Bad Day Flying

wrote:
had forgotten to fasten
his belt -- and flew right up over the plane. No chute. They named an
airfield after him.

Would that be "KSPLAT" field?

--
Message posted via AviationKB.com
http://www.aviationkb.com/Uwe/Forums...ation/200804/1

On Apr 7, 10:17 am, wrote:
On Apr 7, 10:58 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:



On Apr 6, 8:45 pm, wrote:

On Apr 6, 3:56 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

On Apr 6, 1:45 pm, wrote:

On Apr 6, 12:32 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote :

On Apr 6, 5:51 am, "muff528" wrote:
" BTW, I think the word "dumbass" is Politically Incorrect.

Dam! I thought I was being PC by pretending to be offended. Someone
needs to publish the rules. (As if the usenet isn't already full of
PC kops.) TP

PC RULE #1:
We don't make fun of retards like Bertie, even though
he is living proof that turkey eggs should be sold in
supermarkets.

Oh ouch. Anyhow, how do you even know I stil exist Kenny? You have me
killfiled, remember?

Nice airplane in the story. I've seen (and have) water
skiing wipe-outs at 40 mph, it's a case of rolling on
the surface. If true a 67 yo is lucky he didn't break a
few bones smakin the water.
A friend of mine broke his back when the ski rope
broke. His ass hit the water at ~30-35 mph with
rapid deacceleration centered on his lower vertabrae.

Bull****.

Bertie

Not likely the deceleration, but the bending and flexing of the
spine as he dug into the water. My back is all messed up from
waterskiing tumbles (and snowskiing wrecks, and lifting too much).
When you're young you're invincible.
Dan

I hear ya, my spines a bit wore-out from putting up
TV towers as a brat a little to quick, (my fault, I hurried).
To be more detailed, my friend had to get a vertebrae
fusion at the base of his back. (I'd wash his back so
I saw the scars).
I guess the technical term might be crushed vertebrae,
but my point is water hit at high speed is hard, anybody
who belly flopped from a few feet knows that.

This fella is quite broad shouldered and stout, so when
his ass hit the water the rapid deacceleration focused
on the lower part of his spine and exceeded design
specifications.
LOL, a skinny assed guy like me would probably skid
across the water and get a free enema.
Ken

The enema is likely all you'll get from landing hard on your
tail. Never had one myself but some friends have experienced it.
Landing at high speed just means you bounce along for awhile until
something digs in and twists you around something fierce. That's when
the joints get busted.
Dan

Best wipe out I've seen: I was spotting in a 65 hp fibre-
glass job, doing about 33 on the speedometer, so into
a tight turn we go. The skier, decides to take the max
circumference, (I've done the same, try to pass the boat),
and dug in for high speed.

Well he's out there doing a whip-lash at maybe 50-60
mph, and his ski's start oscillating...well he flipped
out, and must have rolled over and skipped 3 times
like a skipping stone, before settling into the drink.

He claimed to have dislocated his shoulder, and he
blamed the driver for going too fast, he's a whinner,
the speed was set to 33, I kept checking that.
Ken

Pretty tiny boat, to get 33 MPH, with a skier on tow, out of just 65
HP. Especially in the turn. You sure about that?

Pretty much. The boat was a nice 15 footer with
a bit too much flat bottom (Lake of Bays Muskoka)
to handle 1' chop but ok with twink waves.
The 65 Merc would max it out at about 40 mph, also
it had a mid speed prop so it could troll ok and pull
out of the hole with a skier with some nice thrust.

Another buddy had a low HP O/B ~ 80 Hp, with a
high speed prop, on a 14' stilleto, that would get to
50 mph easy.

Nowaday's, the 200 HP's can get 70+ mph, which
is nearly standard, and they're pretty cheap $20K,
for nicely equipt unit.

My fav is a 25 HP Evinrude on 14' Aluminum, quiet,
efficient, and I ski fine behind it. Maxs out at ~ 25
30 mph, depending on how much pizza I ate.

Unfortunately, the motor manufacturers do not
have the varible pitch props I'd need inspite of
my letters to them to get me one.
It's like shifting gears. I pull out out the hole fast,
plane out, shift the prop bite to 2nd, then wham
out to speed slope, to 100 MPH.

I think I'll write a simulator using a paddle boat
to catch lot's of fish, for yummy's, the trolling
is excersize.
Ken

wrote:

I just read in Jimmy Doolittles' book about a fellow who did a
negative G maneuver back in the old days -- had forgotten to fasten
his belt -- and flew right up over the plane. No chute. They named an
airfield after him.

The author of "Lucky ******* Club", a B-17 pilot, recalls a training
mission in which one of the crews was forced to explain how they
returned to the field with the entire top turret missing.

-c

"gatt" wrote in message
news:wbKdnTZcUch1PGfanZ2dnUVZ_hOdnZ2d@integraonlin e...
wrote:

I just read in Jimmy Doolittles' book about a fellow who did a
negative G maneuver back in the old days -- had forgotten to fasten
his belt -- and flew right up over the plane. No chute. They named an
airfield after him.

The author of "Lucky ******* Club", a B-17 pilot, recalls a training
mission in which one of the crews was forced to explain how they returned
to the field with the entire top turret missing.

-c

My father is also a certificated member of the "Lucky ******* Club". By 1945
many bombardment groups had some version of the "award" for air crewmen who
completed their combat missions. Although the required number of missions
was 35 he only completed 26 combat missions + 3 chowhound/manna missions to
Holland before the war ended. He has a good story about a missing top
turret. He and a crewmate somehow acquired a case of vienna sausages and
since they were the only ones who liked them they finished most of them off
by the time the night was through. The next morning he was sick enough to
remain at the base but he didn't want to make up the missed mission with an
assignment to a strange crew later so he went on the raid. They had to make
up any missed missions so they could finish with their own crew. During the
raid he became physically sick and had to go below to puke. As he was
standing back up into the turret he knocked his helmet off so he had to bend
down to pick it up. Just then a flak burst took out the top turret. It also
wounded the waist gunner (who was sent home afterwards). He says this time
the flak was so close he could smell it. The burst apparently was between
the wing and the stabilizer of the B-17. So, if not for a case of Vienna
Sausages consumed on March 8,1945 in Deopham Green, England neither I nor
any of 5 siblings nor a bunch of grandkids would be around today to not like
them.

Also, today, April 7, 1945, is the 63rd anniversary of the concerted
rammings sometimes known as Sonderkommando Elbe. Much information has been
uncovered in the last few years about this day and a very interesting story
is unfolding as it is pieced together by participants on both sides. The
452nd BG was awarded the Presidential Distinguised Unit Citation for that
mission.

Tony P.

On Apr 7, 1:41 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

Unfortunately, the motor manufacturers do not
have the varible pitch props I'd need inspite of
my letters to them to get me one.
It's like shifting gears. I pull out out the hole fast,
plane out, shift the prop bite to 2nd, then wham
out to speed slope, to 100 MPH.

If there was anything to be gained it would have been produced
long ago. Variable-pitch marine props tend to be very draggy, since
there's no way to increase or decrease the blade washout at the same
time. Aircraft constant-speed props have much more slip and will
tolerate that.
Increasing the blade angle loads the outer part of the blade
more than the inner. Nearer the hub, the blade has a higher angle due
to its lower tangential speed, and at the tips the angle is much
lower. If we have a blade angle of, say, ten degrees at the tip and 30
at the hub, and increase blade angle ten degrees, we will double the
tip angle but increase the inboard angle only 33%, to 40 degrees. That
drags the inboard area and slows thing down.
I once built a 13' cracker box inboard. Had a Chev Corvette 283
straight-shaft with the Borg-Warner Velvet-drive transmission. 250 HP,
supposedly, but it sure didn't perform like it. After I ran it for a
few years I took the prop off and started analyzing those angles, and
found that it had been repitched to a higher angle. (Itbwas a used
prop). I repitched it to the original factory spec, and boy, did that
boat scramble after that. Then I sold it.

Dan

On Sat, 5 Apr 2008 11:10:08 -0700 (PDT), Phil J
wrote:

If you were this pilot, would you ever get back in the cockpit??

http://www.aero-news.net/index.cfm?C...f95e2207910&#d

Plainly put, **** happens. Some just get back on the horse learning
from their mistakes, others never go near the horse again, while some
learn nothing and get back on any way. Remember "Ignorance is bliss".




Phil
Roger (K8RI) ARRL Life Member
N833R (World's oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com

On Apr 7, 9:32 pm, wrote:
On Apr 7, 1:41 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

Unfortunately, the motor manufacturers do not
have the varible pitch props I'd need inspite of
my letters to them to get me one.
It's like shifting gears. I pull out out the hole fast,
plane out, shift the prop bite to 2nd, then wham
out to speed slope, to 100 MPH.

If there was anything to be gained it would have been produced
long ago. Variable-pitch marine props tend to be very draggy, since
there's no way to increase or decrease the blade washout at the same
time. Aircraft constant-speed props have much more slip and will
tolerate that.

Yeah, my rule of thumb, H20 is 800x more dense
than air.

Increasing the blade angle loads the outer part of the blade
more than the inner. Nearer the hub, the blade has a higher angle due
to its lower tangential speed, and at the tips the angle is much
lower. If we have a blade angle of, say, ten degrees at the tip and 30
at the hub, and increase blade angle ten degrees, we will double the
tip angle but increase the inboard angle only 33%, to 40 degrees. That
drags the inboard area and slows thing down.

Yup.

I once built a 13' cracker box inboard. Had a Chev Corvette 283
straight-shaft with the Borg-Warner Velvet-drive transmission. 250 HP,
supposedly, but it sure didn't perform like it. After I ran it for a
few years I took the prop off and started analyzing those angles, and
found that it had been repitched to a higher angle. (Itbwas a used
prop). I repitched it to the original factory spec, and boy, did that
boat scramble after that. Then I sold it.

A friend of ours used 2 props, one for trolling (slow)
and one for skiing (mid speed), swapping props is
fairly easy.
When you get into a class that you (Dan) describe,
there is a lot of aerodynamics, you may want canards!
Ken

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
:

On Apr 6, 8:45 pm, wrote:
On Apr 6, 3:56 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:



On Apr 6, 1:45 pm, wrote:

On Apr 6, 12:32 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote
innews:aa5a020e-1893-4243-b10f-ef865395ddb1
@x19g2000prg.googlegr
oups.com:

On Apr 6, 5:51 am, "muff528" wrote:
" BTW, I think the word "dumbass" is Politically Incorrect.

Dam! I thought I was being PC by pretending to be offended.
Someone needs to publish the rules. (As if the usenet isn't
already full of PC kops.) TP

PC RULE #1:
We don't make fun of retards like Bertie, even though
he is living proof that turkey eggs should be sold in
supermarkets.

Oh ouch. Anyhow, how do you even know I stil exist Kenny? You
have me killfiled, remember?

Nice airplane in the story. I've seen (and have) water
skiing wipe-outs at 40 mph, it's a case of rolling on
the surface. If true a 67 yo is lucky he didn't break a
few bones smakin the water.
A friend of mine broke his back when the ski rope
broke. His ass hit the water at ~30-35 mph with
rapid deacceleration centered on his lower vertabrae.

Bull****.

Bertie

Not likely the deceleration, but the bending and flexing of
the
spine as he dug into the water. My back is all messed up from
waterskiing tumbles (and snowskiing wrecks, and lifting too
much). When you're young you're invincible.
Dan

I hear ya, my spines a bit wore-out from putting up
TV towers as a brat a little to quick, (my fault, I hurried).
To be more detailed, my friend had to get a vertebrae
fusion at the base of his back. (I'd wash his back so
I saw the scars).
I guess the technical term might be crushed vertebrae,
but my point is water hit at high speed is hard, anybody
who belly flopped from a few feet knows that.

This fella is quite broad shouldered and stout, so when
his ass hit the water the rapid deacceleration focused
on the lower part of his spine and exceeded design
specifications.
LOL, a skinny assed guy like me would probably skid
across the water and get a free enema.
Ken

The enema is likely all you'll get from landing hard on your
tail. Never had one myself but some friends have experienced it.
Landing at high speed just means you bounce along for awhile until
something digs in and twists you around something fierce. That's when
the joints get busted.
Dan

Best wipe out I've seen: I was spotting in a 65 hp fibre-
glass job, doing about 33 on the speedometer, so into
a tight turn we go. The skier, decides to take the max
circumference, (I've done the same, try to pass the boat),
and dug in for high speed.

Well he's out there doing a whip-lash at maybe 50-60
mph, and his ski's start oscillating...well he flipped
out, and must have rolled over and skipped 3 times
like a skipping stone, before settling into the drink.

He claimed to have dislocated his shoulder, and he
blamed the driver for going too fast, he's a whinner,
the speed was set to 33, I kept checking that.

You're a hero.


Bertie

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in
:

On Apr 7, 10:17 am, wrote:
On Apr 7, 10:58 am, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:



On Apr 6, 8:45 pm, wrote:

On Apr 6, 3:56 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

On Apr 6, 1:45 pm, wrote:

On Apr 6, 12:32 pm, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote
innews:aa5a020e-1893-4243-b10f-ef865395ddb1
@x19g2000prg.goog
legroups.com:

On Apr 6, 5:51 am, "muff528"
wrote:
" BTW, I think the word "dumbass" is Politically
Incorrect.

Dam! I thought I was being PC by pretending to be
offended. Someone needs to publish the rules. (As if the
usenet isn't already full of PC kops.) TP

PC RULE #1:
We don't make fun of retards like Bertie, even though
he is living proof that turkey eggs should be sold in
supermarkets.

Oh ouch. Anyhow, how do you even know I stil exist Kenny?
You have me killfiled, remember?

Nice airplane in the story. I've seen (and have) water
skiing wipe-outs at 40 mph, it's a case of rolling on
the surface. If true a 67 yo is lucky he didn't break a
few bones smakin the water.
A friend of mine broke his back when the ski rope
broke. His ass hit the water at ~30-35 mph with
rapid deacceleration centered on his lower vertabrae.

Bull****.

Bertie

Not likely the deceleration, but the bending and flexing
of the
spine as he dug into the water. My back is all messed up from
waterskiing tumbles (and snowskiing wrecks, and lifting too
much). When you're young you're invincible.
Dan

I hear ya, my spines a bit wore-out from putting up
TV towers as a brat a little to quick, (my fault, I hurried).
To be more detailed, my friend had to get a vertebrae
fusion at the base of his back. (I'd wash his back so
I saw the scars).
I guess the technical term might be crushed vertebrae,
but my point is water hit at high speed is hard, anybody
who belly flopped from a few feet knows that.

This fella is quite broad shouldered and stout, so when
his ass hit the water the rapid deacceleration focused
on the lower part of his spine and exceeded design
specifications.
LOL, a skinny assed guy like me would probably skid
across the water and get a free enema.
Ken

The enema is likely all you'll get from landing hard on
your
tail. Never had one myself but some friends have experienced it.
Landing at high speed just means you bounce along for awhile
until something digs in and twists you around something fierce.
That's when the joints get busted.
Dan

Best wipe out I've seen: I was spotting in a 65 hp fibre-
glass job, doing about 33 on the speedometer, so into
a tight turn we go. The skier, decides to take the max
circumference, (I've done the same, try to pass the boat),
and dug in for high speed.

Well he's out there doing a whip-lash at maybe 50-60
mph, and his ski's start oscillating...well he flipped
out, and must have rolled over and skipped 3 times
like a skipping stone, before settling into the drink.

He claimed to have dislocated his shoulder, and he
blamed the driver for going too fast, he's a whinner,
the speed was set to 33, I kept checking that.
Ken

Pretty tiny boat, to get 33 MPH, with a skier on tow, out of just 65
HP. Especially in the turn. You sure about that?

Pretty much. The boat was a nice 15 footer with
a bit too much flat bottom (Lake of Bays Muskoka)
to handle 1' chop but ok with twink waves.
The 65 Merc would max it out at about 40 mph, also
it had a mid speed prop so it could troll ok and pull
out of the hole with a skier with some nice thrust.

Another buddy had a low HP O/B ~ 80 Hp, with a
high speed prop, on a 14' stilleto, that would get to
50 mph easy.

Nowaday's, the 200 HP's can get 70+ mph, which
is nearly standard, and they're pretty cheap $20K,
for nicely equipt unit.

My fav is a 25 HP Evinrude on 14' Aluminum, quiet,
efficient, and I ski fine behind it. Maxs out at ~ 25
30 mph, depending on how much pizza I ate.

Unfortunately, the motor manufacturers do not
have the varible pitch props I'd need inspite of
my letters to them to get me one.
It's like shifting gears. I pull out out the hole fast,
plane out, shift the prop bite to 2nd, then wham
out to speed slope, to 100 MPH.

I think I'll write a simulator using a paddle boat
to catch lot's of fish, for yummy's, the trolling
is excersize.
Ken


Yes, and you can sel it to the military afterwards.


Bertie

"Ken S. Tucker" wrote in news:51c3498a-206f-
:

On Apr 7, 9:32 pm, wrote:
On Apr 7, 1:41 pm, "Ken S. Tucker" wrote:

Unfortunately, the motor manufacturers do not
have the varible pitch props I'd need inspite of
my letters to them to get me one.
It's like shifting gears. I pull out out the hole fast,
plane out, shift the prop bite to 2nd, then wham
out to speed slope, to 100 MPH.

If there was anything to be gained it would have been
produced
long ago. Variable-pitch marine props tend to be very draggy, since
there's no way to increase or decrease the blade washout at the same
time. Aircraft constant-speed props have much more slip and will
tolerate that.

Yeah, my rule of thumb, H20 is 800x more dense
than air.

Increasing the blade angle loads the outer part of the blade
more than the inner. Nearer the hub, the blade has a higher angle due
to its lower tangential speed, and at the tips the angle is much
lower. If we have a blade angle of, say, ten degrees at the tip and
30
at the hub, and increase blade angle ten degrees, we will double the
tip angle but increase the inboard angle only 33%, to 40 degrees.
That
drags the inboard area and slows thing down.

Yup.

I once built a 13' cracker box inboard. Had a Chev Corvette 283
straight-shaft with the Borg-Warner Velvet-drive transmission. 250
HP,
supposedly, but it sure didn't perform like it. After I ran it for a
few years I took the prop off and started analyzing those angles, and
found that it had been repitched to a higher angle. (Itbwas a used
prop). I repitched it to the original factory spec, and boy, did that
boat scramble after that. Then I sold it.

A friend of ours used 2 props, one for trolling (slow)
and one for skiing (mid speed), swapping props is
fairly easy.
When you get into a class that you (Dan) describe,
there is a lot of aerodynamics, you may want canards!
Ken



God you're an idiot.


Bertie