Chicken Cannon Lovers

David Windhorst wrote:

[Snip previous hailstones stuff]

got the Polaroids. Given that the projectiles in question had had a
chance to melt some -- it was summer, after all -- before the insureds
figured it was safe enough to go outside and assess, it's possible they
had been the size of softballs when they came down. The tin roof on
their tractor shed looked life it'd been hit with cluster bomblets.

12" or 16" softballs?
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

Alan Lothian wrote:

In article , Keith Willshaw
wrote:

"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Indeed. Strange to relate, more windscreens are smashed by hailstones
than by raindrops.

You've never weighed a raindrop vs a hailstone have you?

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

:"Jim E" wrote in message
...
:
: Watched the program.
: Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
: Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.
:
:Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
:big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
:in a single lump.

Sounds to me like they left out a calculation of the energy of
deformation (which doesn't go into the windscreen, but rather into the
chicken). Frozen chicken deforms much less, so I would expect it to
actually have greater energy of impact when compared to the non-frozen
variety given the same initial impetus.

Sort of like the 'crush space' on a car with a long hood.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

"Fred J. McCall" wrote in message
...
"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

:"Jim E" wrote in message
...
:
: Watched the program.
: Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
: Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.
:
:Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
:big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
:in a single lump.

Sounds to me like they left out a calculation of the energy of
deformation (which doesn't go into the windscreen, but rather into the
chicken). Frozen chicken deforms much less, so I would expect it to
actually have greater energy of impact when compared to the non-frozen
variety given the same initial impetus.

Sort of like the 'crush space' on a car with a long hood.

--



Their calculation based upon observed deflection of steel plate target upon
impact (high speed camera for time of deceleration)
Time of deflection of target was identicle in both cases.
Amount of deflection however was not measured.
This could be inducing error?

Side note: This proved an excelent method of deboning a chicken.

Jim E
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Maybe in the case of water. But I once talked to an engineer involved
in developing the canopy for the Shorts Tucano and he basically said
the same thing - frozen chicken, thawed chicken, made no difference to
the damage caused.

IIRC he said it was a 4lb chicken that was used as standard.

Eugene Griessel wrote:

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message ...
"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Maybe in the case of water. But I once talked to an engineer involved
in developing the canopy for the Shorts Tucano and he basically said
the same thing - frozen chicken, thawed chicken, made no difference to
the damage caused.

IIRC he said it was a 4lb chicken that was used as standard.

How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I can't
think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.

Kristan,

How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I
can't think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.

Suggest you see:

http://www.birdstrike.org/
http://www.pesthunters.com/BirdStrikeInfo.htm
https://www.avemco.com/briefingroom/birdstrikes.asp
http://www.aphis.usda.gov/ws/nwrc/fi...ky/strike.html

and many other good sources that I found with a Google search (terms: "bird
strikes" +"aviation").

In years past, there were certain seasons when one flew certain military
low-level training routes with extra caution due to bird strike potential.
Low-level hops in areas where 20 lb.-plus carrion birds are common
(Southeastern US, for instance) can be particularly hazardous.

BTW, low frequency is irrelevant if it happens to YOU.

--
Mike Kanze

"Clothes make the man. Naked people have little or no influence on society."

-Mark Twain


"Kristan Roberge" wrote in message
...


Eugene Griessel wrote:

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message
...
"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters
guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Maybe in the case of water. But I once talked to an engineer involved
in developing the canopy for the Shorts Tucano and he basically said
the same thing - frozen chicken, thawed chicken, made no difference to
the damage caused.

IIRC he said it was a 4lb chicken that was used as standard.

How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I
can't
think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.

"Kristan Roberge" wrote in message
...




How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I
can't
think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.



Herring Gulls reach 1.5 kg

Cormorants have been known to be as heavy as 3 kg

Gannets are in the 2-3 kg range

Swans of various types can reach 10 kg

Keith

"Kristan Roberge" wrote in message
...
How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I
can't
think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.

Um, there's lots... I've dodged plenty of hawks and buzzards- big ones over
5 foot wingspan too. It depends what area you fly in I guess.

Buzzards aren't God's smartest creatures either, they don't seem to yield to
anything no matter how big it is. (Even seagulls will give you right of way
if they see you in time.)

In article , "Jim Carriere"
jcarriere(at)isp01.net wrote:

"Kristan Roberge" wrote in message
...
How often do you strike 4 pounds of bird? Other than ducks and geese, I
can't
think of many 4 pound birds you might run a plane into.

Um, there's lots... I've dodged plenty of hawks and buzzards- big ones
over
5 foot wingspan too. It depends what area you fly in I guess.

Buzzards aren't God's smartest creatures either, they don't seem to yield
to
anything no matter how big it is. (Even seagulls will give you right of
way
if they see you in time.)



They may have the same logic of superior deterrent that seems inherent
to the limited brain of even a tame skunk.