Airplanes

[oldshurst442]

 

[trinacriabob]

On 10/27/2021 at 11:24 PM, oldshurst442 said:

My favorite Air Canada 747, the 400 series, and livery.

I remember CP Air, or Canadian Pacific, the "orange" airline based in Vancouver, which then became Canadian Airlines (different alliance, possibly One World with American, and not part of Star Alliance with United) and was based in Calgary. 

They were definitely around in 1998 and were flying a 747 as well, but merged into Air Canada a few years later.

[trinacriabob]

Aerolineas Argentinas has had 3 or 4 major liveries for their jumbo, with this one being the first.  It was a little obnoxious with the stacked AA in the tail, but I liked striping that widened as it went rearward and/or curved up into the tail.

I'm going to guess that this is at Madrid, based on the big field and parched look.  They used to bring the jumbo from Buenos Aires to Los Angeles, possibly with a stop in Lima, Peru to and from.

These guys used to go to a lot of places, even to Canada.  By the time I got around to flying on them, they were only using 747s to B.A. from Madrid and Miami nonstop.  And Airbus 340s to reach New York and Rome nonstop, so, basically, only anywhere it made sense to fly Argentines aboard Argentine planes.

[oldshurst442]

My favorite Air Canada livery. From the '80s.   (Not my favorite airline tho. LOL)   

And of course the 747.  I dont think I could ever say I have a favorite 747.  I LOVE EVERY 747 EVER MADE!!!

 

 

[trinacriabob]

4 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

My favorite Air Canada livery. From the '80s.   (Not my favorite airline tho. LOL)   

And of course the 747.  I dont think I could ever say I have a favorite 747.  I LOVE EVERY 747 EVER MADE!!!

 

There will be no other, that's for sure.

[Robert Hall]

IIRC, I've flown on 747s to the UK a couple of times on British Airways, and a couple times to Hawaii on United or American.  It's been a while, but I remember I felt they were more spacious than other trans-ocean planes I've been on.

I do miss travel, don't miss airports and crowds, though.  I just don't feel comfortable spending hours in a tin can w/ plague-infested masses.   But I really need to get back out West sometime in the next year...

Edited December 16, 2021 by Robert Hall

[oldshurst442]

On 12/15/2021 at 11:13 PM, trinacriabob said:

There will be no other, that's for sure.

The next big thing in commercial airplanes will be electric engines. But I doubt a specific airliner will have the impact the 747 had.   

In the military, the next big thing would be pilotless fighters and bombers. When that tech filters down to commercial airliners, I doubt that a specific airplane will have the same impact the 747 had.

The only airplane that rivals the 747 in being a game changer on the same level was an airplane that was launched at about the same time as the 747. And that would be the Concorde.  

Sadly today, flying simply does not have the same aura it had like in the 1960s and 1970s.  Today, especially in North America, flying is reduced to riding the city bus.  Its too common, its too cheap and its available to far too many people.   People that dont have any self respect, let alone asking for these people to respect their flying environment and others around them.   And that is one reason why there wont be another airliner like a 747.  

 

[oldshurst442]

[Robert Hall]

7 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

One of those big Russki jets sat for years at DIA, used to see when landing in the 00s...never knew why it was there.

[oldshurst442]

If it werent actually transporting huge stuff, who knows why it was there? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[G. David Felt]

11 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

One of those big Russki jets sat for years at DIA, used to see when landing in the 00s...never knew why it was there.

? Maybe like BMW M and Mercedes AMG it was awaiting hand made parts so it could fly again.  

[trinacriabob]

@Robert Hall  For a while in the late '90s and early 2000s, British used to fly a 747 daily from Seattle to London.  I would have thought Seattle was a little more intermediate of a hub than that, and could have done with a daily 777 or smaller.

@oldshurst442  The thing about the 747 is that it had beauty and brains ... more so than any other commercial airplane ever has.  By being able to put over 400 people onto a plane, it made transoceanic travel feasible for so many more people.  Not only that, it was born beautiful, for lack of a better word.  They are so damn photogenic.

I am happy that a few operators (namely Lufthansa and Swiss) are keeping some of their Airbus 340s around.  This is partly because of the removal of the Airbus 380 from service.  That's made them rethink the Airbus 340, which I like quite a bit, and they gave it a bump up in the fleet's pecking order.  Lufthansa flies it from Frankfurt to Montreal, Boston, and Washington-Dulles, depending on the seasonal load.  Swiss might fly theirs from Zurich to Miami and/or Boston, again, depending on load factors.  I believe Lufthansa operates -600 series and Swiss operates -300 series A340s, which are sort of neat because of the 4 smaller engines.  I like to sit out in the 2s on the A340 and look at the scenery ... and even the engines.  I like knowing these stupid things so I can plan my flight segments accordingly.

[Robert Hall]

21 minutes ago, trinacriabob said:

@Robert Hall  For a while in the late '90s and early 2000s, British used to fly a 747 daily from Seattle to London.  I would have thought Seattle was a little more intermediate of a hub than that, and could have done with a daily 777 or smaller. 

IIRC, I flew BA 747s out of Denver once, Phoenix once...then the other three trips across the pond in the 00s were on BA 777s out of Phoenix... if I were to do it now (I really want to get back to Blighty, go out to Cornwall and Devon, up to Northumberland), I'll probably have to drive to Pittsburgh or Detroit to fly direct (I don't like connecting flights). 

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

 

Edited January 8, 2022 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

Edited January 8, 2022 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

Edited January 8, 2022 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

 

[oldshurst442]

 

[Drew Dowdell]

 

My favorite

[oldshurst442]

B-52...

Its a living legend.   Some of them have been refurbished in 2013-2015 and are expected to be in service in 2050.  

2050!!! 

First flight was in 1952. Went into service in 1955.  If one does the math, the B-52 would be in service for 100 years!!!   

Edited January 13, 2022 by oldshurst442

[Drew Dowdell]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

B-52...

Its a living legend.   Some of them have been refurbished in 2013-2015 and are expected to be in service in 2050.  

2050!!! 

First flight was in 1952. Went into service in 1955.  If one does the math, the B-52 would be in service for 100 years!!!   

There are a lot of great planes out there, but few as versatile and capable as the B52.  They refit a bunch of them to be drone carriers now. They can circle 800 miles from you and still take you out.

[oldshurst442]

 

 

 

[oldshurst442]

And the (almost) behind the scenes video

 

[oldshurst442]

 

[oldshurst442]

[G. David Felt]

Crazy video of a China Airlines cargo plane plowing into stuff on the snow-covered airport.

Cargo Plane Plows Into Several Baggage Carts At O'Hare Airport (jalopnik.com)

[oldshurst442]

 

Edited March 20, 2022 by oldshurst442

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

 

 

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

 

[oldshurst442]

[G. David Felt]

WAR WAR WAR machines, sad that we cannot learn to live together, get along and focus on the future and space.

Too many damn narcissistic dictators and dictator wannabes.

[oldshurst442]

Unfortunately, airplanes have been major contributors in warfare since WW1 (never forgetting that the Wright Brothers first successful flight was done in 1903) and major aircraft development and technologies were made because of its war contributions. Airplanes and war go hand in hand.   Even going in space and to the moon wouldnt have been possible in the 1960s had it not been for the need to improve airplane technology and the need to fly faster and climb higher during WW2.  Rocket fuel was but one of these technologies to come out of WW2 that assisted space flight.  Aerodynamics of the fuselage and wings are another.  Breathing apparatus is another.   But all these technologies discovered is for one reason and one reason only:  to kill ourselves in combat. 

Airplane travel for vacation destinations across the planet is not happening unless Country A figures out how to produce a long distance bomber to bomb the shyte out of Country B...

Sorry, but that is how it is...

 

 

[G. David Felt]

8 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Unfortunately, airplanes have been major contributors in warfare since WW1 (never forgetting that the Wright Brothers first successful flight was done in 1903) and major aircraft development and technologies were made because of its war contributions. Airplanes and war go hand in hand.   Even going in space and to the moon wouldnt have been possible in the 1960s had it not been for the need to improve airplane technology and the need to fly faster and climb higher during WW2.  Rocket fuel was but one of these technologies to come out of WW2 that assisted space flight.  Aerodynamics of the fuselage and wings are another.  Breathing apparatus is another.   But all these technologies discovered is for one reason and one reason only:  to kill ourselves in combat. 

Airplane travel for vacation destinations across the planet is not happening unless Country A figures out how to produce a long distance bomber to bomb the shyte out of Country B...

Sorry, but that is how it is...

I get that war has helped develop commercial level items, but we have also had things that were developed out of Nasa that were not War Time related and those technologies have helped humanity. I still believe we could move humanity forward without having to go to war, but I do understand that some humans are crazy power hungry and war and death mean nothing to them as long as they get the attention and what they aim to achieve.

[oldshurst442]

Nothing out of NASA, flight wise,  has been developed without war technology first or war technology first in mind. 

 I agree that as a species, in 2022 AD, we should be above and beyond killing each other. We have all our past history to learn from that war should never be the answer and our current advancements in life improvement technologies such as the internet, medicines, transportation, etc should tell us that we should never have to kill ourselves ever again because all these technological advancements have and will  propel humanity to areas that are ancient ancestors regarded as Godly...

But humans are a strange species. It seems that once in awhile, humans are content in destroying all in the name of control.  Irony is that Putin has an ungodly amount of riches and has an incredible (mind) control of a percentage of his people and even that is not enough for his ego and his legacy. Somehow he wants more... 

Just hoping his war stays conventional. Its doing enough human carnage already without the need to go biological or nuclear...  

[oldshurst442]

But by me posting airplanes, even military ones, I dont want it to go further political.  I just want to post pics of airplanes.  It does become sketchy with the military ones because airforces of countries are being posted when there are wars going on and assumptions could be made.  With the exception of the Antonov AN- 225 that I posted being destroyed and the Ukrainian MiG 29 right after, that is as far of a political statement that I wanted to make.  

The Russian Bear bomber with the American fighters intercepting it would also kinda be a message. Kinda like a "phoque you Putin!"  

The rest of the pics I posted (in the creation of this thread) is just me celebrating my love for all that is airplanes. 

Edited March 22, 2022 by oldshurst442

[G. David Felt]

1 hour ago, oldshurst442 said:

But by me posting airplanes, even military ones, I dont want it to go further political.  I just want to post pics of airplanes.  It does become sketchy with the military ones because airforces of countries are being posted when there are wars going on and assumptions could be made.  With the exception of the Antonov AN- 225 that I posted being destroyed and the Ukrainian MiG 29 right after, that is as far of a political statement that I wanted to make.  

The Russian Bear bomber with the American fighters intercepting it would also kinda be a message. Kinda like a "phoque you Putin!"  

The rest of the pics I posted (in the creation of this thread) is just me celebrating my love for all that is airplanes. 

Totally agree, was not wanting to take it political either, as I do have admiration for what has been accomplished by all types of airplanes including military. Today's news does take a toll on one and I was only thinking what you stated so well in your post above that by now, in this 21st century we would have thought humans would have learned by now that war is not the answer, but sadly even here in the U.S. we have narcissistic individuals that can only think of control and their own ego over humanity.

Thanks for the well worded posting!

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

[ccap41]

17 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Something about this piqued my interest and I want one. 

Okay, I don't have a spare 1.15M+ sitting around nor the schooling and hours to fly one even if I did have the cash but this certainly has me interested. I'm not 100% sure why, but it really does. 

I think I looked at it and thought, "damn, "that's a pretty lookin' plane.", then thought how a 7-seater would also be relatively "practical". It's pretty, it's "practical" I LIKE IT! 

[oldshurst442]

@ccap41

I know NOTHING about these aircraft. Neither the Panthera nor the Diamond duo.   I was just googling about new lightweight personal aircraft and came across these. 

Like you, I IMMEDIATELY fell in love with them.  

The next few days and Ill be researching them.  Just for knowledge as I also havent got a spare 1.15 million just laying around. 

I like that Diamond breaks it down financially.  Maybe other companies do also. I wouldnt know, its not as if Im a private airplane collector often shopping around for these...   I like that the breakdown includes a per hour amount.   Good for a business stand point if a company wants to buy these to rent them to folk.

 

 

[oldshurst442]

[oldshurst442]

Edited April 22, 2022 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

10 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

Those are some skilled pilots! 

[oldshurst442]

Just now, ccap41 said:

Those are some skilled pilots! 

Phoque YEAH!!!

Imagine how steady you have to be in order to accomplish that sort of thing? 

The pilot has to counter every little blip for a rescue mission like that to succeed.  Blips like wind, or if in the water, the waves.  The people walking inside the helicopter also produces bounces.   I would be in a psychological mess trying to focus to get the Chinook steady enough for people to be rescued.  LOL

[G. David Felt]

I remember this picture and thought wow, talk about skill.