Nomination - world's ugliest airplane
02-11-2010, 11:12 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: forever fo
Posts: 2,413
In the words of Eric Cartman, on the Ginger Kids Episode, EW! SICK!
The Transavia PL-12 Airtruk is a single-engine agricultural biplane aircraft designed and built by the Transavia Corporation in Australia. The Airtruk is of all metal construction with the cockpit mounted above a tractor engine and short pod fuselage with rear doors. It has twin tail booms with two unconnected tails. Its first flight was in 22 April 1965, and was certified on 10 February 1966. Source Transavia PL-12 Airtruk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Originally Posted by FlyOrDie
The Transavia PL-12 Airtruk is a single-engine agricultural biplane aircraft designed and built by the Transavia Corporation in Australia. The Airtruk is of all metal construction with the cockpit mounted above a tractor engine and short pod fuselage with rear doors. It has twin tail booms with two unconnected tails. Its first flight was in 22 April 1965, and was certified on 10 February 1966. Source Transavia PL-12 Airtruk - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
02-11-2010, 01:19 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 277
Originally Posted by 727gm
Beautiful airplane with the right paint job:
Photos: Messerschmitt Me-163B-1a Komet (replica) Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
Photos: Messerschmitt Me-163B-1a Komet (replica) Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net
True, but that variation is a glider. The landing gear of the 163 was designed to fall off after takeoff, so while it was afloat, it didn't look that bad. But when it was parked on the ground, whoah-nelly was it hideous.
Oh and a nice paint job will make any model look half decent, just watch What Not to Wear on TLC..
02-11-2010, 03:47 PM
#28
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 18
Dhc-6-200
Originally Posted by jrutt
frankin otter
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0622; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-034-AD;
Amendment 39-15999; AD 2009-18-03], RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-6, PC- 6-H1, PC-6-H2, PC-6/350, PC-6/350-H1, PC-6/350-H2, PC-6/A, PC-6/A-H1, PC-6/A-H2, PC-6/B-H2, PC-6/B1-H2, PC-6/B2-H2, PC-6/B2-H4, PC-6/C-H2, and PC-6/C1-H2 Airplanes
Findings of corrosion, wear and cracks in the upper wing strut fittings on some PC-6 aircraft have been reported in the past. It is possible that the spherical bearing of the wing strut fittings installed in the underwing can be loose in the fitting or cannot rotate because of corrosion. In this condition, the joint cannot function as designed and fatigue cracks may then develop. Undetected cracks, wear and/or corrosion in this area could cause failure of the upper attachment fitting, leading to failure of the wing structure and subsequent loss of control of the aircraft.
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
Think the Demon Deacons could use a vertical wind tunnel!
02-11-2010, 04:50 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: FDX MD11 Capt in MEM
Posts: 885
Originally Posted by Digger079
Hmmm This one needs to be aware of AD; 14 CFR Part 39
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0622; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-034-AD;
Amendment 39-15999; AD 2009-18-03], RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-6, PC- 6-H1, PC-6-H2, PC-6/350, PC-6/350-H1, PC-6/350-H2, PC-6/A, PC-6/A-H1, PC-6/A-H2, PC-6/B-H2, PC-6/B1-H2, PC-6/B2-H2, PC-6/B2-H4, PC-6/C-H2, and PC-6/C1-H2 Airplanes
Findings of corrosion, wear and cracks in the upper wing strut fittings on some PC-6 aircraft have been reported in the past. It is possible that the spherical bearing of the wing strut fittings installed in the underwing can be loose in the fitting or cannot rotate because of corrosion. In this condition, the joint cannot function as designed and fatigue cracks may then develop. Undetected cracks, wear and/or corrosion in this area could cause failure of the upper attachment fitting, leading to failure of the wing structure and subsequent loss of control of the aircraft.
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
Think the Demon Deacons could use a vertical wind tunnel!
[Docket No. FAA-2009-0622; Directorate Identifier 2009-CE-034-AD;
Amendment 39-15999; AD 2009-18-03], RIN 2120-AA64
Airworthiness Directives; Pilatus Aircraft Ltd. Models PC-6, PC- 6-H1, PC-6-H2, PC-6/350, PC-6/350-H1, PC-6/350-H2, PC-6/A, PC-6/A-H1, PC-6/A-H2, PC-6/B-H2, PC-6/B1-H2, PC-6/B2-H2, PC-6/B2-H4, PC-6/C-H2, and PC-6/C1-H2 Airplanes
Findings of corrosion, wear and cracks in the upper wing strut fittings on some PC-6 aircraft have been reported in the past. It is possible that the spherical bearing of the wing strut fittings installed in the underwing can be loose in the fitting or cannot rotate because of corrosion. In this condition, the joint cannot function as designed and fatigue cracks may then develop. Undetected cracks, wear and/or corrosion in this area could cause failure of the upper attachment fitting, leading to failure of the wing structure and subsequent loss of control of the aircraft.
We are issuing this AD to require actions to correct the unsafe condition on these products.
Think the Demon Deacons could use a vertical wind tunnel!
Ever heard of a UV-18?
02-11-2010, 05:36 PM
#30
No one's home
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,091
Shorts had a history of building some ugly airplanes. For instance the SB.3 which looks as if it has a problem with its proboscis. 
Or the SC.1 for example.
And Boeing engineers must have had a bad night before they came up with the X-32B. That Joker-like intake and overall shape, if it had won, would have had fighter pilots wearing C-5 patches when they entered the bars.
Or the SC.1 for example.
And Boeing engineers must have had a bad night before they came up with the X-32B. That Joker-like intake and overall shape, if it had won, would have had fighter pilots wearing C-5 patches when they entered the bars.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
