I’ve been reading Risks Digest since the Usenet days, it often has interesting items, but you are correct they do get a little paranoid sometimes.
Wasn’t that the problem with the 737 Max? Stab trim overpowered the elevator?
You know, I never really gave much thought to what was the largest single-engine plane. It doesn’t seem like this would be it, but I can’t think of anything bigger.
Exactly. There have been many accidents over the decades of jets from mis-set stab trim on takeoff either preventing rotation & liftoff leading to high-speed runway overrun or else causing uncontrolled premature rotation to a high pitch attitude followed by low altitude stall. And a few close calls with stab trim jamming in flight at a setting far from that required to land.
Ultimately, the MAX accidents went like this: the airplanes hit the ground diving steeply nose down because the pilots lost control because the stab trim went incrementally to full nose-down & could not then be physically overcome because the stall-management computer got confused and mistakenly thought the airplane was stalling and cranked in nose-down trim to compensate because the AOA sensing system had bogus / defective parts installed which wrongly signalled a non-existent stall.
With a side order of: the airplanes hit the ground diving steeply nose down because the pilots lost control because the stab trim went incrementally to full nose-down because they lacked the basic piloting skill and awareness to detect and manage the problem in the early mis-trim increments while it was still easily manageable because certain high growth airlines in certain ill-regulated countries have scrimped on pilot training / pilot quality and still do so with no acknowledgement that this is even an issue.
And a side order of: the airplanes hit the ground diving steeply nose down because the pilots lost control because the stab trim went incrementally to full nose-down because Boeing designed a non-redundant and easily confused stall-management system that assumed both no defective AOA signal and that the pilots were more skillful / attentive / resourceful than at least those two crews were. So far the defective AOA assumption has been corrected in software. And (at least in the reliable countries of the world) task-specific training for this specific scenario has been mandated and actually performed by all MAX drivers to improve the likelihood of success if something that “can’t” happen again does happen again.
Yep. It just edges out the Douglas A-1 Skyraider.
Well, there was that 777 after one of the engines exploded.
It’s scary to watch it approach because your brain assigns it a certain size. It just gets bigger and bigger while seeming not to move. It’s also produces extremely dangerous wing vortices. They had one at Oshkosh a couple of years ago and I advised the pilot of the issue and to warn the tower not to let people take off behind him. Departure spacing is compressed compared to normal departures. Nobody died so I guess he followed my suggestion.
More seriously, an F-35 is longer than an An-2 and weighs much, much, more. Lower wingspan, though.
At ~40’ long x ~60’ wingspan, that’s a very archaic shape for an airplane (but see below). Among modern transports of most any size it’s the case they’re usually 1.5x as long they are wide, the opposite from the An-2’s ratio. Fighter types are an even less appropriate ratio, 2 or 2.5x as long as wide.
The EMB-135 series of RJs is a little wider & a bunch longer. If we’re thinking a fighter-type with a 60-foot wingspan we’re talking F-111 scale with wings spread, not swept. And that’s over 2x as long as the An-2.
Creative nitpicks about twins w engine failures aside, we’re not going to ever build something new that size or shape with a single engine using current tech for a conventional mission.
Where it gets interesting is oddball corner-case missions or new propulsion tech.
Here’s a motor-glider with a greater wingspan and one (optional) engine. It’s not quite as long as an An-2, nor nearly as heavy, but has more than enough wingspan.
Many other motor-gliders are available with 18 meter wings, that being a popular competition class. Which wingspan is just about equal to the An-2’s. But all have shorter fuselages.
Once we start talking electric airplanes, what does “single engine” even mean?
One battery powering one electric motor turning one propellor is obviously a single. But what is two e.g. fuel cells powering one electric motor turning one prop? Or one battery powering 12 electric motors turning 12 propellors?
Fun to think about.
I’m not going to comment. I’ll just leave this here:
That elicits a “No Shit, Sherlock!” from me. I hope like hell no grant money was expended coming up with this not-novel finding.
F-105? That takes the award for heaviest single engine aircraft.
(I have a couple hundred hours in that model.)
Here’s a motorglider available with spans up to 29.3 m (96 ft): EB29
Tres swanky!
Those actually look nice.
I do not know what it is about US airlines but their first class, to me, are just bigger bus seats with marginally better food (which is not saying much). And you pay a fortune for it (I haven’t but have been upgraded by the airplane gods a few times).
It’s like American luxury cars. You get into a Cadillac that costs $100,000 and it still has that cheap stereo and ubiquitous GM plastic finish you’d find in a Chevy Malibu.
The difference is that a transatlantic flight on a US carrier in first class will set you back $5K. In one of those fully enclosed pods, try $30K. As a general rule, you don’t always get what you pay for, but it’s an even more reliable rule in commerce that you almost never get what you don’t pay for.
A ski buddy of mine designs baggage handling systems (most recently at Schipol, I believe) and sent me pictures from the suite on Emirates on the A380 that has a shower. He was flying for free. Can’t even imagine what rack rate would be!
For those interested I posted something about time change in this thread in Politics and Elections and suggested pilots may have something to say about how time changes affect people.
All comments wanted. Even if they are about how wrong I am.
Pilots have a well regulated maximum number of hours worked. They operate a machine that does most of the work and is isolated in an airway designed to keep them away from other planes. and from my limited time jump-seating they are well rested during the flight.