The transponder codes of doom.
>7500 - Hijacking >7600 - Radio failure >7700 - Emergency Every day, there are a few pilots who have to change their transponder to one of the sacred trio for when shit gets real in the sky (although 99% of the time it doesn't mean they're fucked). ITT, we... -Tell our emergency stories. It doesn't matter if you didn't squawk 7700, just give us your tale. -Monitor live 7700's and 7600's. You can configure alerts for when somebody starts squawking 7700 or 7600. -Sit and wait for the inevitable brick-shitting 7500 alert.
>>1681841 >So is a no flaps landing generally considered a big deal in these jets?
I was on a 738 from ORD to ANC that had to do a slats only landing. We crossed the threshold at Vref + 50 kts. It took over 10k feet to stop with maximum reverse thrust. For perspective, 737 pilots never use maximum reverse thrust. Fire trucks followed us in because the brakes were so hot there was a non-trivial chance of fire.
The problem with a flaps up landing is that the lift dump the spoilers provide when the flaps are up doesn't happen. The hole in the wing where the lift would dump is blocked by the retracted flaps. That makes the brakes incredibly ineffective because braking force is directly related to the amount of force exerted on the wheels. You can't get any reasonable weight on the wheels because the plane wants to fly.
Wake the FUCK up /n/ we got one.
American Eagle 6033 from Asheville to Philly just squawked and is diverting.
>diverting to Richmond >there's no fucking ATC stream reeeeeeeeeee
Got a Vueling plane diverting from its Birmingham to Barcelona route and descending fast. Might be going to Paris.
American Eagle 5372 from Gainesville to Charlotte squawking 7700 on approach to Charlotte
Why are diesel locomotives so comfy?
>>1689744 >locomotives >pic is a MU
>82% for roads >18% for transit Lmao it's EVEN WORSE than the traditional 80/20 funding split. FUCK boomers and FUCK congress
What is the point of all this investment if you're just spending it on the already crappy system they have in place? It just means they're gonna lose shit loads of money maintaining the thousands of extra kms they build of shitty highways that only make traffic worse. Money that could have been spent getting people off roads and finally reducing the size of that money sink.
leftist media never says how shitty leftist policies are, just as rightie media rarely discusses the failure of right-leaning politics. The difference is you're allowed another opinion and criticism on the right. The left, well, you are laughable 'de-personed' when you call out the left.
As to your question: Optics.
Trump would have objectively done a superior job with infrastructure. This is 100% pork for political favors, public sector unions, etc and will never do half of what it discusses. Amtrak loses a billion yearly so they're going to give it more money. Politicians don't have actual solutions other than to throw more money at something and blame their enemies for being bigots when they point out any facts surrounding it.
>>1689975 >leftist media never says how shitty leftist policies are
that's really not true, what you mean is that they aren't unequivocally opposed to left figures and broad agendas. Anything short of that you would either not see, ignore, or gloss over as controlled opposition or something like that.
speaking of ignore and gloss over...
what, me ignoring the rest of your post? I don't care. I just glanced over this truely idiotic thing you said. What you replied to wasn't me btw.
/n/, are you thankful?
consider the following: Bicycles are better than cars- in a world where people accept this and special lanes are devised for cagers, delivery, civil services and public transport, then we are all healthier, happier, richer, and ironically, we get to work sooner without ever having to stop, using ramps and civil engineering, wind tunnels, etc. There's just one problem in bike world, suddenly everyone's riding a bike. See, if people were smart, they'd ask the government for pay as you go insurance, and buy a bike and ride it, saving fuel, money, and perhaps even gym fees or medical bills. But they aren't. Get it? If we accommodate the world for bicycles when we know and advertise their benefit, we are spoon-feeding a lesser breed, and thus the culture would dip in a severe way. Cyclists would become the guys revving for attention, now finding newer and dumber ways to make their bikes attention grabbers. Men would tag behind women cyclists just to get a good view. People would get stalked, and physical harassment would ensue more quickly. We need cagers, just like we need animal cages. They are The Caged. We are keeping them away from us by putting them in a cage. Why let them out of the cage if they prefer it? Why muddy a culture and hobby with the imbecilic tendencies of the masses when they can't even take it upon themselves to better their lives? Be thankful bicycles are counted as the poor man's vehicle, the DUIs, potheads, thieves and the broke among us are not our denigration by association, but our veils from a society of the wholly stupid. In bicycle world, so many freedoms we take for granted are revoked. As for now, we can do what we like. Rejoice.
why is cycling such a magnet for the mentally ill?
When cars are finally automated all of this week be fixed and commuting will be free time, assuming you don't just work from home anyways. The bike dream isn't going to happen
Most cagers (women and bugmen) would gladly take up public transit as exclusive transportation if it was better incentivized and efficient/comfortable. Doesn't have to be a problem but I get it.
Because any tweaker can steal a bike
>>1689712 >Cyclists would become the guys revving for attention
Instead of men competing as to who can spend the most money and buy the fastest car we would go back to men competing as to who is the most physically fit.
What are the telltale signs a city is full?
Lack of enforcement of what? Being homeless is not illegal.
>>1689462 >What are the telltale signs a city is full?
When the price for even shit housing is absurdly high.
Not sure what such a question has to do with /n/ though.
>>1689823 >Not sure what such a question has to do with /n/ though.
It doesn't. It's literally just another OP with a shit-ass vague WHAT ARE SOME BAD THINGS question, who then completely abandons their thread
>>1689476 >they don’t have enough water for everyone that lives there
Oh they do
Just not under control
This particular OP spams the same shit all the time because he's butthurt that people like trains and bike lanes.
What do you guys think of electric planes?
It's going to take another massive revolution in battery tech before it happens on any serious level, planes are probably the worst possible application for battery-electric propulsion right now because space and weight are such huge factors. I think we're more likely to see alternative fuels instead, JCB have been developing hydrogen internal combustion engines for their heavy equipment and they've got a lot of the same advantages that airplanes need, like easy fast refueling, light weight, reliability, similar range on a tank to current fossil fuels, etc., but with a fuel that's renewable and zero emission.
>>1689655 >basically the route needs to be unable to be serviced by a train.
Every route within 800 kms that doesn't have direct rail connection.
>>1689799 >Every route within 800 kms that doesn't have direct rail connection.
First generation of electric commuter airliners are aiming for about 400km range and 20 passengers. About one hour recharge times at airports, around one hour endurance. After that batteries are simply going to be too damn heavy. Electric motors are light weight as hell. If things haven't changed last few months, heaviest electric plane to fly that isn't truly exotic prototype is modified Cessna 208, motor weighted something around 35kg and batteries took out entire playload, people making the conversion could have gone with more expensive batteries and they could in theory get 9 passengers in it and get 30min endurance. Basically only thing that would be good for would be skydiving.
Electric commuter airliners competing with trains, there simply isn't really capacity for passenger volume to any similar routes. First generation planes will be good small airport to hub airport connections.
>>1689838 >First generation of electric commuter airliners are aiming for about 400km range and 20 passengers.
Eviation Alice aimed for 1000 km and 9 passengers. Latter range was cut down to 800 km due to design failure to reach initial specs.
>First generation planes will be good small airport to hub airport connections.
10 passengers and 1000 km range opens direct flights between small airport what is obviously superior than hub and change system. Trains fall flat on their face here as you cant connect directly every town by rails with each other (air can) and trains are horrendously oversized for the travel demand these routes generate.
Eviation is going for niche markets like very small rural airports. Islands on coast and such. That about 10 passenger size limits it to such niche routes. I have hard time seeing that small planes as profitable unless there are serious tax payer subsidies. The potentially more game changing electric plane is Heart Aviation ES-19. They are going for 19 passengers and 400km range. That might take some of the shortest routes from regional jets and turbo props, mostly feeder traffic smaller cities and airports to larger cities with major airports.
Very idea that trains would compete with any smallish aircraft is silly. What trains compete with in aviation is mostly short distance flights on high passenger volume routes. Things flown with anything between regional jets and large wide bodies. Even 747 had short range option with less fuel tanks and all high density cattle class seating. Boeing managed sell bunch of those to Japanese airlines and handful to Korea and Taiwan. Those got killed by high speed rail and twinjets that were more economical even without all cattle cattle configuration than 747SR. As footnote, second of NASA shuttle carrier aircraft was a ex-JAL 747SR-100. Larger aircraft in regional traffic almost always have geographical reason to exist. Sea or mountains making land traffic impossible or slow due to bottle necks. For small planes competition is car if there isn't water around.
On helicopter side electrics will offer expensive very short haul passenger traffic, business people flying from city to airport and possibly air tours for tourists, probably even more niche business than small 10 passenger or smaller fixed wing aircraft. Electric helicopters won't have endurance for utility market, at least manned ones. Drones might replace police helicopters. Ambulance helicopters for most parts aren't going to be replaced with electric because 30min endurance just isn't going to cut it outside of the most densely populated metropolitan areas
why is tokyo's planning so good?
why didn't american cities, particularly new ones on the west coast, take cues from tokyo?
Bystander, my god you’re a stupid cunt, that southern heritage (vicious incest) is showing.
You tell me
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/24/florida-keys-climate-change-sea-level-rise >>1683266 >immediately ad hominems
Housing should not be treated as an investment. Singapore's model is better
Heard it all before
>Singapore's model is better
Posting some unusual bikes (largely unconventional/esoteric frame designs)
I've wanted a tall bike ever since I watched their documentary. I should learn how to weld.
that front canti is so cool
i did that in 2008 it was kinda fun at the time
and well that bike is the one most people remind me of - the oval bike
could have been a great design to carry a surf board on your bike
...if they hadn't put one wheel on each side for some reason
People go crazy over this
This is a measure against people looking into buildings as most of the rails I have been on in Korea have been above ground. A lot of the actual track would lead among buildings, a lot private.
it seems like women did this and women also have theor own carriages over there yesno ?
i think it's a good thing. 'can we run transit close to peoples' homes while still affording the people in those homes some measure of privacy'.
What am I looking at here?
same train ride just different sections of the same ride
Part of the ride there is a white wall.
I am not seeing a problem or why anyone would go crazy over it. I also don't know where the hell half the people in this thread are getting the stuff they are ranting about.
>two landing runway and one takeoff runway or >one landing runway and two takeoff runway What is the best?
A massive concrete pad with a grid of RGB lights
Seoul has 4 runways now though.
I think I've run into this Korean aviation anon before.
Single runway obvi