![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
by "Jay Honeck" Jun 6, 2006 at 01:12 PM
That stabilizer is designed to stand much more twisting force than any real life girl could ever apply to it. Otherwise it would come off during the first reasonable bumpy flight. (Nevertheless you shouldn't do what she had done, of course.) There are two stabilator attach points that would have been under tremendous twisting load with her pushing waaaay out at the end of the "arm" of the stabilator. I can't think of any in-flight condition that would put such an asymmetric load on the bird. Also, you must figure that the plane is 30+ years old. God knows how many other times those attach points have been subjected to overload. I cringe every time I think of it. Sounds like the FAA is correct in studying older planes, a study which the AOPA is (naturally) "opposing." |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Heres a dumb question | John Huthmaker | Piloting | 12 | March 11th 06 07:44 PM |
military men "dumb, stupid animals to be used" Kissinger | B2431 | Military Aviation | 3 | April 26th 04 05:46 PM |
Humbling! And one item just plain dumb! :-( | Dr. Anthony J. Lomenzo | Simulators | 22 | April 17th 04 02:37 AM |
DUMB AND DUMBER | Krztalizer | Military Aviation | 13 | January 12th 04 11:32 AM |