Going Up

"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn) 05/03/2018 at 16:29 • Filed to: Planelopnik

6

40

Quite a takeoff from the Airbus A350-XWB. Of course, no passengers, no cargo, minimum fuel, and just about any airliner can pretend to be a fighter.

This was filmed at this year’s ILA Berlin air show.

Ash78, voting early and often > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 16:39

4

Pretty much how I drive an empty V8 panel van on the way back from the truck rental place.

Quadradeuce > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 16:45

1

I would love an explanation on how they design the fuel tanks so that the engines don’t starve out on maneuver like this.

ttyymmnn > Quadradeuce 05/03/2018 at 16:45

0

Fuel injection? I got nuthin.

WilliamsSW > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 16:49

0

I’ve flown a lot over the last 30 years, but there’s 1 airline takeoff that stands out vividly in my mind. Departing SFO on a UA 737-500 with about 12 passengers for LA (LAX or Ontario, I forget). Needless to say, this was ~25 years ago.

For whatever reason (construction), SFO was using 2 runways - but the two intersecting. We took the full length from the red arrow, pilot spooled the engines up against the brakes, then released. I swear we were airborne in 20 seconds, tops (30 is typical), and hundreds of feet up when we crossed 19R.

I had set a book on the floor under me, and when we leveled off, it was 4 rows back.

Still nothing like that A350, of course...

Chariotoflove > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 16:49

1

Sweet. The pilot must have had fun. I’m guessing they had to turn off all the Airbus nannies to do this?

Highlander-Datsuns are Forever > Quadradeuce 05/03/2018 at 16:51

0

Arn’t the tanks bladders that expand and contract from full to empty?

davesaddiction @ opposite-lock.com > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:01

1

Incredible.

Cé hé sin > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:03

0

Don’t the engines on modern big twins come alarmingly close to the tarmac? You’d want to be careful landing in a crosswind.

ttyymmnn > Cé hé sin 05/03/2018 at 17:13

0

I don’t know about “alarmingly,” but that’s why the nacelles on the 737 aren’t round.

ttyymmnn > Chariotoflove 05/03/2018 at 17:19

1

Either that, or they just put on their husband ears and ignored them all. But yeah, you would have to put in “air show mode” or something just so the plane will allow you to do it.

Spanfeller is a twat > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:22

0

Boeing>Airbus.

ttyymmnn > Spanfeller is a twat 05/03/2018 at 17:23

0

Boeing certainly makes prettier airplanes.

victor > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:26

0

The A350s look awfully pretty both inside and out though. And I say this knowing that a lot of my neighbors work for Boeing.

Mercedes Streeter > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:29

1

“V1, V2, Blast Off, Positive Rate, Gear Up.”

Wrong Wheel Drive (41%) > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:33

0

Okay now I want to see one take off from an aircraft carrier. I suppose it might be theoretically possible if assembled on the ship.

Mercedes Streeter > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:33

0

Meanwhile, at Dassault :

Spanfeller is a twat > Cé hé sin 05/03/2018 at 17:35

1

I’m not an aerospace engineer or a pilot, but two things:


1. The rear landing gear, which would be where the plane’s rotation axis is when in contact with the ground, is a good distance away from the engines, this means that given pitch the engines rise from the tarmac a lot, and during hard landings the pitch the aircraft carries on touchdown also keeps the engines a safe distance from the runway even if the impact causes the winds to bend a lot towards the tarmac.

2. If a crosswind is bending a wing enough for clearance to be an issue, then that wind is impossibly strong, also if your wing is at an angle during a cross wind landing you could end up having the wind provide significant lift IN ONE SIDE of the plane, creating a dangerous flipping motion.

Spanfeller is a twat > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 17:41

1

Yup.

Spanfeller is a twat > victor 05/03/2018 at 17:43

1

It looks like a racoon to me.

ttyymmnn > WilliamsSW 05/03/2018 at 17:59

2

I remember back in the 707 and early 737 days, the pilots would set the brakes, spool up, then pop the brakes and push you back into the seat. That was fun. I also flew out of John Wayne once in CA, and due to the noise abatement restrictions it was a much steeper than normal climb out. The pilot alerted us to that before takeoff, and it was a gas.

ttyymmnn > Mercedes Streeter 05/03/2018 at 18:00

0

Damn....... That’s amazing.

ttyymmnn > Wrong Wheel Drive (41%) 05/03/2018 at 18:00

0

Pretty sure the wing wouldn’t make it past the island.

ttyymmnn > victor 05/03/2018 at 18:02

0

They got it right with the 350, but only because they copied the 787.

Wrong Wheel Drive (41%) > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 18:10

1

Well of course it would have to start off forward of there. And landing is just out of the picture but it might be possible. I know the C130 has done takeoff/landing but that is still a bit smaller and kind of designed for that sort of abuse. Hooking up that to a catapult seems like a bad idea for the airframe but maybe with better landing gear its possible.

ttyymmnn > Wrong Wheel Drive (41%) 05/03/2018 at 18:14

1

They flew a U-2 from a carrier, but that’s a similar sort of thing.

arl > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 18:35

1

That was boring- right up to 1:20. Then “holy crap, straight up!”

ttyymmnn > arl 05/03/2018 at 18:39

0

I’d like to see that from the side to see just how “straight up” it was. I bet it was a solid 60 degrees.

ttyymmnn > Spanfeller is a twat 05/03/2018 at 18:54

0

Spanfeller is a twat > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 18:56

1

Oh the 737

I wish they still sold the 757

TheRealBicycleBuck > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 19:13

0

I imagine this what National Airlines Flight 496 (a Boeing 727) looked like when they took off from the tiny Lake Jackson air field after being hijacked and landing there in 1972. They were running out of fuel and were considering a beach landing by the Gulf of Mexico when the crew spotted the 5,000 ft runway.

Lake Jackson is a company town built around Dow Chemical. My grandfather worked there for many years. He said t o get the 727 off the ground, they stripped it of all non-essential equipment, including the seats. I thought it was one of his fanciful tales, but years later, I found the story, although many of the details about the plane are missing.

https://blog.chron.com/bayoucityhistory/2012/07/40-years-later-the-day-a-727-landed-at-lake-jackson/  

ttyymmnn > TheRealBicycleBuck 05/03/2018 at 21:15

1

I’m going to have to look into that. I’m not familiar with the story, and it might make a neat article. Thanks for the tip!

ttyymmnn > Spanfeller is a twat 05/03/2018 at 21:17

1

Their still cranking out 767s for the freighter market, and I think the 797 will be targeted at the hole left by the 75. The 75 is such a hot rod. I love it.

f86sabre > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 21:35

2

757 with a light load, maybe 20 of us, on a Thanksgiving morning. Pilot took the runway, ran up the engines and held the brakes. We’d were off the ground before we reached the end of TechOps.

The twin jets are designed to be able to climb and maintain safe flight when fully loaded. That means a good power to weight ratio.

f86sabre > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 21:40

0

Saw one today.

wafflesnfalafel > ttyymmnn 05/03/2018 at 22:11

1

Airbus is just a little jealous of the promotional vids Boeing has been pumping out.

wafflesnfalafel > Wrong Wheel Drive (41%) 05/03/2018 at 22:13

0

gonna need a FULL charge of the catapult...

ttyymmnn > f86sabre 05/04/2018 at 00:43

1

Now, where in the world did you see that? I dig the raccoon mask.

ttyymmnn > wafflesnfalafel 05/04/2018 at 00:44

1

I don’t remember which show it was, Paris or Farnborough, but Boeing did a super dynamic demo with the 787 and the organizers weren’t happy. So they told AB that they couldn’t do a similar demo, and AB really wasn’t happy.

You can tell a Finn but you can't tell him much > Quadradeuce 05/04/2018 at 09:24

1

I can’t find an explanation for the 787 or A350, but there is a very in depth explanation of the fuel system on the A380 available here . Any of the other aircraft would be somewhat similar in that there are multiple tanks used to store fuel, and then the tank feeding the engine is kept full by transferring fuel from the other tanks. Since the tank feeding the engines is basically full to the brim the whole time you don’t need to worry too much about the fuel sloshing away from the pickups. Plus the engineers place the pickups in a location where they should be supplied with fuel even in emergency maneuvering.

You can tell a Finn but you can't tell him much > Highlander-Datsuns are Forever 05/04/2018 at 09:26

1

No, but they do have multiple fuel tanks. Most are used to store fuel, but the tanks used to feed the engines are kept full by transferring fuel from the other tanks. Here is a good explanation of the A380 fuel system , and other aircraft would be somewhat similar.