FYI: Dec 12 MythBusters: Airplane Hour

Matt W. Barrow wrote:
"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
...
They tried, in one previous show, to duplicate the old cartoon shotgun
barrel blow up with the barrel unwinding. They tried to use modern
shotguns
which are made from solid tubular steel. Shotguns made before about 1920
were generally made by wrapping steel wire around a mandrel and using the
old blacksmith welding with a hammer and anvil.
Those barrels would have flaws and weak spots.

More like 1880 than 1920.

"Damascus" barrels were not really produced after the 1880's or so, long
before the introduction of smokeless powder around 1900. Smokeless powder
would easily destroy such a barrel.

Actually it's not the barrels but the chamber that couldn't take the
higher pressure. I know one gunsmith that has somewhat permanently (red
loctite) installed 20 and 28 gage adapters in 12 gage Damascus steel
barrels. The adapter takes the load from firing the cartridge and the
rest of the barrels are strong enough for the rest. This makes for a
heavy low powered shotgun but it also makes a wall-hanger into a useful
piece.

Tony

F. Baum wrote:
On Dec 13, 12:06 am, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person with
some level experience with a cockpit display can control an airliner. Most
FAA controllers would not have the experience to describe the cockpit and
give useful instruction in how to manually fly with the autopilot or where
the switches are located, or how to use the radio to even start the
"rescue."

Maybe they should have an in-flight movie before each take-off on how to fly
the airplane, do you think TSA would allow that?


Jim, I caught just the parts of the show where J and A tried to land
the plane with some coaching from the sim instructor (Mainly to see
how the instructor would do this). These portions of the show were
amazingly brief (Possibly for security reasons ?) . The stuff they did
show was scary and I doubt they could have gotten awhay with some of
it in a real plane. I do watch the show for its "Infotaiment" value
but I remain unconvinced that someone could actually be talked down in
an airliner. I think it has been tried a time or two in GA after the
pilot became incapacitated.
FB

I had the opportunity to "fly" a American Airlines F-100 in their full
motion simulator with an instructor. He was able to talk me through a
landing at O'Hare Airport without crashing the airplane. However,
without someone familiar with the aircraft the intimidation of the
lights, buttons, dials, radios, switches, etc would overwhelm anyone.

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

Ross wrote:

F. Baum wrote:

On Dec 13, 12:06 am, "Jim Macklin"
wrote:

What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person with
some level experience with a cockpit display can control an
airliner. Most
FAA controllers would not have the experience to describe the cockpit
and
give useful instruction in how to manually fly with the autopilot or
where
the switches are located, or how to use the radio to even start the
"rescue."

Maybe they should have an in-flight movie before each take-off on how
to fly
the airplane, do you think TSA would allow that?


Jim, I caught just the parts of the show where J and A tried to land
the plane with some coaching from the sim instructor (Mainly to see
how the instructor would do this). These portions of the show were
amazingly brief (Possibly for security reasons ?) . The stuff they did
show was scary and I doubt they could have gotten awhay with some of
it in a real plane. I do watch the show for its "Infotaiment" value
but I remain unconvinced that someone could actually be talked down in
an airliner. I think it has been tried a time or two in GA after the
pilot became incapacitated.
FB


I had the opportunity to "fly" a American Airlines F-100 in their full
motion simulator with an instructor. He was able to talk me through a
landing at O'Hare Airport without crashing the airplane. However,
without someone familiar with the aircraft the intimidation of the
lights, buttons, dials, radios, switches, etc would overwhelm anyone.


Oh, BTW, at the time I probably had about 800 hours and I have a
CPSEL/IA. However I fly for self entertainment

--

Regards, Ross
C-172F 180HP
KSWI

"Anthony W" wrote in message
news:AGd8j.22555$Bg7.20727@trndny07...
Matt W. Barrow wrote:
"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
...
They tried, in one previous show, to duplicate the old cartoon shotgun
barrel blow up with the barrel unwinding. They tried to use modern
shotguns
which are made from solid tubular steel. Shotguns made before about
1920
were generally made by wrapping steel wire around a mandrel and using
the
old blacksmith welding with a hammer and anvil.
Those barrels would have flaws and weak spots.

More like 1880 than 1920.

"Damascus" barrels were not really produced after the 1880's or so, long
before the introduction of smokeless powder around 1900. Smokeless powder
would easily destroy such a barrel.

Actually it's not the barrels but the chamber that couldn't take the
higher pressure. I know one gunsmith that has somewhat permanently (red
loctite) installed 20 and 28 gage adapters in 12 gage Damascus steel
barrels. The adapter takes the load from firing the cartridge and the
rest of the barrels are strong enough for the rest. This makes for a
heavy low powered shotgun but it also makes a wall-hanger into a useful
piece.

After the load leaves the chamber, the barrel does...what (with the internal
pressure)?

In rec.aviation.piloting Matt W. Barrow wrote:

"Anthony W" wrote in message
news:AGd8j.22555$Bg7.20727@trndny07...
Matt W. Barrow wrote:
"Jim Macklin" wrote in message
...
They tried, in one previous show, to duplicate the old cartoon shotgun
barrel blow up with the barrel unwinding. They tried to use modern
shotguns
which are made from solid tubular steel. Shotguns made before about
1920
were generally made by wrapping steel wire around a mandrel and using
the
old blacksmith welding with a hammer and anvil.
Those barrels would have flaws and weak spots.

More like 1880 than 1920.

"Damascus" barrels were not really produced after the 1880's or so, long
before the introduction of smokeless powder around 1900. Smokeless powder
would easily destroy such a barrel.

Actually it's not the barrels but the chamber that couldn't take the
higher pressure. I know one gunsmith that has somewhat permanently (red
loctite) installed 20 and 28 gage adapters in 12 gage Damascus steel
barrels. The adapter takes the load from firing the cartridge and the
rest of the barrels are strong enough for the rest. This makes for a
heavy low powered shotgun but it also makes a wall-hanger into a useful
piece.

After the load leaves the chamber, the barrel does...what (with the internal
pressure)?

While one could put in a chamber only sub-caliber adapter in a shotgun,
the pattern would be crap.

What is usually put in is called a "tube" and is a full length barrel.

--
Jim Pennino

Remove .spam.sux to reply.

wrote:
On Dec 13, 4:11 am, James Sleeman wrote:
On Dec 13, 10:19 pm, James Sleeman wrote:

For those outside the US, you can find it with a search for
mythbusters on piratebay.org now, but you didn't hear that from me.
Argh, before anybody else does, don't bother if you're only wanting
plane ona treadmill, because, they dropped it from the episode.
Quoting from the MythBusters forum...

--- Begin Quote ---

I have just received an email from Dan Tapster, executive producer of
MythBusters.

Thanks to all the activity, he can't log in and asked me to post this
for him.

quote:
"Adam? Jamie? Dan? Someone step up and tell us what happened tonight."

Dear all,

As wbarnhill called out, I thought I should step in to what is rapidly
becoming a hornet's nest. I will try to calm things down but I don't
hold out much hope!

First up, for those concerned that this story has been cancelled,
don't worry, planes on a conveyer belt has been filmed, is
spectacular, and will be part of what us Mythbusters refer to as
'episode 97'. Currently that is due to air on January 30th.

Secondly, for those very aggrieved fans feeling "duped" into watching
tonight's show, I can only apologise. I'm not sure why the listings /
internet advertised that tonight's show contained POCB. I will
endeavour to find out an answer but for those conspiracy theorists
amongst you, I can assure you that it will have just been an honest
mistake. At one point
several months ago, POCB was going to be part of Airplane Hour.
Somewhere, someone has mistakenly posted the wrong listing. It will
have been a genuine mistake but nonetheless it was a mistake which is
unacceptable. As said I will try to find out what went wrong and hope
that you will see fit to forgive the team at Discovery.

Thanks in advance,

Dan

And with that, the entire board is going "READ ONLY" until I can clean
up the mess.

MythMod

--- End Quote ---

I want the treadmill..... I want the treadmill.... :)).

Lil ben


Really?
Who cares?
The interesting discussion is the theoretical one with a layman.
Actual real world behavior taking into account all variables is boring
because the answer is clearly... it depends! (on wheel drag, excess
thrust, and many other things)
In my bede, the rate of acceleration over a certain ground speed drops
off dramatically... If my wheels have to go much over 70 on the ground
to take off, I am not sure I would ever get airborne (I have never had
a long enough runway to test.

I also had a Corben that wouldn't go over 60 on the ground.


Mike

On Dec 14, 10:14 am, pittss1c wrote:
Really?
Who cares?

I don't think anybody here really cares, but it would be undeniably
cool to see an aeroplane hurtling down a massive treadmill.

"Mark Hickey" wrote in message ...
"Gladrock" wrote:


I like to use the example of flying a toy helicopter inside a bus to
describe the concept of downwind turns. Doesn't really matter how
fast the box full of air is going, the helicopter will behave the same
(minus the effects of accelerating the bus, of course).

Mark "how many G's is that?" Hickey


Nothing to do with down wind turns, but ever notice how a helium filled balloon fixed inside a car leans toward the
inside of a turn, or leans backward when a car stops, or leans forward when it accelerates?

Interesting problem there ;-)

On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 22:20:15 -0800 (PST), buttman
wrote:

On Dec 8, 9:32 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
"Jamie and Adam take wing to test if a person with no flight training can
safely land an airplane and if a plane can take off from a conveyor belt
speeding in the opposite direction. Tory, Grant, and Kari jump on some
Hollywood-inspired skydiving myths."

Quoted from the Discovery channel schedule:http://dsc.discovery.com/tv-schedule...=1.13056.24704....

(My local paper's weekly TV schedule has just the brief summary "Landing a
747" so I presume the plane they attempt to land without training is a 747.
Will be interesting to see if they try the real thing and are not limited
to a simulator.)

I'm really anxious to see this episode, because apparently they filmed
the treadmill myth at my home airport.

That one wasn't even mentioned.

Roger (K8RI)

Ross wrote:


Jim, I caught just the parts of the show where J and A tried to land
the plane with some coaching from the sim instructor (Mainly to see
how the instructor would do this). These portions of the show were
amazingly brief (Possibly for security reasons ?) . The stuff they did
show was scary and I doubt they could have gotten awhay with some of
it in a real plane. I do watch the show for its "Infotaiment" value
but I remain unconvinced that someone could actually be talked down in
an airliner. I think it has been tried a time or two in GA after the
pilot became incapacitated.
FB



I had the opportunity to "fly" a American Airlines F-100 in their full
motion simulator with an instructor. He was able to talk me through a
landing at O'Hare Airport without crashing the airplane. However,
without someone familiar with the aircraft the intimidation of the
lights, buttons, dials, radios, switches, etc would overwhelm anyone.


Oh, BTW, at the time I probably had about 800 hours and I have a
CPSEL/IA. However I fly for self entertainment


I have several thousand hours in simulators.
I taught on Navy sims in my second military career.

Golly, TA-4, T2C, F4, F14, F18.

T37, T38, F16, F18 Airforce sims.

National Guard F100 and F101

American Airlined (Global Graphics actually) 727 and 747.

They are the absolute best toys on hte planet!