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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
In article , Morgans says...
"ChuckSlusarczyk" wrote Think of prayer like chicken soup when you have a cold.It might not help but maybe it won't hurt either :-)As atheists you may not think praying has any validity but just consider it our way of offering someone our very best wishes for good luck and in this case a speedy recovery. More than that, I think. I have seen things happen that either are the most improbable collections of coincidence, or put another way, a miracle of sorts. An atheist looks at it as the improbable happening, and others look at it as a touch of The Almighty. A religious person prays for a person to recover well, and believes that his God can make it happen. Who is to say that it will not? In Christianity, the believers are told to love their enemy, (not that the atheist is an enemy) and pray for non believers. That is what they are doing. So, in short, I hope that some combination of happenings combine to contribute to a fast and full recovery. How I make that wish is a personal thing, and no less meaningful, no matter who it is for, and no matter how that hope is expressed. well said Chuck S |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
Morgans wrote:
"Stealth Pilot" wrote maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a better way of flying them. interesting. You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of a down side? Not a one. Richard |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
On Thu, 24 May 2007 03:28:10 GMT, cavelamb himself
wrote: Morgans wrote: "Stealth Pilot" wrote maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a better way of flying them. interesting. You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of a down side? Not a one. Richard -=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Yes, and I'm surprised there is no rebuttal. If it was better, it wouldn't be called 'hot-dogging.' ;-) For openers... The FAA is not known to support 'hot-dogging'. Neither do legit aircraft manufacturers, AFAIK. Why? Like has been said... It's just hot-dogging. hot-dogging; 1. to perform in a recklessly or flamboyantly skillful manner, show off. 2. intended or done to draw attention; showy or sensational. Although speed can be traded for altitude, you won't get as much with this technique or as much opportunity to pick a crash site. Blast away. Nomex union suit - ON. - Barnyard BOb - |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
In article ,
"Dave" wrote: "Morgans" wrote in message ... In Christianity, the believers are told to love their enemy, (not that the atheist is an enemy) and pray for non believers. That is what they are doing. Funny, I've noticed over the years that for the most part the more a person or group calls on God, the more they love their enemy dead. True for some religions, but not all. Frank Tallman said that the P.O.H. and the Bible are two books that are routinely ignored. You cannot get "we want you dead" out of either book. ....and don't wait until after a crash to start reading either book! |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
On Thu, 24 May 2007 03:58:41 -0500, Barnyard BOb
wrote: For openers... The FAA is not known to support 'hot-dogging'. Neither do legit aircraft manufacturers, AFAIK. Why? Like has been said... It's just hot-dogging. hot-dogging; 1. to perform in a recklessly or flamboyantly skillful manner, show off. 2. intended or done to draw attention; showy or sensational. Although speed can be traded for altitude, you won't get as much with this technique or as much opportunity to pick a crash site. Barnyard, the boy and I discussed this technique tonight. he is of the opinion that it may be the desired way to effect a takeoff in the BD5. He said that it is surprising but the wheels should be raised/retracted as soon as possible after liftoff. The BD5 sees an immediate jump in speed of 20 knots when the wheels come up. holding the aircraft low to the ground and accelerating in level flight does two things. it gets you to a safer climbout speed faster. if the engine does quit you avoid the spine destroying thump into the ground. most of us have been flying what I'll call FAR23 type aircraft all our lives. The BD5 is quite a different handling aircraft and needs to approached with techniques evolved from flying the actual aircraft not from past FAR23 experience. Pete has a number of wood strakes along the underside which are an inch high by half inch wide. he has accidently landed the BD5 with wheels up and in the slide along the runway the inboard end of the flaps got ground away and the strakes became half inch by half inch where they took the rubbing on the bitumen. there was no other damage and he didnt feel any jolts to the spine. if he had been low to the ground he might have worn away the strakes and the lower skin but he would have been spared the spinal injury. I called it hot dogging because we would all know what I meant but it may just be the safest way to takeoff in a BD5. btw his fuel injection is a single point injector not a per cylinder injection system. he says it usually works well and it solved the surging problems experienced with the marvel schleber carby he tried previously. Stealth Pilot |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
"Barnyard BOb" wrote in message ... On Thu, 24 May 2007 03:28:10 GMT, cavelamb himself wrote: Morgans wrote: "Stealth Pilot" wrote maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a better way of flying them. interesting. You may have finally made a positive point for hot-dogging. Anyone think of a down side? Not a one. Richard -=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Yes, and I'm surprised there is no rebuttal. If it was better, it wouldn't be called 'hot-dogging.' ;-) For openers... The FAA is not known to support 'hot-dogging'. Neither do legit aircraft manufacturers, AFAIK. Why? Like has been said... It's just hot-dogging. hot-dogging; 1. to perform in a recklessly or flamboyantly skillful manner, show off. 2. intended or done to draw attention; showy or sensational. Although speed can be traded for altitude, you won't get as much with this technique or as much opportunity to pick a crash site. Blast away. Nomex union suit - ON. - Barnyard BOb - Ok, but this is not enough to require Nomex--much less a real, industrial strength, asbestos suit over it. ;-) My disagreement is only with calling it Hot Dogging. What Stealth Pilot suggested, and called Hot Dogging, was really just a soft field take off without the soft field. Accelerate in ground effect, retract the wheels as appropriate, and begin climbing at the normal climb speed. I have read that the proceedure was strongly advised for some low powered retractables, such as the early Swifts, to reduce the risks during the early part of the climb--although that had to do with maintaining a usefull climb angle over obstacles, rather than a possible loss of power. FWIW, there may be some additional lessons regarding regarding a formation take off, especially using dissimilar aircraft--which I will leave to those with the required experience. Peter |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
"Stealth Pilot" wrote ...
holding the aircraft low to the ground and accelerating in level flight does two things. it gets you to a safer climbout speed faster. if the engine does quit you avoid the spine destroying thump into the ground. That wouldn't help on the BD-5. The BD-5 is a very poorly designed airplane and your friend had the quintessential BD-5 accident. There have been several accidents and deaths along these lines. These usually happen early in the testing program. The pilot is new to the airplane and the airplane has an engine cooling problem. That's inherent in the design and the designer never solved the problem. The pilot taxis out to the runway as the engine compartment overheats causing a new problem in the fuel system. Once on the runway, the pilot applies power pouring more heat into the compartment. The engine lasts long enough to get in the air and the engine quits. On the BD-5 all the big weights are down low. The fuel is on the bottom of the airplane, the pilots center of gravity is low and the engine is fairly low. That makes the airplane center of gravity low but the thrust line is up at that top of the airplane. The high thrust line wants to push the nose down so the pilot has to compensate with aft stick. Now the engine stops. The clutch disengages the engine and the prop and the prop sits out there windmilling. A windmilling prop is like a parachute, now trying to pull the nose up. The airplane controls are commanding nose up already so, between the controls and the prop, up the nose goes. If the pilot's not spring loaded to shove the nose down, it won't go down. It will pitch up violently and the g-loading will go up. This causes the wing skins to wrinkle and that destroys the wing aerodynamics. The airplane does a high speed stall and, without altitude to recover, it slams into the runway. If the pilot's lucky. If not, the airplane stalls asymmetrically and half-snaps to the inverted position and slams into the runway with generally fatal results. Your friend was lucky. Rich |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
Peter Dohm wrote: maybe the hotdog method of achieving liftoff then maintaing low level horizontal flight and accelerating like hell before climb out is a better way of flying them. My disagreement is only with calling it Hot Dogging. What Stealth Pilot suggested, and called Hot Dogging, was really just a soft field take off without the soft field. Accelerate in ground effect, retract the wheels as appropriate, and begin climbing at the normal climb speed. I have read that the proceedure was strongly advised for some low powered retractables, such as the early Swifts, to reduce the risks during the early part of the climb--although that had to do with maintaining a usefull climb angle over obstacles, rather than a possible loss of power. Peter -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Peter, If what was meant by Stealth is as you describe...... establishing NORMAL climb speed similar to a soft field T.O., I'm with you. However, if climb out is NOT established at NORMAL climb speed as soon as practical.... I gotta stick by my original guns. :-) P.S. All this discussion is rather moot for me, after reading Rich Isakson's comments. Barnyard BOb - the devil's in the details |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
Funny, I've noticed over the years that for the most part the more a person or group calls on God, the more they love their enemy dead. You've just met the wrong people. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Yeah, and there's a helluva lot of 'em to meet!!! P.S. Only takes one to kill ya... or 20 to kill over 3000 in NYC on Sept 11. - Barnyard BOb - |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
BD-5 crash in Australia
Peter, If what was meant by Stealth is as you describe...... establishing NORMAL climb speed similar to a soft field T.O., I'm with you. However, if climb out is NOT established at NORMAL climb speed as soon as practical.... I gotta stick by my original guns. :-) P.S. All this discussion is rather moot for me, after reading Rich Isakson's comments. Barnyard BOb - the devil's in the details I have always thought that the BD5 was a "very cool looking" little airplane, and it is certainly interesting on how it might have turned out if the original engineering team had been much more lucky, or possibly insightfull, in troubleshooting their drive line problems. I also really think that much of the behavior to which Rich Isakson alludes is more related to pilot expectation and the relationship between the center of trust and center of drag than it is to the relationship between the center of thrust and the center of gravity. However, in a practical sense, these are really semantic arguments. They would make a great discussion over a keg of beer; but in the end, I would never atempt to fly that airplane equipped as described--because I don't know how to balance it within the weight that the wing can really handle and, combined with the change in pitching moment from power on to power off, the damned thing would attempt to kill me. The bottom line is that we all agree. Peter |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
vampire or venom crash pic - wx904 crash.jpg (1/1) | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 4 | January 1st 07 06:30 PM |
vampire or venom crash pic - wx904 crash.jpg (0/1) | [email protected] | Aviation Photos | 0 | December 30th 06 04:57 PM |
Anyone from Sydney Australia here? | John Doe | Piloting | 1 | March 14th 06 12:52 AM |
Anyone from Sydney Australia here? | John Doe | Owning | 1 | March 14th 06 12:52 AM |
Australia | Badwater Bill | Home Built | 18 | January 3rd 05 03:57 AM |