Aviation


BlueInNZ said:
Flight over the plane looked like something Indiana Jones would use, would look great in a museum. 6am flight and very cold in the air (I should have kept the window shut). Flight back was in a modern one.
Yep. 2 wings. One pilot, one propeller flying over a very treacherous stretch of water. What could possibly go wrong. Exhilarating stuff eh? Calm weather when I flew, I imagine a windy day would be fun, landing sideways and all that.
Click to expand...
Yeah the one time I flew with them was windy and it’s the first time I’ve ever been on a plane where people have been genuinely scared
 
Seems to be a fair bit of momentum building on the social media platforms with a ‘gender reveal’ of one of the pilots (presumably the pilot flying) involved with the Toronto crash.

It’s sad we’ve come to this but there are many qualities of a human that go into making a proficient pilot, and gender is not one of them.
 
slipstream86 said:
Seems to be a fair bit of momentum building on the social media platforms with a ‘gender reveal’ of one of the pilots (presumably the pilot flying) involved with the Toronto crash.

It’s sad we’ve come to this but there are many qualities of a human that go into making a proficient pilot, and gender is not one of them.
Click to expand...

Same nonsense involved in the thinly veiled racism surrounding "DEI pilots"
 

Not going to repost it all here but there was a twitter conversation yesterday between someone I've blocked and don't know and Space Karen (who I've also blocked, but am aware of) discussing why airplanes may not always fly "in a straight line." Eventually the OP reports that they asked the pilot and was told "to avoid turbulence." I'm actually impressed that a blue check blowhard would ask a legitimate question and report the answer. Here are a few more reasons off the top of my head that the airplane may not fly "in a straight line"

1. Avoid weather (incl turbulence, thunderstorms)
2. Find good weather (favorable winds)
3. Traffic avoidance at departure
4. Traffic avoidance en route
5. Clearance/routing/traffic avoidance at destination
6. Clearance/routing/alternates destinations in case of emergency
7. Clearance/designated routes (although this is largely redundant with #5)
8. Not all airspaces are open to flight
9. The earth is not flat; straight lines are not straight lines

I'm sure there are at least a handful of other reasons that can be added here as well
 
SerenityNigh said:
Not going to repost it all here but there was a twitter conversation yesterday between someone I've blocked and don't know and Space Karen (who I've also blocked, but am aware of) discussing why airplanes may not always fly "in a straight line." Eventually the OP reports that they asked the pilot and was told "to avoid turbulence." I'm actually impressed that a blue check blowhard would ask a legitimate question and report the answer. Here are a few more reasons off the top of my head that the airplane may not fly "in a straight line"

1. Avoid weather (incl turbulence, thunderstorms)
2. Find good weather (favorable winds)
3. Traffic avoidance at departure
4. Traffic avoidance en route
5. Clearance/routing/traffic avoidance at destination
6. Clearance/routing/alternates destinations in case of emergency
7. Clearance/designated routes (although this is largely redundant with #5)
8. Not all airspaces are open to flight
9. The earth is not flat; straight lines are not straight lines

I'm sure there are at least a handful of other reasons that can be added here as well
Click to expand...
- Isn't there an environmental condition where a sudden patch of air (hectares in area) suddenly loses pressure and descends? I believe planes and radar scan for this condition and actively avoid places calculated to occur?
-US to Europe utilize the jet stream. Avoid Euro to US.
-Weather issues, if a destination suddenly has ice, fog, snow, hurricanes move in suddenly - rerouting is obvious.
-Plane issue, if there is a mechanical fault - flying round till there's only fumes left is a brilliant idea, because crash landing with wing tanks full of fuel probably means death for everyone in a huge fire ball. Specialist response teams operate at larger airports, but less so smaller regionals.
-Terrorism, if whoever with the gun and the dynamite belts say we're flying to denver instead of chicago - then so be it.
-Accident avoidance, a military helicopter recently crashed into a passenger jet, everything gets diverted.
-Sudden medical emergency - if someone is dying on board they tend to put down and take the stricken person off.
-Ah yes, a fairly recent example, if you are a journalist that the kremlin doesn't like, they somehow can force the airline you've decide to travel with to divert midflight and drop you off somewhere unfriendly so you can be arrested and imprisoned without trial.
-That volcano from about 14 years ago that was spewing ash onto passing planes at high altitudes. Like a really rough covering of cement.
-Don't go flying over anywhere a bit warm like MH17 did.
 
Rita_Poon said:
- Isn't there an environmental condition where a sudden patch of air (hectares in area) suddenly loses pressure and descends? I believe planes and radar scan for this condition and actively avoid places calculated to occur?
-US to Europe utilize the jet stream. Avoid Euro to US.
-Weather issues, if a destination suddenly has ice, fog, snow, hurricanes move in suddenly - rerouting is obvious.
-Plane issue, if there is a mechanical fault - flying round till there's only fumes left is a brilliant idea, because crash landing with wing tanks full of fuel probably means death for everyone in a huge fire ball. Specialist response teams operate at larger airports, but less so smaller regionals.
-Terrorism, if whoever with the gun and the dynamite belts say we're flying to denver instead of chicago - then so be it.
-Accident avoidance, a military helicopter recently crashed into a passenger jet, everything gets diverted.
-Sudden medical emergency - if someone is dying on board they tend to put down and take the stricken person off.
-Ah yes, a fairly recent example, if you are a journalist that the kremlin doesn't like, they somehow can force the airline you've decide to travel with to divert midflight and drop you off somewhere unfriendly so you can be arrested and imprisoned without trial.
-That volcano from about 14 years ago that was spewing ash onto passing planes at high altitudes. Like a really rough covering of cement.
-Don't go flying over anywhere a bit warm like MH17 did.
Click to expand...

I was thinking of more routine causes, but war and regional safety is obviously a concern. I don't know anything about scanning air from aircraft, but groups like NOAA/NWS have really sophisticated weather products that help predict turbulence.
 

SerenityNigh said:
Not going to repost it all here but there was a twitter conversation yesterday between someone I've blocked and don't know and Space Karen (who I've also blocked, but am aware of) discussing why airplanes may not always fly "in a straight line." Eventually the OP reports that they asked the pilot and was told "to avoid turbulence." I'm actually impressed that a blue check blowhard would ask a legitimate question and report the answer. Here are a few more reasons off the top of my head that the airplane may not fly "in a straight line"

1. Avoid weather (incl turbulence, thunderstorms)
2. Find good weather (favorable winds)
3. Traffic avoidance at departure
4. Traffic avoidance en route
5. Clearance/routing/traffic avoidance at destination
6. Clearance/routing/alternates destinations in case of emergency
7. Clearance/designated routes (although this is largely redundant with #5)
8. Not all airspaces are open to flight
9. The earth is not flat; straight lines are not straight lines

I'm sure there are at least a handful of other reasons that can be added here as well
Click to expand...

Turbulence is a bit of a generalisation for a few different atmospheric phenomena. The obvious one as mentioned - thunderstorms, which is likely what the space Karen was going on about. They're visible via the onboard weather radar, and also generally the mk1 human eyeball when not obscured by other cloud layers. Best practice is to avoid them laterally by at least 20NM, ideally upwind of their tracking. If there's one positioned on or close to your planned route, they you're requesting a new heading to dodge it, simple as. Can't have peoples GnT's sloshing about everywhere - or worse un seatbelted heads smashing into the cabin ceiling.

Clear air turbulence is caused by high wind gradients in the upper atmosphere is generally impossible to see (very rarely can see disturbed pattern cirrus clouds forming which would be a giveaway). This type of turbulence is best mitigated by changing your flight level to find a smoother layer rather than altering course.

There's perhaps one or two more reasons to not fly "in a straight line":
  • To take advantage of oceanic airspace instead of more direct over land routes, to either avoid a slot delay due to enroute congestion, or to avoid the navigation charges (oceanic is free)
  • To gain more track miles in order to loose altitude when descending for an approach...sometimes ATC can keep you higher than planned because of conflicting traffic, and modern efficient aircraft like to glide so much, it can be impossible to get the bugger down in time to stabilise the approach if staying on a published standard arrival/approach procedure.
but you've got the meat and bones of it already.
 
slipstream86 said:
Turbulence is a bit of a generalisation for a few different atmospheric phenomena. The obvious one as mentioned - thunderstorms, which is likely what the space Karen was going on about. They're visible via the onboard weather radar, and also generally the mk1 human eyeball when not obscured by other cloud layers. Best practice is to avoid them laterally by at least 20NM, ideally upwind of their tracking. If there's one positioned on or close to your planned route, they you're requesting a new heading to dodge it, simple as. Can't have peoples GnT's sloshing about everywhere - or worse un seatbelted heads smashing into the cabin ceiling.

Clear air turbulence is caused by high wind gradients in the upper atmosphere is generally impossible to see (very rarely can see disturbed pattern cirrus clouds forming which would be a giveaway). This type of turbulence is best mitigated by changing your flight level to find a smoother layer rather than altering course.

There's perhaps one or two more reasons to not fly "in a straight line":
  • To take advantage of oceanic airspace instead of more direct over land routes, to either avoid a slot delay due to enroute congestion, or to avoid the navigation charges (oceanic is free)
  • To gain more track miles in order to loose altitude when descending for an approach...sometimes ATC can keep you higher than planned because of conflicting traffic, and modern efficient aircraft like to glide so much, it can be impossible to get the bugger down in time to stabilise the approach if staying on a published standard arrival/approach procedure.
but you've got the meat and bones of it already.
Click to expand...

Laughing again at the idea of this: “left turn 100, climb maintain FL370, cleared direct IAH, please fly a straight line”
 

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register

Shop

Back
Top