General Aviation Thread

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
His seat was next to an emergency exit, with space in front of him. He's told the press that after the plane crashed, he found himself next to a hole in the fuselage, & was able to push his way out. The section he was in seems to have been at ground level. He said he saw flight attendants & some other people die in front of him. He had multiple injuries, but was able to walk away - unlike his brother.
It will be a difficult future for him and he will likely need a significant amount of support.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
|"A British Airways flight from Heathrow to India had to turn around mid-air when it suffered a “technical issue”.

Flight BA35 circled over the strait of Dover to dump fuel before safely landing back on the runway at 1.50pm on Sunday.

Just hours later, a New Delhi-bound Air India Boeing 787-8 Dreamliner flight also has to return to its origin of Hong Kong as a precautionary measure."|

These are probably no serious technical problems. It is just a little bit embarrassing for Boeing that this happen shortly after the Air India crash.

 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Today started Le Bourget 2025, one of the world's biggest aerospace trade fair, exhibition and air show.
Only this afternoon, Airbus signed contracts for:
- 40 A220 for LOT AIR + 44 options
- 27 A321 for ANA
- 25 A350-1000 for RIYADH
- 10 A350 and 30 A320 for AVILEASE

The european company started strong, also "helped" (really no sarcasm intended, it's just how it is) by Boeing.
Boeing CEO wont even attend the event.

Also, we are currently seeing a pattern here that is really not very pleasing for Boeing.
European airlines have historically been huge Boeing's customers.
In the last 10-15 years, however, European airlines are methodically replacing Boeing aircraft with Airbus.
Air France, KLM, Ita, Turkish, Iberia, SAS.
Only Lufthansa maintains a small order for Boeing, mainly 787s, but with an ever-increasing presence of Airbus aircraft.
Low-cost airlines are also switching to Airbus, with many hundreds of aircraft operational and on order.
Only Ryanair continues to fly Boeing, the only one in Europe among the large airlines.
 
Last edited:

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Today started Le Bourget 2025, one of the world's biggest aerospace trade fair, exhibition and air show.
Only this afternoon, Airbus signed contracts for:
- 40 A220 for LOT AIR + 44 options
- 27 A321 for ANA
- 25 A350-1000 for RIYADH
- 10 A350 and 30 A320 for AVILEASE

The european company started strong, also "helped" (really no sarcasm intended, it's just how it is) by Boeing.
Boeing CEO wont even attend the event.
Given the to-do list, the Boeing CEO is better off staying home to address things. For Boeing's sake, hopefully there is no 787 issue that needs to be added to the list.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Here two videos for the EMBRAER-fans of DT.
The first one is about that Embraer and the Netherlands have signed a contract yeesterday to deliver a cutting-edge Aeromedical Evacuation System for the Royal Netherlands Air Force’s C-390 Millennium fleet. The deliveries of the first of five C390s to the Netherlands is expected to commence at the end of 2027.

The second one shows the flight display of the C390 and E195-E2 at Paris Air Show Le Bourget.
 

76mmGuns

Active Member
Not sure where to ask this so here I am. Please move/delete if needed.

I have a Q:

What's the difference between a missile and a one way drone used to hit targets?


Missiles are unmanned, one way items of destruction with warheads, and long range.
Drone are unmanned, one way items of destruction with warheads, and long range

Only difference seems to be price and speed- 150-300kmh drones vs 1000+kmh for cruise missiles
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Not sure where to ask this so here I am. Please move/delete if needed.

I have a Q:

What's the difference between a missile and a one way drone used to hit targets?


Missiles are unmanned, one way items of destruction with warheads, and long range.
Drone are unmanned, one way items of destruction with warheads, and long range

Only difference seems to be price and speed- 150-300kmh drones vs 1000+kmh for cruise missiles
Not only costs and speed, but i think also propulsion and the way it operates. And together it will give them a different way in purpose/target.
Both can be controlled from a distance, or operate autonomously.

But it also depends on the newschannel/source of the article. Some reporters/journalists will maybe call every remote controlled toy helicopter/aircraft, UAV or missile a drone. Like they do with "every tracked armoured vehicle = tank".
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
The Tu-214 still has a 3-person cockpit, quite remarkable, because the Tu-204SM already has a 2-person one.


And here we have a nice video of this unique helicopter.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Accident Tupolev Tu-204-100V RA-64047, Saturday 29 December 2012 Accident Tupolev Tu-204-100V RA-64047, Saturday 29 December 2012

This accident in 2012, is the only crash of Tu-204 that's involve fatalities. While there are no crash or fatalities with Tu-214 recorded so far. With sanctions still hapening, I recon it is relatively safer to fly all Russian made airliners in Russia today. Using western made airliners more likely using airliners that still fly with either canibalise parts or black market parts.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
So certification of the new Il-114-300 is planned for December 2025.


A brand new successor for the Il-96 will stay of course just a dream, the coming 20 years. So the question is actually, what is faster (=cheaper) to develop: an extended MC-21 (MC-21-400 is in the same class as the 757-200), or a modernized Il-96 with two PD-35 engines instead of four PS-90s?


Impressive, but this is even more a far away dream than a brand new Il-96 successor.
WindRunner - the biggest of the big

WindRunner | Radia
 
Last edited:

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Fuel supply to the engines of the Air India Boeing 787 that crashed last month was cut off just seconds after the flight took off, a preliminary report by Indian aviation accident investigators has said.

Voice records indicates that it is unlikely that it is caused by external factors like bird impacts and that or the fuel was cut off by the pilots unintentionally/accidentally or the aircraft did it by itself.
text editing in progress
Brandstoftoevoer van neergestort vliegtuig in India werd voor crash afgesloten

Air India crash: Fuel switches cut off before crash, preliminary findings say.
 
Last edited:

FormerDirtDart

Well-Known Member
Fuel supply to the engines of the Air India Boeing 787 that crashed last month was cut off just seconds after the flight took off, a preliminary report by Indian aviation accident investigators has said.

Voice records indicates that it is unlikely that it is caused by external factors like bird impacts and that or the fuel was cut off by the pilots unintentionally/accidentally or the aircraft did it by itself.
text editing in progress
Brandstoftoevoer van neergestort vliegtuig in India werd voor crash afgesloten

Air India crash: Fuel switches cut off before crash, preliminary findings say.
From twitter
Breaking Aviation News & Videos

https://x.com/aviationbrk/status/1943765485923053978

India's AAIB has released its Preliminary Report into the crash of AI flight 171:

The aircraft achieved the maximum recorded airspeed of 180 Knots IAS at about 08:08:42 UTC and immediately thereafter, the Engine 1 and Engine 2 fuel cutoff switches transitioned from RUN to CUTOFF position one after another with a time gap of 01 sec. The Engine N1 and N2 began to decrease from their take-off values as the fuel supply to the engines was cut off. In the cockpit voice recording, one of the pilots is heard asking the other why did he cutoff. The other pilot responded that he did not do so. (my highlight FDD)

As per the EAFR data both engines N2 values passed below minimum idle speed, and the RAT hydraulic pump began supplying hydraulic power at about 08:08:47 UTC.

As per the EAFR, the Engine 1 fuel cutoff switch transitioned from CUTOFF to RUN at about 08:08:52 UTC. The APU Inlet Door began opening at about 08:08:54 UTC, consistent with the APU Auto Start logic. Thereafter at 08:08:56 UTC the Engine 2 fuel cutoff switch also transitions from CUTOFF to RUN. When fuel control switches are moved from CUTOFF to RUN while the aircraft is inflight, each engines full authority dual engine control (FADEC) automatically manages a relight and thrust recovery sequence of ignition and fuel introduction. The EGT was observed to be rising for both engines indicating relight. Engine 1’s core deceleration stopped, reversed and started to progress to recovery. Engine 2 was able to relight but could not arrest core speed deceleration and re-introduced fuel repeatedly to increase core speed acceleration and recovery. The EAFR recording stopped at 08:09:11 UTC At about 08:09:05 UTC, one of the pilots transmitted “MAYDAY MAYDAY MAYDAY”. The ATCO enquired about the call sign. ATCO did not get any response but observed the aircraft crashing outside the airport boundary and activated the emergency response. At 08:14:44 UTC, Crash Fire Tender left the airport premises for Rescue and firefighting. They were joined by Fire and Rescue services of Local Administration.

The flap handle assembly sustained significant thermal damage. The handle was found to be firmly seated in the 5-degree flap position, consistent with a normal takeoff flap setting. The position was also confirmed from the EAFR data. The landing gear lever was in “DOWN” position.

The thrust lever quadrant sustained significant thermal damage. Both thrust levers were found near the aft (idle) position. However, the EAFR data revealed that the thrust levers remained forward (takeoff thrust) until the impact. Both fuel control switch were found in the “RUN” position. (fig.13) The reverser levers were bent but were in the “stowed” position. The wiring from the TO/GA switches and autothrottle disconnect switches were visible, but heavily damaged.

The aircraft is equipped with two Enhanced Airborne Flight Recorders (EAFR) part number 866-0084-102. The EAFR are fitted at two locations, one in the tail section at STA 1847 and other in the forward section at STA 335. The two EAFRs are similar in construction and record a combined data stream of digital flight data and cockpit voice information, with both stored on the same device.

The downloaded flight data contained approximately 49 hours of flight data and 6 flights, including the event flight. The recovered audio was two hours in length and captured the event. Initial Analysis of the recorded audio and flight data has been done.

LINK: https://t.co/7oXkzRTlUm
1752329780493.png
 
Last edited:

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Why would a pilot cutoff and lie about it?
If you want to kill yourself, you just push the stick dont you?
And why would you then signal MAYDAY and try to restart the engines??
A "suicidal" pilot makes no sense!

Unless... he didnt want to expose himself...
 
Last edited:
Top