Aviation Channel 2010 gorillafreundschaft 🤗

Aviation Channel 2010 That was a steep climb🥴

Do they have a cockpit voice recording of the pilot saying, “Pidä olutta.”?

Feels horrible as a passenger though!

i miss flying on this plane, is my favourite plane since i was a child, dont make them like they used to!

@@NikkiEvernight A flew on a 757 for the first time only a few months ago. Thought it was fantastic.

@@NikkiEvernight Horrible, i guess if you're not into Fast Vehicles, it would be "Horrible" I would call it Awesome !

Ever fly the L-1011 ? I've only heard Good things from Previous Pilots.

Lol

You said it, I Didn't!

Forget the jet there was a c130 he can takeoff practically at 1mph those thing are like the big boy stop planes lol

iPetroSS looooooooool

iPetroSS it would take of shorter if everyone lost weight

Riswan Ahmad P. I see what you did there

Riswan Ahmad P. The Finnish are finished.

Aviation Nut Finns*

Isn't it only Kimi of ho says bwoah, not all finish people?

He knows what he's doing

Those are Rolls royce for ya.

You can hear the compressor blades!

I can't hear you over the roar of the engines! *activates roar of the engines*

AviationRoblox There is You Tube that show the Rolls Royce engine community.

The buzzsaw sound of the blade tips going supersonic gets annoying quickly onboard during the climb.

I loath Russians, but there's nothing like the sound of a IL-76 with the first model Kusnetsov engines!

Why of course. I, as a Finn, can confirm this :D

I would guess the pilots are fueled with Salmiakki-kossu.

Ah, Sisu... of course, what else. :)

Mhm, and sisu has to be very strong because Finland custom builds their planes with nokia 3310s aka bricks. Its good though, because if a planewere to crash, nothing would happen.

jet fighters have a shorter takeoff path

Same

+Jacob Hardy (JacobHardy64) he had no trouble getting the gear up right away did he LOL

+leephelaan Co-Pilot: positi... Pilot: Gear Up! :D

+Neil M How the hell did you achieve that?

WTF is benedryl? Speak UK English or simply fuck off!

+Owen DeLong They have very different wings, the 757 wing is much smaller. 125' wing span vs 156' wing span is not essentially the same wing. Wing area is also much greater on the 767.

I know your comment was from 9 years ago, but just wanted to say nice job going into that much detail about how you found the takeoff distance. So how's your life going?

@@thecomedypilot5894😂

v-r

🙌🙌🙌

lol

Akira Akiyama GTA V it's more shorter

Akira Akiyama hey how about the co-pilot ?

engel Eng Crying in the lavatory.

"This aircraft isn't even in GTA Online, captain!"

And since everyone knows it, it is necessary to explain it to everyone? You contradict yourself even faster than this takeoff. Do you have headwind, too?

@@ciesinsk He said “anyone who knows”

​@@adamaviation6236 I admit that my attempt at trolling was not very masterful. :)

@@ciesinsk It was as masterful as You tubes algorithm recommending an 8yr old video

@@ciesinsk oop

They ceased operations on 26th June 2012. RIP.

They ceased operations because of corruption. Well at least we still have finnair

Plane revs engines, plane takes off.

The POINT is how short & fast of a takeoff for such a large plane!

Strong headwind. It's very easy to get a big plane to take off if the headwind is strong enough.

780m I measured that at

nice number

And what is that in freedom units?

@@rmkilc 12 Miller lites

I also never get pushen back in my Seat during landings.......... same as you.

That's the Rolls-Royce RB211 Power pushing you back into the Seat. Just like a Late 60,s Early 70,s Big Block Powered Muscle Car.

@@leofranssen I don't think No One has been pushed back into the Seat during Landing. That would defy the forces of Acceleration, Only during Takeoffs should you be pushed back into the Seat.

Bill McCandless No, engines are more likely to fail at maximum stress, like during the takeoff where it is essential to get the aircraft off the runway expeditiously. That throttle back is "climb thrust", a predetermined setting (that is usually less than max setting) of the throttles that it can continue climbing leisurely and safely on its route (You don't floor the accelerator of your car to drive right up to the top of a hill). There is no longer any hurry to get off the runway anymore, at about 1500 feet they just power back and climb away...

Bill McCandless The throttle back saves fuel and reduces wear and tear on the engine. A jet engine constantly being run 90-95% of full power will not last as long as engine that is run around 85%. The difference is significant. Part of the reason the early A340-200 and -300 series aircraft are expensive to fly was because the CFMs didn't give enough power, requiring higher thrust settings that both increased fuel consumption and spiked the maintenance bill.

I've got a question comment: As a passenger, I think a pilot outside the "norms" should have a good reason. Can you give me a reason why this pilot could be doing that?

I remember a flight from London to Zürich in th early morning, we were less than 10 passengers, strong wind in London = I never experienced such a short takeoff roll. It was ridiculous for an airliner. The B757 is a rocketship.

@@12345fowler I rode jumpseat in a nearly empty UPS DC8 with the CFMs out of Newark one night in 1999. Now that thing was flat out amazing.

Compare this to the Hawker Tridents -only the curvature of the earth finally got them off the ground !!!

I gave you your 134th up thumb b'coz the 757 was originally designed by Hawker Siddeley as the HS.134 'Airbus' hence the British engines. It was to replace the HS Trident way back in the early to mid seventies.

@@ronnieince4568 There is no curvature of the earth

That would be amazung GET 90 on a 737 ! Talk about overpowered

HEAR HEAR!

I know right?! A 757 MAX would be fantastic

Michael Flatman Indeed the GE90's fan diameter is roughly the size of the whole 737 fuselage. It would probably rip the poor 737 apart.

nigahiga6400 The 737 and 757 fuselages - above the floor crease - are the same diameter. 737 baggage hold is smaller, though.

The B757 is an overpowered aircraft (at least the ones which have the Rolls-Royce RB211 engines). The RB211 are even used in the B767, which is larger than the B757.

Correct. The 757 has much more power than it needs, which unfortunately in a time where fuel efficiency is everything to airlines, has proven to be its downfall. An amazing plane though.

rigdon I didn't know that the 757 had a "downfall."

Gary Clement Its downfall is its efficiency, or lack thereof, the majority of which is down to its overkill engines. It's great for passengers, but not so much when you're paying the fuel bills.

rigdon Seems to me that it's been a very successful aircraft with a lot of sales, and those overly powerful engines may be because it's a narrow body that can cross the Atlantic.

Because it ceased operations on June 26, 2012

I know right! At first I was certain this is from Microsoft Flight Simulator, because there the player can create their own airlines and slap the logo on the aircraft. Then I was like "damn, those are some great graphics"...

It’s about wind not about the name of the company

Those L-1011s also cruised nose high very prominently, and I remember how comfortable it was and the flight attendants having to muscle those food carts up the isle while in cruise... back when they actually fed you hot meals on domestic flights in coach. Last one I flew on (Delta) was into Denver/Stapleton and it was a rough landing after a major snowstorm. We were the first to land after our assigned runway was plowed and I remember feeling the aircraft slide sideways and the thrust reversers kicking up what appeared to be dirty snow mixed with pebbles over the wings out of my window seat over the wing (I could actually hear crackling of something hitting the side of the lower fuselage...so no telling what went in engines 1 and 3). The captain actually apologized for the scary landing. Hell of a memory to finish my last L-1011 flight!

Nfarce Since you mentioned about the nose high attitude of the Tri-Star in cruise--it's true and I remember back when I would fly out West from ATL to SAN or LAX in the 80's and 90's and at cruising altitude if I happened to be in a window seat on starboard side-which is where I usually sat on Westbound flights and looking North, I would often see one zip by in the distance headed in the opposite direction with that distinctive nose up attitude while in level flight with the contrails behind it...other aircraft do it at cruising altitude as well but not quite to the extreme of the L1011....as I have stated in the past, my all-time fav airliner was the L1011 with the 727 following and lastly being the early DC9 models prior to the MD80's starting with the DC9-10 on thru to the DC9-50. Those planes had so much character not to mention the noisy, smokey takeoffs and had much more character than the new generation 737-300-- 757/767/777's and Airbus aircraft of today all being new generation airliners. I loved the L1011 because it was very roomy, comfy in coach and easy to walk about and stretch without it becoming too crowded in the aisles or rear galley...it had so many lavatories in the rear-aft all lined up side by side wall to wall, long wait times in line to use the toilet was quite rare. I remember in the center lav that if you placed your ear against the back wall you could hear that center RB211 screaming with the S duct intake & engine being just feet away on the other side of that wall...I miss that old plane--it was awesome,with it's Rolls Royce engines it was easy to recognize by sound without actually seeing it, from inside the terminal you could hear it on startup even if you didn't see it... a unique plane and had very beautiful lines in it's design and to me, it was more attractive than it's competitor the DC10 of which was a great airliner but not as much to me as the Tristar...

The L-1011 TriStar is my Favorite Aircraft also, the Looks and Design was Amazing. I also like the Boeing 727 TriJet also, my Favorite Twin Engine would definitely be the 757, with the RB211,s Such a Powerful Airplane.

The exact opposite of the high altitude airport at MEX. I've flown out of there many times (as a passenger). But I still get nervous how long it takes to get airborne. Even in narrowbody jets. Are we really gonna make it? Of course we do, every time.

+jeremeh911 and the one passenger on board got a great ride too :)

You can see a very full wind sock at 1:09

I have a very full cum sock

Yeah, you can hear the wind on the microphone.

giggety

first plane I ever flew on was an MD-82 and that felt like a rocket taking off, I was pinned into my seat :) Fell in love there and then.

dont forget Frank whittle! without him, we would still be flying propliners!

And high altitudes.

That's the Power of Thrust to Weight Ratio. The 757 was a High Performance Aircraft.

I love watching the Fedex Md-11's at the SLC airport taking off into a strong head wind fully loaded with freight. Those things climb like Rockets. Of course they're never fully loaded with fuel.

RB 211's are some of the best sounding engines you'll hear!

Shame a mega super jumbo with 8 RB211s would not be economic!

Chris This frame though is a PW2040-powered 757.

All Air Finland planes all 5 of them all 757s are powered by RB 211s.

+Britt Unculus Were. The airline went bust in June 2012, with criminal charges issued in 2014.

Presumably, he was light on the load, or there was a seriously boisterous headwind. The 757 also has a set of some terrifically powerful jet engines adding to the short distance witnessed here.

MileHighClub211 Yeah, you can hear those beasts reaching maximum output in no time. They rotated just out of the gate. Nice to have it when you need it!

Rich Green Yep, certainly! I hear some of those 757 pilot's accept nothing but maximum power when departing with a soulless airplane!

just look at the ocean... crazy windy gusping waves .

I think that his Vmu is very close to or equal to Vr, equates to a very light aircraft.

I wish you good luck in your spotting sir!

Was that about 2-3k feet, that is short, even for such a overpowered aircraft. My dad flew KC-135s (military 707) for 23 years, and he still says a 757 climbs like a bat out of hell every time he flies commercially on one.

ye

*[Immediately takes off in a laser]* Oh, yeah, instant flip. I'm such a baller. *[Gets magically shot down by enemy jets that spawn behind you]* Well...

Because GTA physics are highly unrealistic

The reason it was able take off so early is because this airline no longer holds passenger. That airplane is empty, and probably doesn't hold much fuel either.

And in madeira is very common to have strong winds so that probably helped a bit

Flown on loads of the RB211 powered 757's, pilots always said they were overpowered and a bit like the sports car of commercial jets at the time (1990's). They made a great noise too.

haha, clever comment :p

+Sukhrajah It looks as if it took off in less than 2500 feet. Amazing.

+Patrick Hogan It's close. The threshold is displaced so 3000 feet would be a solid estimate, I think.

+001savagE I'd have thought that solidity would be a hindrance to lifting off into the heavens, Mr Savage. Ethereal thoughts, take off on a Sunday and a stiff opposing breeze might help, though..........

P

Airframe is a gem. However, I'm basing my estimation on the use of the displaced threshold. Beyond that, you can add the runway markings. The first set of hash marks indicates 500 feet, the solid blocks, 1000 feet and each set beyond that is 500 feet.

***** ...and, not to forget, a pilot full on a paranoia flash "PUUUUUL THE FUCK UP!!!! WE'RE NOT GONNA MAKE IT!!!! "

Looks like he got it off in about 3000 feet. Not bad at all!

That takeoff was about half as short than at SNA, I fly out of there all the time. Probably had very few passengers on board, if any.

lol, maybe, just maybe the most accurate KZfaq post EVER lol

t' art of clickbait

Here's the most useless reply EVER. Except you have to make it clickbaity by adding a question mark at the end for no reason. "Fastest takeoff EVER?"

Randy The Americans are very prone to that.

They are no longer made. Boeing stopped making B757s after sales reached 1,500 or so in 2003-2005 (not sure of the exact year) The B757 is an endangered species.

+Mastacheifa 118 *plane*

+Mastacheifa 118 the production of B757's lasted till 28 oct 2004, the last airplane deliverd was for Shanghai Airlines

+Mark Leenders Yep!

+Mastacheifa 118 : After reading your comment, I checked the Boeing 757 article on Wikipedia, and it says 1,050 have been produced, and that production ended in 2004.

Accurate, as many pilots report that the 757 is somewhat sluggish to respond to roll inputs compared to the larger, but developed-in-tandem, 767. The 767 has "spoilerons." 757 is still one of the largest narrowbodies we've had.

+Stormer Swiftpaws I was thinking the same thing ... short trip. Too bad that KLH 747 that crashed into another 747 in the Canary Islands couldn't have taken off so quick but it had a full tank.

Flight from Madeira to Helsinki takes 5½-6 hours, so i doubt there were VERY little fuel. Of course there is a possibility it was a transit flight to pick up passengers from somewhere else, so I shut up.

You mean a ferry flight?

***** If that's the term for no pax flight to other airport than Helsinki, then yes.

Yep it's a ferry flight.

+pingpongpung Nah... It's actually pretty impressive

Why enough said?

They are Rolls. But not that much more powerful than the Pratts. T/O performance is similar on the two. The RR's show more balls once up high when heavy.

+Nuke Gaming TV Yep the 737NGs are slugs and ground hogs. Because of the engines and wing design it will never match the short field performance of the 757. And it only even remotely comes close to this performance when they are extremely weight restricted. Ala the 737-800 Short Field Performance equipped flying for GOL Brazil out of Santos Dumont Airport. The best replacement will be the A321 Neo LR with the larger and more powerful Geared Turbofans, approaching the mid to high 30k lbs of thrust per engine.

+Emil Serafino I'll pass on anything that says Airbus. Don't want to ride in anything built by the French, even Peugeots. Even if the Brits try to find all the errors the French make. Boeing forever!

I think the whole Boeing sucks, Airbus rules and vice versa thing is silly and childish. They are both great manufacturers for what it is albeit with a different vision. Being that I'm unbiased and enjoy both manufacturers equally I can say without hesitation that the 737 and that includes the new MAX series is still NOT an adequate replacement for the 900-1000 757 airframes still in service that will need to be replaced within the next 5-10 years. The older 5 to 600 757s have already been retired and scrapped after 28-34 years of service. A high powered NEO LR will be the type airlines go for unless Boeing decides to re-engine and modernize the 757 putting it back into production as a MAX model or NG type. And by all accounts thus far no matter the pressure and lobbying from AAL, UAL & DAL they are holding their ground and sticking by their 737MAX or 787-8 business model. Boeing has made it clear they are willing to concede this market to Airbus as their pride and ignorance of the 737 product as a one size fits all solution has prevented them from understanding that the 757 market is not a niche one. A 752NG or MAX would blow the A321NEO LR away in every facet.

BOEING > AIRBUS

yes very fast. i would say the average is 30 secs

LMAO!

i think its called a dead cat not dead kitten lol