>> ^Trancecoach:

Too bad for him (and you) that "flying the plane" involves diplomacy and charisma.>> ^quantumushroom:
I don't care if the pilot of the 747 I'm on isn't the World's Most Interesting Man/Media Creation, I only care that he's sober and can fly the damned thing.
ROMNEY LANDSLIDE 2012.



And, incidentally, caring about the interests of more than just the richest 1% of the county.

Too bad for him (and you) that "flying the plane" involves diplomacy and charisma.>> ^quantumushroom:

I don't care if the pilot of the 747 I'm on isn't the World's Most Interesting Man/Media Creation, I only care that he's sober and can fly the damned thing.
ROMNEY LANDSLIDE 2012.

I don't care if the pilot of the 747 I'm on isn't the World's Most Interesting Man/Media Creation, I only care that he's sober and can fly the damned thing.

ROMNEY LANDSLIDE 2012.

Apparently adding a 1-ton 400 Megawatt air conditioner to a rocket engine improves efficiency. Who knew?

But it's just under 60% as efficient as a Boeing 747-400, so I hope this never happens.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SABRE_(rocket_engine)#Performance
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Specific_impulse#Energy_efficiency

>> ^deathcow:

@mintbbb she's d e a d jim


Found a fix, thanks!

Don't usually get to see this angle at St. Maarten, wind usually going the other way. Normal approach is over the water, and take off in the same direction, towards the center of the island. In fact, you have to juke on takeoff to avoid the mountains (see in the backdrop of this video), which is rather troublesome in a large jetliner. Made more so by the fact the runway at St. Maarten is only 7,150 ft. Of note, the recommended take off length for the fully laden 747 is around 10k feet (it is less, but that is what they recommend), so you can bet those aren't fully loaded. And if you have an engine failure, even just a single, your boned...can't abort, can't fly.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'sint maarten 747 takeoff close flyby' to 'saint maarten, boeing, 747, take off, close, low, flyby' - edited by kulpims

>> ^Jinx:

Ahh. poor old plane still yearns for the sky : (


God Humans can connect with ANYTHING. You damn people are the reason TV sucks and is only full of reality bullshit!

Tags for this video have been changed from 'MateDemate Device, Space Shuttle, Timelapse' to 'Mate Demate Device, Space Shuttle, Timelapse, NASA, 747, Jumbo Jet' - edited by calvados

>> ^direpickle:

What kind of escort did they have flying along with it? No one mentions it anywhere. Just kinda curious.


Superman.

Thanks a bunch!

In reply to this comment by Barseps:
Now this would have been FABULOUS to see in person

^Upvoted^
*Doublepromote
Nice one :

A T-38 that almost ran out of fuel near Dulles International. >> ^direpickle:

What kind of escort did they have flying along with it? No one mentions it anywhere. Just kinda curious.

Back in '88 I got to be on the tarmac at an airforce base under a space shuttle strapped to a 747. If you have not seen it you can not imagine how massive that combination is.

Does he mean to repeal the separation of church and state built into the US constitution?
Does he mean to amend the constitution to remove the part about all men being equal?
Does he mean to return the religious heritage where Christians massacred the "savages" of North America?
If not NorthAm, than where?


I'm not sure Rick thought these things through.

11 hours since @Truckchase's quality suggestion. Rick's video is up to: 6,164 likes, 284,665 dislikes out of 747,019 views. I think his views are not as popular as he thought.

Even if Rick Perry win's the RePub nomination, he has no chance of unseating the current president.

>> ^Truckchase:

As of right now:
2,064 likes
109,058 dislikes
I recommend flagging this video as inappropriate on yt with the reason "Hateful or abusive content".

>> ^ReverendTed:

>> ^Powel6016:
These planes are 20+ years old. LOT needs new planes. Flew with LOT several times and its just ridiculous.
Just goes to show you, they don't build 'em like they used to.


The 767 has a far fewer deaths than its older cousin the 737. It isn't apples to apples, because they aren't the same class of plane, but the 737 has well over 3500+ fatalities, where as the 767 has about 500+. Its brother, the Narrow body 757, is over 700+ deaths in its run so far. The 737 is only a decade older, not enough to make up the death per year ratio of the 737. So in this case, thank god they don't make them like they used to. If you notice that in the ten latest crashes include a 737 and a 747. The 767 has had a bad rap ever since EgyptAir Flight 990, but it is a good hull if properly maintained. That being said, the plane in question was delivered to LOT on 15 May 1997, a very new plane in all respects.