Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

aeroxplorer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 386 posts

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#291

Post by wiseowise »

gre wrote: post #269
dgudkov wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vast majority of West-built planes that are currently being operated in Russia are stolen from their owners (they were leased and then Russia simply didn't return the planes when the lease was ceased due to the war). Are you proposing to permit sending parts to repair stolen planes?

"The United States and Western allies have seized more than $300 billion in Russian central bank foreign currency assets frozen by sanctions." Really dumb way to doom the US dollar and the world banking system. I guess Russia took a few planes as consolation? https://www.reuters.com/world/yellen-says-legal-obstacles-re...

Because West just decided to do it out of the blue and not in response to full scale invasion of the biggest country in Europe.

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#292

Post by evader01101 »

tguvot wrote: post #135
krisoft wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think the more apples-to-apples comparison here would be a train without breaks, wouldn't it be No. Not really. Russia has the means to produce brakes for their trains. They do not have the means to do the same for these airplanes. So the reality on the ground is that the trains have brakes while the airplanes don't (or they have breaks but with rapidly aging out of compliance parts.)

maybe they can make train brakes, but they can't make bearings.

[dead]

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#293

Post by [deleted] »

kgeist wrote: post #263
attentive wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just a thought, but may be they shouldn't have started a war of invasion then. Not stealing western planes would be good too.

Who are "they"? Civilians who have to fly by plane because they have no other option?

[deleted]

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#294

Post by kashunstva »

WalterBright wrote: post #189
nocoiner wrote: post #149

What’s going to be the effect of increased use of the engine? Airlines like to derate their engines for takeoffs that don’t require full performance in order to save wear and tear; how much quicker are the engines going to require overhaul due to extraordinary reverse thruster usage? I guess the brakes involve more rapidly consumable items, but this seems like a decidedly suboptimal solution when it knocks a good por…

I seriously doubt the thrust reversers significantly shorten the life of the engine for the few seconds they're on. All the reverser is is a couple of hydraulically operated clamshells that close over the exhaust stream forcing it to the side rather than back. Ironically, it doesn't actually "reverse" the thrust. The exhaust stream impinges on the clamshell, pushing the airplane backwards.

> All the reverser is is a couple of hydraulically operated clamshells that close over the exhaust stream forcing it to the side rather than back.

Clamshell and bucket type thrust reversal systems are one way of achieving reversal. The latter are mostly seen on low-bypass turbofans. Large high-bypass engines often use a cold-stream reversal “cascading” system that is more complicated and includes both shunting of the exhaust vector and blocking air intake into the combustion stage. You’ll see this in action on engines where the rear cowling slides backwards to uncover the cascading vanes.

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#295

Post by mjan22640 »

Dalewyn wrote: post #175
Waterluvian wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This feels like “it’s not as bad as it seems. Only three rooms are currently on fire, not twelve.” …They’re disabling brakes?

I think the moral here is there is an unhealthy dash of sensationalism and propaganda that must be sifted away, if we actually want to take any worthwhile information out of this. As the saying goes, the first casualty in war is truth.

I am curious what is the point of the omnipresent "Russia is doomed" propaganda in the first place? People are emotionally uninvested in Russia, and Russia itself is in practice irrelevant. What is to gain here by manipulating the public opinion in this way?

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#296

Post by berdario »

throwaway2037 wrote: post #285
Johnny555 wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>More importantly, there is absolutely no shortage of airplane parts in Russia — they’re just delivered in a more “wink-wink” obscure way. That sounds like a hazard in itself, airlines being forced to buy parts outside of official supply lines makes it much easier for unscrupulous sellers to substitute counterfeit parts.

You raise an interesting point. How does Iran, Cuba, and Syria get parts for any Boeing or Airbus civilian aeroplanes? Or are they all flying Russian aircraft now?

Not every country is sanctioned equally:

Iran is flying mostly western planes, and there were plans to buy more:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air#Future_fleet_plans

DPRK is only flying Russian planes:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Koryo#Current_fleet

As a reminder, Russia lost overnight 78 planes:

https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/russia-sa...

(Of course, Russia also seized planes that were on its territory )

And due to other sanctions and boycotts, lessors are unable to keep their contract up and be paid from Russia (so, Russia is either forced to return the plane, or seize more... Since they already got comprehensively sanctioned, there's not much point in the former)

Also, of course in the long term some countries are going to try to rely more on domestic/friendly production, but Sukhou planes apparently have lots of foreign parts, so switching to use only Sukhou isn't feasible nor a silver bullet

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#298

Post by nocoiner »

Rapzid wrote: post #271
foverzar wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> this kind of ridiculous sensitivity about a country's perception before What's up with these emotive labels? Lots of people (myself included) enjoy klyukva - it's an awesome source of hilariously absurd content. But you'd be surprised how often it actually leaks into supposedly serious reasoning, constantly making you question exactly how far (not even "if") the person you are talking to is detached from objective…

> But you'd be surprised how often it actually leaks into supposedly serious reasoning I live in Texas and let me tell you I believe I know exactly how you feel. A lot of people's entire perception of this state is based on agitprop headlines they consume. To the point where the other day, on HN, everyone is an expert on Texas energy production and policy desperate to dunk on the state based on a headline about a tem…

But if I live here, then I automatically hold a “Texas energy production expert” card, right?

Actually, surely it’d be a badge. Anyway, I automatically get the badge… right, pardner?

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#299

Post by jbergens »

thrway63245 wrote: post #100
bri3d wrote: post #28

I'm curious the actual mechanics of this operation. The main primary-source I found is a Telegram post of an Aeroflot pilot memo [0], but this only discusses the side-effects of reverser only braking, not the mechanics of "disabling the brakes." There is a possibility the brakes are still available and not worn through, and this is a preemptive measure to leave enough brake material to handle an emergency rejected ta…

Thank you for that link. In case anyone else is wondering, this is a Telegram chat with actual pilots in it. There is currently a lot of cursing in that thread about stupid sensational news on the topic, along with an actual explanation. Aeroflot is disabling 1 out of 4 brakes, not all 4. Nobody is actually trying to stop a plane with just reverse thrusters.

> Aeroflot is disabling 1 out of 4 brakes, not all 4

1 out of 4 brakes _so far_...

Re: Aeroflot deactivates brakes on nine aircraft, relies solely on reverse thrust

#300

Post by eesmith »

ramesh31 wrote: post #245
bri3d wrote: post #28

I'm curious the actual mechanics of this operation. The main primary-source I found is a Telegram post of an Aeroflot pilot memo [0], but this only discusses the side-effects of reverser only braking, not the mechanics of "disabling the brakes." There is a possibility the brakes are still available and not worn through, and this is a preemptive measure to leave enough brake material to handle an emergency rejected ta…

>There is a possibility the brakes are still available and not worn through, and this is a preemptive measure to leave enough brake material to handle an emergency rejected takeoff while avoiding "unnecessary" braking on landing by using the reversers instead. The brake question is irrelevent. This will put unimaginable stress on the already taxed engines, which are orders of magnitude more expensive and complex to m…

> unimaginable stress

It's quite imaginable. Already "most of the work of stopping a commercial aircraft is done through the use of thrust reversers", so it's not all that more than they do now.

> We can't see the fact that the engines are about to explode,

There's nothing magical about thrust reversers which make it impossible to inspect for increased engine wear and tear.

Post reply on HN