(800) 853-2651
SHOP NOW

Nice jet

Ultradog MN

Ultradog MN

Well-known Member
Location
Twin Cities
You don't see a commercial jet do nearly vertical take-offs very often.


<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.liveleak.com/ll_embed?f=26d9758e7d8b" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
 

wow ! that jet handles like a small prop plane -- you notice how the the main wing was designed --never seen anything like it .

Larry --ont.
 
It's an air show gimmick. They didn't sustain that angle of attack very long before they had to push the nose over.

I definitely wouldn't try that with a load of passengers.
 
Yeah, it's a commercial.
Still...
Black, yes, the wings. Seem too small to hold it aloft.
And not a lot of space to hold fuel. Is it a short run aircraft?
 
I take it none of you have been a Midway Air Port in Chicago,Ill. Its a short runway and they almost stand them on there tail to get out of there.
 
Ultradog, the plane is a Boeing 787-9 aka "Dreamliner" and will carry 250-290 passengers on routes of 8,000 to 8,500 nautical miles. Not a short range plane at all.

Camera angles make things look much more impressive (no side view on the video). Most every modern jet can perform a takeoff like that.

The 787 is the first primarily composite commercial jet. That's why the wings can be made the way they are, and they are [b:51a24f28ff]very[/b:51a24f28ff] cool.

Tractors are my favorite hobby and aviation is my job. :) If you ever have time when you are in town, I'll give you a tour of one of our 737's at the MSP airport. Bring the grand kids - they'll get a kick out of it.
 
Along the same lines as this, go to you tube sometime and type in 'difficult plane landings' or something along that line. There is some interesting viewing on some of those sites.
 
That particular flight was a practice for the Paris Air Show. I think the show is on next week. They were very light on fuel and of course empty in the cabin. likely just a couple of pilots and some techy types in the cockpit. Still a real neat video.
 
Very cool video. Looks like taking off From BAF air base in Afghanistan. They really stand those C-17's on their tail getting out of there.
 
(quoted from post at 02:29:23 06/13/15) That is almost a 90 degree angle of attack.
Pilots vill know what angle of attack is.
Click to expand...

Angle of attack is the angle between the chord (basically centerline) of the wing and the flow of air. The pitch angle is what looks like 90 degrees although cameras can be deceiving. That being said, yes, it is quite a high pitch angle regardless of the camera but a 90 degree angle of attack would put the wing in a stall.

Looks like fun.
 
(quoted from post at 22:54:30 06/12/15) Very cool video. Looks like taking off From BAF air base in Afghanistan. They really stand those C-17's on their tail getting out of there.
Click to expand...

Only taking off to the South. Taking off to the North was a hard turning climb to avoid the mountains.
 
DJB, Is it camera angle or are the winglets adjustable? Some shots there is just one winglet, sometimes two and then in some they are both parallel to the leading edge?
 
Most likely nothing more than a normal take off.

We are so use to see things filmed by a stationary camera it takes a bit to realize the camera is also moving in the same direction as the plane it is filming but is not climbing. The other plane merely passes over the top giving you what look to be very steep angles.
 
(quoted from post at 05:00:59 06/13/15) DJB, Is it camera angle or are the winglets adjustable? Some shots there is just one winglet, sometimes two and then in some they are both parallel to the leading edge?
Click to expand...

The wing tips are "raked", they have more sweep than the rest of the wing. They went with this design on the 787 and the newest version of the 747.
 
Cool vid

For those who are not familiar with the C17 a couple of others were talking about it's capable of short un-improved air field operations. That means that big jet, capable of carrying a tank, that's a full M1 tank, can land and take off from a long flat grassy area.

When we invaded Iraq the Airborne took what was referred to as the northern airfield. The C17's then flew in a heavy division once the airfield was secured. An amazing feat.

Rick
 
(quoted from post at 05:00:59 06/13/15) DJB, Is it camera angle or are the winglets adjustable? Some shots there is just one winglet, sometimes two and then in some they are both parallel to the leading edge?
Click to expand...


As Busflyer has already noted,The 787-9 has raked wing tips what your seeing is the flex in the wing. Its not unusual for a jet this size to flex 10 ft. and its well below the maximum safety margin.
Byron
 
Harvey, any aircraft, including the 787, will stall long before it reaches a 90 degree AOA. For most aircraft, the critical angle of attack (where the wing stalls) is less than twenty degrees. That includes aircraft capable of sustained vertical flight; the angle of attack and climb angle are different things.
 
Most airliners are capable of very steep climbouts if they have no payload and minimum fuel.

One of the most impressive takeoffs I've seen was a Helio Courier taking off from the Carlsbad, CA airport. Carlsbad has a nice 150' wide runway. The Helio pilot requested an "intersection takeoff", which means entering the runway short of the end so you don't use the whole length for takeoff. The controller granted the intersection takeoff, but probably didn't expect what happened next: The Helio took off CROSSWAYS to the runway. He was probably 50 feet in the air when he cleared the runway.
 
Not to say that it's not impressive, because it is, but with a minimal fuel load, no cargo, baggage or passengers, they're running about 150k light. That increases the performance dramatically.
 
True. It was still a fun ride in and out. The best flight was the flight out for the last time though. Nno other feeling quite like knowing you are on your way back home.
 
Mark, "any aircraft will stall before it reaches a 90 degree AOA" Have you even seen the Thunder Birds or the Blue Angels perform?
 
I watched a cargo plane (at Duluth 100 Years of Aviation 2003) do a JATO rocket takeoff. Nasty purple flame and radical smoke. It was airborne in about 150 feet and stood on its tail at about 50 degrees from level. at 300 feet it was going fast enough to fly and they rotated to level as the rockets ran out of fuel. Neat to see. (I liked the Video, and the technology) I hope Boeing planes prove to be as tough as a 707. Airbus seems to be a bit mediocre. Jim
 
(quoted from post at 10:24:44 06/13/15) Mark, "any aircraft will stall before it reaches a 90 degree AOA" Have you even seen the Thunder Birds or the Blue Angels perform?
Click to expand...
One shot, Mark is right. Unless you are a pilot, AOA probably does not make sense to you, but what you see is referred to as pitch, or attitude. Many military aircraft can climb out straight up or 90*. AOA is more of an aerodynamic term that is being misused here. The definition given above by Busflyer is accurate.
 
>Mark, "any aircraft will stall before it reaches a 90 degree AOA" Have you even seen the Thunder Birds or the Blue Angels perform?

oneshot, I suggest you look up the definition of "angle of attack". I can assure you that military pilots are well aware of their aircraft's angle of attack; in fact many military aircraft have angle of attack indicators. AOA indicators don't go much above 20 degrees, because once the wing stalls it's pointless to increase the AOA.

Pretty much the only military aircraft that can fly with a ninety degree AOA are VTOL aircraft such as the Harrier and USMC F-35, or vectored-thrust aircraft like the F-22. And it's debatable whether or not they are really "flying", given that the wings are generating no lift. Even helicopters are subject to wing (rotor) stall at high angles of attack, but that occurs when the forward airspeed is so fast that's there's no airflow over the receding rotor blades.

There are some aircraft that can "hang on the prop", Sean Tucker's sooped-up Pitts comes to mind. But these aren't flying with a ninety degree AOA: the airflow over the wing (which is all propwash) is still at a relatively low angle.
 
(quoted from post at 15:32:42 06/13/15) I watched a cargo plane (at Duluth 100 Years of Aviation 2003) do a JATO rocket takeoff. Nasty purple flame and radical smoke. It was airborne in about 150 feet and stood on its tail at about 50 degrees from level. at 300 feet it was going fast enough to fly and they rotated to level as the rockets ran out of fuel. Neat to see. (I liked the Video, and the technology) I hope Boeing planes prove to be as tough as a 707. Airbus seems to be a bit mediocre. Jim
Click to expand...

Janicholson The 707 is probably my favorite as well its like the old tractors built tough thicker skins heavier structure. Must be why the military have used it in many different applications. It also did a nice barrel roll in 55 through not that difficult or stressing on the aircraft still impressive. Don't much care for the thin skins on the 737 and have even less likening for McDonald Douglas use of crazy shear straps in it aircraft. We would always say if it ain't Boeing I ain't going.
Byron
 
The carbon fuselage is built here in Wichita and my daughter and son in law work at the Spirit plant where they make them. Tons of weight is saved as the structure of this plane is mostly carbon fiber, not metal.

Using carbon fiber allows Great Dane trailers to save 4,000 pounds per trailer for the new Walmart concept truck which is a product of Walmart, Peterbilt, Great Dane, and Capstone turbines. You can imagine the weight saved on this huge plane if they can shave 2 tons off a 53 foot trailer.
 
(quoted from post at 17:23:14 06/13/15) The carbon fuselage is built here in Wichita and my daughter and son in law work at the Spirit plant where they make them. Tons of weight is saved as the structure of this plane is mostly carbon fiber, not metal.

Using carbon fiber allows Great Dane trailers to save 4,000 pounds per trailer for the new Walmart concept truck which is a product of Walmart, Peterbilt, Great Dane, and Capstone turbines. You can imagine the weight saved on this huge plane if they can shave 2 tons off a 53 foot trailer.
Click to expand...

That will be interesting to see how it holds up over time composite fuselage combined with higher use of titanium structural components will certainly save weight along with that comes fuel savings But the real savings will be in the form of less down time particularly on C&amp;D checks. Corrosion and fatigue is a number one enemy and cost millions to replace skins and structure. Who can forget Jan. 23, 1983,the Aloha Airlines Flight 243 737 that lost A major portion of the upper crown skin and structure of section 43 separated in flight causing an explosive decompression of the cabin. The damaged area extended from slightly aft of the main cabin entrance door, rear ward about 18 feet to the area just forward of the wings and from the left side of the cabin at the floor level to the right side window level. Conclusion of The investigation determined that weather had no role in this accident. The quality of inspection and maintenance programs were deficient. Also, the fuselage failure initiated in the lap joint along S-10L;( Stringer 10 Left) the failure mechanism was a result of multiple site fatigue cracking of the skin adjacent to rivet holes along the lap joint upper rivet row and tear strap disbonding which negated the fail-safe characteristics of the fuselage. Finally, the fatigue cracking initiated from the knife edge associated with the countersunk lap joint rivet holes; Skins to thin, the knife edge concentrated stresses that were transferred through the rivets because of lap joint disbonding. Its amazing they landed this aircraft. The pictures are astonishing.

22564.jpg
22565.jpg
 
(quoted from post at 21:18:09 06/12/15) You don't see a commercial jet do nearly vertical take-offs very often.

Figuring 3501 square feet of wing area. A take off weight of probably 325,000lbs when max takeoff weight is 557,000lbs. Pushed with 142,000lbs of thrust from the fans. Even a mundane passenger airframe in the hands of a talented pilot can be an exciting ride. if nobody was looking they probably could have done a full barrel roll and got away with it except for making a mess via slopping liquids.
Click to expand...
 
On some flights they used to serve drinks to the first class passengers right after they left the gate. With a takeoff like that, I can imagine a lot of spilled booze!
 
(quoted from post at 18:40:38 06/13/15)
(quoted from post at 21:18:09 06/12/15) You don't see a commercial jet do nearly vertical take-offs very often.

Figuring 3501 square feet of wing area. A take off weight of probably 325,000lbs when max takeoff weight is 557,000lbs. Pushed with 142,000lbs of thrust from the fans. Even a mundane passenger airframe in the hands of a talented pilot can be an exciting ride. if nobody was looking they probably could have done a full barrel roll and got away with it except for making a mess via slopping liquids.
Click to expand...

Without a doubt It would be fascinating to see.
Byron
Click to expand...
 
(quoted from post at 10:09:38 06/13/15)
(quoted from post at 17:23:14 06/13/15) The carbon fuselage is built here in Wichita and my daughter and son in law work at the Spirit plant where they make them. Tons of weight is saved as the structure of this plane is mostly carbon fiber, not metal.

Using carbon fiber allows Great Dane trailers to save 4,000 pounds per trailer for the new Walmart concept truck which is a product of Walmart, Peterbilt, Great Dane, and Capstone turbines. You can imagine the weight saved on this huge plane if they can shave 2 tons off a 53 foot trailer.
Click to expand...

That will be interesting to see how it holds up over time composite fuselage combined with higher use of titanium structural components will certainly save weight along with that comes fuel savings But the real savings will be in the form of less down time particularly on C&amp;D checks. Corrosion and fatigue is a number one enemy and cost millions to replace skins and structure. Who can forget Jan. 23, 1983,the Aloha Airlines Flight 243 737 that lost A major portion of the upper crown skin and structure of section 43 separated in flight causing an explosive decompression of the cabin. The damaged area extended from slightly aft of the main cabin entrance door, rear ward about 18 feet to the area just forward of the wings and from the left side of the cabin at the floor level to the right side window level. Conclusion of The investigation determined that weather had no role in this accident. The quality of inspection and maintenance programs were deficient. Also, the fuselage failure initiated in the lap joint along S-10L;( Stringer 10 Left) the failure mechanism was a result of multiple site fatigue cracking of the skin adjacent to rivet holes along the lap joint upper rivet row and tear strap disbonding which negated the fail-safe characteristics of the fuselage. Finally, the fatigue cracking initiated from the knife edge associated with the countersunk lap joint rivet holes; Skins to thin, the knife edge concentrated stresses that were transferred through the rivets because of lap joint disbonding. Its amazing they landed this aircraft. The pictures are astonishing.

22564.jpg
22565.jpg
Click to expand...

Didn't one passenger get sucked out?
 
Spook, Didn't one passenger get sucked out?
Spook, Your right ,I believe the only fatality was A stewardess that was sucked out.
 
>if nobody was looking they probably could have done a full barrel roll and got away with it except for making a mess via slopping liquids.

B&D, a properly executed barrel roll shouldn't spill a drop. In fact, it could be done without disturbing any passengers who happened to be sitting on the toilet.
Bob Hoover shows how its done
 
(quoted from post at 01:10:17 06/14/15) &gt;if nobody was looking they probably could have done a full barrel roll and got away with it except for making a mess via slopping liquids.

B&amp;D, a properly executed barrel roll shouldn't spill a drop. In fact, it could be done without disturbing any passengers who happened to be sitting on the toilet.
Bob Hoover shows how its done
Click to expand...

That's interesting you took that just a step further than pouring tea. Funny but apparently true I for one never knew that. Nice Analogy.
 
Well there is a thing referred to as "thrust to weight ratio" that has to be considered for sustained vertical flight, which this wasn't. Taking the F-16 single engine "hot dog" US built fighter jet, the loaded weight (undefined as to just the ac or with ordinance) per Wikipedia is 26.5k# whereas the thrust with the burner lit is 28.6k lb/force. So it exceeds the ratio and qualifies, as does the F-15 to name a couple of oldies and I have seen well publicized photos of both events.

I ran the Wikipedia numbers on the Dreamliner 787-8 and she is overweight by exactly 2x and doesn't qualify. What everybody is seeing I think is just a stunt where the momentum of the aircraft at "rotate" velocity....velocity where the pilot sucks on the stick was enough to propel the aircraft vertical for a brief minute, which, on the KC-135A was 176 Knots (203 mph). Dreamliner in that configuration was probably much higher than that, and they could have delayed the liftoff for more speed to accomplish their stunt, again, a stellar achievement, but isn't that what air shows are all about....dazzle your potential customers? Course I'm at a loss as to who is the customer here and who was piloting the stunt aircraft.

What's missing from the video of a gorgeous aircraft with the Boeing Flex wing like the B-52 whose tip flexes 18' from parked to WOT airborne, is the side view allowing you to determine the rate at which the velocity of the aircraft decreases as it uses up the energy of the takeoff. But it was a most unusual stunt. Amazing how time changes things....Vietnamese commercial jet built in the USA by the same guys that built the US B-52s that bombed that country big time, refueled by theUS KC-135 tankers that gassed them up built by the same company.
 
The aircraft is never going vertical from the ground. It only appears that way since at one point it is at a 90° angle from the camera as it passes overhead. We assume that the camera is still parallel to the ground rather than following the path of the other plane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

connor9988
Some recent drone videos
Replies
1
Views
201
Tgrasher
Tgrasher
Absent Minded Farmer
Couple videos for today....
Replies
4
Views
612
Absent Minded Farmer
Absent Minded Farmer
connor9988
Antique Buckwheat Harvest
Replies
6
Views
394
connor9988
connor9988
connor9988
Recent Drone Harvest
Replies
10
Views
356
connor9988
connor9988
connor9988
Case 75 Harvesting Buckwheat
Replies
5
Views
257
flying belgian
F
Tractor Parts Tractor Manuals

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Copyright © 1997-2024 Yesterday's Tractor Co.

All Rights Reserved. Reproduction of any part of this website, including design and content, without written permission is strictly prohibited. Trade Marks and Trade Names contained and used in this Website are those of others, and are used in this Website in a descriptive sense to refer to the products of others. Use of this Web site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy TRADEMARK DISCLAIMER: Tradenames and Trademarks referred to within Yesterday's Tractor Co. products and within the Yesterday's Tractor Co. websites are the property of their respective trademark holders. None of these trademark holders are affiliated with Yesterday's Tractor Co., our products, or our website nor are we sponsored by them. John Deere and its logos are the registered trademarks of the John Deere Corporation. Agco, Agco Allis, White, Massey Ferguson and their logos are the registered trademarks of AGCO Corporation. Case, Case-IH, Farmall, International Harvester, New Holland and their logos are registered trademarks of CNH Global N.V.

Yesterday's Tractors - Antique Tractor Headquarters
Website Accessibility Policy

Back
Top