Chicken Cannon Lovers

Given the number of times the infamous "chicken cannon" has come
up in these fora, your attention is directed to this [Sunday]
evening's episode of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery cable channel
[8:00 PM ET, repeated at 11:00 PM ET for the left coast] in which
the intrepid Mythbusters team takes on the chicken cannon.
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message
...
Given the number of times the infamous "chicken cannon" has come
up in these fora, your attention is directed to this [Sunday]
evening's episode of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery cable channel
[8:00 PM ET, repeated at 11:00 PM ET for the left coast] in which
the intrepid Mythbusters team takes on the chicken cannon.

Speaking of chickens, aircraft, and engines, this reminds me of a story a
guy I used to work with told me. Not sure if it is true (it probably
isn't), but damn funny nonetheless-

During bird ingestion tests on some jet engine, the was an insufficient
number of "thawed" baby chickens needed to simulate a flock of small birds.
So somebody took out another case from the freezer, left it out to thaw, and
meanwhile everybody went to lunch. Later on, once the chicks had thawed,
the test was ran- birds shot in the running engine, the engine suffered
severe damage and miserably failed the test. After the high speed film of
the intake view was developed, some light was shed on the matter... a stray
cat somehow found it's way into the breech of the chicken cannon. This
probably happened while it was left unattended and everyone was at lunch.
The cat must have been either celebrating its good fortune to find a free
lunch, or sleeping it off the feast when the test was started up... followed
by noise, confusion, a sharp acceleration, blast of air, and then nothing.

I have a mental picture of a spread eagled cat inches in front of a
compressor face.


PS- I am a dog person.

"Jim Carriere" wrote in message ...
"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message
...
Given the number of times the infamous "chicken cannon" has come
up in these fora, your attention is directed to this [Sunday]
evening's episode of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery cable channel
[8:00 PM ET, repeated at 11:00 PM ET for the left coast] in which
the intrepid Mythbusters team takes on the chicken cannon.

Speaking of chickens, aircraft, and engines, this reminds me of a story a
guy I used to work with told me. Not sure if it is true (it probably
isn't), but damn funny nonetheless-

During bird ingestion tests on some jet engine, the was an insufficient
number of "thawed" baby chickens needed to simulate a flock of small birds.
So somebody took out another case from the freezer, left it out to thaw, and
meanwhile everybody went to lunch. Later on, once the chicks had thawed,
the test was ran- birds shot in the running engine, the engine suffered
severe damage and miserably failed the test. After the high speed film of
the intake view was developed, some light was shed on the matter... a stray
cat somehow found it's way into the breech of the chicken cannon. This
probably happened while it was left unattended and everyone was at lunch.
The cat must have been either celebrating its good fortune to find a free
lunch, or sleeping it off the feast when the test was started up... followed
by noise, confusion, a sharp acceleration, blast of air, and then nothing.

I have a mental picture of a spread eagled cat inches in front of a
compressor face.

debunked at http://www.messybeast.com/urbancat.htm#cannon
also a brief mention of cat version of myth at
http://www.snopes.com/science/cannon.htm

PS- I am a dog person.

It's a scenario more likely to happen to a dog than a cat - e.g. to a
terrier-type dog which is bred to go down holes after prey. Cats
investigate spaces but tend not to crawl into tunnels (which is why
it's so damn hard to get them into front opening pet carriers).
Terriers not only willingly go into tunnels, they go into narrow
tunnels they can't get out of and have to be dug out of.

Ogden Johnson III wrote:

Given the number of times the infamous "chicken cannon" has come
up in these fora, your attention is directed to this [Sunday]
evening's episode of "Mythbusters" on the Discovery cable channel
[8:00 PM ET, repeated at 11:00 PM ET for the left coast] in which
the intrepid Mythbusters team takes on the chicken cannon.

I worked for a time at Arnold Air Force Station, Tennessee, where the
USAF tests airframes, rockets and missiles in both scale and full size
test cells. One of the tests involved firing chickens into windshields
of aircraft at simulated flight speeds.

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

John Lansford
--
The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do with
it.

* I notice someone else just posted a variation on the now-widespread "they
used a frozen bird by mistake" story, now with miniature birds and jet
engines instead of turkey and windscreens. I suspect it's just as
apocryphal as the others, but you never know.

--
Tom Schoene Replace "invalid" with "net" to e-mail
"If brave men and women never died, there would be nothing
special about bravery." -- Andy Rooney (attributed)

"Thomas Schoene" wrote:

John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do with
it.

* I notice someone else just posted a variation on the now-widespread "they
used a frozen bird by mistake" story, now with miniature birds and jet
engines instead of turkey and windscreens. I suspect it's just as
apocryphal as the others, but you never know.

Actually, according to my dad, who also worked at Arnold, the
frozen/unfrozen issue did take place. The need for a bird to be fired
by the gun was determined, and someone was sent out to get one. He
came back with the required payload, but it was a frozen, not fresh,
chicken. For some reason the decision was made to use it immediately,
with the expected results.

John Lansford
--
The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage:
http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Jim E

"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Keith

In article , Keith Willshaw
wrote:

"Jim E" wrote in message
...

"Thomas Schoene" wrote in message
link.net...
John Lansford wrote:

The chicken gun exists. I've seen it in operation in fact.

I'm guessing the myth in qustion is about the frozen vs non-frozen
chickens.* It will be interesting to see what the Mythbusters guys do
with
it.

Watched the program.
Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.


Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
in a single lump.

Indeed. Strange to relate, more windscreens are smashed by hailstones
than by raindrops. I'd be interested to know what experiments, if any,
the programme did in order to reach its conclusions. Obviously they are
quite correct about kinetic energy and momentum, but transfer of
momentum operates in many different ways depending very much on the
nature of the materials in which the transfer occurs.

--
"The past resembles the future as water resembles water" Ibn Khaldun

My .mac.com address is a spam sink.
If you wish to email me, try alan dot lothian at blueyonder dot co dot uk

"Keith Willshaw" wrote:

:"Jim E" wrote in message
...
:
: Watched the program.
: Their conclusion, frozen or thawed makes no difference to impact.
: Strictly a function of mass, velocity, and time of deceleration.
:
:Hmmm, I suspect when dealing with a kg of water it makes a
:big difference to the fan blades if that water is frozen
:in a single lump.

Sounds to me like they left out a calculation of the energy of
deformation (which doesn't go into the windscreen, but rather into the
chicken). Frozen chicken deforms much less, so I would expect it to
actually have greater energy of impact when compared to the non-frozen
variety given the same initial impetus.

Sort of like the 'crush space' on a car with a long hood.

--
"Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar
territory."
--G. Behn