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 |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
WingFlaps wrote in
: On Apr 26, 12:58*pm, Michael Ash wrote: I'd also like to suggest that from my point of view your reaction to the confusion was *way* out of line. The correct response is simply to note that you are using "velocity" in its technical sense as a vector and not its lay sense as a synonym for speed, then continue the discussion from there. Berating him for bad English is simply uncalled for, although it is of course par for the course on Usenet. I simply started getting ****ed off when I had to state it for the third time and he continued to try to put words into my mouth. Go back over the thread and see it. Also I did not berate him, if you read the thread you would see the following exchange Stefan: What part of "everyday's language" wasn't clear? Me: I can see you have trouble with English too. Is that what you call berating him? Perhaps you did not read the thread ? Actually, though I'm too lazy to go look it up, in your original post I also got the impression that you were talking about having to accelerate with the wind.. Much as I hate to agree with the clockwork ****. ( Stefan) Berti |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Apr 27, 3:31 am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
WingFlaps wrote : On Apr 26, 12:58 pm, Michael Ash wrote: Actually, though I'm too lazy to go look it up, in your original post I also got the impression that you were talking about having to accelerate with the wind.. Much as I hate to agree with the clockwork ****. ( Stefan) Yes, I was and that was the point. You do have to accelerate and it does cost some energy -but the cost is not due to the change in ground speed (I never mentioned the change in ground speed you will note). What is interesting is how quickly people grabbed the idea incorrectly, and how willling they were to strut their limited understanding without giving some careful thought as to what might be going on. I feel quite passionate about safety (or rather the avoidable lack thereof). It is illuminating that a post designed to (re)open minds to the danger of the turn back on engine failure (the "impossible turn") by giving some concrete glide numbers should have met such visceral response (was it was mostly macho and invulnerability errors in behaviour coming through?). For some reason many pilots here seem to think an airport is the only safe place to put a plane down. Even if EFATO landing zones include a school, mall and residential housing there are always places to put a light plane within 90 degrees of runway centerline that will allow a proper landing without huge carnage. What may be even more critical is how inflated some people think their ability will be in an actual emergency. I have been in "extreme danger" with other people so I can speak with some authority on how people actually behave in life threatening situations. For some (most?) pilots, when the fan stops there will be several seconds of disbelief. Then they start to muddle through some checks - taking more time than they should as they try to make sure they've got the reason. The practised slick response becomes slowed or not carried out correcly (e.g. the fuel valve is not turned to another tank or the boost pump is not selected). Some panic will bite, the pilot knows he's low and slow, away from the runway and the safety of "home". Even if the turn might have just have been made by a very slick coordinated pilot, in the actual event that option moves quickly out of the realm of possibility. Then the pilot realizes that he's running short on time and tries to turn tightly for "home" at low airspeed. The (nearly always) fatal stall spin crash that results is a preventable event if that turn is not made -so why do so many pilots try it and die? Is it possible that they have become so conditioned to the idea that the airport is the only place where a plane can land that no other options can exist? Sorry for the long post but here's a final thought: It is well known that in emergency situations that infantile response patterns can reappear. Look at how slowly a baby pilot works checks in EFATO (even if they can rattle the FMI parts off on the ground). I suggest that in a real emergency the PIC might take just as long... So I suggest that a way to train EFATO properly might be to look at the height loss in training and then double it and state that unless you are at least at twice that altitude don't turn back. Make that decision point a part of training, much in the same was as you clear forward at 400-500' after T/O. What do you think of this idea, Dudley too? Cheers |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:05:22 -0700 (PDT), WingFlaps wrote:
I simply started getting ****ed off when I had to state it for the third time and he continued to try to put words into my mouth. Go back over the thread and see it. Also I did not berate him, if you read the thread you would see the following exchange Stefan: What part of "everyday's language" wasn't clear? Me: I can see you have trouble with English too. Is that what you call berating him? Perhaps you did not read the thread ? Yikes! I just had a horrible thought. What if DanMc (may he rot in hell) and Wingflapper should get together and procreate? I would think the result would be quite horrid, all ass and no forehead, three balls and a blue cravat. -- pLeEsE mEaT mY oWNer; sEnDs MoNIeS http://s7y.us/32o |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Apr 27, 2:55*am, Michael Ash wrote:
In rec.aviation.student WingFlaps wrote: On Apr 26, 12:58?pm, Michael Ash wrote: I'd also like to suggest that from my point of view your reaction to the confusion was *way* out of line. The correct response is simply to note that you are using "velocity" in its technical sense as a vector and not its lay sense as a synonym for speed, then continue the discussion from there. Berating him for bad English is simply uncalled for, although it is of course par for the course on Usenet. I simply started getting ****ed off when I had to state it for the third time and he continued to try to put words into my mouth. Go back over the thread and see it. Also I did not berate him, if you read the thread you would see the following exchange Stefan: What part of "everyday's language" wasn't clear? Me: I can see you have trouble with English too. Is that what you call berating him? Yes. Here's what berate means: "to scold or condemn vehemently and at length" Is that what I did -come on be honest! Sheesh. |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:51:53 -0700 (PDT), WingFlaps wrote:
I declare you're a troll. http://www.silverraven.com/fy.htm |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 17:37:39 -0700, Hilton wrote:
Hi, OK, too much noise here, let's just refrain from replying to personal attacks shall we. Two and two is four. There, we've now exchanged platitudinous truisms. Are we bonding yet? -- Gonad |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 11:06:42 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
It's not so much the loss of altitude that will get you in this manuever. it's the probable loss of control trying to manuever around back towards the field. Firstly, in any emergency that hasnt been drilled, you will have a moment where you will be sitting there with your mouth open in utter disbelief of what has just happened. in fact, even if you have drilled for it you will still have this moment, but if it's been practiced the moment you begine to do something about it will be sooner coming. While you're sitting there wondering what's going on, the speed will be bleeding off. Not good. Nothing you do is useful. You very rarely even come up with a good idea, and when the blind squirrel principal does kick in (astoundingly, you've seem to even defeat random chance with your incompetence), you manage to cock it up so badly that what might have been a useful thing in a normal person's hands turns to low-grade fertilizer. Those are your two claims to fame. Being a complete flake who can't keep even the simplest of things on track for any significant period of time, and being an absolute moron when it comes to understanding what's useful to the piloting community, and implementing it. -- ____________________ Alric Knebel http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html http://www.ironeyefortress.com |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:33:52 GMT, Larry Dighera wrote:
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 00:33:52 GMT,*Larry Diarrhea* wrote: The Kinetic Energy "Paradox" Larry, there's a difference between 'bad' and 'so earth shatteringly horrible it makes the angels scream in terror as they violently rip their heads off, their blood spraying into the faces of a thousand sweet innocent horrified children, who will forever have the terrible images burned into their tiny little minds'. You˘re the latter. |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 03:45:41 -0700 (PDT), WingFlaps wrote:
I can see you missed the point entirely. DickHead: This is kind of like teasing you, a retarded kid, until he gets so angry you **** yourself. Sure, in a perverse way, it's funny to watch you stand there and scream and deny, all red-faced with **** dripping from your cuffs of your shorts and down your pasty white legs. But, still, I feel bad for you in a way, too. It's worse than shooting fish in a barrel, it's just too easy. -- http://tinyurl.com/ysv7sz |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Lancair crash at SnF
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 12:59:19 -0700 (PDT), WingFlaps wrote:
WTF? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F48eTMgqF2w -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.2 iQA/AwUBR/qGPRv8knkS0DI6EQLqQQCfYI/+jhW28/0AaBVgq58mnuYYo2AAnRMP r/ChOzrJkKnGHZcngwRffPMG =2EPt -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
lancair crash scapoose, OR | gatt | Piloting | 10 | October 26th 06 03:34 PM |
Lancair IV | Dico Reyers | Owning | 6 | October 19th 04 11:47 PM |
Lancair 320 ram air? | ROBIN FLY | Home Built | 17 | January 7th 04 11:54 PM |
Lancair 320/360 kit wanted!!! | Erik W | Owning | 0 | October 3rd 03 10:17 PM |
Lancair IVP | Peter Gottlieb | Home Built | 2 | August 22nd 03 03:51 AM |