Stop Making Sense

John Clear wrote:

Pics from yesterday: http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-01-08-06/

Great photos!

George Patterson
Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
your slightly older self.

I have similar experiences except they were before I was rated and I
ended up in the bumpy slow part of the sky.

It's ironic that while you train for approaches to 200feet and partial
panel misses, you end up using the rating to penetrate cloud decks at
thousands of feet and spend most of the flight regretting the fact that
you forgot your sunglasses.

The benefits aren't entirely obvious until you exercise them.

wrote:
THere's plenty of VMC where 2 mins of IFR flight thru IMC makes the
flight pleasuable, faster, and safer. That's where the sweet spot of
utility is.

You've got that right! I remember a flight last spring from Helena, MT to
the Fargo, ND area. There was a low stratus deck over the entire route with
widespread rain showers. 10 minutes of IMC at the beginning and end of the
flight meant I could cruise in smooth air at 11,000 ft with a 20+ kt
tailwind for the 4 hr flight. VFR would have taken an hour longer, scud
running in the bumps below the stratus deck while dodging rain showers (and
antenna towers!).

That is some very clear photography (no pun intended). Did you shoot
thru the plexi or was something open? Nice shots.

Went thru you site and re-read Al Haynes talk about the DC10 in Souix
City. Wow! I forgot just how amazing it was. In particular, none of
the crew actually flew the plan - an onboard instructor did. Just
fantastic. Recommended re-read for any and all.

John Clear wrote:
But we do get some great flying weather.

Pics from yesterday: http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-01-08-06/

I'm surprised Norcal Approach didnt make any comments. I circled the
Golden Gate for about 45minutes waiting for solar noon so I could get
the last few shots of the bridge in the link above.

John

In article ,
Maule Driver wrote:
That is some very clear photography (no pun intended). Did you shoot
thru the plexi or was something open? Nice shots.

Most are through the vent window on a Cherokee. In the batch from
Sunday, you can see the edge of the window in a few of the shots.
The shots of SFO and downtown from the south were through the
plexiglass.

I really want to get a higher end camera. Those pics were shot
with a point and shoot Canon 3MP camera (A75). A coworker I take
flying sometimes has a 8MP DSLR (Canon 20D, iirc), and gets mad
because I usually get better pictures. I guess I just have a better
eye for picking shots.

This is one of my favorite shots (and my desktop background):
http://www.clear-prop.org/images/sunset.jpg
(Details: April 13, 2005, 6:00pm PST, 3000ft, just north of Santa
Cruz, only picture I took on that flight)

Went thru you site and re-read Al Haynes talk about the DC10 in Souix
City. Wow! I forgot just how amazing it was. In particular, none of
the crew actually flew the plan - an onboard instructor did. Just
fantastic. Recommended re-read for any and all.

I re-read that about once a year or so. It is an amazing story of
not giving up and keep flying the plane, or what is left of it.
Al Haynes kind of did fly the plane. Instead of cables/hydraulics,
his movements of the yoke were acted on by the instructor pilot.
The fact that all the crew that tried what they did in the simulator
all ended up crashing shows just how lucky they were.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

John Clear posted some great photos (see
http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-01-08-06/
) of a recent flight over San Francisco.

John,

I was amazed at the variation in the water color under the Golden Gate
Bridge. Were they taken within minutes of each other?

Jon

In article ,
Jon Woellhaf wrote:
John Clear posted some great photos (see
http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-01-08-06/
) of a recent flight over San Francisco.


I was amazed at the variation in the water color under the Golden Gate
Bridge. Were they taken within minutes of each other?

Yes, the shots were all taken over about 45 minutes. The angle of
the sun makes a big difference in the apparent color, but part of
it is that I filtered the haze out (Picasa's "I'm feeling lucky"
filter), which makes the colors jump out more.

The tide lines and currents are very visible though. In many of
the shots of the bridge, you can see a wave parallel to the bridge
that divides two different colors of water. It is really visible
in this shot of Alcatraz: http://www.clear-prop.org/fly-01-08-06/target44.html

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

For 'high end cameras".....
I recently got Canon 20D (I've been a camera nut and Canon user for MANY years)
and am very happy with it. I do definitely recommend the new breed of "Image
Stabilized" lenses or cameras. For example, I have a 17 - 85 mm stabilized lens on
my 20D and the few aerials I've taken so far have been impressive. (I don't have
any on a web site yet.. will work on that). The stabilization greatly reduces the
effect of the typical airplane vibration. (doesn't help with the dirty Plexiglas or
reflections though...)

Mike Happy 20D and Archer II owner.



John Clear wrote:
In article ,
Maule Driver wrote:

That is some very clear photography (no pun intended). Did you shoot
thru the plexi or was something open? Nice shots.


Most are through the vent window on a Cherokee. In the batch from
Sunday, you can see the edge of the window in a few of the shots.
The shots of SFO and downtown from the south were through the
plexiglass.

I really want to get a higher end camera. Those pics were shot
with a point and shoot Canon 3MP camera (A75). A coworker I take
flying sometimes has a 8MP DSLR (Canon 20D, iirc), and gets mad
because I usually get better pictures. I guess I just have a better
eye for picking shots.

This is one of my favorite shots (and my desktop background):
http://www.clear-prop.org/images/sunset.jpg
(Details: April 13, 2005, 6:00pm PST, 3000ft, just north of Santa
Cruz, only picture I took on that flight)


Went thru you site and re-read Al Haynes talk about the DC10 in Souix
City. Wow! I forgot just how amazing it was. In particular, none of
the crew actually flew the plan - an onboard instructor did. Just
fantastic. Recommended re-read for any and all.


I re-read that about once a year or so. It is an amazing story of
not giving up and keep flying the plane, or what is left of it.
Al Haynes kind of did fly the plane. Instead of cables/hydraulics,
his movements of the yoke were acted on by the instructor pilot.
The fact that all the crew that tried what they did in the simulator
all ended up crashing shows just how lucky they were.

John

"Mike H" wrote in message
news
For 'high end cameras".....
I recently got Canon 20D (I've been a camera nut and Canon user for MANY
years) and am very happy with it. I do definitely recommend the new breed
of "Image Stabilized" lenses or cameras. For example, I have a 17 - 85 mm
stabilized lens on my 20D and the few aerials I've taken so far have been
impressive. (I don't have any on a web site yet.. will work on that).
The stabilization greatly reduces the effect of the typical airplane
vibration. (doesn't help with the dirty Plexiglas or reflections
though...)

Mike Happy 20D and Archer II owner.

I'll second Mike's comments on the 20D. It was the camera that finally got
me to "retire" my Canon T-90s and FD lenses and more or less give up film.

Since I never owned any auto focus gear, I've sort of had to "start over"
and it's been fun getting to know both the digital world and the Canon EF
(auto focus) equipment.

Jay Beckman
PP-ASEL
AZ Cloudbusters
Chandler, AZ

: I'll second Mike's comments on the 20D. It was the camera that finally got
: me to "retire" my Canon T-90s and FD lenses and more or less give up film.

: Since I never owned any auto focus gear, I've sort of had to "start over"
: and it's been fun getting to know both the digital world and the Canon EF
: (auto focus) equipment.

I went the Pentax DSLR route (*ist-DS) so I didn't have to give up my 35mm
film lenses. I have exactly one auto focus lens.... the cheapie kit 18-55mm that came
with it. My other 12 or so lenses are all manual focus glass between 0-40 years old.
They were bought for 1-10% of what autofocus equivalent replacement lenses would cost.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************