I forgot to mention that in the F-18s airshow example (two planes, one inverted above the other), the angle of attack is obviously controlled by onboard computers, which the pilots over-ride as soon as they leave the formation.

(Written on 2012年 01月 27日)(Permalink)

I read through the entire blog and found only a couple of references to the obvious: It is the angle of attack. That's why two identical planes, say two F-18s, can do a fly-by at an airshow, one plane right side up, the other plane inverted a couple of feet above the other plane - at almost the speed of sound. The two pilots must control the angle of attack on their wing foils with incredible precision (they must have exactly opposite values), so that both planes fly at their precise altitude, just feet apart, one plane with positive angle of attack (right side up), the other with negative angle of attack (inverted). Again, it is the angle of attack! Military pilots know this 'secret'. Aeronautical engineers know this 'secret'. Only professors like the one making this video don't know. Why hasn't someone asked this professor to explain how military jets and aerobatic planes can fly inverted at airshows? By the way, the reason the two airshow F-18s mentioned in above example always

(Written on 2012年 01月 27日)(Permalink)

Only my opinion: The A380 returned safely to Singapore only due to superior crew. Thus, all incident facts were preserved. Hopefully, Airbus is now busy fixing what needs to be fixed: a) The RR engines, b) run primary and backup wiring and hydraulics on separate paths through the airframe, c) redesign the handling of automated ECAMs. If not done, it is only a matter of time before a similar, perhaps catastrophic event will occur.

(Written on 2011年 03月 27日)(Permalink)

Tom, check this link. http://www.flyafrica.info/forums/showthread.php?33284-IFALPA-s-take-on-the-Qantas-A380

(Written on 2011年 03月 27日)(Permalink)

Some A380s are equipped with GE Alliance engines. They have had no rotor blade failures. I read the incident reports, not what the CAAs, Airbus, or any other vested interests say.

(Written on 2011年 03月 26日)(Permalink)

Tom, Google the Quantas flight from Singapore last November. One of the Rolls Royce engines blew the rotor blades (other A380s with RR engines have had similar, but less serious failures). The resulting structural damage to the wing revealed design issues with wiring, the fly-by-wire systems, and the automated emergency response systems. The plane made it back to Singapore safely due to the expert crew. Read the official reports.

(Written on 2011年 03月 26日)(Permalink)

Boing was smart in evolving the tried and true 747 into this bigger, more efficient plane, as opposed to doing what Airbus did, develop a totally new airplane in the A380. As we all know, the A380 has some significant problems that make it a less than safe airplane. When traveling intercontinental, I'll fly on the 747-8i, as opposed to the A380. Good job, Boing.

(Written on 2011年 03月 25日)(Permalink)