|
Post by corsair67 on May 22, 2007 12:05:10 GMT 12
Hacksaw blades? Drinking straws more like! ;D
Hacksaw blades would be too heavy!
|
|
|
Post by skyhawkdon on May 30, 2007 15:22:15 GMT 12
From the cockpit photos I have seen of the CT-4F am I correct in that there are NO traditional analogue instruments - it is ALL digital MFD's? Surely that is a bit risky not having any suck and blow back up instruments? Or am I just old fashioned? They must have good generator(s) and battery(ies) - more reliable than the old CT-4B alternator and voltage regulator!
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 30, 2007 15:53:28 GMT 12
That's what it looks like Don. However in the article it does say one of the screens is a back-up to the others. It still struck me as a little dangerous to trust electrics purely - what happens if you're struck by lightning and lose all your screens?
|
|
|
Post by Naki on May 30, 2007 16:57:12 GMT 12
Who suppose to be making these CT-4Fs if they win an order - Raytheon or PAC?
|
|
|
Post by Dave Homewood on May 30, 2007 22:05:29 GMT 12
I guess there is always the chance that PAC may consider selling the production line lock stock and barrel to another party. They considered it once before (at least) back in the NZAI days. However I think PAC needs such a deal as I hear they're pretty slow at the moment for orders, if rumour from an engineer at Rukuhia is to be believed.
|
|
|
Post by flyjoe180 on May 31, 2007 11:52:59 GMT 12
Regarding the avionics, being struck by lightning will screw a lot of aircraft up. The main thing is that the system is protected well and can be reset immediately or have a backup power system. Some new-generation light aircraft (e.g. Cirrus SR20/22) have no analogue flight instruments other than a backup AH/AI, altimeter, and ASI. Even the balance ball is a digital military-style triangle at the top of the PFD. If you lose the electrics completely (both buses) then you have no nav information, and possibly no radios (they are integrated in the Garmin GNS430 GPS units). Freaky eh!
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jun 17, 2007 16:27:31 GMT 12
From the cockpit photos I have seen of the CT-4F am I correct in that there are NO traditional analogue instruments - it is ALL digital MFD's? Surely that is a bit risky not having any suck and blow back up instruments? Or am I just old fashioned? They must have good generator(s) and battery(ies) - more reliable than the old CT-4B alternator and voltage regulator! Correct Don, no analogue instruments except the Clock. Their is a backup electronic instrument (powered by it's own battery) that displays airspeed/attiude heading info etc. Can't remember the exact details of how it's configured/powered. It's pretty standard these days for many aircraft, from A380's to Cessna 182's I had a look over it a week or so back, had some of the systems powered up. Very nice.
|
|
|
Post by Calum on Jun 17, 2007 16:31:43 GMT 12
Who suppose to be making these CT-4Fs if they win an order - Raytheon or PAC? I'd almost certainly say that PAC will build the frame, and probably even install the avionics. The airframe is just a CT-4E, the avionics system is basically that of the Texan II installed into the CT-4E (one less screen), the CT-4F fit was designed and certified by Raytheon Australia, so it's "homegrown" to a large extent The money in this contract isn't in the aircraft manufacture, (and that includes the Texan II) it's the supply of the service for the next 20 yrs. Thats what Raytheon (and every other bidder) wants
|
|