US Air Force aircraft carrying Secretary of War Pete Hegseth is declaring an emergency and diverting to UK

Why did you delete this:

They don't? Why would it suck them out rather than blow them in? The wind is stronger outside the plane than inside. You know physics and all that technical stuff?

Ok Admiral ...tell me about physics. :badgrin:

LoL..... the crow bar comment is an aviation community standard.
Yup. Fortunately I have never experienced it, but I have friends who have.
 
Why did you delete this:

They don't? Why would it suck them out rather than blow them in? The wind is stronger outside the plane than inside. You know physics and all that technical stuff?

Ok Admiral ...tell me about physics. :badgrin:

LoL..... the crow bar comment is an aviation community standard.
I deleted it because I knew you wouldn't understand it and I was tired of dumbing shit down for the handicapped.
 
I said: "Cracks cause blowouts, not depressurization." I was talking about Hegseth's aircraft.

You should have di
I deleted it because I knew you wouldn't understand it and I was tired of dumbing shit down for the handicapped.
Acknowledge your original statement that was highly inconclusive.

The problem for you is you claimed a blowout doesn't cause depressurization......then right after that, you provided a event where a pilot was half sucked out of the cockpit from a windshield being blown out due to pressure differential.

Tell me where you're wrong.
 
You should have di

Acknowledge your original statement that was highly inconclusive.

The problem for you is you claimed a blowout doesn't cause depressurization......then right after that, you provided a event where a pilot was half sucked out of the cockpit from a windshield being blown out due to pressure differential.

Tell me where you're wrong.
I was talking two different scenarios and why the plane changed altitude. That also went screaming over your head. If the aircraft maintained the higher altitude and the window did blow out, that is what could have happened. You are just a little slow on the uptake, I guess. Maybe I should have Barneyed it down for you.
 
I was talking two different scenarios and why the plane changed altitude. That also went screaming over your head. If the aircraft maintained the higher altitude and the window did blow out, that is what could have happened. You are just a little slow on the uptake, I guess. Maybe I should have Barneyed it down for you.
Cut the BS...next time be more specific to what you're trying to say.

Give it a ******* break.

Put down the bottle.
 
I don't drink, asshole. Maybe you should learn to read better. That way you won't go off half-cocked. But then again, your size is probably just that, based on your attitude!
Cracks cause blowouts, not depressurization.

Then backs that up proving a guy getting sucked out from pressure loss due to a window failure.

Can't make this stuff up.

Ok........ LoL
 
Last edited:
Then backs that up proving a guy getting sucked out from pressure loss due to a window failure.

Can't make this stuff up.

Ok........ LoL
He's good at painting himself into a corner ain't he...
 
Do you not speak English? The window had a crack. No depressurization occurred. They simply lowered the altitude. Staying at a higher altitude could cause the window to blow out because the cabin is pressurized. A simple crack will not cause depressurization unless the window blows out.

Is that clear as mud, now?
In other words, the aircraft descended to a lower altitude because remaining at cruising altitude would have kept the pressure inside the aircraft—which is higher than the outside pressure—at a level that could worsen the crack. Pressure always moves from high to low, so staying high would have risked the crack growing larger or the windshield blowing out.


As Admiral Rockwell Tory explains, a simple crack doesn’t cause depressurization—that only happens if the window actually blows out.
 
In other words, the aircraft descended to a lower altitude because remaining at cruising altitude would have kept the pressure inside the aircraft—which is higher than the outside pressure—at a level that could worsen the crack. Pressure always moves from high to low, so staying high would have risked the crack growing larger or the windshield blowing out.


As Admiral Rockwell Tory explains, a simple crack doesn’t cause depressurization—that only happens if the window actually blows out.
Clean up in aisle nine....
 
Then backs that up proving a guy getting sucked out from pressure loss due to a window failure.

Can't make this stuff up.

Ok........ LoL
The window on that plane you cited did not crack, a whole ******* panel blew out. I guess you never realized the difference in a crack and the whole panel blowing out. A simple crack can be compensated for. Lowering altitude relieves the stress.

I was a steam engineer in the Navy. Do you know the difference in a cracked weld and whole steam pipe flange disintegrating? Several sailors died on USS Iwo Jima because a shipyard used "soft" bolts on a high-pressure steam line and they basically melted and caused a catastrophic failure. Just like the wrong fittings used in your story about the panel blowing out.

Whether you like it or not, I know what I am talking about.
 
The window on that plane you cited did not crack, a whole ******* panel blew out.
You cited that link, not me.

Do you know the difference in a cracked weld and whole steam pipe flange disintegrating?

Yes I do, as a matter of fact. I held NDE certifications in ultrasound, X-ray, dye penetrant and magnaflux methods of Nondestructive Examination.

I was a steam engineer in the Navy.
Great, I worked on boilers also, 250 and 650 pound steam.
Whether you like it or not, I know what I am talking about.

So do I......:biggrin:
 
Last edited:
You cited that link, not me.



Yes I do, as a matter of fact. I held NDE certifications in ultrasound, X-ray, dye penetrant and magnaflux methods of Nondestructive Examination.


Great, I worked on boilers also, 250 and 650 pound steam.


So do I......:biggrin:
No, I didn't. Someone else may have but you discussed it.

So you are just incapable of stating your reasons.

Lightweight steam pressures. I was qualified on 1200 and modified 600-pound (720 psi) systems.
 
No, I didn't. Someone else may have but you discussed it.
Yes you did:
Tell that to the airline pilot who was nearly sucked out the window when his windshield disintegrated.

So you are just incapable of stating your reasons.
Already have.
Lightweight steam pressures. I was qualified on 1200 and modified 600-pound (720 psi) systems.
Whoopee ding. 250/650 is what we had.
 
Dave Cronin was a friend, you might have heard of him.
Not by name, but I remember the incident. It was something for sure.

There was a 737 that lost a large portion of the upper fuselage forward of the wing. Flight attendant was sucked out.

In an odd way, both incidents showed the integrity of the wing and main frame which stayed together.
 
15th post
Not by name, but I remember the incident. It was something for sure.

There was a 737 that lost a large portion of the upper fuselage forward of the wing. Flight attendant was sucked out.

In an odd way, both incidents showed the integrity of the wing and main frame which stayed together.
Dave was flight Flight 811 out of Hawaii. He got her back on the ground safely but lost several people. The aircraft was held together by good thoughts.

In the Sim no pilot was ever able to save the aircraft.
 

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom