.. what the heck! Feel free to email me if anyone bitches about our post whoring..

I sat on a few interviews back in early late '99.. I lived in ATL for a while, now in Phoenix... flying CE750 (citation X) on contract while I build a small real estate empire!

Here is my last pic at ASA before I retired a 29 year old ATR-72 captain! those were the days!

I was stuck in Embraers for the longest time. And I still get stuck ferrying them to maintenence at night.(Oh well, keeps me current in them)
That ATR is a BIG turboprop. Almost compairs to the C 130's I captained.

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by badidea

I'm actually a civil engineer!

makes my point even better, thanks!

dcmacdaddy... 95% of transport catagory planes have 90% of the same crap...

The layout is almost always the same.. it's just a few minor difference between how the radio for example tunes, or how the nav instruments are set... the "skill" of flying a plane, no matter how big is the same, and it's basically the instrument flying skills and PROCEDURES that you bring from one airplane to another... here is a picture of the Citation X cockpit.... it's 35,000lbs vs the MD-11's 570,000lbs and the systems of the X are a bit simpler... fewer Hydraulic backups, and electrical systems etc... but for the most part they both are 95% the same in terms of what you need to know to fly them, and to "push the buttons" The training you get that is specific to that plane is called a "Type rating" and doesn't teach you a darn bit about how to actually fly planes.. but more specifically how to fly THAT particular plane, in terms of it's handling or cockpit differences.


Citation X and your host..

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

That ATR is a BIG turboprop. Almost compairs to the C 130's I captained.

it sure almost sounds like one with those prop blades, that's for sure!

Which EMBS? I've got some E-120 time.. :wall: Buzzilia or Braklillya as we called it.

[Sky Captain]

I see you wear the Navihawk.
I have one also. And the Skyhawk.

Yes the 120 and the Mitsu MU2.

I fly for a charter company.
Lots of golfers to Florida.
Took a load of Germans to Nashville last week. Now that was hallarious.


Intresting, you're not caucasian. You have beat all odds/obsticals to be a pilot.
I had an Iraqi first officer in the MU-2.

Also, you can bring a camera? I'm forbidden to have a camera.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by badidea

Since I am pretty sure that you are talking about me, I'll have to admit that SkyCaptain might very well be correct that his uncle is a better expert in design issues than I am!
It's true that I am an engineer working for Airbus on the A380 but I have almost nothing to do with the aeronautic design!

In this case it doesn't really matter what kind of engineer you are, you'd still be more qualified to tell if Airbus machines are deathtraps than an engineer in another continent who isn't involved in building them IMO.

The first concepts of the A380 were made in the early 1990s, designated A3XX at the time. The plane was launched in 2000 and made its first flight in 2005 and in late 2006 it will be certified by JAA and FAA.

I am trying as I can to understand how this is "rushed" in any way. A manufacturer like Airbus shouldn't need more than 10 years to make this plane. In fact, all in all it will be closer to 15 years of development once it enters revenue flying in 2007. Whatever the A380 is, it is not rushed.

To put things into perspective, the B787 was conveived about two years ago and it is scheduled to enter service in 2008. It is no less complicated to design and manufacture than the A380, probably even more so. All in all the B787 will have had 4 to 5 years of development.
The A350 was conceived a year ago and is scheduled to enter service in 2010. That plane is far less involving as a design than the B787 and Airbus is going to take 5 years to develop it.

Airbus do not rush anything out.

PS. Sorry for going back on topic guys

cheers

W-Y

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

I see you wear the Navihawk.
I have one also. And the Skyhawk.

Yes the 120 and the Mitsu MU2.

I fly for a charter company.
Lots of golfers to Florida.
Took a load of Germans to Nashville last week. Now that was hallarious.


Intresting, you're not caucasian. You have beat all odds/obsticals to be a pilot.
I had an Iraqi first officer in the MU-2.

Also, you can bring a camera? I'm forbidden to have a camera.

Sorry Y-M.. as to the topic, my best guess is the A380 was not really rushed, but any gigantic commercial venture like this is going to experience time pressures from the financial investors and the customers waiting on product... for the wing to fail at 3% below what was required isn't unusual and I'm sure thru materials science and engineering they'll solve it.

As for off topic with Sky Captain

The watch is actually an Audemars Piguet Offshore (gift from well off relative)... but I have a few less expensive watches, including a rolex sub that I normally wear for day to day.

My race is technically (or at least on paper) "Caucasian" and yet my skin color is a lot darker.. so I get the worse of both worlds.. I get the paper discrimination of a white guy, and the face to face discrimination of a dark guy! yet with all of that I've managed to do ok considering the shitty environment for pilots today. It's going to get worse before it gets better I'm afraid.

The Camera was due to the fact that this was a line check flight (299 ride), check my .mac website for more pics of that day.. normally we can bring a camera however, but not to take pics of the pax!

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Sorry Y-M.. as to the topic, my best guess is the A380 was not really rushed, but any gigantic commercial venture like this is going to experience time pressures from the financial investors and the customers waiting on product... for the wing to fail at 3% below what was required isn't unusual and I'm sure thru materials science and engineering they'll solve it.

Hey, no worries. Your discussion is very interesting even though it is sort of off topic. I agree that the A380 wasn't really rushed, but yes it was made as fast as possible. Airbus isn't a government company. It is owned by EADS and BAe (aking to being owned by Halliburton and GE)

They want profits and success.

cheers

Y-M

[Sky Captain]

Sometimes profits drive "tombstone technology".
Boeing and Douglas are just as guilty of this.

And Unix, do you own a private civillian aircraft?
Being in real estate, it might come in handy.
I have Beech Muskateer and a Cessna 150.
I had a 172M.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by ghporter

Certainly the failure will be tracked down to a specific component or (more likely) a join between two components, and that particular element will be what needs rethinking, not the whole wing, or even the ribs and spars overall.

I agree with this assessment.

Chris

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Those controls look too complicated. I'm thinking 3 or 4 click wheels and some displays with iPod GUIs would make life a lot simpler!

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by greenamp

Those controls look too complicated. I'm thinking 3 or 4 click wheels and some displays with iPod GUIs would make life a lot simpler!

Look for it in your life time.. it's on the way.

[greenamp]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Look for it in your life time.. it's on the way.

Shuffle: AutoPilot

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Sky Captain

Intresting, you're not caucasian. You have beat all odds/obsticals to be a pilot. I had an Iraqi first officer in the MU-2.

What does that mean? Race is not an obstacle to becoming a pilot! The biggest obstacles are skill and money.

[dcmacdaddy]

Hey, Seeing as hwo you guys are posting some cockpit interior pics, can you show us where the "ignition" is on an airplane? I have always wondered about that. I mean, it doesn't really have a key, does it? Or is there just some button(s) you push that make everything turn on?

[Monique]

I do not have the patience to read through 10 pages; but was wondering what the tourist class; the one most people can afford looks like. If the seats are smaller than a little broom closet.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Hey, Seeing as hwo you guys are posting some cockpit interior pics, can you show us where the "ignition" is on an airplane? I have always wondered about that. I mean, it doesn't really have a key, does it? Or is there just some button(s) you push that make everything turn on?

It's just a "button" but not really a button. The engines have master switches. In the MD-11 pic above, there is a piece of paper just under the throttles, below that are three red things, below them are three black knobs--those are the master switches.

Chris

[Sky Captain]

Originally Posted by chabig

What does that mean? Race is not an obstacle to becoming a pilot! The biggest obstacles are skill and money.

I didn't mean anything mean by it.
The Tuskeegee airmen showed the world that black pilots were just as skilled if not better pilots.
I have NEVER flown with a black captain or first officer as a civilian.
My instructor in the Air Force was/is black. And is propably still in as a lifer.
There are other financial options. My route was millitary.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Hey, Seeing as hwo you guys are posting some cockpit interior pics, can you show us where the "ignition" is on an airplane? I have always wondered about that. I mean, it doesn't really have a key, does it? Or is there just some button(s) you push that make everything turn on?

Originally Posted by chabig

It's just a "button" but not really a button. The engines have master switches. In the MD-11 pic above, there is a piece of paper just under the throttles, below that are three red things, below them are three black knobs--those are the master switches.

Chris

Bummer. I was hoping for something cooler-looking than a twisty knob.

But now I know how to start up a plane. Mwahahahahaha!!!!!
I'm gonna steal me a plane now. Just you wait and see.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Bummer. I was hoping for something cooler-looking than a twisty knob.

But now I know how to start up a plane. Mwahahahahaha!!!!!
I'm gonna steal me a plane now. Just you wait and see.

Considering that you live in Washington D.C. I'm sure the Secret Service is on their way to your house as I write this!

Chris

[UnixMac]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Bummer. I was hoping for something cooler-looking than a twisty knob.

But now I know how to start up a plane. Mwahahahahaha!!!!!
I'm gonna steal me a plane now. Just you wait and see.

Each airplane is different, but most of them require you to either manually or they'll do it automatically re-route high pressure air from the APU (auxiliray power unit) to the engines' high pressure compressor section which "spools" up the engine, you activate the ignition (or it's automatic) then at a certain temp and also RPM, you use a button, or switch to introduce fuel... then the engine "lights up" and it's a self sustaining process.. until you "cut off" fuel and it's shuts down.. the most complex plane I've flow requires 3 or so buttons, the least is a single button... the trick it to make sure to power up the plane properly and to route power away from systems that are not essential.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

the trick it to make sure to power up the plane properly and to route power away from systems that are not essential.

Not to mention that it takes a lot more than just starting the engines to get the airplane ready to fly.

Chris

[UnixMac]

Exactly which is why they make long checklists, and with in each check, there are sometimes memorized "flows".. it's all procedure, and rote memory at times.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by chabig

Considering that you live in Washington D.C. I'm sure the Secret Service is on their way to your house as I write this!

Chris

No problem there. I am already in their database because of work. I've worked several events at various Smithsonian museums where the President, Veep, First Lady, or other high-ranking officials have been in attendance. If you are going to be in the "secure zone" you have to provide your name, DOB, POB (place), and SS #. There were a couple events at American History, with VP Gore, where I even got the "all access" lapel collar that lets you be physically in the presence of the visiting dignitary--I saved one of them somewhere as a cool souvenir. But, after having lived in the DC area for 13 years, I know you DO NOT mess with the Secret Service. I got a machine gun pointed at my car once when I didn't pull over fast enough to let a small motorcade through on the SE/SW Freeway.

Besides, the Secret Service don't investigate plane thefts, that would be the FBI. Although, somehow I don't think knowing how to turn on an engine qualifies me to fly a plane. It's not that easy, is it?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by UnixMac

Each airplane is different, but most of them require you to either manually or they'll do it automatically re-route high pressure air from the APU (auxiliray power unit) to the engines' high pressure compressor section which "spools" up the engine, you activate the ignition (or it's automatic) then at a certain temp and also RPM, you use a button, or switch to introduce fuel... then the engine "lights up" and it's a self sustaining process.. until you "cut off" fuel and it's shuts down.. the most complex plane I've flow requires 3 or so buttons, the least is a single button... the trick it to make sure to power up the plane properly and to route power away from systems that are not essential.

Interesting! So the engine fan blades (?) have to be spinning at high speed before you can start the ignition. I always assumed it was the ignition that got them spinning at high speeds in the first place. How does it stay self-sustaining? Does the burning fuel keep them spinning?

[chabig]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

Interesting! So the engine fan blades (?) have to be spinning at high speed before you can start the ignition. I always assumed it was the ignition that got them spinning at high speeds in the first place. How does it stay self-sustaining? Does the burning fuel keep them spinning?

Basically you've got it right. The engine has four main parts: the inlet, the compressor, the combustion chamber, and the exhaust. The inlet presents the airflow to the compressor, where it is compressed. During compressing, the temperature and pressure both increase. Fuel is introduced in the combustion chamber and burning it further heats the gas and causes it to expand. As it exits the engine in the rear, it turns a set of turbine blades on a shaft connected to the compressor. The engine has to be turning to be started. This can be done in many ways--sometimes a motor on the shaft spins the engine, sometimes external air is forced through the turbine which turns the engine, and on most modern fan engine, external air spins a starter (an external turbine) that is connected to the main engine core through the engine gearbox. (on early jet engines, they even used mortar style cartridge start systems in which you ignited powder in the one-time-use cartridge to generate gas to start the engine) Once running, though, it sustains itself.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by chabig

Basically you've got it right. The engine has four main parts: the inlet, the compressor, the combustion chamber, and the exhaust. The inlet presents the airflow to the compressor, where it is compressed. During compressing, the temperature and pressure both increase. Fuel is introduced in the combustion chamber and burning it further heats the gas and causes it to expand. As it exits the engine in the rear, it turns a set of turbine blades on a shaft connected to the compressor. The engine has to be turning to be started. Once running, though, it sustains itself.

Ahh, got it: My college physics is coming back to me now.

compressing air flow = increasing air speed

So if PV=nRT holds true inside a jet engine--what is R again?--then the compressed air would get hotter and move faster before even introducing a combustible fuel. Do they make engines that can spin fast and stay spinning without a fuel source? In other words, can you have an engine that would keep itself spinning simply from the force of compressed air turning the fan blades?

[UnixMac]

Well the power turbines (in the rear of the engine) are axially connected to the front intake fans, and those power turbines are the reason for the self re-genretion of the engine.. as long as there is fuel in the burners, and the axial compressors have intake air supply. the engine will run for ever.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy

In other words, can you have an engine that would keep itself spinning simply from the force of compressed air turning the fan blades?

If you build one of those, then you can personally drive it over to the Patent Office in Alexandria because you would have invented the first working perpetual motion machine!

Chris

[TETENAL]

Rather nice Airbus 380 videos:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...42226114078023

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...34004126532534

(I think I saw badidea in the second video)

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Rather nice Airbus 380 videos:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...42226114078023

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...34004126532534

(I think I saw badidea in the second video)

Was he the guy speaking in German?

[badidea]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

(I think I saw badidea in the second video)

No, you didn't!