Click to view attachment

first flight and of course landing
she `s BIG

Note the shark tooth nacell(engine cowl)..and the flex in the wings
the new 747-8 wings will flex even more

i saw it take off. man that thing is quiet once it gets in the air. and it must have some big hp. look at the size of the engines!

What is that plane in the background?

The chase plane looks like a Lockheed P-80 "Shooting Star". Military type in early Korea Conflict (no, it wasn't a war ... the gubermint said so). Original design circa 1945.

914-S

Dang, those wings flex more than the B-52...

So did they did fix the wing root problem???

I know that when the wings were flexed for the first time, a spar or two let go...

Not a good match for TATA's FEA....

TATA, gotta love em'.... Indians taking American work and delivering crap.....

Over and over and over again....

Yup F-80/ T-34 / F-94 derivitive flying behind....

Dad flew those until they began augering in from the skies.. I saw a couple come crashing in as a kid and remember the Air Force wives running out of the homes to look at the fireball and smoke plumes..... All had a worried look on their faces....

I remember Mom convincing Dad to get outa fighters at that time......

KennyburnedbyTATAsomanytimes..

A lot more new fangled than those prop-jobbies you used to fly in the Great War!

Tell me Boeing isn't going the way Airbus did. Them composite planes are like Bic lighters. When they're broke you throw them over your shoulder and buy a new one.

Nothing like a fan up front to keep the pilot cool Ricky.

If they ever make a nickel on those 787s they've sold as of now (800+), I'll be amazed. That program is the most mis-managed clusterfuck in the history of Boeing. All the suits that made the mess are either still in place, kicked upstairs, or floating under a golden parachute......oh, and still looking to put the blame elsewhere.

The literal flexibility is amazing....

I ain't gonna try. Airbus has show the way to disposable airplanes and the customers have responded ( it remains to be seen if the USAF will go for it). The days of building B52s or 707s that last for 50 (or more ) years are over.
I've been told that Scare Bus doesn't shot peen anything. That may mean something to some here.

BTW, properly maintianed, carbon fiber last forever....maybe longer.

I expected to see the wing tiplets, what about the vortex issues at the tips?
Flexiflyer!

JP: I hate Airbus planes, flown on a few, feel cheap and uncomfortable.
Scarebus...

I stood inside the cowl and could not touch the top,I needed another 4 feet or more its very close to a 777 and thats 14feet inside

No winglets !not in the design ..as much as they flex you dont need winglets look at the right wing all the way out on the end ..ps there a 737under that wing you can just see the tail,,they just keep the wing from flapping like a bird and that saved fuel as well ..Boeing only started putting those on maybe 5 years back...737 has 6' winglets, 747 has 6' winglets go figure

I dont know if they(Airbus) shotpeen J.P ...none on this aircraft! all other Boeing aircraft wingskins and some of the double plus cords,spars did as well! as far as $ Its gonna take some years to make said nickel....first one going to All Nippon Airlines late 2010 lets hope

.Airbus is not composite Mr Jmill this is a first..hence making history

trying 737 composite next 737-1000

18feet of wing flex AFAIK

yes wing issue solved or there would have been no flight...sub contracted wingbox to body. ...AKA gas tank! yes your setting on the tanks

Chase plane is indeed a t-38 and the photo was taken by the other t-38 .....34 or 38 I think 38..could be wrong ..i will verify

Flex you ant seen nutt`n yet what tell she`s fully load with fuel and people with luggage in this photo she`s low on fuel with just some computer equipment inside


One more little side note ...remember the Boeing(old plane) 309 that crashed into Union Bay(Seattle) maybe 4-5 years back "ran out of fuel"....SAME PILOT there was some jokes fly`n,,, no pun intended

T-33

T-38

The question ISN'T:
What kind of chase plane did they use?

The question IS:
WTF were they doing using a vintage jet trainer from the 50s?

There is a lot of shot peened titanium on that airplane. I've had my grubby mitts all over em'.

EH!

NOT ENOUGH MOTORS.

The Airbus is indeed a POS. (Just my opinion but also that of many others). If you get a chance to fly on one, try to sit just aft of the trailing edge of the wing. Take a good look at how it's built when the flaps come down and the spoilers deploy. Then do the same thing on a Boeing. The Boeing looks like it was made by "Boeing Bridge Works". The Airbus looks like it was made at Lego Land.

About the only thing Airbus got right is the number of motors for long over water flights. You lose and engine half way to HNL on a 777, you are now a lot lower and slower than before. The water can get a little chilly and the fish are bigger than you are.

That is indeed a T33. You don't need a modern super-sonic jet to chase an airliner.

areoshit is like riding in a busted up city bus and any boeing is like riding a tour bus. jmho!

i flew into denver one july day that had a little thunder storm and landed [if you call that landing] in a320 what a piece of shit! the thing was just one big rattle and i thought the damn thing was gonna come apart!

flew a 777 home and hit bad turbulance right out of denver and it took it like a range rover over speed bumps.

I guess there would be some,and if you say there is i have to believe you.I`ll take a close look in the next few days and see if i can find some .What parts did you work on

we have one of these as well ,That prolly were i got the T-38 idea ...the other chase planes T33 or T34 whatever it may be looks alot like that but i dont remember the intakes looking quit like that but it sure could be one of those.I walk right by it today too..Ill find out for sure monday and take the ? mark away ...as far as why we use such old plane is because there always being taken apart and new electronics put into them in many configurations theres actually 3 of them ,blue &white ,red&white ,and just plan gray..and there cheap and we have a ton of parts for them ..Just a guess ,,Ill try to get some pictures if they will let me

Size does matter...lol

Its my understanding Elliot and ive seen it more then one time" but maybe not heavy" that all Boeing twine engine Aircraft can takeoff and land on a single engine fully loaded? I thought it was a requirement for FAA certs

That is a pretty bird.

And Mr. Sprinkle is correct... Lockheed T-33. RCAF is still flying them in military service.

Back in 1969, five days after my fourth birthday, my mom and I stood in our front yard in Navy housing at Paine Field, 1500 feet from the end of the runway, and watched the first 747 take off. That was awesome. The chase plane for the 747 program was a beautiful North American F-86 Sabre:

Click to view attachment

that plane cant fly...... ITS TOO BIG

Man, I wish I could find the image of a jumbo jet in a hanger with the wing flexed at about a 90* and not breaking. I saw it in a magazine and I think it was about the 787s wing construction.

This is close, but the one I saw was more profound.

Here is a good video
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=htt...t%3D36%26um%3D1

I met one of the original 747 test pilots about 25 years ago. The engines on the first 747s had a problem catching fire. It was one of the only jet engines that hadn't been first used by the military. It was basically brand new. He had a standing order for his crew that if the egt reached a certain temp. they where to shut the engine down immediately. No questions. No check list. Just shut the sucker down.
I found out later that this same test pilot had served with my uncle in WWII after he flew Spitfires in the Eagle Squadron in England.
Flying the "whale" was the highlight of my career and it was the most pleasant and easy airplane to fly. We had the seventh one ever built at UPS. We finaly retired it and I got to watch them chop it up for scrap on the internet. Not pleasant to see.

I think they'll make alot of money on these once they've, got the logistics figured out. The payload is better and the fuel burn better, that's enough to drive the customers right to them.

As far as the Scarebus goes, no thanks.
Remember the one that crashed in the ocean off Brazil? Suposedly there's an issue Airbus denies, but it was aggravated by the fact they were in severe turbulence at 39,000.

Boeing for the most part makes a very good product, and if they can deliver on their promises, this will be very profitable for them.

Wasn't it an airbus in New Jersey that lost it's tail and crashed? I believe the fault was pilot error. He was correcting too much and shook the tail off.

Most are pilot error..like the A320 that dumped during an airshow ..if i knew how to post vids we could all see it again....How about the women pilot that was trying to land in Germany in a severe side wind and scraped the lift wing on the ground ..aborted the landing and came around again and made it ...good work on her part

So they say... but the Airbus vertical stab is weak. The rudder should not be able to rip the stab off... and it's happened more than once.

T34

Oh. Wait. Wrong T34. Try again.

Boeing is one of my customers and Airbus is not, but I've gotta say that as a passenger (and I fly a lot) I find the A32x planes to be a bit quieter and "more comfortable" than the 757. They both get the job done.

I recently did some long international trips on 3-cabin premium 767's and 777's though, and those planes were darn nice equipment.

The 747 is legend around here for a number of reasons.

During static must the wing must not fail at 150% of calculated load. Once they get there they used to bend it to failure. On the whale, legend has it, it went to the 150% then they kept going till *they ran out of travel* on their test rig......ah, shit. It took 13 saw cuts in the lower skin to get it to break. That same wing makes the 747 the fastest commercial airliner....less the SST.

Mike:
Bits you should never see, torque tubes.

I think that thing needs an Engman stiffening kit. No offense you guys but, seeing the wings flex like that would make me nervous. It kind of reminds me of a bridge that used to be up here by me. I wonder if you'll even see the wing tips sitting in a seat looking through the window.

Dave

Without flex you get breaks. Ever look at a cCorvettes paint or some of the body edges on an older one? They crack. Why? Becuase the fiberglass has little to no flex. All of the oad put on the chassis, is ditributed to the body and the hard corners crack. You need some amount of flex to eliminate disaster. You should be happy to see SOME flex, but yeah too much flex is a bad thing

They are already several billions over the R&D budget and over 2 years behind schedule. Add in the billion or so they'll pay the customers for not making delivery plus a couple billion for the new facility in SC.....the payback on that is maybe 20-30 years.....AND their production schedule is so aggressive as to be absurd. We gots lots more chances to screw the pooch.

Factor in their profit margins of less than 10%. The 787 may well turn out to be a good airplane....by God, it had better be......but the whole program has been so mismanaged that it will be in the textbooks for what not to do.....come to think of it, it was done by textbook...teachers teach rather than produce and are never wrong.

In case you haven't noticed, all they have gotten done (profitwise) is promises....most all have already been broken. At what point do you think that is going to cease?

The last new airplane program was the 777. The guy that ran that is now running Ford. He was adjudged to be not good enuff to run Boeing......we got a Jack Welsh trained bean counter instead......he's been knocking em' dead, eh?

I concur J.P ....Im gonna run over to the 350bldg and try to sneek a pix of some chase planes..and ask why they run with old jets

T-38
T-33

Sorry about the bad pix ,its the best i can do with what i have to work with

Ok so i talk with the machanic he said they use these because there cheap
and super strong and easy to work on ..the T-33 for low speed stuff and the T-38 for hi speed

Click to view attachment

#2 flys... total of 6 test bed`s so we can get the FAA cert`s faster

Click to view attachment

there go`s another paycheck that made it sound like i bought them ..No thats what we say when we see them leave for good