New answers tagged

1

Well they do of sorts. But your pilot friend is right, they are not tabulated for a transport category aircraft like is done for a Part 23 aircraft. Due to the large payloads, CG ranges and configurations, the best rate of climb speed must be computed for each situation. There is no one published Vy for a large transport category airplane. Incidentally ...


2

I won't be displaying mathematics or even a guesstimate here because this subject is somewhat beyond my scope of competency. However: To shoot something into orbit with a catapult from ground level is not feasible, as the object would immediately burn to ashes, no matter what the material would be. The required velocity to reach orbit is about 40 000km/h, ...


3

"Naked Pilot" by David Beaty suggests that this technique was introduced by engineers following Foote's accident. Behind the scenes, BOAC and de Havilland were worried too. The manufacturers had been doing further tests and a new take-off technique was introduced. The nose-wheel had to be lifted off the ground at 80 knots, but afterwards it had to be ...


13

The 1952 takeoff accident you read about was piloted by Captain Harry Foote. The technique got its name after the accident, which Captain Foote was blamed for (Comet! The World's First Jet Airliner, page 125). Pushing the nose down is not standard though, rather a corrective measure to over-rotation past 6°. The article quoted below covers the proper ...


12

At the time of the Comet disasters, Vr did not exist. The standard takeoff technique was what was used on all previous airplanes - line up, release the brakes, apply full power (derated thrust did not yet exist), accelerate, apply some back pressure to take the weight off the nose wheel, start feeling the airplane off the ground. The problem was that the ...


Top 50 recent answers are included