Aviation brain teasers

[brianw999]

Nope, not a sinkhole. The brakes were working perfectly but they were part of the crash cause.

[brianw999]

...and he was flying a Cessna 182 RG.

[Gabriel]

Did he turn downwind?

[3WE]

That's quite the conflict- the brakes were working PERFECTLY BUT were a CAUSE of the crash.

...so if they were working PERFECTLY, I would infer that theywere OPERATED improperly.

The crash happened at the moment of touchdown.

On final the brakes were off.

How do you operate brakes improperly to cause a crash that starts at the moment of touchdown.

The only thing (and I kind of mean the ONLY thing) I can think of is that the dude turned the brakes back on...

...traditionally that usually doesn't cause a crash, as much as an unpleasant response.

...I dunno, we need more hints.

By the way- some background for Brian...a long time ago on a forum far far away- I posted the downwind turn thread...it turned into a very long lived debate with a licensed pilot and career aviation dude insisting that there was 'an issue' with the plane adjusting to the tail wind...and Gabriel pushed me to do it too!

[brianw999]

The brakes were not a cause of the crash.......they were a part of what caused the crash.
A clue...
This particular Cessna 182 RG had 4 wheels !

[Gabriel]

A clue...
This particular Cessna 182 RG had 4 wheels !

With clues like that, misleading leads are not needed.

[Petertenthije]

The only 4 wheel cessna 182s are floatplanes I think. And they would have "interesting" landings on land. But the RG does not necessarily use floats.

[brianw999]

Nonetheless Peter, you have it.

He took off from a hard runway using the float wheels and landed with the float wheels down......

.....which caused the aircraft destruction.

http://youtu.be/a0DJn6KJGF8

[Gabriel]

That was a very good one.
Let's see what teaser Peter gives us now.

[3WE]

Brian:

In response to your teaser, please assume I unleased a vicoius, expeletive-laden, personal attack on you...

...and ban me.

Thanks.



PS I send a similar attack at Gabriel for starting this whole thread.

[Petertenthije]

Someone else may post a riddle. Besides, I have still not had an explanation on the "147 passenger" riddle.

[Gabriel]

Someone else may post a riddle.

Aw, come one.
You surely know some fun riddle that, if not aviation related, can be modified to make it aviation friendly (replace a train for a plane).

Besides, I have still not had an explanation on the "147 passenger" riddle.

I don't know what you mean.

After a few days and nobody getting even close, I gave an explanation to that riddle (I was the one who posted the riddle in first place):

http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost.php?p=617385&postcount=57

Here this riddle was "closed" and asked for someone else to post a new one.

After that, you offered an explanation too:

http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost.php?p=617393&postcount=60

And finally, I told you that your approach gave the correct result but that I didn't understand the logic behind it, and asked you please to explain it to me.

http://forums.jetphotos.net/showpost.php?p=617400&postcount=65

And we've had 2 more riddles after that:
Turning downwind (posted by 3WE and correctly answered by Brian)
Cessna float plane (posted by Brian and correctly answered by you).

Since there are no "pending" riddles, and you are the one who solved the last riddle, now it's your turn to post a riddle.

(If, in addition to a new riddle, you want to explain the logic behind your mathematically correct solution to the 147 passengers riddle, you are more than welcome too)

[Petertenthije]

Following scenario:


Your the captain of a 747 freighter;
Your cargo is 1.000.000 live african swallows
To be precise, these are the unladen variant of african swallows!
Average weight per swallew is 20 gram. Therefor a total weight of 20.000 KG.
Upon take-off the swallows are stored in boxes.
The boxes are safely secured to the floor.


Unfortunately halfway through the voyage there is heavy turbulance. All packaging breaks and all birds escape. They are now flying circles in the cargo hold.


You make an emergency landing with all the birds still flying freely in the hold.


How does this affect your landing weight.

[Petertenthije]

As for the explanation on the 147 passengers, the easiest way to do so is with a table or four.



In this example there are three passengers. Each seating option shown below. The last passenger has two scenarios going favourably, and two scenarios going badly. Thus 50/50.

1 2 3
G G G
B B G
B G B
B B B



In this example there are four passengers. Each seating option shown below. The last passengers has four options going favourably, and four options going badly. Again 50/50. Note this list was simply created by copying the list for three passengers and pasting it twice, then adding G behind the first paste and B behind the second paste.

1 2 3 4
G G G G
B B G G
B G B G
B B B G
+
G G G B
B B G B
B G B B
B B B B



Add a passenger, and you're still looking at 50/50. Eight good scenarios and eight bad scenarios.

1 2 3 4 5
G G G G G
B B G G G
B G B G G
B B B G G
G G G B G
B B G B G
B G B B G
B B B B G
+
G G G G B
B B G G B
B G B G B
B B B G B
G G G B B
B B G B B
B G B B B
B B B B B



And why not, here's the six passenger option. Again we end up with 50/50, this time 16 good and 16 bad scenarios.

1 2 3 4 5 6
G G G G G G
B B G G G G
B G B G G G
B B B G G G
G G G B G G
B B G B G G
B G B B G G
B B B B G G
G G G G B G
B B G G B G
B G B G B G
B B B G B G
G G G B B G
B B G B B G
B G B B B G
B B B B B G
+
G G G G G B
B B G G G B
B G B G G B
B B B G G B
G G G B G B
B B G B G B
B G B B G B
B B B B G B
G G G G B B
B B G G B B
B G B G B B
B B B G B B
G G G B B B
B B G B B B
B G B B B B
B B B B B B



You'll notice that with each additional passenger the number of scenarios doubles, but the new options all even each other out again.

Note that each list is created by copying the previous list and pasting it twice. Behind the first paste the G was added and behind the second paste the B was added. This was repeated three times, but can be repeated as often as you like.

[3WE]

Thanks to the media on this one:

Go Here:

Read this: http://blogs.wsj.com/corporate-intel.../?mod=yahoo_hs

Each traditional pair of winglets on the 737 cuts fuel consumption by 3.5% to 4% on flights of more than 1,000 nautical miles.

The riddle is how much does it cut fuel consumption of flights of less than 1000 nautical miles?