Results 61 to 70 of 152
Thread: Flight 370
-
03-14-2014, 06:19 PM #61
Its my 172. I had a go pro mounted on the bottom of the stab making a video. That is just a frame from the video...Final Rnwy 03 KAVQ
The easy road is rarely rewarding.
-
03-14-2014, 06:20 PM #62
-
03-14-2014, 06:24 PM #63
This one was more fun...
The easy road is rarely rewarding.
-
03-14-2014, 06:25 PM #64
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Location
- Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 17,293
Thanked: 3223Would a 777-200ER with the passengers on board, luggage and what not in cargo and near empty fuel tanks be considered a "light" 777-200ER? What runways would support operating the 777-200ER in the area it was capable of flying to on fuel remaining from last point of contact?
Even if you could shoe horn it into a 6000 ft strip then what would you do with it for "nefarious" purposes if you needed an 8000 to 10,000 ft runway to go any distance to do some damage? I imagine that relative humidity and height above sea level enters into the length of runway needed on any given day too. Just too many variables to do anything but speculate on.
BobLife is a terminal illness in the end
-
03-14-2014, 06:30 PM #65
Awesome! It's been years since I've even been in one that I could spin! Looks like a few textbook entry/exits!
-
03-14-2014, 06:32 PM #66
If it were empty with enough fuel to go 1000 miles it would be fairly easy to get out of a short strip. The problem of a 777 not attracting attention when you had to go somewhere to "fill 'er up" is probably much harder to solve (without a cooperative government) than the operational aspect of short fields, light weight and limited range.
The easy road is rarely rewarding.
-
03-14-2014, 06:38 PM #67
I haven't flown a 777-200ER, nor have training on one. That said I don't think that having pax and stuff onboard would qualify as a "light" plane.
i don't know what you'd do with it for nefarious purposes given those circumstances. That's kinda what I was getting at saying you couldn't go anywhere with it. So if you think it was taken and flown somewhere and landed then you run the numbers on how much runway you'd need with what's on the plane as far as pax (slang for passengers) and baggage with enough fuel to go somewhere and then you can check the airports inside your search area fairly easily. Also keep in mind that you'd need the airport you use couldn't have an ATC tower as they'd report it.
-
03-14-2014, 06:39 PM #68
-
03-14-2014, 06:50 PM #69
For some perspective:
Searching for an aircraft in the Indian Ocean is like searching for a sesame seed in Yosemite
... or trying to find a grain of salt in San Francisco or a red blood cell at Burning Man.
This will take weeks.--Mark
-
03-14-2014, 07:41 PM #70
- Join Date
- Mar 2012
- Location
- Thunder Bay, Ontario, Canada
- Posts
- 17,293
Thanked: 3223I think everyone who commented on the ac being stolen is on the same page, sounds a bit like a long shot at best or just pure horse droppings. I have been on a couple of air searches for missing light planes over a much smaller search area that found nothing of the missing planes. The search was over Boreal forest and what wasn't heavily wooded was water. Can't recall if the planes had ELTs but none went off. The searchers have an unimaginable task in front of them to try and locate the missing airliner. I wish them all the luck they can get.
BobLife is a terminal illness in the end