RUPERTKBD Posted May 12, 2015 Share Posted May 12, 2015 Malaysia: Too soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Offensive Threat Posted May 13, 2015 Share Posted May 13, 2015 For anyone that's into aircraft, or has kids that are, I highly recommend the Museum of Flight in Seattle. It has the original Air Force One on display, loads of aircraft displays, space capsules, rockets, etc. http://www.museumofflight.org/air-force-one Or, equally cool, is the Future of Flight at Boeing field in Everett. There's a museum there and you can go on a tour of the Boeing plant and see how they build the aircraft. http://www.futureofflight.org/ My 4 year old nephew loved the Future of Flight . We all did. It was a lot bigger than I was expecting. We went there in early January on our way to Seattle International for a flight to Florida. We took about 4 hours for the museum. Could have stayed a lot longer but we were on a deadline so we missed the tour. On the trip back from Florida we extended a layover in Washington from 1 1/2 hours to 11 hours so we could do the National Air and Space Museum. Its only 1 bus stop ride away from Dulles International in Washington and we had pretty well the whole day there. Also a fantastic museum. Washington in January is cold as ****! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromotacanucks Posted May 14, 2015 Author Share Posted May 14, 2015 Malaysia: Too soon? actually... Malaysia's Prime Minister and the Yang di-Pertuan Agong travel in a Boeing Business Jet operated by the Royal Malaysian Air Force. The callsign of the plane is Perdana One (for the Prime Minister) or DiRaja One(if the King is aboard). The BBJ was purchased in 2003 from Malaysia Airlines. The Chief Minister of Sarawak uses a Cessna Citation, which is operated by Hornbill Skyways, a state-owned charter company. Recently they started to fly an Airbus A319 with callsign M1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CALGARY! Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 good planes are mass produced... great planes are made for a few examples. Concorde, X-15, IL-96... ok. I know it´s not true but MD11 is a damm good plane. FEDEX loves it... The MD-11 is a fantastic airplane, its beyond its time as a pax airliner now, but as a freighter its perfect, its got lots of mods for cargo doors/floors etc, they can be had for quite cheap, and yeah, Fed Ex and UPS love em, the only real replacement is a new 777 freighter, but, the big factor is the 777 is gonna cost you a few hundred million per unit, whereas the MD-11's are all paid for, the only expenses are operating(maintenance, fuel, etc). And yeah, the greatest planes of all time, IMO are the DHC-6 Twin Otter and the DHC-7. Worked on both for the first 6 years of my career, and they are just unreal aircraft. The twotter especially, its just amazing how you can work on something thats on floats all summer hauling fisherman and supplies into fishing lodges in the Charlottes, then, do 2 weeks of maintenance, install a set of de-ice boots and all the de-ice plumbing, throw some wheelskis on it and send it to Antarctica where it will haul loads of anything you can fit through the door to the middle of no where at -50*c. And the DHC-7, until you've seen one takeoff from a 900 meter strip, loaded with 94 drums of jet fuel, and only use half the runway to get airborne, you havent seen a take off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aeromotacanucks Posted May 14, 2015 Author Share Posted May 14, 2015 The MD-11 is a fantastic airplane, its beyond its time as a pax airliner now, but as a freighter its perfect, its got lots of mods for cargo doors/floors etc, they can be had for quite cheap, and yeah, Fed Ex and UPS love em, the only real replacement is a new 777 freighter, but, the big factor is the 777 is gonna cost you a few hundred million per unit, whereas the MD-11's are all paid for, the only expenses are operating(maintenance, fuel, etc). And yeah, the greatest planes of all time, IMO are the DHC-6 Twin Otter and the DHC-7. Worked on both for the first 6 years of my career, and they are just unreal aircraft. The twotter especially, its just amazing how you can work on something thats on floats all summer hauling fisherman and supplies into fishing lodges in the Charlottes, then, do 2 weeks of maintenance, install a set of de-ice boots and all the de-ice plumbing, throw some wheelskis on it and send it to Antarctica where it will haul loads of anything you can fit through the door to the middle of no where at -50*c. And the DHC-7, until you've seen one takeoff from a 900 meter strip, loaded with 94 drums of jet fuel, and only use half the runway to get airborne, you havent seen a take off. 300% agree with you. the problem was that McDonnell Douglas rushed very much to put the MD11 into service delivering an incoplete and unfinished plane. it´s said wordwide. the original project of the MD11 was a plane with at least 15.000km range and mach 0.88 cruise speed... the MD has many projects including a bigger MD11 (MD11X) and the MD12 that looks like an American made A380... however the rushed to deliver the MD11 ahead of the A340 and the new B777 screwed all because when the new Airbus and Boeing entered in service they had a better performance and lower costs than the MD11 dooming the hole project. I don´t think the B777F will replace the trijet from California so soon. unlike passenger planes cargo planes demand much more effort and an extra engine might hand better on a polar flight from Alaska to Japan and with the USA-Russia relations getting worse an emergency landing in Russia doesn´t sound a nice idea. also the MD11 is stronger, cheaper and some people say "overpowered" as for the DHC-6 and DHC-7 agree too. both fantastic planes. I noticed they´re doing the -400 series of the DHC-6 in Victoria right? if they keep the basic key of the Twin-Otter and add some extra power and yes, digital avionics will make the little beast even better. the DHC-7 is a superb plane, the size of an ATR-42/Dash-8-300 with capacity of take-off/land in an air-carrier if needed. I´m wondering why Bombardier didn´t invest into a new serie of the DHC-7 since can open market overseas and of course in Canada/USA. it´s a reliaeble plane, they fly in Greenland like monsters... if DeHavilland marketed well we could have some of these flying in Brazil untill today since it´s needed. a big DHC-7 landing into small jungle runways would do a great job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ice orca Posted May 14, 2015 Share Posted May 14, 2015 CANADA CC-150 POLARIS: see? compared with the Russian plane Harper travels on a truck! Jesus Harper really is trailer trash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.