'Blind' Qantas jet guided into airport by 747 missing 2 engines!



  • Full article: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=657309

    And the suspect 747:

     747 with 2 engines



  • Perhaps my reading comprehension has sunck to a new low, but nowhere in that article does it mention missing engines.



  • snore 



  • @KattMan said:

    Perhaps my reading comprehension has sunck to a new low, but nowhere in that article does it mention missing engines.

    Boeing 747s have four engines.  Clearly that is not a 747. 



  • Not only is the obviously wrong picture shown, but the rest of the details in the story seem suspect, too.  "Blind" because it lost its weather radar antenna?  Unless there are many other instruments on that antenna, I fail to see how that would make them "blind".  For starters: GPS?  Magnetic compass? Communication with air traffic control?  Things that make me go, "hmmm...."



  • @KattMan said:

    Perhaps my reading comprehension has sunck to a new low, but nowhere in that article does it mention missing engines.
    Apparently, the plane pictured, while labeled as a 747 in the article, cannot possibly be a 747 because all 747s have 4 engines (or so wikipedia tells me), not 2.  Hence the "missing engines" joke.

    The real WTF is the OP expects people to know that.  As if the number of engines on major boeing airliner models should be common knowledge.



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Boeing 747s have four engines.  Clearly that is not a 747. 
     

    The OP specified two engines were missing, aeronoob.



  • @merreborn said:

    Apparently, the plane pictured, while labeled as a 747 in the article, cannot possibly be a 747 because all 747s have 4 engines (or so wikipedia tells me), not 2.  Hence the "missing engines" joke.

    The real WTF is the OP expects people to know that.  As if the number of engines on major boeing airliner models should be common knowledge.

    I would expect most WTF readers (techno-geeks of various kinds) to know that.

    It's also "missing" the upper deck.  I certainly assume that most people know at least that and/or the fact that they have 4 engines.  Up until the A380 started commercial service almost exactly a year ago, the 747 was the only commercial plane to have both of these features.  And it's still readily distinguished from the A380 since only the A380's upper deck extends for the full length of its fuselage.

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.



  • Never mind the fact that the story correctly captions this image as: The Air New Zealand Boeing 777-200. (Sean Lygo)



  • @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    I would expect most WTF readers (techno-geeks of various kinds) to know that.

    Your expectations are wildly misplaced.  I wouldn't expect you to know the differences between a chromatic scale and a major scale without some explanation.  Not all geeks are interested in the same things.  The only commonality you can perhaps expect here is a knowledge of IT technologies, not aerospace.

    @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.

    As stated above, you might be an airplane fan, but I am not.



  • Well the real WTF on that page is the article saying: Russell Brand resigns from radio over 'sex with granddaughter' controversy




  •  The caption below the photo says it's a 777-200. Looks accurate to me. Is this a "WTF" because you can't read photo captions? Seriously, I have no clue what this posting is about.



  • They have updated the article. It originally stated that the Air NZ jet was a 747. It's now changed to state that was a 777.



  • @blakeyrat said:

     The caption below the photo says it's a 777-200. Looks
    accurate to me. Is this a "WTF" because you can't read photo captions?
    Seriously, I have no clue what this posting is about.

     

    Earlier
    today the caption said it was a 747. I didn't take a screenshot, so I
    can't prove it, but I can testify to the OP having (had) a valid
    point. 

     

    Dang, too slow. 



  • VOR & GPS are separate systems and the pilot should be able to find the closest airports with either (GPS is a given, and they have charts with the frequency for each airports VOR). If he could communicate with another aircraft, then he could do so with the closest airports as well. This story about a weather radar malfunctioning and causing a "blind flight" seems too WTFy to me.

    edit: also, this kind of aircraft has gotta have a backup for each navigational system. If it lost an antenna it should still be able to use another.



  • @sootzoo said:

    @morbiuswilters said:

    Boeing 747s have four engines.  Clearly that is not a 747. 
     

    The OP specified two engines were missing, aeronoob.

    Right.  I know.  That was my point: the caption and article said 747 and the picture was not of a 747.  That's what the WTF was.  That's what I explained to the person I was replying to.  That's what I didn't think was very interesting or funny in my first comment. 



  • @KattMan said:

    I wouldn't expect you to know the differences between a chromatic scale and a major scale without some explanation.

    One compares the weight of colors and the other compares the weight of officers, duh.



  • An airplane would need to know weather information, such as wind speeds at different altitudes and air stability, for safety reasons (avoid storms and turbulance), as well as economic reasons (maximize the use of a tail wind to save time and fuel).  

     The use of the word 'blind' is misleading because it implies that the pilot can't see in front of him.  But, because weather information is limited, the use of the word 'blind' is not out of place.



  • @DaEagle said:

    Full article: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=657309

    And the suspect 747:

     747 with 2 engines

    Isn't the "suspect" plane supposed the be the Qantas one?


  • @ActionMan said:

    Isn't the "suspect" plane supposed the be the Qantas one?
     

    You mispelt Quantas



  • @morbiuswilters said:

    Boeing 747s have four engines.  Clearly that is not a 747. 


    yes it is, two dropped off remember



  • @j6cubic said:

    @KattMan said:

    I wouldn't expect you to know the differences between a chromatic scale and a major scale without some explanation.

    One compares the weight of colors and the other compares the weight of officers, duh.
    Don’t you confuse it with the mayor scale, though.



  • @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.
     

    An "airplane-fan"?()

    If you really knew anything about 'planes, you'd know that those things are called "propellers"!

     

     

    () - For full effect, read this bit to yourself using a Lady Bracknell "A handbag?" voice.



  • @DaveK said:

    @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.
     

    An "airplane-fan"?(*)

    If you really knew anything about 'planes, you'd know that those things are called "propellers"!

    You're right!  I guess that would make me a propeller-head!  Bringing us full circle back to standard IT geekdom :)



  • @PJH said:

    @ActionMan said:

    Isn't the "suspect" plane supposed the be the Qantas one?
     

    You mispelt Quantas

     Is that a joke about Qantas not caring about 'u', or do you not realise it's an acronym for Queensland And Northern Territory Air Service?



  • @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    @DaveK said:

    @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.
     

    An "airplane-fan"?(*)

    If you really knew anything about 'planes, you'd know that those things are called "propellers"!

    You're right!  I guess that would make me a propeller-head!  Bringing us full circle back to standard IT geekdom :)
     

    But what about propfans? I prefer turbofans personally. Especially the high-bypass flavor.



  • @too_many_usernames said:

    @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    @DaveK said:

    @AssimilatedByBorg said:

    But then again, I am a bit of an airplane-fan.
     

    An "airplane-fan"?(*)

    If you really knew anything about 'planes, you'd know that those things are called "propellers"!

    You're right!  I guess that would make me a propeller-head!  Bringing us full circle back to standard IT geekdom :)
     

    But what about propfans? I prefer turbofans personally. Especially the high-bypass flavor.

    Mmmmmm..... crunchy turbofans... <drool>



  • @DaEagle said:

    Full article: http://news.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=657309

    And the suspect 747:

     747 with 2 engines

    So that's where Donny Darko's engine came from!


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.