KevinL1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 1, posted (4 years 10 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 7469 times:
The guy definately has a great software collection and a lot of sim. hours.
Loved the UAL 727 in the classic video. Man, that Connie was on stilts!
I dunno about the music. I prefer jet noise.
Some videos seemed to exaggerate the wing flex more than others like the Varig 747 Cargo in the 1st vid.
Why don't FX videos play smoothly or is it just me?
We never see a complete landing. Almost every landing has the thrust reversers deployed before the nose gear touches. I wonder how many of the St.Maarten landings went off the end.
The A-380 landing must have been hairy. Only inboard reversers deployed and no spoilers!
It appears as if time of day and camera angle were carefully planned in several videos.
Overall very nice.
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 3, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 7431 times:
Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 1): Only inboard reversers deployed and no spoilers!
The A380 only HAS inboard reversers. Unless you were being sarcastic, but it's one of its design features.
Great videos!
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Malaysia From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 3183 posts, RR: 0 Reply 4, posted (4 years 10 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7407 times:
He had red A/C labels on in the classic video for all the planes going into Macau
Cool videos, a bit smoother than my FSX,
I still prefer my Aerosim L-1011 package better.
There Are Those Who Believe That There May Yet Be Other Airlines Who Even Now Fight To Survive Beyond The Heavens
KevinL1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 6, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 7210 times:
Quoting ANITIX87 (Reply 3):
The A380 only HAS inboard reversers. Unless you were being sarcastic, but it's one of its design features.
Yes on the sarcasm and No about knowing the A-380 only has inboard reversers!
That seems kinda goofy. Do you know of any other 4 engine jet airliner that has only two reverse thrust engines? You'd think the largest airliner in the world would need all the help it can get.
Thanks for the correction ANITIX87.
KevinL1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 8, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 7187 times:
Klimchuk From United States of America, joined May 2008, 8 posts, RR: 0 Reply 9, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 21 hours ago) and read 7184 times:
Checklist
1) Nice videos
2) Don't like the music, sound of engines is much better for me
ANITIX87 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 3233 posts, RR: 14 Reply 10, posted (4 years 9 months 3 weeks 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 7161 times:
Quoting KevinL1011 (Reply 6): Do you know of any other 4 engine jet airliner that has only two reverse thrust engines?
No, but I know of one that doesn't have ANY. The Bae Avro RJ100 series...
TIS
www.stellaryear.com: Canon EOS 50D, Canon EOS 5DMkII, Sigma 50mm 1.4, Canon 24-70 2.8L II, Canon 100mm 2.8L, Canon 100-4
Mika From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 2788 posts, RR: 4 Reply 11, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 20 hours ago) and read 6941 times:
Isnt the reason that the A380 has only inboard reversers because of the extensive wingspan? I thought i read somewhere that they didnt want outboard reversers as well because the engines would kick up (and possibly ingest) all kinds of crap from outside of the rwy. I could be wrong though, please correct me in that case.
KevinL1011 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, RR: 51 Reply 12, posted (4 years 9 months 2 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 6897 times:
Quoting Mika (Reply 11): Isnt the reason that the A380 has only inboard reversers because of the extensive wingspan? I thought i read somewhere that they didnt want outboard reversers as well because the engines would kick up (and possibly ingest) all kinds of crap from outside of the rwy. I could be wrong though, please correct me in that case.
See...that's what happens when you don't frequent the "Tech Ops" or "Civ Av" forums.
Your knowlege of current events gets rusty. There's probably a thread about it somewhere.
Whatever the reason, there must have been a compromise. I can't see the Airbus design staff saying "Aw hell, we can do it with two. So what if it's the largest airliner in the world. She'll stop somehow. "
Or..." Why the heck are we putting all four on the A-340?".
They're like the Chrysler Corporation of aviation.
Sponsor Message: 
From Norway, joined Aug 2006, 3228 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 2964 posts, 
for all the planes going into Macau
From Greenland, joined Jun 2004, 8473 posts, 
From Japan, joined Nov 2006, 2380 posts, 
From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 2788 posts, 
Sponsor Message: 
Printer friendly format
