What did it take to get a ticket in 1946?

Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

wrote
Somebody's been reading "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"

I was required to read it 50 years ago while in Preflight
Class 12-58, NAS Pensacola. I still have my copy.



I have one given to me when I was 13..

Bertie

On Jan 19, 5:18 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I have one given to me when I was 13..

Bertie

You're jes a damn genius, Gump!

" wrote in news:734ef6c1-d411-4269-
:

On Jan 19, 5:18 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

I have one given to me when I was 13..

Bertie

You're jes a damn genius, Gump!


Wasn't braggin. Just pointing out what a great book it is.
I got another one at the same time, also USN. It's about instrument flying.
It's unbeleivably simple, with pics of giants holding F4Fs by their wings
to illustrate loads.

Bertie

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:18:23 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote in :

I have one given to me when I was 13..

Oh, just last week, eh? :-)

Larry Dighera wrote in
:

On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 22:18:23 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote in :

I have one given to me when I was 13..

Oh, just last week, eh? :-)


Go fjukk yourself netkkkopp


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

wrote
Somebody's been reading "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
I was required to read it 50 years ago while in Preflight
Class 12-58, NAS Pensacola. I still have my copy.



I have one given to me when I was 13..

Bertie

You can't beat those basic military flight manuals. I read through the
Army Basic Rotorcraft manual (Can't remember the title)before I started
my PP R-H instructions and I was WAY ahead of the other guy that started
lessons the same day I did.

Gig 601XL Builder wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Bob Moore wrote in
46.128:

wrote
Somebody's been reading "Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators"
I was required to read it 50 years ago while in Preflight
Class 12-58, NAS Pensacola. I still have my copy.



I have one given to me when I was 13..

Bertie

You can't beat those basic military flight manuals. I read through the
Army Basic Rotorcraft manual (Can't remember the title)before I
started
my PP R-H instructions and I was WAY ahead of the other guy that
started
lessons the same day I did.


Hm, well, the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" was a bit over my head at
the time and the instrument flying one was a bit confusing with the pics
of giants holding up the wings of Wildcats!
I have it somewhere. I mighth post some of the funnier things in it.
It's a bit scary top think of guys going to war after reading the "Boys
big big book of instrument flying"

To this day I figure I can spot a Navy pilot if he's flying a
taildragger.
No joke, no smart remark, I used to check out jys in cubs and such who
had been away for a while and I got it right every time.
Anyone else know how?
Hint, they had to be a bit unco-ordinated first...


Bertie

On Jan 23, 12:56 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Hm, well, the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" was a bit over my head at
the time and the instrument flying one was a bit confusing with the pics
of giants holding up the wings of Wildcats!

I read through it for the first time (prior I had picked my way
through) while watching the NFC and AFC playoffs this Sunday. It was
the perfect 10 minutes at a time read -- more than that and it was
just too much info to process.

Most was a review of things I had read elsewhere, but written in a
much more succinct and authoritative manner.

The landing performance section confirmed earlier posts about arriving
at the runway with minimal energy -- 1.3-1.5 Vso.

Seems as if this rule would be doubly critical to conventional gear.

Dan

" wrote in news:28fafb4c-f37c-4f9f-
:

On Jan 23, 12:56 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Hm, well, the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" was a bit over my head at
the time and the instrument flying one was a bit confusing with the pics
of giants holding up the wings of Wildcats!

I read through it for the first time (prior I had picked my way
through) while watching the NFC and AFC playoffs this Sunday. It was
the perfect 10 minutes at a time read -- more than that and it was
just too much info to process.

Most was a review of things I had read elsewhere, but written in a
much more succinct and authoritative manner.

The landing performance section confirmed earlier posts about arriving
at the runway with minimal energy -- 1.3-1.5 Vso.

Seems as if this rule would be doubly critical to conventional gear.


Well, yeah, becase you generaly three point them anyway, arriving with any
more than that just extends your flare. It's not what I'd call critical,
more pointless.






Bertie

On Jan 23, 9:12 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
" wrote in news:28fafb4c-f37c-4f9f-
:







On Jan 23, 12:56 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Hm, well, the Aerodynamics for Naval Aviators" was a bit over my head at
the time and the instrument flying one was a bit confusing with the pics
of giants holding up the wings of Wildcats!

I read through it for the first time (prior I had picked my way
through) while watching the NFC and AFC playoffs this Sunday. It was
the perfect 10 minutes at a time read -- more than that and it was
just too much info to process.

Most was a review of things I had read elsewhere, but written in a
much more succinct and authoritative manner.

The landing performance section confirmed earlier posts about arriving
at the runway with minimal energy -- 1.3-1.5 Vso.

Seems as if this rule would be doubly critical to conventional gear.

Well, yeah, becase you generaly three point them anyway, arriving with any
more than that just extends your flare. It's not what I'd call critical,
more pointless.

Bertie

Well, isn't it critical in the sense that excess speed increases the
possibility of a ground loop?

Dan