Post amazingly cool pictures of aircraft (Volume 2)
Discussion
onyx39 said:
Hugo a Gogo said:
I know airliners are always stripped back
quite a few kilos in a coat of paint, it all adds up
Indeed... American Airlines sadly had to change their colour scheme when the 787 was introduced as bare metal is a different colour to bare carbon fibrequite a few kilos in a coat of paint, it all adds up
I have seen (oldish) figures that it takes 2500-3000 Man Hours to strip and repaint a whole 777. Whilst the materials cost is $20k, labour is the biggest cost and brings the total cost to repaint a plane to $160k+
ChemicalChaos said:
What was the cost and man hours to keep them polished up when they were bare alloy, though?
It saves fuel, but you have to wash them more, polish, and still paint it. So it is not seen as a cost saving in reality.American Airlines replaced paper charts with ipads, "In fact, removing the kitbag from all of our planes saves a minimum of 400,000 gallons and $1.2 million of fuel annually based on current fuel prices. Additionally, each of the more than 8,000 iPads we have deployed to date replaces more than 3,000 pages of paper previously carried by every active pilot and instructor. Altogether, 24 million pages of paper documents have been eliminated." (source AA media dept)
In April the app they use on the ipad's had an update that screwed up, and the pilots couldn't access the maps, so couldn't take off, resulting in delaying and cancelling flights for 2 days (I was flying AA that day, and it was a total mess). I dare say their cost savings were wiped out thanks to putting 100% trust in a piece of technology, with no backup solution.
To put the cost of that kind of large scale incident to a large operator into perspective, the 18th of December 2010 snowfall at LHR and LGW reported to cost BA £50m.
smack said:
ChemicalChaos said:
What was the cost and man hours to keep them polished up when they were bare alloy, though?
It saves fuel, but you have to wash them more, polish, and still paint it. So it is not seen as a cost saving in reality.An American Trans Air Tristar captain told me they saved 3 tons of fuel on a transatlantic crossing after the aircraft was polished.
American Airlines is without doubt the worst airline I have had the misfortune to experience. Delayed and cancelled flights, rude and unpleasant cabin crew, rude and unpleasant check in, unpleasant service onboard, once shared an airport shuttle with an AA pilot who b
hed and moaned about how much he hated working for them.
hed and moaned about how much he hated working for them. I have an earlier edition of this book http://www.amazon.co.uk/V-Bombers-Valiant-Vulcan-V... and I happened to be browsing through it yesterday; it gives the following explanation of the cause of the fatigue cracks in both Valiant and Victor aircraft.
I paraphrase and quote from it below:
The Ministry of Supply was very enamoured of an alloy DTD683 that came from the Rolls-Royce metallurgical research facilities at Derby early in WW2. They created a very strong aluminium alloy for use in forgings. which was quite light in weight but had a tensile strength of 32 tons per square inch, compared with only 10 tons per square inch for similar aluminium alloys being used in aircraft construction. It was originally registered as Alloy R.R.77. Handley Page and Vickers-Armstrong both selected it for their bombers. Indeed, English Electric used it on the Canberra and at one time the aircraft came close to being killed off, due to structural failures that caused a number of fatal accidents.
Checks on several wrecks disclosed that the cause was a very high sensitivity of the alloy to such things as the chatter of the cutting tool during machining operations, insufficient radius at corners and wrong heat treatment temperatures, none of them being attributable to the aircraft manufacturer. Extensive changes were made in processing techniques, which changed DTD683 and it became DTD5024, 5044 or 5114, according to the application.
The Victor B2 and the Vulcan were in production when this all came to light and made use of the new techniques.
The author has an interesting "debrief" to the book in which he reckons that had the Valiant Mk2 been marketed as a bomber and not as a pathfinder it could have been the best of the three and used extensively with one of either the Vulcan or the Victor.
I paraphrase and quote from it below:
The Ministry of Supply was very enamoured of an alloy DTD683 that came from the Rolls-Royce metallurgical research facilities at Derby early in WW2. They created a very strong aluminium alloy for use in forgings. which was quite light in weight but had a tensile strength of 32 tons per square inch, compared with only 10 tons per square inch for similar aluminium alloys being used in aircraft construction. It was originally registered as Alloy R.R.77. Handley Page and Vickers-Armstrong both selected it for their bombers. Indeed, English Electric used it on the Canberra and at one time the aircraft came close to being killed off, due to structural failures that caused a number of fatal accidents.
Checks on several wrecks disclosed that the cause was a very high sensitivity of the alloy to such things as the chatter of the cutting tool during machining operations, insufficient radius at corners and wrong heat treatment temperatures, none of them being attributable to the aircraft manufacturer. Extensive changes were made in processing techniques, which changed DTD683 and it became DTD5024, 5044 or 5114, according to the application.
The Victor B2 and the Vulcan were in production when this all came to light and made use of the new techniques.
The author has an interesting "debrief" to the book in which he reckons that had the Valiant Mk2 been marketed as a bomber and not as a pathfinder it could have been the best of the three and used extensively with one of either the Vulcan or the Victor.
Not sure about the capacity. The tank was installed in what had been the bomb bay.
The K2 was very much a stop gap effort brought about by the realisation that the RAF was woefully short of tanker capacity. I think they served from around 1982 to 1984 and were retired when refurbed ex BA VC-10s and the Tristar entered service.
The K2 was very much a stop gap effort brought about by the realisation that the RAF was woefully short of tanker capacity. I think they served from around 1982 to 1984 and were retired when refurbed ex BA VC-10s and the Tristar entered service.
From wiki
"After the end of the Falklands War in 1982, the Vulcan B.2 was due to be withdrawn from RAF service that year.[143] However, the Falklands campaign had consumed much of the airframe fatigue life of the RAF's Victor tankers. While Vickers VC10 tanker conversions had been ordered in 1979[155] and Lockheed TriStar tankers would be ordered subsequent to the conflict,[156] as a stopgap measure six Vulcans were converted into single point tankers. The Vulcan tanker conversion was accomplished by removing the jammers from the ECM bay in the tail of the aircraft, and replacing them with a single Hose Drum Unit (HDU).[146] An additional cylindrical bomb-bay tank was fitted, making a total of three, giving a fuel capacity of almost 100,000 lb (45,000 kg).[146][157]
The go-ahead for converting the six aircraft was given on 4 May 1982.[158] Just 50 days after being ordered, the first Vulcan tanker, XH561, was delivered to RAF Waddington.[146][158] The Vulcan K.2s were operated by No. 50 Squadron, along with three Vulcan B.2s, in support of UK air defence activities until it was disbanded in March 1984.["
"After the end of the Falklands War in 1982, the Vulcan B.2 was due to be withdrawn from RAF service that year.[143] However, the Falklands campaign had consumed much of the airframe fatigue life of the RAF's Victor tankers. While Vickers VC10 tanker conversions had been ordered in 1979[155] and Lockheed TriStar tankers would be ordered subsequent to the conflict,[156] as a stopgap measure six Vulcans were converted into single point tankers. The Vulcan tanker conversion was accomplished by removing the jammers from the ECM bay in the tail of the aircraft, and replacing them with a single Hose Drum Unit (HDU).[146] An additional cylindrical bomb-bay tank was fitted, making a total of three, giving a fuel capacity of almost 100,000 lb (45,000 kg).[146][157]
The go-ahead for converting the six aircraft was given on 4 May 1982.[158] Just 50 days after being ordered, the first Vulcan tanker, XH561, was delivered to RAF Waddington.[146][158] The Vulcan K.2s were operated by No. 50 Squadron, along with three Vulcan B.2s, in support of UK air defence activities until it was disbanded in March 1984.["
eccles said:
I used to work on American Airlines MD-11's and various Tristars that were polished. They were only polished when they came in for 'D' checks, so not much more in the way of maintenance.
An American Trans Air Tristar captain told me they saved 3 tons of fuel on a transatlantic crossing after the aircraft was polished.
I expected some saving but that is enormous! What about Sharkskin technology.. An American Trans Air Tristar captain told me they saved 3 tons of fuel on a transatlantic crossing after the aircraft was polished.
Eric Mc said:
Not sure about the capacity. The tank was installed in what had been the bomb bay.
The K2 was very much a stop gap effort brought about by the realisation that the RAF was woefully short of tanker capacity. I think they served from around 1982 to 1984 and were retired when refurbed ex BA VC-10s and the Tristar entered service.
Thanks The K2 was very much a stop gap effort brought about by the realisation that the RAF was woefully short of tanker capacity. I think they served from around 1982 to 1984 and were retired when refurbed ex BA VC-10s and the Tristar entered service.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff