Even Ericsson

kan hende at jeg tulla litt

Alle fly som har FBW må vel uansett ha dette. Ellers ville jo de være f**** hvis motorene skulle stoppe. MelJet sin 777 har vel også RAT.

Ja, mens Airbus gjør hva de kan for å gjøre pilotene til passasjerer så gir Boeing de noe de kan bestemme over

Her er ett intervju av sjefstestpiloten på 787 programmet, "litt" langt, men la gå Boeing_Host: Hello and welcome to the Boeing 787 Dreamliner chat with Mike Carriker, Chief Pilot on the Boeing 787 Dreamliner. Mike will discuss the development of the Dreamliner flight deck, new features and its compatibility with our current Boeing fleet of airplanes. Boeing_Host: Mr. Carriker will be taking your questions for the next hour. bhasky Q: Why is boeing hesitant to use the sidestick controller when airbus has been using it for nearly 17 years starting with the A320 ? Mike Carriker: We believe that large motion++ back-driven interconnected controllers are the best solution for safety over the 100s of millions of flight hours that airplanes will fly. Our customers told us one of the biggest values that we could provide them is commonality with current Boeing airplanes. For these two reasons++ we chose the center control. joe Q: how do the new LCD displays look++ are they good in sunlight conditions? Mike Carriker: They have to be -- otherwise we can't put them in the airplane. We are working with our supplier - Rockwell Collins - to meet the requirements. Howie Q: What items are standard and which are optional to the ordering airlines? Mike Carriker: The list of standard equipment is extensive because we made a decision to have a more standard airplane. That has allowed us to provide a much higher level of equipment at a lower cost. Among the standard items are dual HUDs++ dual EFB++ SATCOM++ vertical situation display++ full format map. There are only a few options++ like dual SATCOM. bhasky Q: Will it feature a quiet climb system as demonstrated in the 737 900 demonstrator aircraft ? Mike Carriker: Not as of now. We think the noise signature of the 787 will be so much lower that such a system won't be required. If it proves to be an enhancement it is a straightforward incoporation. Alex Q: Mike++ how would you describe your role as Chief Pilot on the 787 project? Mike Carriker: Multifaceted . . . challenging . . . broadbased . . . fun . . . difficult at times. Anthony Q: I notice that there is no anolog instruments in the cockpit++ doesn't there have to be some non-digital back up instruments in the aircraft? Mike Carriker: We have an integrated stand-by flight display system that is self-contained and we have retained the whiskey compass. Alex Q: How much does the evolution of an aircraft like this depend on the input of pilots--and specifically++ the Chief Pilot? Mike Carriker: I'd like to think a lot++ but that's not entirely true. We have had conversations and input from pilots at more than 30 airlines as to their preferences and requirements. Obviously they don't all have the same requirements and we want to make one airplane that is certifiable. So we help sort that all out++ look at the available technology and develop the best solution we can. noshow Q: hello mike. will the 787 main instrumentation have a similarity with let's say the 777. Mike Carriker: Yes. While it looks different from a broad picture standpoint++ details such as alternate flaps++ alternate gear++ ECS information are all identical to 777. This is how we are minimizing training requirements for 777-trained pilots. They can be fully trained on 787 in only five days. jeep40 Q: what are the requirements to fly left seat on the 787? Mike Carriker: The training requirements are standard and set by the regulatory authorities. Adi Q: Will the HUD be standard on all production aircraft? Mike Carriker: Dual HUDs are basic equipment on the airplane. Alex Q: At what point in the process of the development of the aircraft do virtual mock-ups and flight simulation set-ups begin? Do you fly the plane virtually before you test the real bird? Mike Carriker: Four years ago! I flew it for 12 hours this week already. isu_pilot Q: How many hours will you have on a simulator before you fly this thing for the first time? Mike Carriker: The flight test team will have logged thousands of hours. Personally I will probably have more than 500. jeep40 Q: on landings do you use aerodynamic braking? Mike Carriker: No - the FAA certified braking performance will not allow for aerodynamic braking. And even if you tried++ it doesn't make much difference. I know because I tried it on the 737 brake program. Fredric Q: Why can't we make planes that fly over 41++000 feet? What will be maximum cruising altitude? At 45++000 you've avoided absolutely most weather... Mike Carriker: This airplane's maximum cruise altitude is FL (flight level) 430 (43++000 feet). Only in the U.S. because of the oxygen requirements do airliners have a tendency to stop at 410 (41++000 feet). As you go higher++ design issues get more critical with less benefit. 787_LOVER Q: how does visual flight profile look between 777 and 787? meaning++ for a pilot++ the appearance of flight are the same? Mike Carriker: To achieve the goal of commonality with the 777++ we have designed the pilot's view to be virtually identical. The only difference is that the landing gear length is a little less. kenthealiasguy Q: Would pilot training/transition time from 737-800 to the new 787-300 be shorter than that of Airbus a321 to a330? Mike Carriker: My transition course from the A320 to the A330 took me 14 days. We think for the 737NGs to 787 training we can do better. Howie Q: The interactive flight deck shows "soft" buttons. Trackball (like 777) or Touch screen? Mike Carriker: The 777 has a touch pad. We think that track balls don't do as well in heavy turbulence. The 787 will have dual touch pads. We call them cursor control devices (CCDs). bill Q: what will pilots like best about the 787 Mike Carriker: It's been designed to be flown by the pilot and not the computer. If I could have something in the airplane it would be to build in the desire of the pilot to hand-fly the airplane. noshow Q: mike++ what is the time frame you are looking for to make the first flight? Mike Carriker: 2007 isu_pilot Q: How do you become chief pilots? And how many pilots are on the design/test of this thing? Mike Carriker: Be in the right place at the right time - experience++ age++ personality++ good looks . . . no really . . . experience and the fact that you are at the company during the time that it is producing a new airplane make the biggest difference. We have three engineering pilots and two training pilots already on the team. GaryH Q: Mike++ Can you identify what you see as the single annoying feature that has been addressed in the development of the Dreamliner's cockpit environmfnt? Mike Carriker: In all of our conversations++ we never found THE single annoying factor. We strived to improve lighting and such items as water bottle stowage++ document storage++ writing surfaces++ quicker access to data. We worked extensively on datalink communications. OriginalMikro Q: Mike++ if you had a choice to pilot any of the Boeing aircraft++ would the 787 be your first choice? Mike Carriker: It is now. Heli Q: Good evening. How accurate have the computer models of the design have been on practical tests? Mike Carriker: Since I am an aeronautical engineer by schooling++ I am very happy with the progress of the aerodynamics of the airplane. Our computational fluid dynamics are spot on to the wind tunnel tests. bill Q: Capt. Carriker: How confident are you in the 787 timeline as it now stands? Mike Carriker: As far as I can see++ we're on schedule. If we were ahead of schedule we'd get told to do a lot more work. If we were behind schedule++ I wouldn't have time to chat. TOM Q: Mike++ Have you put time and thought in the saftey of the cockpit and flight attendants from terrorists Mike Carriker: Yes - unequivocally. It started in the original flight deck design++ it wasn't added on or enhanced like current airplanes. I can't go into detail because that would sort of defeat the purpose but it has been a consideration that has driven design choices. raymond Q: From the looks of the ND++ it looks like you have used a digital terrain map to depict with the vertical profile++ can the data be used to render a 3-D image much like some military do when flying low? Mike Carriker: The computational ability is there. We would have a lot of certification and operational approval issues. 777Justin Q: When flying the 787 in the simulator how would you compare the flying characteristics of the 777 to the 787? Mike Carriker: We use the same flight control laws as the 777 so that the handling qualities are identical. One of my jobs is to ensure that this is done. Heli Q: What has been the greatest challenge or stumbling for the design team so far? Mike Carriker: The biggest challenge is to develop a world-class product at the price the customer will pay. Marc23 Q: Will this aircraft handle more like a mid-size or jumbo in terms of angles++ rates++ etc? Mike Carriker: More like a mid-sized airplane. Nick_L_ Q: How big are the displays on the 787? Mike Carriker: 15.1-inch diagonal -- about 9x12 inches++ like a laptop. bobbi Q: could she fly and land without you? Mike Carriker: Cat IIIb autoland is basic but having said that we expect the pilots to monitor the airplane's performance at all times. jcflyer Q: Hello Mike++ with so much experience in such varied equipment++ what do you find the most appealing and advanced feature of the 787 flight deck Mike Carriker: The ability to configure the displays to my desires. As an interesting note++ some of our customers are actually wondering if they can handle that much flexibility (I think they can). It may drive the standards people to many more meetings! Nick_L_ Q: How much data can the HUDs display? Can you almost fly the plane with only the HUD? Mike Carriker: The HUD is not the primary flight display. However++ the HUD provides enough guidance information that you wouldn't have to refer to head down displays. The head-down display is always in view. homestarrunner Q: The vertical stabilizer looks kind of small for an airplane this large. How does it handle with one engine out? Mike Carriker: It does just fine. jeep40 Q: how do you takeoff from hoigh altitudes airport? Mike Carriker: By applying thrust. B6Drew Q: Will the 787 range from Cat1 to Cat3 landing capability? Mike Carriker: Yes. Allan Q: How about mixed fleet flying++ will it be possible for pilots to fly both the 737NG's and 787 at the same time? Mike Carriker: You can't fly them at the same time - you have to get out of one and get into the other. Hernan_Saldana Q: Hi Mike++ last night I saw the pictures of the flight deck and it is awesome. However++ compared to other Boeing aircraft++ it looks emptier++ as if several systems were simplified and integrated in the large screens you have there. Could you elaborate a litt Mike Carriker: Yes -- it is simpler. One of the economic benefits that we have provided the airlines is fewer parts and simplified systems. That means fewer spares and less maintenance. aeroeric Q: The 787 wing flexes a lot ++ does the stiffness requirements differs for a composite wing? Mike Carriker: No - we have to meet the same stiffness++ flutter loads++ wind gust loads that are specified in the FARs (federal requirements). kenthealiasguy Q: It would be nice to see a keyboard integraded pilot work/tray table++ any plans? Mike Carriker: We are exploring ways to get QWERTY keyboard on to the airplane++ Guy. PilotWing Q: With the growth of internet technology and live TV on aircraft++ do the pilots benifit from this technology in the cockpit??? Mike Carriker: Connexion by Boeing is an option on the 787. We are just discovering the possibilities of using that data pipeline. It's going to be really fun. Greg Q: What is it like to be the first person to fly such an airplane? How much preparation goes into this on your part? Mike Carriker: I may be one of the two people in the airplane but I've had the support of thousands. It's an honor to represent them and their hard work. By the time I fly the jet++ we will all know exactly how it will perform++ otherwise we won't take off. I have been preparing for that day my entire career. isu_pilot Q: Who gets to ride in the two jump seats? Mike Carriker: For the first flight it is required to have a minimum crew - only two pilots. We have a full telemetry suite on the airplane that broadcasts millions of data bits to dozens of engineers on the ground. The jump seats are there for in-service use of alternate crews and FAA inspectors. jeep40 Q: whats your maximun mach at cruise altitude? Mike Carriker: Cruise Mach is 0.85 homestarrunner Q: I understand the 787 cabin is very quiet....what is the noise level in the cockpit? Mike Carriker: Yet to be determined but we are striving to have the quietest flight deck in the industry. Bill_2 Q: Is the wing dihedral similar to other large Boeings? Mike Carriker: No - wing dihedral is there for aerodynamic reasons. We have the same effective dihedral although the wing will look like it has more. PilotWing Q: Is the cockpit paperless such as digital checklists and flight plans? Mike Carriker: The goal is to be more paperless but we still have our printer. tigertom Q: Are looking forward to barrel rolling the first one ?? Mike Carriker: The airplane can do it. But I like my job and I'd like to keep it. So++ I probably won't. 777Justin Q: Do you think that the overall success of this aircraft will trump that of the A380 Mike Carriker: Yes - it's exciting to have so many customers from so many places around the world. Russ Q: How many planes do you have sold NOW Mike Carriker: 21 airlines have announced orders and firm commitments for 256 airplanes. For me that is great news and we have the pleasant challenge of building that many airplanes and training that many crews. Leo Q: Mike++ when I first flew the 777 (March 1995) it was love at first touch. Do you feel the same for the 787? Mike Carriker: One of my goals is to create an airplane that pilots want to fly. Sometimes I jokingly say++ "I want to create an airplane where the pilot's will say++ 'I'll look really good in that left seat.' " We are trying really hard to keep the fun in flying.

Noen fått med seg dette: http://www.iht.com/articles/2005/09/06/news/crash.php Er vel ikke den offisielle rapporten, men det hele høres meget fornuftig ut.

skulle holde det. Ligger bare 1.100 meter nede men russerene skulle jo sprenge vrake så ingen får tak i det, så mye hemmelige teknologi

Ser meget fin ut, bilde her: http://boeingmedia.com/images/one.cfm?image_id=13606&release=t

Aeroflot IL-96/86 kanskje?

jojo, er nok ikke alle som bryr seg det kvekk, men for en som elsker alt av biler/fly/båter/ubåter osv er det ganske irriterendes å se på en film med vanvittig med faktafeil. Det er jo ofte sånn at de som liker f.eks fly leier/kjøper flyfilmer, da burde de neste lagt litt vekt på å gjøre de litt "riktige" ihvertfall.

sant nok det. Men, er jo forskjellige typer filmer da, sånne fly/bil/ubåt filmer bør jo helst være litt "rett" i forhold til temaet da. Eksepel på gode filmer som inneholder fly/bil/ubåt og er realistisk er: Memphis Belle, Ronin og Das Boot edit: blir for dumt med slik som The fast and the furious der deler av gulvet detter av pga bruk av lystgass. Og at bilene tilsynelatende har like mange gir som en lastebil.

Så filmen Tactical Assault på tv3 nå i kveld(natt). Må bare få si at det var noe av det latterligste jeg har sett med tanke på fly-detaljene. Var en sånn typisk jagerfly film.. Iallefall driver de å tuller med ett passersjerfly (en 757 i demofargene til boeing, det rød og blåstipete, og når du ser inneifra er det en tu154 cocpit). Dette er liksom amerikansk airforce, men de fly i tillegg til F16, Sukhoi og Mil Mi24 heli(som selfølgelig har helt feil cocpit). I tillegg blir de angrepet av 3 jagerfly, som alle er helt forskjellig og hele tiden endrer flytypene seg, både fiende og amerikanerene sine. På toppen av det hele bruker de sidewinders til bakkeangrep Sikkert ikke noe folk som ikke er flyinteressert hadde ligget merke til, men jeg hadde iallefall en morsom stund der jeg koste meg med å finne flest mulige feil i filmen Jeg synes nå iallefall de kunne lagt litt vekt på å ha sånne detaljer riktig når det tross alt er en flyfilm.

I will die in the gas chamber on Monday, November 27, 2034 . Litt usikker på bmi'en og var ingen valg for snuser som festrøyker heller, så må kankskje justeres litt

kom over en link i et forum: http://www.carsurvey.org/air/review_11283.html der er det en som har flydd med helios forrige søndag, der det dryppet vann fra airconditionen. Mistenkelig..samme fly?

Syke greier, detter jo ned fly i ett sett for tiden. Huff Huff Leste på ett annet forum at det muligens var en Boeing 737-300 (cn 29099/2982) med reg: 5B-DBY. edit: Er bekreftet nå av Helios at det var en av 737-800 maskinene deres. edit 2: Var visst sannsynligvis etter ruteplanen 737-300 maskinen 5B-DBY som gikk ned. Pilotene hadde gitt beskjed til ATC om problemer med airconditionen om bord like etter avgang. Samme flyet hadde hatt problemer med airconditionen for 1 måned siden også, men skal ha hatt service etter dette.

så på BBC nå, noen passasjerer som hadde tatt bilder med mobilen før de var kommet seg ut og rett etter. Ikke det første jeg hadde tenkt på å gjort da, men.

så på cnn nå, alle passasjerer var evakuert på 50 sekunder, det er sinnsykt fort. men man kan begynne å undre litt med en A380 med oppimot 800pax, går det så fort å evakuere så mange? edit: og i følge Air France, skal alle ha kommet fra det med livet i behold. Det er bra

huff, fæl ulykke, håper det går bra med alle. tydeligvis, dette er jo igrunn første gang det er en alvorlig ulykke med en av de nye generasjons Heavyene (777, A330/340). Utrolig nok derimot har ikke en eneste 737NG gått ned ennå..

jeg må inrømme at jeg har litt middels flyskrekk. Har flydd mange ganger og det går stort sett helt fint, men er nok litt annspent ombord på fly. Hjelper godt å ta noen pils først Litt rart igrunn, men jeg synes turbulens, landing og takeoff er gøy. Men tror at det i bunn og grunn koker ned til det at jeg ikke er i kontroll og ikke vet hva som skjer til enhver tid, liker å være i kontoll. Vet såpass mye om fly og flygning at jeg ikke burde være redd, burde jo etter statistikken vært mere redd for å kjøre bil, men det tenker jeg ikke over engang

har visst fått gjennomgå dette http://www.airliners.net/open.file/147788/L/

Noen som vet hvordan det er i Bulgaria, nærmere bestemt Burgas? Tenkte jeg skulle få knipset noen bilder av noen Tu154 blandt annet. Vil ikke risikere å bli skutt liksom, er ikke helt gode disse bulgarerene, fant ut det i fjor

På formiddagen i går kom det en 737 med winglets over meg på vei inn mot flesland. Det var stort sett hvitt og fremste delen av halen var rød, hvilket selskap er det? Har ikke sett det før. Kom også noe som så ut som en E3 awacs uten radar på toppen av flyet, helt lik lyd som E3en også, er det en tanker det eller? Den kom over 2 ganger.

Ikke så ofte man ser fly med Winglets eller Hapag Loyd? Hapag Loyd har uansett ikke winglets på alle sine fly, men mesteparten av de ja.. ikke så ofte jeg ser noen av delene faktisk har ikke sett noen bilder av 737 med winglet her heller tror jeg. Trodde de hadde fått på winglets på alle sine jeg, men da er de nok på vei, de skulle få på alle sine ganske snart leste jeg ett sted.

Hapag Loyd har jo winglets på alle sine 738, det er vel ikke hver dag man ser slike i norge? eller?

Uff, fæle greier sånnt som dette, men det som er utroligt er at folk har overlevd sånne ting flere ganger, var en historie i vi-menn eller noe for ett par år siden. Han var rimeligt nedkjølt, men i live fortsatt.

disse hadde vel PW motorer etter det jeg vet. ER står for "Extended range" (utvidet rekkevidde), men de to flyene som braathens hadde var ikke ER versjonen.