Posts Tagged ‘747’

And This Week’s #1 San Francisco-Related YouTube Video is All About “Chemtrails” from an Asiana 747

Thursday, February 20th, 2014

Of course the scientific term for chemtrails is contrails, or vapor trails if you prefer.

But if you’re tired of controlled demolition, Building 7, and the JFK conspiracy, then chemtrails might be for you!

Chemtrail sprayer closeup over San Francisco, 2-16-14

(Nice camera, dude – a Canon Powershot SX50 at 1200mm equivalent.)

Mountain View View, Sometimes – The Boeing 747-200 What They Call Air Force One Right Next to the 101 Freeway

Friday, October 25th, 2013

What you can see from the freeway, sometimes:

Click to expand

And then you’ll see the support aircraft at and around SFO, in the next county up the 101.

Hill, Plane, Building: “SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, THE INDUSTRIAL CITY” – Frankfurt-Bound Lufthansa 747-400 – “UNITED AIR LINES”

Tuesday, July 2nd, 2013

Icons all:

Click to expand

Check Out How Big the Overly Large Wingsails of Larry Ellison’s Failed America’s Cup are – Like in Relation to a Jetliner

Wednesday, June 5th, 2013

This is pretty much to scale, believe it* or not.

Click to expand

And actually, the real wing of this KC-10 jet, which would be considered the size of a medium-big jetliner these days, is smaller than what you’ll find on Craaaaaazy Larry Ellison’s AC72 America’s Cup yachts.

And actually, Craaaaaazy Larry Ellison’s AC72 America’s Cup yachts have wings bigger those found on monstrous Boeing 747′s, your prototypical jumbo jets.

Hey Larry! Why don’t we use smaller wings on days when the wind is blowing a lot? Oh, you said no, Larry? OK fine.

But hey Larry! Why don’t we allow control devices like, IDK, spoilers, you know, the way other similar-sized wings have? Oh, you said no, Larry? OK fine.

But hey Larry! Why don’t we have a spoiler system for use in emergency situations, like NASCAR has, you know, since your people felt the need to promote this under-regulated “sport” as “NASCAR ON THE WATER?”

Oh, you said no, Larry? OK fine.

But you WILL take eight figures from the taxpayers of San Francisco in order to fund your ego-gratification race?

Well then, On With The Show.

*Your DC-10, MD-10, KC10 type aircraft were famous for having big, big tailplanes, back in the day, the likes of which you can see in this photo, the horizontal stabilizer you can see at the back. Which was fine, but it wasn’t efficient because  tailplanes don’t really lift anything. So, McDonnell-Douglas engineers made the updated model, the MD-11, with a smaller tailplane. And they also strengthened the landing gear to deal with the lengthened body. All these things led to a more efficient but harder-to-handle aircraft. So in tough landing situations things head south in a hurry and, instead of the landing gear collapsing, you’ll break a wing off and roll over. (See below.) These days, this is mostly a problem for FedEx pilots and it will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Godspeed, FedEx pilots. 

Oh, and this wasn’t the only safety issue with this unsuccessful and relatively rare a/c.

  • On July 31, 1997 FedEx Flight 14, MD-11 N611FE, crashed during a landing at Newark Liberty International Airport, New Jersey. The aircraft flipped onto its back and subsequently burned, following a landing attempt from an unstabilized flare.
  • On August 22, 1999 China Airlines Flight 642, an MD-11 operated by subsidiary Mandarin Airlines, crashed while landing at Hong Kong airport during a typhoon that exceeded the plane’s crosswind specifications, also flipping onto its back and burning. Three passengers were killed.
  • On March 23, 2009 FedEx Express Flight 80, N526FE, crashed at Narita International Airport, Japan while landing in windy conditions. Airport surveillance video showed the aircraft becoming airborne again after the first touch-down, then impacting nose-first the second time and turning onto its left side, erupting into flames; the impact flipped the aircraft upside down. The aircraft finally came to rest some distance left of the runway. The two flight crew members were killed.

December 3rd, 2011 was San Francisco’s DAY WITHOUT CLOUDS – A Jumbo Sky Filled with (Quiet) Jumbo Jets

Sunday, December 4th, 2011

Yesterday, owing to the unusual winds what blew away* the fog, I saw jumbo jets above S.F. in places where I normally don’t, but I couldn’t really hear  them. (I guess jets have gotten a lot quieter these days.)

Like  this low-flying United Air 747-400 near the Ferry Building – you could hardly hear it:

Click to expand

*I suppose – cf. yesterday’s Blue Sky Red Bridge from Burrito Justice

“Giant A380 Jetliner Proves SFO Planners Were Right?” Uh, Not Really, SFGate

Monday, May 23rd, 2011

Well, here’s the latest from Business Report – The Chronicle with Bloomberg:

Giant A380 jetliner proves SFO planners were right

Uh, so I’m not saying that the powers that be shouldn’t have gotten ready for the long-delayed Airbus A380 jumbo jet, but this wasn’t all that much of a gutsy call, right? It’s like, should we prepare to accommodate the jets that are being planned for five-ten years from now?

O.K., so why not prepare? Sure. But I don’t know how much credit should go to the people of SFO for doing what they’re paid to do.

See? Some have three jetway thingees, some have two:

Click to expand

In other news, the new A380 uses more fuel than any other airliner you could think of. So this is incorrect:

It’s a much less fuel-consuming aircraft. It’s a much more efficient aircraft; it costs 30 percent less to operate than other wide bodies.”

And considering all the hype, the hype like this:

The A380′s modernity, comfort and stylishness should help drive business between the Bay Area and overseas markets, said R. Sean Randolph, president and CEO of the Bay Area Council Economic Institute. Randolph said he thinks this is especially true of the burgeoning business relationship with India, which generates high transpacific traffic.”

…the A380 appears to be kind of a big nothingburger. You want to fly from India, you can do it on a Boeing 777 or an old 747 or, soon enough, the long-delayed new 747-8i. And in fact, if anything, the trend of rising fuel prices is making some airlines rethink the desirability of non-stop hops from faraway lands. And “stylishness?” You know, I’d just love to make business with you there, Reddy, but that triple-seven they want me to fly over on, well, it just doesn’t do it for me, it’s not stylish at all, you know? I’ll wait until Airbus makes a fat piggy plane with wings that are too big (because they were designed for future stretched versions like the A380-900, or, Gaia help us, the mythical A380-1000. But, seeing as how the freighter version of the miraculous, wonderful, oh-my-God-this-changes-everything A380 got cancelled, it might be a good long time before the world sees a stretched A380…)

And speaking of the new 747, Lufthansa is also buying those as well, so maybe you’ll be on a Boeing the next time you fly to Frankfurt. IRL, Lufthansa calculates about a 3% delta in fuel economy per passenger betwixt the newish A380 and the impending Boeing 747-8i.

Anyway, the giant A380 jetliner does not necessarily prove SFO planners right, just saying.

Now, about those substandard runways…

Boeing Celebrates the First Flight of the New 747-8 Intercontinental Jumbo Jet – Does It Get Better MPG Than the Airbus A380?

Monday, March 21st, 2011

Here it is, the latest VLA (Very Large Aircraft) to hit the skies. Get all the deets right here and be sure to check out the Flight Tracker – they flew over Port Angeles (and not too far from Forks, WA and La Push Beach (for you Twilight fans)).

The other VLA up there there is the Airbus A380 Superjumbo, which burns more fuel but has more seats. The test will be when you fill up both with maximum passengers and then fly a certain distance and then figure the fuel burn per passenger.

The A380 is a new plane but it’s kind of stubby and its engines are older than those on the freshened 747. Probably the A380 will win the mpg battle, but only by a few percentage points. And both manufacturers (but especially Airbus) might end up losing money on these programs. Oh well.

First flight:

Click to expand

Anyway, that’s current battle above your heads….

People, Turn Off Your iPods and Whatnot When You’re Below 10,000 Feet the Way They Tell You – Here’s Why

Thursday, March 10th, 2011

Now it’s sort remarkable how no passenger has died the past decade in an Airbus or Boeing jetliner that either took off or landed in the United States. Of course there was the 9/11 and shortly after that at the end of 2001 there was American Airlines Flight 587, but since then, nothing. That’s a pretty good record, non?

But you people, you don’t listen when they tell you to turn off your portable electronic devices during critical phases of flight. And then stuff like this happens.

Just saying, bro-ham.

Ah the daily Lufthansa flight from Frankfort, Germany. This happens to be an aging Boeing 747-400, but in a few months it will get replaced by a superjumbo A380.* Can you see someone iPodding or texting up there? I can:

Click to expand

*No, contrary to what the Mayor’s Office tells you, the A380 doesn’t use less fuel than legacy aircraft. And the version that’ll soon be coming to SFO each and every day has wings that are too big for its body, and it’s overweight, and blah blah blah. But oh well.

Recalling the Close Call United Flight 863 had with Mount San Bruno Back in 1998

Monday, July 6th, 2009

There wasn’t all that much coverage of the incident back in the day, so the time that a United Airlines Boeing 747-400 out of SFO with 300 people aboard came super close to crashing into 1,576-foot-high San Bruno Mountain is worth remembering.

Did the pilot at the controls really forget how to steer the plane after one of the engines failed and lots of vibration began? Pretty much. But everybody treated this near miss as if it were an actual accident and procedures for pilot training are now better because of it.

The proper way to clear San Bruno:

IMG_9113 copy

Click to expand.

Some of the locals of San Mateo and San Francisco living around the mountain won’t ever forget hearing and feeling that particular flight.

That’s something to think about when you’re out and about near the mountain, huh?

Qantas Flirts with San Francisco, But It’s Just Not That Into Us

Wednesday, January 14th, 2009

Does this huge, somewhat ungainly superjumbo jet seen above SFO today look somewhat familiar? It should, as we’ve seen its kind before. But Qantas is proud that it has the first scheduled Airbus A380 flight into San Francisco. These paying passengers came all the way from Cindy, Australia.

Check out the photos of our welcome at the International Terminal. (The kangaroo QANTAS had in Sydney yesterday at the start of the flight was a bit more lively than the specimen we had this morning at SFO, it appears. And for some reason, the Emirates A380 seems to be more luxurious. And there was no sign of Ralph Fiennes. But that’s not the problem.)

The problem is that this is all a tease and the big new metal bird is going to spend its time in sunny Los Angeles. Why? Read on.

The A380-800 looks stubby because it is. Its wings is too big for its body! But that will pay off once stretched models start coming out in a few years. Then this series of aircraft will look better proportioned, more like the graceful stretched Boeing 747. Click to expand:

via Joit’s photostream

Now back a half-year ago, the Queensland and Northern Territory Aerial Services got all huffy at LAX and threatened that it would “move its flagship Airbus A380 services to San Francisco” unless Los Angeles upgraded its facilities.

Of course we’ve got mad upgrades up here in the 415. But not as many Australians want to come to the Bay Area compared with SoCal, and Oneworld connections with American Airlines are easier in LAX than in the Bay Area, and yada yada yada. So Qantas and El Lay patched things up and S.F. got left at the altar.

We’ll have to make do with regular old 747 service to Oz for a while longer anyway. But our cargo cult terminal upgrades for the new superjumbos should be worth the effort down the road, especially when the economy recovers.

And these days you can fly down under for cheap, so check the details after the jump.

G’day mates.

(more…)