Is there anything she can't do?

[tor lives]

Who cares if the 747 can't scribble on a bit of paper with crayons

Earth bound mortal. [/quote]

I seem to recall when a 747 did in actual fact perform some unanticipated and spectacular inflight "aerobatics", (China Airlines 747 SP, 18 Feb 1985). After barrel-rolling, breaking the sound barrier, and shedding parts, she held together and landed safely in San Francisco. I say again.....is the anything the mighty 747 cannot do?
TOR[/quote]

- It was more a aileron induced roll that developed into a spiral dive shedding parts as you say. A true barrel roll requires elevator, aileron and rudder input - not just aileron. Did that 747 fly again - not being smarty pants here - I just don't know. BTW, an actual "barrel roll" is not even considered a aerobatic manoeuvre in the Aresti (bible) catalogue. Now, if the 74 could do a slow roll or a snap roll- then I'd be even more impressed! [/quote]

Really Adam??....you are going to counter with semantics .
I think I have proven my point .
And yes the 747 SP in question did fly again.....just like the United 747 that had the major explosive decompression out of Honolulu after loosing the forward cargo door.....hey they are Boeings .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_006
TOR

[Adam the Akrodude]

Who cares if the 747 can't scribble on a bit of paper with crayons

Earth bound mortal.

I seem to recall when a 747 did in actual fact perform some unanticipated and spectacular inflight "aerobatics", (China Airlines 747 SP, 18 Feb 1985). After barrel-rolling, breaking the sound barrier, and shedding parts, she held together and landed safely in San Francisco. I say again.....is the anything the mighty 747 cannot do?
TOR[/quote]

- It was more a aileron induced roll that developed into a spiral dive shedding parts as you say. A true barrel roll requires elevator, aileron and rudder input - not just aileron. Did that 747 fly again - not being smarty pants here - I just don't know. BTW, an actual "barrel roll" is not even considered a aerobatic manoeuvre in the Aresti (bible) catalogue. Now, if the 74 could do a slow roll or a snap roll- then I'd be even more impressed! [/quote]

Really Adam??....you are going to counter with semantics .
I think I have proven my point .
And yes the 747 SP in question did fly again.....just like the United 747 that had the major explosive decompression out of Honolulu after loosing the forward cargo door.....hey they are Boeings .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China_Airlines_Flight_006
TOR[/quote]

Yes, the 74 is a tough bird, maybe the toughest airliner ever and certainly the fastest, but it ain't aerobatic. What it did was survive a departure from controlled flight - it was not a "aerobatic manoeuvre". A 74 would not be able to perform even a Graduate aerobatic sequence, let alone the Unlimited on I posted. Still, given all this I very much doubt a A380 would survive the same event (+5.1G - impressive!), then a A380 would not have let the aircrew do this in the first place- "I'm sorry Capt Min-Yuan, I can't let you do that!". Where's Capt "Salty" when I need him? This indeed could be a cool discussion with Salty!

[tor lives]

Where's Capt "Salty" when I need him? This indeed could be a cool discussion with Salty!

Yeah.....it would be good to have Salty back.

[Adam the Akrodude]

Where's Capt "Salty" when I need him? This indeed could be a cool discussion with Salty!

Yeah.....it would be good to have Salty back.

Hopefully he checks us out occassionally for the odd chuckle!