Around 4:10 … Interesting how the B2 does it…
That looks pretty cool, but I do wonder what happens if that plane has to lower the gear without any power at all…
Crewmen with pumps?
Gravity.
At least the one configuration I know a little about, the gears are hydraulically held up/stowed so that if the hydraulic system fails the gear can still be dropped under gravity assist.
There’s an emergency lever for that in the cockpit but I don’t know the complete mechanism.
It’s safer to fly gear down than land gear up, generally, do that’s the fail-safe design.
What should a flight attendant do in this case?
I was reading a Reddit thread: Flight attendants, what’s your NSFW story while on the job?
The top answer (for me…can depend) was:
An old lady waited until the seatbelt sign went on prior to landing, then got up to go to the toilet. Flight attendant came over, told her she had to sit down. There was a language barrier. There was lots of arguing. The old lady then slapped the flight attendant and a couple of others flight attendants rushed in.
The old lady was sat back down, proceeded to shit herself, and was then arrested when the plane landed.
I get the seatbelt sign is meant to be a hard rule but, if a passenger tells a flight attendant the choice is let them use the bathroom or they will shit themself will the flight attendants refuse use of the bathroom?
I think most of us have probably experienced a minute where you need a bathroom NOW. There is no waiting.
But then, rules are rules and probably do not account for such things. (I assume the lady was arrested for hitting the attendants which makes sense.)
Yep. There’s little or no warning as age increases. Feel free to arrest me for not having my seatbelt on in the bathroom.
did anybody notice the speed brakes built into the bomb bay when doors are open?
Southwest Airlines’ very horrible, terrible no good day;
Southwest Airlines Stock Is Falling as DOT Sues for Chronic Delays
Southwest Airlines pilot accused of DUI, arrested before flight
The system worked!
/unbelievable
Different jetbridges have different rages of motion. Some of the old ones only translate lateral to the long axis of the airplane. So left/right, not fore/aft from the airplane’s POV. Those are very critical for stopping in the right place and even 12" is too out of position to mate properly. Those oldies often did not have a real long range of travel so depending on fuselage diameter they’d be near one or another limit of traverse too.
Airport gate design is a real art. Each model of plane has a certain box size, and they’re trying to squeeze as many as possible into the smallest possible space. But you don’t want to fit things so tightly that e.g. the 737 fits, but the A320 doesn’t. Otherwise you end up with your gate layout driving what kinds and mixes of planes you can bring to that airport.
For a convex curving terminal face the MD-80 was nice because it had relatively short wings set well aft on the fuselage. So the wingtip to wingtip circle’s radius and hence circumference was larger. If you replaced all those with e.g. 737-configured gates, the wings are longer and closer to the nose. So you either park the airplanes along the same alignment stripes, but farther back from the building (if the jetbridges can reach that far), or you need the parking spaces farther apart laterally which may mean you get one less airplane in there. Parking farther back is also limited by how much room there is behind the tails for the truck driving lane and the taxiway behind.
It’s real-world Tetris with real-world financial and operational impacts.
Considering that the allegedly drunken pilot was in the cockpit when he was arrested, I’d say the system worked just barely.
Arresting drunk pilots will just delay the flight further. I heard the news story about this and they mentioned the rule was 8 hrs before flight or an alcohol rating above .04. I always thought it was zero.
The problem is the testing machines have a tolerance band. They aren’t designed to accurately detect very low levels. So you might in fact have consumed absolutely positively zero alcohol but a breathalyser will record 0.01 or 0.02. Just because of the machines’ tolerances.
So the machine-based regulation is 0.04. But the rest of the regulation is about qualitative factors, not machine readings. if you drank within the time limit, you are in violation regardless of cognitive status or breathalyzer reading. If you have impaired cognition, at all, you are in violation.
The issue with the last of these is proof. The whole reason drunk driving laws went to breathalyer levels was it made proof a slam-dunk. Even as it under- or over- reported the subjects’ actual state of impairment. It was convenient and assembly-line “justice” demands convenience.
Are you talking about the C-5M Galaxy from @Johnny_L.A 's video specifically?
If yes, I’d really like to know how the gravity assist rotates the wheel assembly, and if it works even if the plane has lost all hydraulic pressure.
I’m imagining a guy furiously cranking a handle that turns a chain.
It appears that the C-5’s emergency gear extension system is powered, not manual or gravity-driven.
It’s simply an electrical motor situated in parallel with the normal hydraulic system, operated by a dedicated set of switches.
A dual power source for each system is provided at each actuator for each system. A hydraulic motor system provides power input to the actuator during normal operation and an electric motor provides the input for emergency gear extension.
Different airplanes have different systems.
I’ve flown jets with hand cranks, simple freefall gravity, an aux electric hydraulic pump with separate fluid source, and one rather complex system with an electric motor to drive the uplocks open and a different electric motor to later drive the downlocks closed after gravity powered the big motions. IIRC something I flew way back in the day (that was itself ancient even then) had a backup blowdown bottle that would pressurize the hydraulic plumbing with high pressure nitrogen.
In general the simpler the motion, the simpler the backup system.
And jets with no emergency gear lowering system at all. Those cheated by having an ejection seat instead. 
Passengers these days are showing more than enough rage. Let’s not drag jetbridges into it.
Here is a response from aviation industry people about Trump’s attack on DEI.
I was halfway expecting some grizzled captain to say, “About time!” And I’m sure those people do exist, but the article quotes people making some good points, I think. The standards are still the standards, no matter how someone gets the job.
This is an example of how aviation is somewhat exempt (or at least different) from ideological problems in other fields: You can’t bullshit the airplane. In the end, it comes down to physics. We are now in a world in which the best minds of some scientific fields, such as Anthony Fauci, are very stupidly pilloried and second-guessed. But we don’t generally have people standing in the aisle of an airliner shouting, “Enough of these elite pilots! I can fly this plane!”, which was the subject of a great political cartoon I can’t locate at the moment.
As I understand it, DEI and Affirmative Action don’t get someone a job - it is one of many factors in whether someone gets a job. They still have to learn to fly the plane and pass the same test as everyone else. I once had a minor debate about this with a colleague who feels differently and characterized all DEI as “discrimination”, and shouldn’t all discrimination be illegal?
My response: “Despite DEI in our airline hiring process, we are allowed to discriminate against people who don’t have pilot licenses or can’t pass the checkride.”
Edit: Found the cartoon:
I discovered flightradar24 during the Big Jersey Drone Kerfuffle (being used to debunk lots of drone sightings) and now find myself keeping firing it up to see what planes I hear overhead are up to. Today I looked at one then wasted around half an hour monitoring his crazy flight path.
