Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: bentway who wrote (487916)	6/14/2009 5:10:52 PM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575761

"What they were designed to do was fly straight and level with as many passengers as possible, and when full were severely overloaded for any kind of stressful flying." It is all about cost per passenger-mile. Which is why planes don't fly any faster. Boeing tried to interest the industry in a plane that flew about 10% faster for the same cost. For overseas flights, that would be a god send. But, no interest. So, what they wound up with was using the same technology, flying at normal speed for longer range and lower cost per passenger-mile.

To: bentway who wrote (487916)	6/15/2009 1:50:30 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575761

He started talking about the DC-3, and how it was a very strong airliner that could actually do some not to stressful aerobatics. He told me that modern airliners weren't able to take those kind of stresses, and if you tried anything like what a DC-3 could do, the wings would probably rip off! He said modern airliners were designed for the stresses of taking off, landing, maybe dropping into a low pressure area and recovering, and that was it. What they were designed to do was fly straight and level with as many passengers as possible, and when full were severely overloaded for any kind of stressful flying. He said the pilot's job was to keep it smooth, for the passengers, but also to keep the plane together. That's exactly what some of the pilots have been saying on the forum I have followed. That current planes are not nearly as well built as those 50 years ago. They feel composites have not been put through enough testing. In addition, they say that flying at 35k feet is good for airlines because fuel is saved at that altitude but the margin of safety....coffin corner.....is reduced. If going too fast, the plane hits the supersonic buffet; if going to slow, it goes into a stall. Normally, staying within that margin is not a problem if all things are okay/in clear weather. However, if you get into a mess and lose control over the speed factor, then the whole thing falls apart and a plane is likely to crash. BTW airbus has been having a lot of trouble with its airbuses......a lot more than I knew about.