@more1980sgamer: Landing Airplanes With Engine Trouble

Landybitz 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 :

Old news, Thunderbirds did this in 1969. 😁😁

AgateGnu 68552 :

What it the larger aircraft has engine problems

The Good Guy! :

This has to be a trump’s idea 💡

motorsportsq :

mid air collision final boss 💔

GS :

so you want 2 accidents instead of 1

ĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪĪ :

can planes slow down in the air

Lil YG :

Oh yes, engine problem i cant land on a stable gound, so let me land on a floating moving target….

3chiry :

i can give u 100 reasons why this cant work🥀

Plane knowledge guy :

It’s not arrow dinamic and that big plane will bearly be holding its self up

BuzzTimmy :

What if the larger airplane also has engine problems

Mörtájn :

Bro really out here talking about it like it’s possible and he’s amused by it😂

Gio_crazyy :

Tell me why this wouldn’t work

giruga89 :

Because life isn't a cartoon

mrmorv :

A guy in aviation here. I could create an essay on why this would never work and is a sci fi concept, which I will do now! Buckle in for a lesson 😁 1. The flight formation complexity; when you have two large aircraft; maintaining a tight formation is incredibly challenging. We aren't talking thunderbirds skill, but something much scarier. Keep in mind the landing plane is having a malfunction, or possible engine failure. Trying to land a possibly damaged aircraft which is also unstable in air, and could have unpredictable yaw and roll movements, make it impossible to simultaneously conduct a formation flight in this manner. 2. The bottom aircraft that catches the failing aircraft is going to experience IMMENSE turbulence like never before from the downwash and vortices of the plane above. No current pilot in our world has the training for that. This entire aircraft essentially has a roller ramp for a top fuselage, which will affect both aircrafts stability through rapid changes in airflow. 3. The instantaneous moment any aircraft touches that ramp, it would act like one COLOSSUS airbrake, which can be devastating. Thats because the increased aerodynamic drag and flow separation from having a second aircraft on the back would dramatically reduce lift and could potentially stall the rescue aircrafts engines. 4. Mechanically, we have no materials that could survive this. Let me explain. The technology required to make this bottom aircraft would probably weigh something similar to a C-17/C-5, i would guesstimate 300,000 lbs. The interworking mechanisms of the bottom aircraft need to be incredibly robust, and be able to withstand sudden load transfer without sheering mid transfer. With everything I have already explained, majority of all modern materials in aviation would sheer right away. There is a reason KC 135's have so many crew chiefs. They are always getting repaired. NEXT SECTION IN REPLIES

Kalpesh Rabadiya :

what if they both have enjin troubel

ImAlwaysRight :

How do u do this with an Airbus a380

senatorXTik :

You won't have time to get the larger airplane there

ram_vr :

What if the larger airplane catches on fire?

KobeSweeterTTV :

yeah let's build like 5000 airplanes for 10's and 100's of millions of dollars each to disperse across the world to potentially collect the small percentage of planes that have problems... make sense buddy?

i♡ted :

what if the larger one has engine trouble? would they need another larger one?

566 :

Why not just plan with parachute 🪂?

ℂｈⓇⒾ𝕊т𝕚𝕒ⓝ🤴 :

Who have all d money for tha 💀??

Kameron Tyler :

ZanMan :

Why do we need this 😭🙏

B :

Not realistic. Usually the plane with engine trouble would have already crashed by the time the rescue aircraft is in the air