Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Check Out This Pic  
User currently offlineIndianGuy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 7 hours ago) and read 1770 times:


Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Bernard Charles



Do 747's really rotate this much? This one has barely missed striking its rear-end!

8 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 1605 times:

If you watch a takeoff, the rotation angle clears the runway, the plane lifts off, and the plane can increase the angle imediately afterwords. This is especially true for long aircraft like a 737-800, which is long and low to the ground. I flew one today - liftoff is at a mild angle, which gets significantly steeper immediately afterwards.

Charles


User currently offlineBoeing727 From United States of America, joined May 1999, 950 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 4 hours ago) and read 1567 times:

I guess so...

Click for large version
Click here for full size photo!

Photo © Matthew Johnston



Boeing727


User currently offlineXFSUgimpLB41X From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 4183 posts, RR: 37
Reply 3, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1530 times:

jets always rotate like that. The DC-10, for example, if it is light will rotate to 22 degrees. By the time you reach maximum rotation angle you are already a ways into the air.


Chicks dig winglets.
User currently offline747-600X From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 2785 posts, RR: 15
Reply 4, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 1 day 3 hours ago) and read 1498 times:

Does anyone know the rotation angle of jets on the ground before they have a tailscrape - the 777-300 or 757-300 perhaps? (I would ask about the 737-900 but that's probably about 2 degrees...)


"Mental health is reality at all cost." -- M. Scott Peck, 'The Road Less Traveled'
User currently offlineAJ From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 2381 posts, RR: 24
Reply 5, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

If the angle of rotation of an aircraft is limited by the aircraft fuselage it is known as 'geometrically limited'. Boeing has installed higher undercarriage on the B737NG and B767-400 to allow a higher rotation attitude. Boeing has suffered from this before, the Boeing 707 could not be stretched further due to being geometrically limited, whereas the competition, Douglas' DC-8, had the p[otential to be stretched, and it was!
 Smile/happy/getting dizzy


User currently offlineThomacf From United States of America, joined Sep 2000, 542 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1382 times:

I saw evidence of a 727 scraping the ground at Cleveland Burke-Lakefront. The tailscrape looked pretty beat-up and the co-pilot said it had been hit the week before when it took-off out Cleveland Burke-Lakefront.

User currently offlineGmonney From Canada, joined Jan 2001, 2159 posts, RR: 20
Reply 7, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 21 hours ago) and read 1370 times:

WOW, I never knew it was soo close, is there not something to prevent the tail from hitting or not. There should be, it could be potentialy dangerous,

Nice pics though!!




Drive it like you stole it!
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (13 years 2 months 4 weeks 12 hours ago) and read 1304 times:

Gmonney,

Yes it can be dangerous, but generally not immediately disasterous. A hard tail strike can bend the frame and pop some rivits. If a pressurized part of the aircraft is struck, then the pilots will soon know when their pressurization systems start giving funny readings, and they can turn around. Otherwise, if the tailstrike is not properly fixed, the bent components and popped rivits and welds will cause rapid fatigue and possible failure sometime in the future. I have never heard of a tailstrike causing a disaster on the same flight. The important thing is that is reported and fixed.

The JAL 123 accident, as I recall, was caused by some damage done previously to the tail (I think it was a tailstrike). The repair job was not properly done, and the new rivits were put in places where they would fatigue rapidly, which is eventually what happened, killing over 500 people

Many planes have some sort of rudementary tail skid, made of hardwood or maybe metal. It will protect the plane from damage from very slight tailstrikes, but generally, if there is a tailstrike, however minor, the airlines are required to make a close inspection of the tail.

Cheers,

Charles


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Check Out This Pic! posted Fri Mar 9 2001 07:27:23 by Kevin
Check Out This Pic posted Wed Jan 24 2001 14:13:51 by IndianGuy
Check Out This Segment Of The A 380's Testflight posted Tue Sep 5 2006 18:03:09 by Mortyman
Check Out This Incredible 757 Video posted Fri Feb 24 2006 22:31:59 by Bucks918
Check Out This Itinerary (I'm Showing Off A Bit) posted Wed Jan 18 2006 22:28:24 by FLY2LIM
Check Out This Aircraft - The Aalto Air E-474 posted Mon Nov 21 2005 01:48:48 by BMIFlyer
Check Out This Week's Economist! posted Fri Nov 11 2005 12:52:02 by Iluv747400
Check Out This Link posted Tue Nov 8 2005 15:15:14 by Blasphemystic
Check Out This Video From FRA posted Tue May 31 2005 08:49:13 by Irishpower
Check Out This Funny Zero-G Video posted Fri Apr 8 2005 20:03:17 by LH450