I know Fsim isn't allowed on here, but is this possible on a 747? (Found it on YouTube).

I would imagine that the barrel roll would be possible, but the other would equal crash and burn methinks.

Remember that FS defaults aren't the best in terms of realism...

Aerodynamically there are no huge problems with doing a very rough non-circular loop as long as you don't overstress the airframe. However fuel pumps and so forth are not built for this kind of thing. The engines might stop due to fuel starvation. The latter is not modeled in MSFS

This also on YouTube, good stuff!!!

Quoting Cumulus (Thread starter): is this possible on a 747?

It's too bad Tex isn't around to try it...

http://www.aviationexplorer.com/707_roll_video.htm

If it could be done on an empty 707, why not an empty 747?

As for the flt sim video it looks like it enters a spin at the end and doesnt really complete a loop but none the less i would be impressed if a 747 could do that. As for the SA video wow!! They have to much fun weather it be formation flying or this those pilots are having fun.

Cheers Chris

Quoting Cumulus (Thread starter): but is this possible on a 747?

Of course it can. Why do you think the crew always want the passengers to go to sleep so quickly on overnight flights - it's really so the flight deck crew can play around.

The 747 does a mean stall turn too !!.

 

This might be relevant to the discussion: http://www.airliners.net/discussions/tech_ops/read.main/170984/

China Airlines Flight 006 rolled right over in 1985:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_006

Per _Air Disasters_, during the Air India 855 crash in 1978 the incident 747 executed a full barrel roll without the crew being aware of what was occuring (they were chasing a failed artificial horizon).

sPh

Quoting Cumulus (Reply 4): This also on YouTube, good stuff!!!

That aircraft performing at an air show at Rand is the same 742 which is now parked there on display.

Quoting OPNLguy (Reply 5): If it could be done on an empty 707, why not an empty 747?

I have seen that before, it's great, I think the meeting with "Mr. Allen" later was great too.

M

This makes me want to make a trip out to the desert to find a 747, modify it a little, install a smoke system, and hit the show curcuit~ who's with me?
                    

[Edited 2006-11-06 06:48:33]

Quoting StudeDave (Reply 13): who's with me?

I like the idea!! We can switch up the flying duties. You take half i talk half, now we need a sponsor.

Quoting Leezyjet (Reply 7): The 747 does a mean stall turn too !!.

On one particular night shift, we completed our aircraft maintenance work relatively early. We went to the simulators to have a bit of a play around, these simulators being the full motion devices used to train commercial pilots.

Flying in the 744 simulator - with motion off - I managed to successfully fly under the Sydney Harbour bridge at maximum power, pull up into a vertical climb on the other side, and top it off with a stall turn   .

The simulator seemed happy to pull off the manoeuvre, but I still doubt very much that it could happen in reality. Practising the old runway 13 approach into Hong Kong Kai Tak on a dark stormy night proved to be a thrill as well. How the pilots managed to pick out the approach lights and checker board amongst all the neon signs I will never know.

Once I flew a 744 upside-down from BNE-SYD on FS! Don't think the PAX were too happy.  

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 3): Aerodynamically there are no huge problems with doing a very rough non-circular loop as long as you don't overstress the airframe. However fuel pumps and so forth are not built for this kind of thing. The engines might stop due to fuel starvation. The latter is not modeled in MSFS

In a properly executed loop, the aircraft is always under positive g's. Therefore the aircraft is not, aerodynamically speaking, "inverted". However, if you fall out of the loop at the top (perhaps into an inverted flat spin), that is another story!

I've done a few loops in my aerobatic Sundowner. Under positive g's, nothing flies around inside the cabin, and the fuel system continues to feed the engine at full power even though it is not an inverted fuel system; at the top of the loop, you need to throttle back to idle to avoid overspeeding the engine coming out of the loop.

The problem with fuel systems is when flying truly inverted, that is, under negative g's or straight-and-level while upside down.

Beech

Quoting Door5right (Reply 9): China Airlines Flight 006 rolled right over in 1985: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_A...t_006

I never knew about this "incident". That is really scary, I can't imagine what those passengers went through, it is a miracle that the pilot was able to pull out of it without destroying the aircraft, but I hope they were fired promptly upon landing.

I also can't believe that plane is still flying.

Quoting Door5right (Reply 9): China Airlines Flight 006 rolled right over in 1985

Any pics of this plane?

Quoting BeechNut (Reply 17): In a properly executed loop, the aircraft is always under positive g's. Therefore the aircraft is not, aerodynamically speaking, "inverted". However, if you fall out of the loop at the top (perhaps into an inverted flat spin), that is another story!

Thx. But I thought in a properly executed loop you needed either lots of power or lots of speed, meaning the 747 would find it tricky at best.

Quoting Cumulus (Reply 19): Any pics of this plane?

There is a picture, and I found it online.



Upon seeing the picture, one can imagine the kind of structure stress that plane went through.

[Edited 2006-11-06 18:25:18]

Quoting Starlionblue (Reply 20): Thx. But I thought in a properly executed loop you needed either lots of power or lots of speed, meaning the 747 would find it tricky at best.

I don't know what the correct loop entry speed would be for a 747 but for my Sundowner, it's 122 knots, which isn't anywhere near the redline speed of Vne (never exceed) of 152 knots.

The correct entry is indeed full power. However there is a weight limitation for aerobatics. My normal category MGTOW is 2450 lbs. In the acrobatic category, that is reduced to 2030 lbs. Maximum stresses at that weight are limited to +6/-3 g's. The 747 has a much wider range between empty and MGTOW weights than my Sundowner. I should think that if a 747 CAN do a loop, it won't be at MGTOW!

Beech.

Agreed! Although there was a film called "Turbulence" in which you could see a 742 do a rollover as for a loop... no idea! Guess by strengthening the structure and putting 4 GE90-115Bs we might get somewhere close to doing one!   

That SAA 747 display is awsome.

Quoting J41 (Reply 24): That SAA 747 display is awsome.

I wish I could post the video of the SAA 743 display at Virginia, I have it on VHS but that doesn't help! This picture was taken during the same display.

View Large View Medium

Photo © T Neuman

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 21): There is a picture, and I found it online.

a few more pics are to find here on A.net
http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19850219-0&lang=en

Quoting Cumulus (Reply 19): Any pics of this plane?

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 21): There is a picture, and I found it online.

a few more pics are to find here on A.net

View Large View Medium

Photo © Andrew Hunt - AirTeamImages

Quoting Acabgd (Reply 21): Upon seeing the picture, one can imagine the kind of structure stress that plane went through.

I wonder if the aircraft went supersonic. Possible if the aircraft had engine power and descended at almost 15000 fpm.

Regarding CI 006, I remember reading that the aircraft wing was permanently bent 6" up due to the stress.

Quoting JohnClipper (Reply 28): I remember reading that the aircraft wing was permanently bent 6" up due to the stress.

The Wikipedia article says 2".

A couple more pics of this historic plane:

View Large View Medium

Photo © Terry Nash - Cactus Wings

In Arizona March 2005


View Large View Medium

Photo © Cal Gosselin


In Ontario, Canada, Dec 2005

Anyone know if she is still there?