12

Kim Jong Un plane in Incheon Airport Terminal 1 Gate 9

Comments
  • 2
    Why I like this plane
    1. Pretty much the only IL-62 operating
    2. Waste of engines
    3. That cockpit windows tho
  • 3
    Here's my not asked for, terrible transliteration!

    Chin shin min chu chu ir in min kung huin kuk

    I think the last part means Korean, so the kung huin might mean our leader, so fuck it, the rest means the airplane of, it's the airplane of our leader of Korea, that's what it means!!! I actually have no clue.
  • 0
    @gorsamp What are you talking about?
  • 0
    @RQZERZ i am sure you will love this plane. is there a n addon for IL-62 in FSX and P3D?
  • 2
    What a beautiful bird...
  • 1
    @intromatt
    Bird == airplane ??
    lol
  • 1
    You can never have too many engines.

    Otherwise you risk Concording..

    Related link:

    https://mirror.co.uk/news/...

    > The plane was over its maximum
    > weight for take-off

    Note, the next time you want to take extra luggage with you, or eat another slice of pizza, weight can kill !
  • 2
    I follow aviation news religiously and the cause of this incident was not the weight of the aircraft. A piece of debris punctured one of the fuel tanks. This is well documented online with some incredibly fascinating reads. @Nanos
  • 1
    @intromatt

    I was just reading about that, but no mention of why the piece of metal fell off.

    Was it riveted on or bolted perhaps ?

    If riveted, why did the rivets fail, was it because they was alu rivets with Titanium plate and the differing thermal expansion when hot causing them to snap off ?

    It seems as if there is a missing piece to the story I've yet to hear !

    Any thoughts ?
  • 0
    But from what I've read, if the aircraft had been lighter, it would have stayed in the air longer, perhaps long enough to land safely..

    On a related note, passenger weight is not taken into account !

    Well, it is kinda, but its based on old figures, not actual weights of passengers !

    As such, there is variance between countries.

    I'm thinking for example of carrying a set of scales with me, so any passengers on my next vehicle, I can weigh them beforehand and say "No sorry, your too heavy for me to transport!"

    This is also an increasing problem for helicopters..

    Related links:

    https://ft.com/content/...
    > Helicopter crash review: Ban
    > overweight oil workers from flying

    http://dailymail.co.uk/news/...
  • 0
    The piece fell off of a Continental DC-10.... My brain is a little murky but I think that's the correct type. Additionly, the piece fell off because it was not properly welded onto the old McDonnell Douglas airliner. @Nanos
  • 0
    The weight difference was within allowable FAA limits. Absolutely no chance for the Concorde to do a go around and land. Impossible. @Nanos
  • 0
    @intromatt

    https://flightglobal.com/news/...
    se-of-concorde-crash-121739/

    It appears it was drilled to be riveted, rather than welded.
  • 1
    @Nanos

    Drat, link didn't copy correctly !

    https://flightglobal.com/news/...
  • 0
    > weight difference was within
    > allowable FAA limits.

    I wouldn't be happy on an overloaded plane, even if its within allowable limits for someone.

    I believe the particular plane was also the heaviest of all in the fleet. (Quite why, also interests me!)

    And from what I can gather, had particularly heavy passengers.
  • 0
    Thanx for sharing that, this shit fascinates me. @Nanos
  • 1
    > Absolutely no chance for the
    > Concorde to do a go around
    > and land. Impossible.

    If it had 4 engines instead of 2, how much further could it have stayed in the air ?

    And if it was lighter, say for every 100kg lighter, how much more airtime would that have given everyone ?

    If I see some sums, then I might start to believe it was impossible. :-)
  • 1
    No chance for another 2-3 minutes of flight.. No chance at all (in my opinion). Also consider the late 50s tech in materials and construction methods and systems. @Nanos
  • 1
    @CozyPlanes what are your opinions on the new cockpit windows for almost every aircraft? The ones with the black padding and tinted windows on like the A350 etc. I hate it 🙃
  • 0
    @CozyPlanes the korean writing on the side of the plane
  • 2
    @RAZERZ Well, A350 is better than IL-86. lol
    @gorsamp You should read as ChosunMinju ju eue in min gong hwa guk which means DPRK
  • 1
    @CozyPlanes well of course, or at least I hope so :p
  • 0
    @intromatt

    > No chance for another 2-3 minutes
    > of flight..

    I'd be interested in an expansion as to why not.

    Was it because the fuel leak was so bad, there wouldn't be any fuel left in to power any extra engines if there was some ?

    I thought there was different fuel tanks, so they could use fuel from one of the unpunctured ones ?
  • 0
    Loss of control (hydraulics), loss of engine power....the airplane was on fire..it wasn't just the engine (otherwise the pilot could have shut down the affected powerplant and limped for a go around). Too many things went wrong too quickly....it was a dominos effect of extremes. I don't believe in luck but there was so much bad luck in this incident it almost makes no logical sense. Think..tiny piece of metal bursting a tire which popped just in a certain way to pierce the fuel tank at its weakest point which started a fire which led to loss of not only power but also control (the Concorde is not able to climb with only 2 engines...but correct me if I am wrong).
    @Nanos
  • 0
    @intromatt

    > Concorde is not able to climb with
    > only 2 engines.

    That's why I was suggesting more engines would have helped. :-)
  • 0
    @intromatt

    > the airplane was on fire..

    Wasn't it just around the fuel tank leak area though ?
  • 0
    @intromatt

    > Loss of control (hydraulics),

    Why was there loss of hydraulics ?

    Are they powered by the engines ?

    Isn't there a secondary system for powering the hydraulics ?
  • 0
    > I don't believe in luck

    What is the lottery if it isn't luck based. :-)

    Luck, trying to decided to turn left or right at a junction, one choice could lead to an accident, the other a safe return home..

    Which to take !

    Or build a vehicle though enough that even if you get hit, you survive !

    As they say, plan for the worst, hope for the best. :-)

    I remember a while ago asking if I could take a parachute onboard a plane, but was told it would worry the other passengers !

    As if that would matter when you are opening the door to jump out before the plane hits the ground !
  • 0
    @CozyPlanes hey thanks, you have furthered my understanding!
Add Comment