Seen Over Your House Today

[Captain Canada]

Great stuff, Hawkeye. I'll have to check out this flighaware and see what's going on over my house !

[GTX]

Had to put up with low flying F-111s doing beat ups including dump an burns for the last few days at work!

Regards,

Greg

[Hawkeye]

First B747 I have seen with only two engines!

The distortion from the ice crystals in the air really makes seeing the outboard engines difficult. A one point it turned into nothing more that a glint of light.  It is was a NWA 747-400, had I gotten the shot as it approached you'd have seen the engines clearly. 

[B777LR]

First B747 I have seen with only two engines!

The distortion from the ice crystals in the air really makes seeing the outboard engines difficult. A one point it turned into nothing more that a glint of light.  It is was a NWA 747-400, had I gotten the shot as it approached you'd have seen the engines clearly. 

Hmm, what i see is a twin engined airliner, no matter how hard i try to imagine a 747. The 2 engines simply look too big to be a 747s. In fact, wingspan, wingsweep and tail shape makes me think that this is in fact a 777 with GE-90-115 engines. Tail logo looks like Air Canada too. Fuselage is not a 747 either:

A 747:
http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6499065

A 777:
http://jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=6466743&nseq=35

[JayBee]

I was thinking more of a B767, not one of the streached ones. The fuselage to wing proportions look right, and the wing sweep angle looks right. Certainly not the sweep of a 74's wings.
Also the number and shape of the con-trails is not a 74. If you have ever looked at a 74's trails they come out as four then about three a/c lengths back the two pairs (port and starboard) twist round themsleves. This is very distinctive of the 74, and is a good way to tell whether it is a 74 or an Airbus 340 that you are looking at.
O.K. I am an old spotter, I have also been in civil ATC for the last 41 years and still am, and in 1966 I was the U.K. Air Traing Corps (Air Cadets) Individual National champion in aircraft recognition, also the team captain for the team that won the Air Britain , All England Aircarft Recognition trophy, for the winning youth organisation.
I hope I have not upset you, Hawkeye.

Jim

[kitnut617]

Not over our house, but my wife who is staying with her very ill friend down in Yuma and very close to the Marine Air Station, tells me today there's an An-124 on the tarmac there.  Her description was ' a huge cargo plane which reminded her of the Russian one that frequents Calgary International from time to time, and is painted all over white with blue markings'.

So I sent her a photo of an An-124 painted like that and asked if it was like it, she confirmed that is what she has seen.

[PR19_Kit]

JayBee,

I'm with you there about 747 contrails.

Nowadays most 74s you see are -400s but when there were more winglet-less 74s about you could differentiate the -400s from their lesser brethren by the way that 'four to two' contrail was formed. The -400s leave a very distinct twin trail, after the join, that lasts for miles and miles. The -200s and -300s, while still making the 4>2 contrail, left a much less firm twin trail behind them.

There's not a sign of a four engine trail in that piccie I'm afraid.

[B777LR]

I was thinking more of a B767, not one of the streached ones. The fuselage to wing proportions look right, and the wing sweep angle looks right.

I think the wingspan looks a bit wrong of a 767. The 767-300 should be longer compared to the wings, and 767-200 should be more stubby. Wingspan is too great of a 767. Perhaps a Northwest A330-200 that replaced a 747 on that particular flight?

[JayBee]

I was thinking more of a B767, not one of the streached ones. The fuselage to wing proportions look right, and the wing sweep angle looks right.

I think the wingspan looks a bit wrong of a 767. The 767-300 should be longer compared to the wings, and 767-200 should be more stubby. Wingspan is too great of a 767. Perhaps a Northwest A330-200 that replaced a 747 on that particular flight?

Nah. Don't think so. I have zoomed in and the taper on the fin is not Airbus, more Boeing. I think so anyway.

JimB

[B777LR]

I was thinking more of a B767, not one of the streached ones. The fuselage to wing proportions look right, and the wing sweep angle looks right.

I think the wingspan looks a bit wrong of a 767. The 767-300 should be longer compared to the wings, and 767-200 should be more stubby. Wingspan is too great of a 767. Perhaps a Northwest A330-200 that replaced a 747 on that particular flight?

Nah. Don't think so. I have zoomed in and the taper on the fin is not Airbus, more Boeing. I think so anyway.

JimB

You are right.

Me thinks Air Canada 777-200LR

[Jschmus]

I really need to see about getting the A330 fixed.  I sat on the porch this afternoon and tried to get some photos with Dad's D-550.  It's great up close, but shoddy on the long-distance stuff.

I got another flying hyphen.



And one of the Eurocopters, I can never keep them straight.

[pyro-manic]

Went to the FAA museum at Yeovilton today, and there was a C-17 parked out the back. Too far away to make out any details, but it had a yellow band on the tail fin...

[nev]

Musta been a Yankee one then - they're in and out of Mildenhall all the time, but Yeovilton?

[Ian the Kiwi Herder]

Sea King parts ?

Ian

[nev]

Dunno, but there are pics of it on UKAR