The BEST of Paris Air Show 2019
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: The BEST of Paris Air Show 2019

  1. #1

    The BEST of Paris Air Show 2019

    I love the flights and presentation of this guy

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5S4MU-3HVlk

  2. #2
    Impressive! There's a lot of money floating around that airfield. We're talkin' big bucks. Boeing needs to get their act together.

  3. #3
    Very boring , airliners ............... then even more airliners !

    Boeing have always had their act together , Airbus and others just copy technology , developments , and concepts created by Boeing in a lame
    attempt to cash in on the market , even the Concorde was a British project .
    And no , I'm not American , I'm an Australian , but the facts are inescapable .

    No coverage of new technology developments , or General Aviation or Military aircraft , very annoying .

    Cheers
    Karol

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by COBS View Post
    Very boring , airliners ............... then even more airliners !
    I'm with You (!) but its a nice technicaly movie.
    Webmaster of yoyosims.pl.

    Win 10 64, i9 13900 KF, RTX 4090 24Gb, RAM64Gb, SSD M.2 NVMe, Predator XB271HU res.2560x1440 27'' G-sync, Sound Blaster Z + 5.1, TiR5 [MSFS, P3Dv5, DCS, RoF, Condor, IL-2 CoD/BoX] VR fly only: Meta Quest Pro

  5. #5
    Yes , the video quality was lovely , but I would have loved to see the other stuff .
    Even the shots of new mockups was only very cursory, that frustrated me .

    Cheers
    Karol

  6. #6
    Hi Kobs,
    Newbie in aircraft and airliners, welcome to you!
    Let me please kindly suggest you to dig in the subject, you will learn a lot!
    Plenty of excellent stuff on this forum and others like PRRUNE, AIRLINERS.net (not to mention those on flightsim) will help you to progress quickly.
    Avoid as much as possible the very typical and very, very, basic black vs white approach, it does not fit at all the aeronautic world.

    Again, welcome onboard!


  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by COBS View Post
    Boeing have always had their act together , Airbus and others just copy technology , developments , and concepts created by Boeing in a lame
    attempt to cash in on the market , even the Concorde was a British project .
    And no , I'm not American , I'm an Australian , but the facts are inescapable .
    Come on Karol, that's just utter BS. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by COBS View Post
    ... even the Concorde was a British project ....
    Post does not compute, what has that to do with anything? Must be a brain fart.
    Tom
    __________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
    Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. Proverbs 4:7



  9. #9
    Senior Administrator huub vink's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Noordwijk, The Netherlands (EHVB)
    Age
    65
    Posts
    10,269
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjoern View Post
    Come on Karol, that's just utter BS. You know it, I know it, everybody knows it.
    Just my thoughts! Boeing and Airbus just copied the whole thing from Otto Lilienthal. Who was copied first by the Wright Brothers, but they got the design wrong an introduced an engine. And than this guy Bleriot did it again and so on. In the end Microsoft copied them all and and put them on a DVD and called it FS2004. But not the Concorde because they found out it was a French project copied from the Tupolev Tu-144. Which was actually a poor copy from the "Thunderbirds Fireflash Atomic Airliner".......

    Cheers,
    Huub

  10. #10
    Just as a point of information, if Boeing had their so-called "act together", their planes wouldn't be falling out of the sky, they wouldn't be leaving critical information out of their pilot manuals, they wouldn't be limiting the number of inspectors checking production lines, they wouldn't be leaving tools inside air frames and they wouldn't be lying to the FAA. Not that the FAA is much better these days. Sorry but this ain't your fathers' Boeing.

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by mal998 View Post
    Just as a point of information, if Boeing had their so-called "act together", their planes wouldn't be falling out of the sky, they wouldn't be leaving critical information out of their pilot manuals, they wouldn't be limiting the number of inspectors checking production lines, they wouldn't be leaving tools inside air frames and they wouldn't be lying to the FAA. Not that the FAA is much better these days. Sorry but this ain't your fathers' Boeing.
    I've always been a Boeing fan, but, I gotta say, they REALLY screwed the pooch this time..... And the FAA, my god. It's just so disgusting what worshipping the almighty dollar does to folks. Hopefully now that the doors have been blasted open, we can finally start turning this country around again. And I hope that whoever was responsible for this at Boeing gets his head handed to him. They should have been designing a proper new replacement for the 737 a decade ago, or two for that matter.... This shortcut they took totally to extend its life way beyond its capability bit them in the ass, and they deserve everything that'll hopefully happen to correct this. Everything you said is true. So many things that were done wrong, and in my opinion illegally so, across the board from Boeing to the FAA.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by FlyingsCool View Post
    ...This shortcut they took totally to extend its life way beyond its capability bit them in the ass, and they deserve everything that'll hopefully happen...
    Extending an aircraft’s useful life is no crime. Fitting it with under-designed, inadequately tested “safety” systems is, or ought to be. To then omit mentioning the system in pilots’ documentation and later giving incomplete updates to that documentation is cavalier at best. It won’t end well.

    However, Airbus has had its problems too, as Air France 447 clearly showed. Let him who has no sin cast the first stone.
    Tom
    __________________________________________________ ___________________________________________
    Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom: and with all thy getting get understanding. Proverbs 4:7



  13. #13
    Over the years I have picked up my car(s) after service or repairs only to find several days later a tool left in the engine bay , it wasn't often ,
    probably only half a dozen times .
    You would go into the hangars and they had mobile tool cabinets , each tool had a tool outline painted , when the aircraft was zipped up
    a check was made to ensure all tools were accounted for before the aircraft could be signed off .

    Years ago the Australian authorities issued pilots with what we called the "Crash Comic" , an aviation safety digest , I remember a accident report
    on a fatal Chipmunk aerobatic event , the pilot had a good record and was proficient at aerobatics , tests revealed that no medical event was involved .
    Examination of the wreckage discovered a 20 cent coin in aft fuse , control was by bellcrank and tubular push rods , as the rod moved through it's normal travel
    it moved up and down , an elongated hole was in a bulkhead to accomodate that travel , indent markings were found on the coin , the rod , and the bottom
    of the hole , the summary was that a mechanic working in the fuse had a coin in his pocket that fell out , and purely by chance during aerobatics lodged in the
    elongated bulkhead hole and limited the rod's movement , thus pilot had no control and it went in .

    In 1969 the Saturn 5 had an instrument/control ring it included a computer that had the memory capacity of a tiny shopping calculator , it powered men to the moon .
    In one early firing an igniter line came adrift from one of the 5 second stage engines , that engine began to faulter , that was detected and the computer sent a
    message to shut down the engine , unfortunately all 5 engines were serviced by identical cables of the same length , during assembly there was a mix up ,
    the message went to a good engine , so the second stage ended up with 2 dead engines .
    The rocket started to pitch down , but that small computer regained control , rectified the pitch and it went into orbit .

    The Space Shuttle used a old Computer chip ( possibly the 3086 , but I'm not sure ) it took several years to write and purify the software to a man safe
    standard , as the years progressed chip stocks were depleted and manufacture lines had closed years earlier , NASA ended up having to search
    for stocks of chips and it was reported they had to resort to secondhand chips .

    The Australian version of the F-111 ended up with about 1.1 million lines of software code , thats a lot , however , last I heard
    the F-35 had 24 million lines of code and that was before the gun was integrated into it .
    You can imagine the effort that goes into debugging and purifying all that code , to remove errors , bugs , and conflicts , and that task has to be done
    thoroughly as the end product will be flying frequently over populated areas with live munitions , or worse .

    A modern Miljet might be designed and built in as little as 4 or 5 years , but the integrated systems , avionics , fly by wire , computers , and software
    can take over 15 years to sort out . Some will remember the saga with those systems in the B-1 bomber , it dragged on for many years .
    The "E" jet is a nightmarishingly complex beast .

    Cheers
    Karol

Members who have read this thread: 0

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •