Aeroplane Strike By Lightning

[weisoon]

Personally had lightning strike twice so far. Once on the wing and the other right in front on the nose. The one that hit the nose radome took out the weather radar and for the rest of the flight, we have to get reports from aircraft ahead of us to update on the weather enroute. After landing, one black patch on the radome!

Do not know if the pax can feel the 'rumbling' or not but up front, only got blinded by a ray of light and then very light/soft boom. Think most time the pax will not feel anything except sudden brightness.

[minsmarine]

Guys, there are rules regarding such sensitive issues that we ought not to joke about to respect our fellow men.

Sorry, really forgotten about the rule. My intention was just to joke.

Thank for deleting my paragraph

Cheers

[Achilles Tang]

Anyway... since some of us are pilots... care to share how bad turbulence can get?

One of my trips to Sydney, there was enough turbulence for me to see the 747 wing bend almost 40 degree above horizontal!!! Yikes! I thought the wing was going to snap off!!

[Achilles Tang]

Personally had lightning strike twice so far. Once on the wing and the other right in front on the nose. The one that hit the nose radome took out the weather radar and for the rest of the flight, we have to get reports from aircraft ahead of us to update on the weather enroute. After landing, one black patch on the radome!

Do not know if the pax can feel the 'rumbling' or not but up front, only got blinded by a ray of light and then very light/soft boom. Think most time the pax will not feel anything except sudden brightness.

Did you scream?

[minsmarine]

Personally had lightning strike twice so far. Once on the wing and the other right in front on the nose. The one that hit the nose radome took out the weather radar and for the rest of the flight, we have to get reports from aircraft ahead of us to update on the weather enroute. After landing, one black patch on the radome!

Do not know if the pax can feel the 'rumbling' or not but up front, only got blinded by a ray of light and then very light/soft boom. Think most time the pax will not feel anything except sudden brightness.

Was that the flight from SG to BKK a few months back ?

Were u the one controlling the flight ?

I was a passenger on board for that flight ( If I am right ).

I did feel and knew it was striked, but not all. Even crews were not aware.

Confirmed after seeing black pitch nose.

[minsmarine]

A320 on 777 ?

AT u said "some of us are pilots" though u r not in that industry ?

[Achilles Tang]

Some of us SRC MEMBERS are pilots...

I have personally flown the F16 fighting falcon myself many years ago.

But I was a true ace pilot on the Hellcat V and Banshee, taken down many an evil Kilrathi!

All flight-simulation of course.

[minsmarine]

Wonderful life for pilot than,

They work above the earth and love bottom of the earth

I was told flying is easything ( used to right ), check , take off, read book, landing , check off that's.

And used to be good paid. Currently high pay.

BTW I was wonder who was the pilot for Concord while SIA leased from BA. ( Is asian or european )

[weisoon]

Happened too fast to scream. Just wow! and then look for any instrument failure. Lucky only the weather radar. Not a big issue.

The 747 wing can flap upto 15' before they will snap! Part of the test done by boeing when designing the wing. It can really fly like a bird! The 744 can ride turbulance best among all aircraft. Think worst is the 340 followed by the 777 according to my experience.

Turbulance is mainly caused by unstable air mass or jet streams. During this time of the year, over the bay of bangal is worst. Another is on the descend to Tokyo. Jet streams are like streams of wind upto 200 miles/hr in easterly direction.

Mismarine, the 2 strikes happened quite long ago. Lucky I am not in that BKK flight.

[Achilles Tang]

Oh yeah.... I did remember the Tokyo descent was quite horrid. My ex-boss's face was quite hilarious to watch... she really hated flying.

[minsmarine]

How about 345, I though that's improved on wing ?

Hee hee need to book only on 747 flight rather than 777 in raining season than.

[minsmarine]

Some of us SRC MEMBERS are pilots...

I have personally flown the F16 fighting falcon myself many years ago.

But I was a true ace pilot on the Hellcat V and Banshee, taken down many an evil Kilrathi!

All flight-simulation of course.

U meas @ RSAF (PLA) ?

[Tanzy]

The A340 does have a horrible ride! Especially upfront away from the wing! I do consider myself a seasoned flyer but flying in the A340 made me nauseous.

I don't recall Tokyo having a nasty approach. I remember going over the sea then out of the mist a great big urban jungle appeared! Endless grey on grey with red blinking lights as far as the eye can see.

[Cedric]

Hi Weisoon, how do you find our ATC compared to those of other countries? Is our current clearance still up to 3000ft upon take off from 118.6? before transfer to approach?

[Tanzy]

U meas @ RSAF (PLA) ?

Computer games.

MS Flight Simulator and Wing Commander.

[weisoon]

Hi Weisoon, how do you find our ATC compared to those of other countries? Is our current clearance still up to 3000ft upon take off from 118.6? before transfer to approach?

Singapore ATC still very conservative. seperation between take off and landing still needs about 8 miles. If you go to London or LA, they are 3 miles or less.

SQ normally uses the southerly runway and the frequency changed to tower at 118.25 and yes, always climb to 3000' thereafter transfer to approach 120.30. If you ask this, then I think you already know the reason and maybe you also flying?

[weisoon]

The A340 does have a horrible ride! Especially upfront away from the wing! I do consider myself a seasoned flyer but flying in the A340 made me nauseous.

I don't recall Tokyo having a nasty approach. I remember going over the sea then out of the mist a great big urban jungle appeared! Endless grey on grey with red blinking lights as far as the eye can see.

The A340 always oscillates laterally when it hits turbulence, this is due to its length to fuselage ratio....the aircraft is too long and slender thus whips like a cane...

The 747 has a upper deck and this gives it better ratio and larger fuselage and thus rides turbulence better. It only oscillates vertically.

Likewise the 777-300 is also too long and has bad ride quality.

Too bad the company is trying to retire the 747s as they find it cheaper to operate the 777s. Fuel consumption for 747 is about 10 tons per hour as for the 777s is only 8 tons per hour. Most fuel economy is the A340 at 6 tons per hour.

[Achilles Tang]

Correction: F16 fighting falcon by Infogrames, I think.

I think it took 16 diskettes... back then

[Tanzy]

The A340 always oscillates laterally when it hits turbulence, this is due to its length to fuselage ratio....the aircraft is too long and slender thus whips like a cane...

The 747 has a upper deck and this gives it better ratio and larger fuselage and thus rides turbulence better.  It only oscillates vertically.

Likewise the 777-300 is also too long and has bad ride quality.

Too bad the company is trying to retire the 747s as they find it cheaper to operate the 777s.  Fuel consumption for 747 is about 10 tons per hour as for the 777s is only 8 tons per hour.  Most fuel economy is the A340 at 6 tons per hour.

I love the 744! It's my staple between London and Singapore. It has the nicest and softest landing of all airliners. Probably due to the large wings and ground effect.

The 777 engines sound really nice though.

AT,

5.25" or 3.5", DD or HD?

[Achilles Tang]

Tanzy... 5.25".

I can't remember... or was my favourite F16 game called Falcon 4.0... i think that was 3.5".

I know the ride in to Tokyo was bumpy but it wasn't as scary as the flight over/near Australia at times.

[Tanzy]

Tanzy... 5.25".

I can't remember... or was my favourite F16 game called Falcon 4.0... i think that was 3.5".

I know the ride in to Tokyo was bumpy but it wasn't as scary as the flight over/near Australia at times.

Falcon 4.0 till 7.0 by Microprose I think. They all come in silver boxes.

[Cedric]

Singapore ATC still very conservative. seperation between take off and landing still needs about 8 miles. If you go to London or LA, they are 3 miles or less.

SQ normally uses the southerly runway and the frequency changed to tower at 118.25 and yes, always climb to 3000' thereafter transfer to approach 120.30. If you ask this, then I think you already know the reason and maybe you also flying?

? 8nm? Perhaps you got the rookies at the healms? I remember its usually 5nm or 2mins for heavy behind heavy for Wake turbulance. 118.25 was used during duo ATC plug in. So they changed from 118.6 to 118.25 for good?

So its still 3000? There's no breather for the ATCOs at 3000 lah, I was hoping they'll revert back to 5000. Oh well . . .

Nope, I dun fly, I was an ATCO

[coralreef]

Falcon 4.0 till 7.0 by Microprose I think. They all come in silver boxes.

i still got the box for the 4.0 version...back then...in 1999 when it lauched the 4.0.....the manual was very thick....and it's in CDs.

[Achilles Tang]

Falcon 4.0 till 7.0 by Microprose I think. They all come in silver boxes.

Golly! You're right!! Microprose!!

I still have my CH F16 Flightstick somewhere in my room... hehehe...

[minsmarine]

Correction: F16 fighting falcon by Infogrames, I think.

I think it took 16 diskettes... back then

Oh I c, I played F15 Eagle it's 3.5" 11 Disks

I still have it @ home

Wanna try ?