正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

On the A321neo, the flare law does not include automatic compensation for thrust-related pitching moments. This applies whether it's the nose-down tendency that occurs when thrust is reduced to idle, or the nose-up tendency that can result from selecting TOGA thrust. Below 100 feet radio altitude (when flare mode...

65,475 次观看 • 6 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

Luxon butchering Te Reo before he launches into one of his woke progressive speeches is like hearing the pop and hiss of cracking open a can of Bud Light. Cam Slater has written today that the Nats are helicoptering in Paula Bennet to stab him from the front while his MP’s pat him on the back - in order to feel where to stick their knives. Luxon’s pathetic political career is coming to an end, so how about a retrospective ? “Chris Luxon this is your life !” Everyone with half a brain knew what he was going to be like. Did those who voted for him watch his maiden speech? Here it is if you missed it May 24th 2021. It’s truly a speech that perhaps only Ardern herself would be so cynical to deliver with a straight face. Here’s the break down of the 4 minute speech. * Tay Rayo introduction * Diversity pitch * Immigration pitch * Diversity pitch * Climate change pitch * Globalism pitch * Air NZ career pitch * Globalism Pitch * Diversity pitch * Critical race theory pitch * Gender ideology pitch * Diversity pitch * Rainbow tick pitch * Getting things done pitch * Getting things done pitch * Diversity pitch * Getting diversity done pitch * voters will get what they deserve pitch So who remembers this speech? And yes it was THIS BAD, no joke. Maybe everyone who voted National was just so keen to dump Labour they fooled themselves that Luxon was the panacea? Also Trump rising from the ashes has put the spot light on a diminutive man with an even smaller appreciation of what the average sane kiwi wants. They can change him out, for a cosmetic attempt at pivoting but that party will never change - at the core of its fundamental philosophy is - woke nothingisim.

Holyhekatuiteka

11,074 次观看 • 1 年前

The MD-11 has always had a critical design flaw. It was manageable until someone screwed up. To improve fuel efficiency and range, its horizontal stabilizer was made smaller than those of earlier DC-10 variants. While the design delivered performance benefits, it also reduced the aircraft's natural pitch stability, particularly at slower speeds during approach and landing. To help compensate, the MD-11 relied heavily on computerized stability augmentation systems. Many crews also preferred flying slightly faster approaches, which improved pitch stability but could make the aircraft more challenging to manage during touchdown due to its weight and sensitivity in roll and yaw. These characteristics became evident in several high-profile accidents. In 1997, a FedEx MD-11 arriving at Newark was reportedly operating under the belief that runway length was limited, prompting the crew to aim for an immediate touchdown. The aircraft landed hard, bounced, and became unstable. Instead of executing a go-around, attempts to salvage the landing resulted in another severe impact, collapsing the landing gear and destroying the aircraft in a post-crash fire. All five crew members survived. The accident highlighted a key lesson: when an MD-11 bounced significantly after touchdown, a go-around was often the safest option. That lesson resurfaced in tragic fashion in 2009 at Narita, Japan. During strong and gusty crosswinds, a FedEx MD-11 touched down hard and bounced. Believing the aircraft could still be recovered onto the runway, the crew attempted to continue the landing. The resulting control inputs led to an even harder impact, loss of control, and a crash that destroyed the aircraft and claimed the lives of both pilots. 📹: buybygb

Turbine Traveller

206,274 次观看 • 2 个月前

🚨WHOA!!! Gravity Just Got Outmatched… Watch a C-17 Drop Out of the Sky Using Reverse Thrust Most people think giant cargo aircraft descend slowly in wide lazy circles. Not the American 🇺🇸 C-17. What you’re seeing in this footage is one of the most aggressive controlled descents ever engineered into a military aircraft. The C-17 Globemaster can actually deploy thrust reversers while still in the air… something almost no other jet transport can safely do. When those massive engines flip into reverse thrust, the physics of the aircraft changes instantly. Instead of the engines pushing the aircraft forward… they begin fighting the forward motion of the airplane. The result is dramatic. The aircraft can transition from flying nearly parallel to the horizon… to a steep nose-down descent that looks almost perpendicular compared to the Earth below. Pilots can drop altitude incredibly fast… going from high cruising altitude to landing approach in just a couple minutes. Why does this matter? Because the C-17 was built for battlefield logistics. It was designed to fly into dangerous airspace, descend rapidly to avoid threats, land on short or rough runways, unload equipment or troops, and get back into the air before anyone has time to react. That rapid descent capability allows the aircraft to minimize time exposed to enemy radar or missile threats. The moment the thrust reversers are disengaged, the aircraft stabilizes instantly and transitions back into normal controlled flight for landing. It’s a perfect example of American aerospace engineering. Four massive turbofan engines… flight computers… and aerodynamics working together to make a 585,000-pound aircraft move like a precision instrument in the sky. For people who have never seen reverse thrust used mid-air before… this footage is a rare look at how military airlift aircraft operate when seconds matter. It’s one of the coolest demonstrations of aviation physics you’ll ever see. #SilentMajoritySpeaks #AStoneGroove

A Gene Robinson

1,045,627 次观看 • 5 个月前

The Engine Start Levers or Fuel Cut off switches (different name, same switches) control the fuel and ignition for the engines. The 787 shares the same switches and very similar logic to the Boeing 737 Max. The switches have been designed in such a way that they require a very deliberate movement in order for them to move from one position to another. They’re also placed in such a position (below the thrust levers) so that it’s very unlikely that they’ll be knocked. But even if they were, the spring force and detent would prevent them from moving unintentionally. When we move the start levers from the “Run” or “Idle” position, to “Cutoff”, an electrical signal is sent to move the fuel valves from open to close. The engine ignitors are also then de-powered. This stops the supply and ignition of fuel and the engine spools down. Pilots are trained from day one to only touch those switches in flight when called for by a non normal checklist, such as an engine fire or failure. When a fuel switch has to be moved to cutoff in flight, we adhere to a very strict procedure… Pilot monitoring will place their hand on the switch of the damaged engine and both visually and audibly confirm with Pilot flying that the correct fuel switch has been selected. Only after both pilots have confirmed that the correct switch has been selected, will pilot monitoring move that switch to the cutoff position. As an additional layer of safety, some aircraft types only allow the switch to be moved to cutoff in flight if the thrust levers are in the closed or idle position. Do you think that this design feature should be implemented in all aircraft? 📸 by ig/airlinepilotperformance

aircraftmaintenancengineer

149,946 次观看 • 1 年前