Marty wrote:
"Mark Fergerson" wrote in message
newsQwEd.4$bX4.2@fed1read03...

Marty wrote:

"Edward Green" wrote in message
egroups.com...
SNIP
Sounds like a job for Myth Busters

Buster isn't equipped for that sort of test; they'd have to go to pig
parts again (remember the cola-pop rocks ep?).

Oh yea, I remember.
They don't always "recreate" accurately either. The other nite saw them
testing the "thawed vs frozen chickens" thing. Thru an airplanes windscreen
it may have been OK, but there would be (I think) a considerable difference
in a jet engine test just from the frozen bird being solid.

I've never heard a chicken-gun/engine version.

I have heard the "Myth" as the jet engine not a windscreen. That test may
have been cost prohibitive.

Uh, yeah, considering that pretty much anything bigger
than a cockroach inhaled into a turbine _will_ destroy it
catastrophically. Obviously even a thawed chicken will too,
so no point.

As for acuracy, they never did test actual bird-rated
"military" canopies, but they ain't cheap. But in their
defense, for my money the final test with multiple sheets of
glass pretty much proves that frozen birds have more
penetrating power.

I still find them entertaining and thats probably their main goal.

Well yeah. They're a real example of "infotainment" or
"edutainment". I'm considering getting their DVD's for my
grandkids.

Mark L. Fergerson