Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Your Photos and Videos
Nomination - world's ugliest airplane >

Nomination - world's ugliest airplane

Search

Notices
Your Photos and Videos Share your best

Nomination - world's ugliest airplane

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-11-2010, 11:44 AM
  #21  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Oct 2009
Posts: 59
Default

Certainly not the ugliest.... but I always thought the B1900 was ugly looking.... Great Plane though!
cmac88 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 12:12 PM
  #22  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Position: forever fo
Posts: 2,413
Default

In the words of Eric Cartman, on the Ginger Kids Episode, EW! SICK!

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
lakehouse is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 01:52 PM
  #23  
Weekends off? HA!
 
alarkyokie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2006
Posts: 991
Default

Westland Lysander ,RAF
alarkyokie is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 02:15 PM
  #24  
On Reserve
 
Digger079's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 18
Default Pl-12u

Yes this would have to be the ugliest!

Mad Max - Piloted by Bruce Spence; film credits call it "The Flying Jalopy".
Digger079 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 02:19 PM
  #25  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dubes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2008
Posts: 277
Default

Originally Posted by 727gm

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..
Dubes is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 03:22 PM
  #26  
Gets Weekends Off
 
jrutt's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Right Seat switch monkey
Posts: 266
Default

frankin otter
jrutt is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 03:24 PM
  #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
jrutt's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: Right Seat switch monkey
Posts: 266
Default

up at oonc
jrutt is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 04:47 PM
  #28  
On Reserve
 
Digger079's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2010
Posts: 18
Default Dhc-6-200

Originally Posted by jrutt
frankin otter
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!
Digger079 is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 05:50 PM
  #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
ClutchCargo's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Retired FDX MD11 Capt
Posts: 888
Default

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!
That would be true if this were a Pilatus aircraft. However it's not.
Ever heard of a UV-18?
ClutchCargo is offline  
Old 02-11-2010, 06:36 PM
  #30  
No one's home
 
III Corps's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,091
Default

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.
III Corps is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
toney
Flight Schools and Training
31
03-04-2010 07:48 AM
BoilerWings
Corporate
24
10-23-2009 05:18 PM
vagabond
Hangar Talk
4
08-29-2008 05:41 AM
ksatflyer
Hangar Talk
10
08-20-2008 10:14 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices