Experimentals To Be Banned To Rural Airports?

jeremy wrote in
:

John wrote:

PS. We have laws about proper vehicle operation already, we don't
need new laws that call out specific activiries. Enforce what we
have already

Do not ever think of driving in Europe.

let's qualify that. We're talking Germany and Gemrany wannabes here.


In most countries you will be stopped if spotted eating, drinking,
talking on the phone, or doing anything that is not driving. On the
autobahn at speed, you may be cautioned for not having both hands on
the steering wheel. You can fail your driving test by talking, failing
to check your mirrors once a minute or resting your elbows on the
door. You will get tickets for failing to signal a lane change,
cruising in the fast lane, overtaking on the inside, running out of
washer fluid, not having a spare tyre, car body damage, misaligned
headlights, and not having your lights on if your wipers are running.


Snort! Ever drive in Italy? They don't believe in seatbelts. It means
you haven't got confidence in your driving and makes you more likely to
have an accident.
A quick peek at the cars going by there will reveal a huge percentage of
people not bothering with them. The further south you go the fewer wear
them. (Padanians, are, after all, wannabe germans) You can nearly tell
your lattitude by the percentage of non wearers. Same is roughtly true
for france and spain.


And then, OTOH, you can drive as fast as you like just about anywhere
but England.



Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...


Snort! Ever drive in Italy? They don't believe in seatbelts. It means
you haven't got confidence in your driving and makes you more likely to
have an accident.
A quick peek at the cars going by there will reveal a huge percentage of
people not bothering with them. The further south you go the fewer wear
them. (Padanians, are, after all, wannabe germans) You can nearly tell
your lattitude by the percentage of non wearers. Same is roughtly true
for france and spain.


And then, OTOH, you can drive as fast as you like just about anywhere
but England.



Bertie


Like you have ever been there looserboi.

jeremy wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Snort! Ever drive in Italy? They don't believe in seatbelts. It means
you haven't got confidence in your driving and makes you more likely
to have an accident.
A quick peek at the cars going by there will reveal a huge percentage
of people not bothering with them. The further south you go the fewer
wear them. (Padanians, are, after all, wannabe germans) You can
nearly tell your lattitude by the percentage of non wearers. Same is
roughtly true for france and spain.

I drive all over the Northern hemisphere and usually get caught in
Europe by bad habits learned elsewhere. Turning on a red light always
catches me, as does the difference in traffic light sequence. I have
to watch myself after time in Panama, as after midnight traffic lights
are advisory only.

I have DLs for USA, and most of the EU and the test here is a joke.

The seatbelt issue is of no consequence to many cops in Italy, as they
consider it your funeral, but they will pop you for overtaking without
signaling.

Maybe in the north... I've driven a good bit in Italy and as far as I can
tell, th eonly rule is to keep your foot planted and beep a lot.
Hand signals take both hands, of course.
Hand free phones have freed up the italians to talk while driving of
course. Can't talk without your hands..


Bertie

"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in :


"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...


Snort! Ever drive in Italy? They don't believe in seatbelts. It means
you haven't got confidence in your driving and makes you more likely to
have an accident.
A quick peek at the cars going by there will reveal a huge percentage of
people not bothering with them. The further south you go the fewer wear
them. (Padanians, are, after all, wannabe germans) You can nearly tell
your lattitude by the percentage of non wearers. Same is roughtly true
for france and spain.


And then, OTOH, you can drive as fast as you like just about anywhere
but England.



Bertie


Like you have ever been there looserboi.

Was there monday and will be there tomorrow evening again...
Day after, I'll be in Italy..






Bertie

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Was there monday and will be there tomorrow evening again...
Day after, I'll be in Italy..


Yeah, prove it liarboi.

"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message
...

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Was there monday and will be there tomorrow evening again...
Day after, I'll be in Italy..


Yeah, prove it liarboi.

You still need to prove you're anything more than a waste of bandwidth.

BT wrote:

Sadly another airplane has crashed in the vicinity of the North Las Vegas
airport.
A Piper Navajo departed VGT and shortly after departure he called the tower
that he was returning with a rough running engine. The pilot was solo, no
pax. Witnesses on the ground reported the aircraft was on fire and fire
crews were responding to meet the aircraft at the airport when it crashed
short of the runway in a local neighborhood. There were no fatalities to
people on the ground.

BT

"T. "Tim" Timothy Haag aka HyoogeUmp56" wrote in
message ...

http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1199-full.html#198676



Was that an "experimental" Navajo? Didn't think so. Looks like
certified airplanes crash too.

"Mxsmanic" wrote in message
...
Bob F. writes:

First an "experimental" aircraft in aviation talk is just another
classification. The characteristics may be well known and just doesn't
fit
into any other class.

My impression is that many aircraft are called experimental in order to
get
around certain troublesome regulations.

And my impression was that you were talking about an aircraft that was
unsafe for flight.


Secondly, I have personally flown a number of experimental Boeing
aircraft
into LAX when I worked for the flight test group there. I believe
B747-100
s/n 1 is still classified as experimental. And I flew B401, 2 and 3 (the
first 3 747-400 designated a/c). They too were classified as
experimental
and flew into a lot of large airports with heavy population.

How many hours had they flown elsewhere before they visited those large
airports?

I don't know exactly, in the case I cited, dozens probably. Everett (Payne
Field), North of Boeing field was built for 747 development because
manufacturing and test facilities were too small and there was no place to
expand since the city was built tightly around the airport. Many maiden
flight took place at Boeing Field and nearby Renton (same situation). It
was a matter of conveniences that Everett was used for their latter flights
and as far as I know, there was never a crash in the neighborhood. Early
maiden flight aircraft actually have a very good statistical record.
--
Regards, Bob F.

"Mike" wrote in message
newsyZtk.37$jE1.12@trnddc03...
"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message
...

"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
...

Was there monday and will be there tomorrow evening again...
Day after, I'll be in Italy..


Yeah, prove it liarboi.

You still need to prove you're anything more than a waste of bandwidth.

Changing the subject there aincha Mikey Mouth. Just like Mx.

In article tNRtk.1134$w51.346@trnddc01, "Mike" wrote:

Nobody wants to give up their "right" to
drive with a cell phone, ignore speed limits, run stop lights, etc. even
though such activity puts other people at risk.

"drive with a cell phone" .... ohmygawd. Hey, what about drive with
one of those GPS thingies, or changing CDs or scanning thru XM radio
or....?
Maybe we should require a sterile car so that nothing, absolutely nothing
can distract the driver.

(yep - this crusade about talking on a cellphone is a hot button for me).

Crusade all you want.

it isn't my crusade, the crusade against cellphones is being waged by people
who don't understand how to analysis risk.

Talking on
the phone while driving increases risk of having a serious accident by 4-5
times.

hmmm, if your claim of a 4-5x time greater risk were true, why hasn't
the accident rate increased dramatically during the time period when
cellphone usage has exploded? In fact, the accident rate has remained
flat or decreased slightly (if we believe the NTHSA)


But you prove my point beautifully.

You don't understand proofs.

People don't really give a
rat's arse about being safer if it inconvieniences them, even if the
inconvienience is slight.

Then why do people wear motorcycle helmets? and leather jackets or
equivalent protective clothing when riding? Talk about inconvenience.

Now, if you wanted to make the point that people don't care about
the inconvenience of OTHERS as long as it appears that they
are trying to help them even when there is no actual evidence
to support the help being effective....

--
Bob Noel
(goodness, please trim replies!!!)