canuckistani Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 1 minute ago, peaches5 said: Every plane crash is multiple problems. You didn't maintain underestimated weight is rarely a problem you flat out said underestimated weight is not going to be a problem. That is 100% false. You are wrong. Then what you're saying about elevators is just as ignorant. You assume that every elevator is in pristine condition. It very expensive to replace an elevator if something goes with it so they are almost always repaired on site. Years of maintenance maybe shoddy maintenance on elevators... If you see a jammed back full elevator and just go oh well don't worry it can hold twice this weight...That is such ignorance. Go find someone who works on elevators and ask them what they think. I can guarantee you they will not recommend getting into a full elevator bud, i am an engineer who has worked in the airline industry. Control systems is what i specialize on and as such, overloading is not an issue unless you fly mickey-mouse carriers. When i said overloading is never the problem, i meant overloading an aircraft is never the problem TODAY. Ofcourse, one extra can of beer = overloading for the Wright brother's puddle jumper. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 2 hours ago, canuckistani said: bud, i am an engineer who has worked in the airline industry. Control systems is what i specialize on and as such, overloading is not an issue unless you fly mickey-mouse carriers. When i said overloading is never the problem, i meant overloading an aircraft is never the problem TODAY. Ofcourse, one extra can of beer = overloading for the Wright brother's puddle jumper. Must suck being proven wrong then, bud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 6 minutes ago, peaches5 said: Must suck being proven wrong then, bud. yes, i am sure picking a complex scenario for crash, from a plane that doesn't exist anymore, is proving me wrong. Might as well go full-Monty and use bi-planes as your example next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 1 minute ago, canuckistani said: yes, i am sure picking a complex scenario for crash, from a plane that doesn't exist anymore, is proving me wrong. Might as well go full-Monty and use bi-planes as your example next time. Every plane crash is a complex scenario. You blatantly said weight doesn't matter when it does. You are a terrible engineer, lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 7, 2018 Share Posted December 7, 2018 1 minute ago, peaches5 said: Every plane crash is a complex scenario. You blatantly said weight doesn't matter when it does. You are a terrible engineer, lol. it doesn't matter anymore. It doesn't matter for ANY commercial FAA approved plane flying around TODAY. Happy ? Pardon me for speaking of my industry for what IS going around and not pulled from history books. I am sure when automotive engineers talk about potential causes of injury in a vehicular accident, they don't use 1910 Ford Model-T's tendency to shoot the engine into the passenger compartment in frontal crashes anymore, either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 5 minutes ago, canuckistani said: it doesn't matter anymore. It doesn't matter for ANY commercial FAA approved plane flying around TODAY. Happy ? Pardon me for speaking of my industry for what IS going around and not pulled from history books. I am sure when automotive engineers talk about potential causes of injury in a vehicular accident, they don't use 1910 Ford Model-T's tendency to shoot the engine into the passenger compartment in frontal crashes anymore, either. Guess your industry is elevators too right? Lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 1 minute ago, peaches5 said: Guess your industry is elevators too right? Lol my 'industry' is anything that has control systems in them. Look it up what it means. its also the control systems people who set overloading response parameters or any such mechanism that deals with a malfunction. People of my industry work in industries that require automated responses - this includes aircrafts, elevators, escalators, etc etc. I have experience in the former. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peaches5 Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 5 minutes ago, canuckistani said: my 'industry' is anything that has control systems in them. Look it up what it means. its also the control systems people who set overloading response parameters or any such mechanism that deals with a malfunction. People of my industry work in industries that require automated responses - this includes aircrafts, elevators, escalators, etc etc. I have experience in the former. Right but you had no idea weight was a factor in a plane taking off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canuckistani Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 1 minute ago, peaches5 said: Right but you had no idea weight was a factor in a plane taking off. Again. In TODAY's planes, for each and every single commercial flight involving turbofan planes, the weight factor is practically IMPOSSIBLE to exceed with human passengers and their luggage, unless every single one of you is a scientist carrying a chunk of uranium in your luggage. Clear ? Bringing up examples of defunct planes only proves my point and the fact that your desire to be right is making you dig up assinine, derelict technologies to make it. As I said, next time, go with bi-planes. Will be more amusing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scottish⑦Canuck Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 On 12/6/2018 at 11:57 PM, canuckistani said: You must be flying RyanAir or something equally cheap and dodgy if you think that planes will run out of fuel because of too much weight. First off, planes are the prime eg of the 150% rule. In engineering, the rule of thumb is, if catastrophic failure leads to potential death, you 'red-line' or limit it to 2/3rd the mechanical capacity. In reality, elevators that say '18 people max' can actually carry 24 before snapping. Same with bridges and their weight classes. Or planes. Planes usually also carry 25-30% more fuel than necessary for the trip, because you never quite know how long or when you are stuck on a holding pattern at an airport before you are given clearance to land. For eg, i figured out to my own detriment that the Nanjing airport uses 1950s style radar. Meaning it cannot track in-bound and out-bound at the same time, so it does the 50s style '2 hour outbound window, all you inbounds hold your pattern, all out-bound, get in a giant conga-line and go like you are F-18s going on a bombing mission...2 hours later reverse'. So if you are not carrying 25% extra fuel while inbound to Nanjing, you are &^@#ed. Ryanair might be cheap but they're far from dodgy. I think statistically they're the world's safest airline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HI5 Posted December 8, 2018 Share Posted December 8, 2018 On 12/6/2018 at 6:03 PM, Nucksfollower1983 said: no, I'm pretty sure it's your fault Don’t fat shame me bro; I show no mercy to those stuck seated next to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.