Further information about amputees and aeroplanes here for those that are interested
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-28785171[/url]
[QUOTE=AcidGravy;45687670]Planes still have propellers? I thought they were all replaced with engines.[/QUOTE]
I think you mean jet engines. Planes have always had engines, otherwise there wouldn't be anything to drive the propellers.
Besides, lots of people prefer the look and feel of a propeller aircraft over a jet. I'm also pretty sure that propeller planes are cheaper than jets, and easier to maintain.
[QUOTE=Last or First;45687767]Plane engines still have propellers in them.[/QUOTE]
Yes, but that's not what makes jet engines move. All they do in a jet is compress the air flowing into the engine to be mixed with the fuel, they don't provide any thrust like a normal propeller does.
Not to mention less, cheaper maintenance and cheaper fuel for better performance at lower airspeeds.
e: Hey, you did mention that.
[QUOTE=AcidGravy;45687670]Planes still have propellers? I thought they were all replaced with engines.[/QUOTE]
Yes
[QUOTE=wauterboi;45686869]Yeah, but you read the article, right? You don't have to try and draw everyone in with the same sensationalist title.[/QUOTE]
fucking lol, its a thread title dont spill your mtn dew over it
[QUOTE=AcidGravy;45687670]Planes still have propellers? I thought they were all replaced with engines.[/QUOTE]
How the fuck do you think prop planes work? off fucking rubber bands?
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;45689542]How the fuck do you think prop planes work? off fucking rubber bands?[/QUOTE]
They work like in the Flintstones, duh!
We're losing altitude! Pedal faster!
Everyone give this pilot a hand. No seriously we're gonna crash someone please
[QUOTE=Marzipas;45686940]lmao people actually get this angry over thread titles, holy shit.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Cabbage;45686951]"HOW DARE YOU LURE ME INTO A THREAD WITH YOUR LIES"
like seriously press the back button if the thread title annoys you that much[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Ryz0;45689535]fucking lol, its a thread title dont spill your mtn dew over it[/QUOTE]
Why is it that when someone disagrees with someone doing something it's perceived they are raging?
[QUOTE=RAG Frag;45686933]Yes please everyone stick to informative titles in sensationalist headlines
Really?[/QUOTE]
What's wrong with that? Is anyone objecting to this? I think informative thread titles would be awesome.
I mean, it's not like you need to reel in views for money. You don't have to be sensationalist, and you don't have to be a copy+paste robot. Just explain the article as it is.
"Look Ma, no hands!'
[QUOTE=wauterboi;45690331]Why is it that when someone disagrees with someone doing something it's perceived they are raging?
[/QUOTE]
maybe because you made 3 posts about how you disagree with the title
when you could have read the title, read the thread and moved on
[QUOTE=Jacen;45689048]I think you mean jet engines. Planes have always had engines, otherwise there wouldn't be anything to drive the propellers.
Besides, lots of people prefer the look and feel of a propeller aircraft over a jet. I'm also pretty sure that propeller planes are cheaper than jets, and easier to maintain.
Yes, but that's not what makes jet engines move. All they do in a jet is compress the air flowing into the engine to be mixed with the fuel, they don't provide any thrust like a normal propeller does.[/QUOTE]
Nobody prefers propellor planes(piston or turboprop) for passenger usage. Jets are always faster quieter and have more carrying capacity. The reason turboprops still have a use is cost and fuel efficiency.
Prop engines are more responsive thrust-wise than commercially available jet engines, which makes them desirable in tighter spaces.
Holy fuck this thread needs a hefty dose of reading comprehension.
Firstly, how the fuck do you read the title and [I]not[/I] realise it means a prostetic.
Secondly, AcidGravy is obviously referring to [I]jet[/I] engines.
just add to the check list
"Limbs in their Secure Latched Positions"
problem solved
[editline]14th August 2014[/editline]
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;45690493]Nobody prefers propellor planes(piston or turboprop) for passenger usage. Jets are always faster quieter and have more carrying capacity. The reason turboprops still have a use is cost and fuel efficiency.[/QUOTE]
they're better for these small flights, they are more fuel efficient because the planes aren't up at high altitudes that much to make the fuel benefits jets get, propellers are really better for short flights because they're just easier to work with and better at variable altitudes
For a skilled pilot, he seemed a bit mentally ill-equipped to [I]hand[/I]le a situation like this. We need to [I]arm[/I] our pilots with the skills needed in order to take control in such an emergency.
[QUOTE=Trekintosh;45690493]Nobody prefers propellor planes(piston or turboprop) for passenger usage. Jets are always faster quieter and have more carrying capacity. The reason turboprops still have a use is cost and fuel efficiency.[/QUOTE]
I was referring more to recreational pilots. There's a certain charm to old prop planes that jets just don't have.
Not that I'm a pilot, it's just that I see a lot who do prefer them.
It reminds me of the Top Gear double decker racing episode. "Jeremy. My arms come off!"
[QUOTE=AcidGravy;45687670]Planes still have propellers? I thought they were all replaced with engines.[/QUOTE]
Oh wow.
[QUOTE=Adlertag1940;45695025]Oh wow.[/QUOTE]
No, quite the opposite lol
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.