Mustang Air to Air: The Sequel
/forum/topic/600984/4097

1       2       3              4097      
4098
       4099              4273       4274       end

JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 16036
Country: United States

As long as I'm tossing out questions, how about that Triple 7?! What in the world happened there? Transponders switched off, data being reported by the plane long after communications ceased. If it was a biz jet I'd guess they experienced a Payne Stewart type scenario, but that seems unlikely with all the redundancy that must be on a 777.

What an excruciating time for families and friends of those 239 passengers, ugh!



stevezzzz
Registered: Aug 01, 2010
Total Posts: 3267
Country: United States

JWilsonphoto wrote:
That looks like a quality product design for sure. I'm wondering why the more expensive sponsorship slots were so minimal? Seems that you'd want to have a bunch of those to raise funds more rapidly. Does he have any plans for units that would work with larger camera bodies?

What happens in these situations if the financial goal isn't reached? Does the whole effort just drop off the map?


On Kickstarter, if the goal isn't reached by the stated time, nobody's credit card gets charged. What happens after that? No clue.



MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2135
Country: United Kingdom



JWilsonphoto wrote:
As long as I'm tossing out questions, how about that Triple 7?! What in the world happened there? Transponders switched off, data being reported by the plane long after communications ceased. If it was a biz jet I'd guess they experienced a Payne Stewart type scenario, but that seems unlikely with all the redundancy that must be on a 777.

What an excruciating time for families and friends of those 239 passengers, ugh!


Jim,

Google Helios crash. B737-800 from Cyprus to Athens. Air con probs led to crew suffering hypoxia. Aircraft flew flight plan route up to a pre-programmed arrivals hold and then flew round the hold till it ran out of fuel.



dtw757
Registered: Jan 05, 2009
Total Posts: 102
Country: United States

If it had been a hypoxia event the aircraft wouldn't have turned around, turned off the transponder unless it was a coincidental failure. The fact that the engines were still reporting engine data, if that is true, is certainly an indication of "not" a cataclysmic event. I spent many a night over my career flying the Narita to Singapore and Bangkok runs, plus a few operational flights in the Navy "way back when" in that area. The radar coverage is minimal but once you get in close to overflying land, there should have been at least a secondary target picked up on radar somewhere. Given the fuel load, with reserves, it still had some legs left if it did remain airborne. (Pakistan?) My fear is that it did indeed land in one piece, the passengers "accommodated" that the aircraft might be used for a deadlier purpose in the future. I am not a conspiratist by any means, but given the extremes the terrorist groups have gone to in the past...who knows?

I hope I'm wrong as well as hope for some closure soon to those who don't know what has happened to their loved ones.



futurshox
Registered: Feb 15, 2008
Total Posts: 2371
Country: United States

I found a flying thing! Caught this Raven on takeoff, before he soared off over the Grand Canyon.



MMcGrath
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Total Posts: 2135
Country: United Kingdom



dtw757 wrote:
If it had been a hypoxia event the aircraft wouldn't have turned around, turned off the transponder unless it was a coincidental failure. The fact that the engines were still reporting engine data, if that is true, is certainly an indication of "not" a cataclysmic event. I spent many a night over my career flying the Narita to Singapore and Bangkok runs, plus a few operational flights in the Navy "way back when" in that area. The radar coverage is minimal but once you get in close to overflying land, there should have been at least a secondary target picked up on radar somewhere. Given the fuel load, with reserves, it still had some legs left if it did remain airborne. (Pakistan?) My fear is that it did indeed land in one piece, the passengers "accommodated" that the aircraft might be used for a deadlier purpose in the future. I am not a conspiratist by any means, but given the extremes the terrorist groups have gone to in the past...who knows?

I hope I'm wrong as well as hope for some closure soon to those who don't know what has happened to their loved ones.



The engine reporting has been debunked as innacurate. Inmarsat the satellite operator have apparently received pings to the satellite from the SATCOM transmitter after the aircraft's last known position. The pings are basically like a phone home signal to the satellite. No data was sent with them. The aircraft had approx 7 hrs fuel on board. It was airborne for nearly an hour when contact was lost. It would have taken them another hour or so to reach the Straits of Mallaca. Approx 4.5 to 5 hrs fuel remaining, probably into a headwind & potentially at a lower altitude. Rough distance roughly 2000 to 2500nm from Last Know Position. However if they didn't back track, then it's potentially same distance but in opposite direction.



Donald Gray
Registered: Nov 12, 2005
Total Posts: 2285
Country: United Kingdom

Thanks Steve. That 'Stubilizer' is quite a neat piece of kit. When you think of the potential applications, it has to sell in good quantities - It will be a crying shame if it doesn't get the funding. Just recall the amount of times you have seen on TV a GoPro mounted on a helmet or on a body mounting or on a mountain bike or other action activity. The demand must be there.

Jim: as Steve says, the brutal reality is if he does not get the backers to pledge the FULL amount, the project is dead in the water.

If it does fail to achieve it, Stu will then be in need of finding backeing elsewhere, that is my guess at the moment. I havent spoken with him on that point...

His website http://www.rocksolid-tech.com/ will remain the same for the duration of the Kickstarter. If it gets the funding, to help Stuart out, I will probably takeover the website & do it free for him until it is well established...

The funding is via:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1496576492/stubilizer-gopro-compatible-active-camera-stabiliz

Forgive the blatant advert but I am wanting to help him out in anyway I can. He and his Stubalizer deserves all the help we can muster... Thanks



Donald Gray
Registered: Nov 12, 2005
Total Posts: 2285
Country: United Kingdom

JWilsonphoto wrote:
. Does he have any plans for units that would work with larger camera bodies?


I keep meaning to ask him about larger bodies - My gut feeling is he wants to get the GoPro to market, first and foremost. Walking before running!

From a technical standpoint, I cannot see any reason that it could not be scaled up. A lot depends on exact centre of gravities of the mass being stabilised - I would think that the gyros and other motion sensors can interface with larger stabilizing motors
.
I have a 2 dimension stabilizer for the GoPro on my UAV (now a hexcopter with 6 props & video downlink). But the stabilizer has internal drives and external interfaces and uses external power source. As do all the other GoPro stabilizers - Non are intended for use other than on remote control aircraft/UAVs.

What makes the Stubalizer unique is that it is completely self contained and self powered - It is small & light. See his video when he fixes it to a monopod & holds the monopod from the other end - the camera just irons out the tilting & swaying ...



nickjohnson
Registered: Sep 15, 2009
Total Posts: 741
Country: United Kingdom

Been following the Malay T7 thing here:-

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/535538-malaysian-airlines-mh370-contact-lost.html

Some very interesting stuff and a predictably large amount of silliness.

Slow old duffer that I am I'm bewildered that most folks have apparently assumed that because transponder returns suddenly stopped it means that the transponder was turned off. I understand that other causes of transponder non return have a small likelihood about as small a likelihood as loosing a commercial T7 for 6 days and counting. Oh well.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 16036
Country: United States

True Nick, but we're talking about an airplane with redundancy out the wazoo, which makes the odds of a complete failure exponentially less likely.

Thanks for the experienced analysis DTW. If it's true that the two passport thieves bought tickets with cash for a previous flight, then didn't fly, or ask for a refund, then rebooked on the vanished 777, one could surmise that the first run was a trial to see if the stolen passports were going to create an issue. Perhaps they watched it from afar, when it was obvious that it wasn't going to be a problem, they booked again with cash and made the trip.

If it is still in one piece somewhere being retooled for evil, you would think that they'd have to do a quick turn because you have to believe that every satellite that can read the label on a golfball is looking for an errant 777 sitting someplace. You could probably convince the pilots to land somewhere on the off chance they might be deluded enough to think they'd be let go, but it seems highly unlikely anyone could convince them to fly the aircraft out knowing what they'd know. One has to wonder, what with the aircraft in hand and that much fuel left, why they just didn't proceed to a target at that point. The logistics of landing it, hiding it, refueling it and whatever else they wanted to use to weaponize it, sure would raise the chances of being noticed.

An attack on US soil would be a real stretch wouldn't it? Seems that we'd be vigilant enough to notice the signature of something like that off shore long before it could complete it's mission. That would lead one to theorize that it's target would have to be somewhere in that part of the world, and pretty shortly after departure, because the second they are detected and fighters scramble, they are going to get blown out of the sky. A Triple 7 aimed for a major metropolitan area at the right time of day would make 9/11 look like a walk in the park. Great times we live in.

Would love for Dazz to weigh in on this with all his experience in that part of the world.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 16036
Country: United States

Well, that's a good strategy Donald, what with a zillion GoPro's out there compared to the number of larger camera bodies, that's where the gravy is. Hope he reaches his goal, the product is beautiful.

Donald Gray wrote:
JWilsonphoto wrote:
. Does he have any plans for units that would work with larger camera bodies?


I keep meaning to ask him about larger bodies - My gut feeling is he wants to get the GoPro to market, first and foremost. Walking before running!

From a technical standpoint, I cannot see any reason that it could not be scaled up. A lot depends on exact centre of gravities of the mass being stabilised - I would think that the gyros and other motion sensors can interface with larger stabilizing motors
.
I have a 2 dimension stabilizer for the GoPro on my UAV (now a hexcopter with 6 props & video downlink). But the stabilizer has internal drives and external interfaces and uses external power source. As do all the other GoPro stabilizers - Non are intended for use other than on remote control aircraft/UAVs.

What makes the Stubalizer unique is that it is completely self contained and self powered - It is small & light. See his video when he fixes it to a monopod & holds the monopod from the other end - the camera just irons out the tilting & swaying ...



azbill
Registered: Jun 26, 2009
Total Posts: 466
Country: United States

Thunderbirds over Luke AFB earlier today.



Tim Adams
Registered: Jan 01, 2004
Total Posts: 2583
Country: United States

A shame this thing is still a pile of parts somewhere in a hanger in CA.



NightOwl Cat
Registered: Feb 19, 2007
Total Posts: 7620
Country: United States

Tom Clancy's "Debt of Honor" is what's ringing in my head.

JWilsonphoto wrote:
True Nick, but we're talking about an airplane with redundancy out the wazoo, which makes the odds of a complete failure exponentially less likely.

Thanks for the experienced analysis DTW. If it's true that the two passport thieves bought tickets with cash for a previous flight, then didn't fly, or ask for a refund, then rebooked on the vanished 777, one could surmise that the first run was a trial to see if the stolen passports were going to create an issue. Perhaps they watched it from afar, when it was obvious that it wasn't going to be a problem, they booked again with cash and made the trip.

If it is still in one piece somewhere being retooled for evil, you would think that they'd have to do a quick turn because you have to believe that every satellite that can read the label on a golfball is looking for an errant 777 sitting someplace. You could probably convince the pilots to land somewhere on the off chance they might be deluded enough to think they'd be let go, but it seems highly unlikely anyone could convince them to fly the aircraft out knowing what they'd know. One has to wonder, what with the aircraft in hand and that much fuel left, why they just didn't proceed to a target at that point. The logistics of landing it, hiding it, refueling it and whatever else they wanted to use to weaponize it, sure would raise the chances of being noticed.

An attack on US soil would be a real stretch wouldn't it? Seems that we'd be vigilant enough to notice the signature of something like that off shore long before it could complete it's mission. That would lead one to theorize that it's target would have to be somewhere in that part of the world, and pretty shortly after departure, because the second they are detected and fighters scramble, they are going to get blown out of the sky. A Triple 7 aimed for a major metropolitan area at the right time of day would make 9/11 look like a walk in the park. Great times we live in.

Would love for Dazz to weigh in on this with all his experience in that part of the world.



Tim Adams
Registered: Jan 01, 2004
Total Posts: 2583
Country: United States

Back in 2008, as long as you payed attention to where you were at, anywhere on the ramp was available.



dtw757
Registered: Jan 05, 2009
Total Posts: 102
Country: United States

I have a hard time believing that given the history of the last 12 years, that a pilot could be coerced into landing (willingly)a plane with extremists on the aircraft. Most of us go to work understanding that "giving" an airplane to someone is not the way to go. Even if it means leaving the passengers on the aircraft. Its a hard thought to have, one you hope never to deal with. But...in the question of qualified pilots on board, without slandering anybody, there is one person who is qualified, young, and not been at the airline too long. I agree that it will be hard to keep that aircraft "hidden" and given the proximity to Europe and amount of fuel required to feed it, that would be a better guess if that is what has happened. Certainly a mystery given all the electronics around.

Mike



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 16036
Country: United States

I agree Mike. You guys have always shouldered a tremendous amount of responsibility, these days, even more.



Tim Adams
Registered: Jan 01, 2004
Total Posts: 2583
Country: United States

Not a $100 hamburger plane, but one of the great designs ever IMO.



JWilsonphoto
Registered: Jan 16, 2002
Total Posts: 16036
Country: United States

Wish there was a factory doing this today.................



Jeff W.
Registered: Feb 09, 2008
Total Posts: 1843
Country: United States

Thunderbird 1 taxiing to the active at Luke AFB.



1       2       3              4097      
4098
       4099              4273       4274       end