Seaplane down off Miami Beach....

[Jay Honeck]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash

Dang. It was one of Chalk's famous seaplanes, too... Two confirmed
dead, thus far.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Longworth]

We were in Bimini last year and saw a Chalk's Grumman Mallard landed
on the water then taxied to the ramp. It was awesome. We had planned
to fly our Cardinal to Florida then fly to Bimini with Chalk next
sprng.
Robert Chamber introduced us to a Mallard owner at Bridgeport last
summer. The owner told us that he would not land his plane in any salt
water. He told me that it cost Chalk airline quite a bit of money to
keep their fleet running.
It's sad to hear about the accident. Just hope that this will not
put Chalk out of business.

Hai Longworth

[Jim Burns]

Thanks for the link. I've been watching MSNBC.... dumbest thing I've
seen... they keep calling it a Hydroplane.
Jim


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash
>
> Dang. It was one of Chalk's famous seaplanes, too... Two confirmed
> dead, thus far.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[Brock Boss]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash
>

http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/13443342.htm
They're saying it was a Grumman G73-T Mallard in this report.

[Jim Burns]

Witness says "part of the tail or rear of the plane had a small fire, pilot
tried to gain control, then a wing broke off and it all fell into the water.
I was about 200 yards from it."

Cell phone pics now starting to show up on TV that confirm the fire.

Crashed just after takeoff on a flight to Bimini

17 aboard, reports keep changing about survivors, unconscious victims, and
deceased.

Jim

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash
>
> Dang. It was one of Chalk's famous seaplanes, too... Two confirmed
> dead, thus far.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

[vincent p. norris]

>Thanks for the link. I've been watching MSNBC.... dumbest thing I've
>seen... they keep calling it a Hydroplane.

That means "water-plane." They've been called that since Glenn
Curtiss started building them.

vince norris

[Casey Wilson]

Just saw the news clip of the airplane going into the water.

Sad....

[Flyingmonk]

>Two confirmed dead, thus far.

Which article did you read? The one that you've linked saids 18 bodies
found and no signs of surevivors.

[Peter R.]

Jim Burns > wrote:

> Witness says "part of the tail or rear of the plane had a small fire, pilot
> tried to gain control, then a wing broke off and it all fell into the water.
> I was about 200 yards from it."

At 21:00 Eastern Time tonight, a Fox News reporter stated that the pilot
heroically directed the aircraft away from surfers in the water as the
aircraft fell from the sky.

Posted in consideration of Dudley's recent post indicating that it seems
every account of an aircraft crash includes some witness stating that the
pilot was able to steer away from people on the ground, when in reality
there most likely is no such attempt.

--
Peter

[Jim Herring]

Flyingmonk wrote:

> >Two confirmed dead, thus far.
>
> Which article did you read? The one that you've linked saids 18 bodies
> found and no signs of surevivors.

What's weird is that the airline started in 1919, there were 19 souls on
board, and today is the 19th.

[Jay Honeck]

> Just saw the news clip of the airplane going into the water.

Got an URL for that?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Macklin]

http://news.google.com/news?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGLB,GGLB:1969-53,GGLB:en&tab=wn&ncl=http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/miami/sfl-zchalksprofile20dec20,0,1357048.story%3Fcoll%3Dsfl a-news-miami&hl=en


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:ExLpf.414921$084.377502@attbi_s22...
|> Just saw the news clip of the airplane going into the
water.
|
| Got an URL for that?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|
|

[Jay Honeck]

Thanks, Jim.

Here's the write-up that contains the actual video URL:

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/miami.crash/

(You have to suffer through a Dodge truck commercial to see it, though...)

The wing clearly departed the airframe before the crash. I wonder if these
old birds are simply fatigued?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Jim Macklin]

My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
the spar enough for it to fail.. The airplane seems to have
been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
impact.

Thanks.


--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
news:aASpf.660077$xm3.524670@attbi_s21...
| Thanks, Jim.
|
| Here's the write-up that contains the actual video URL:
|
| http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/12/20/miami.crash/
|
| (You have to suffer through a Dodge truck commercial to
see it, though...)
|
| The wing clearly departed the airframe before the crash.
I wonder if these
| old birds are simply fatigued?
| --
| Jay Honeck
| Iowa City, IA
| Pathfinder N56993
| www.AlexisParkInn.com
| "Your Aviation Destination"
|
|

[Flyingmonk]

This source saids 19 dead, but it also saids 14 plus two crews were on
board, huh? Doesn't that equal 16?

[Flyingmonk]

This source,
http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1056407,
saids 19 dead, but it also saids 14 plus two crews were on
board, huh? Doesn't that equal 16?

[[email protected]]

>>>Robert Chamber introduced us to a Mallard owner at Bridgeport last summer. The owner told us that he would not land his plane in any salt water.<<<

That would be Jack Bart. I know him from my days in Ops at Bridgeport.
I flew in his Mallard a few years back up to Nashua. Man, does that
thing handle like a truck. Built-in delay to roll inputs, but those
1340 Pratts sound awesome. He recently added a Twin Beech (loves round
engines I guess)

[Jay Honeck]

> My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
> caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
> the spar enough for it to fail.

Boy, I sure hope that's "all" it was. (Who'd ever think we'd be saying that
kind of stuff?)

With everyone describing an "explosion" (which the video tends to
support) -- and Chalk's not having to do much in the way of security
screening, as a small carrier -- this could easily have been some kind of a
nut-job with a shoe bomb and a "cause".

And *then* we'd start seeing all sorts of stupid proposals for "enhanced
security" that we don't want or need.

Sad to say, a mechanical problem is the best-case scenario.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Toks Desalu]

Perfect evidence on why you shouldn't trust media that much!

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> This source,
> http://www.channel4.com/news/content/news-storypage.jsp?id=1056407,
> saids 19 dead, but it also saids 14 plus two crews were on
> board, huh? Doesn't that equal 16?
>

[Otis Winslow]

I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old airframes
didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.

This thing's just a heart breaker. I see them flying all the
time when I'm in Miami. They've been flying off Watson Island
forever. I've always thought it would be fun to fly with them
over to the Bahamas.


Jim Macklin wrote:
> My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
> caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
> the spar enough for it to fail.. The airplane seems to have
> been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
> impact.
>
> Thanks.
>
>

[sfb]

Apparently, there were three infants also on board.

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> This source saids 19 dead, but it also saids 14 plus two crews were on
> board, huh? Doesn't that equal 16?
>

[Flyingmonk]

Toks wrote:
>Perfect evidence on why you shouldn't trust media that much!

Well, I never really trusted them.

[Matt Whiting]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
> caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
> the spar enough for it to fail.. The airplane seems to have
> been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
> impact.

Any information as to what altitude they were cruising at? It seems
like it would take a minute or more to soften a spar enough to fail, but
maybe the pilot wasn't aware he had a problem in time. Then again, it
may have been something else entirely. I wonder if they could have hit
a gull or something like that also and cause a problem.


Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>>My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
>>caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
>>the spar enough for it to fail.
>
>
> Boy, I sure hope that's "all" it was. (Who'd ever think we'd be saying that
> kind of stuff?)
>
> With everyone describing an "explosion" (which the video tends to
> support) -- and Chalk's not having to do much in the way of security
> screening, as a small carrier -- this could easily have been some kind of a
> nut-job with a shoe bomb and a "cause".

That seems unlikely as the video seems to show the fuselage pretty well
intact and the wing separated. Unless the wing has a luggage locker, I
doubt it was a bomb.


Matt

[George Patterson]

Jim Macklin wrote:

> The airplane seems to have
> been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
> impact.

There were excellent reasons for people calling Grumman "The Ironworks."

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

[George Patterson]

Flyingmonk wrote:
> This source saids 19 dead, but it also saids 14 plus two crews were on
> board, huh? Doesn't that equal 16?

Plus several infants.

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

[Jim Macklin]

More likely that a fuel line was not properly safetied or
otherwise failed. Turbine engines have fuel pressures as
high a 1,000 PSI, so the fuel system in the engine is highly
stressed. The fuel supply pumps are high capacity and 50 to
100 PSI, so again, the fuel connections and lines are
stressed.

If there was a fuel leak into the nacelle, wing root area,
any source of ignition could cause an explosion and the
resulting fire would soften the aluminum spar quickly. The
emergency procedure for a fire is to shut off the fuel
valves, but if the failure was between the tank and fuel
tank or the valve was damaged, it might not be possible to
shut the fuel off.

The NTSB is very good at investigating this type of failure,
the will track melted and bent metal, see the pattern of
soot and follow the fractures in the metal.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Otis Winslow" > wrote in message
...
| I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old
airframes
| didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.
|
| This thing's just a heart breaker. I see them flying all
the
| time when I'm in Miami. They've been flying off Watson
Island
| forever. I've always thought it would be fun to fly with
them
| over to the Bahamas.
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
| > caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire
melted
| > the spar enough for it to fail.. The airplane seems to
have
| > been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
| > impact.
| >
| > Thanks.
| >
| >

[Jim Macklin]

Bird strikes are common, but Grumman was called the Iron
Works for a reason, they built tough airplanes. Aluminum
melts at 1100 degrees F and has lost most of its strength at
500 degrees. Kerosene fire is high heat and energy, failure
could happen in 10-15 seconds [guess].


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
| > caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire
melted
| > the spar enough for it to fail.. The airplane seems to
have
| > been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
| > impact.
|
| Any information as to what altitude they were cruising at?
It seems
| like it would take a minute or more to soften a spar
enough to fail, but
| maybe the pilot wasn't aware he had a problem in time.
Then again, it
| may have been something else entirely. I wonder if they
could have hit
| a gull or something like that also and cause a problem.
|
|
| Matt

[Jim Macklin]

Grumman and Republic both built tough airplanes.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:pTUpf.7263$7f3.3404@trnddc01...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
|
| > The airplane seems to have
| > been very sturdy, since the fuselage is intact after the
| > impact.
|
| There were excellent reasons for people calling Grumman
"The Ironworks."
|
| George Patterson
| Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by
rights belong to
| your slightly older self.

[[email protected]]

>>>I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old airframes
didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.<<<

Turbines run a whole lot smoother than the round Pratts that were on
originally. They don't have the power pulses that radial engines have.
I'd agree with the other posters that it sounds more like a
leaking/broken fuel fitting that went bad, ignited and led to
structural failure.

[Casey Wilson]

"Flyingmonk" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Toks wrote:
>>Perfect evidence on why you shouldn't trust media that much!
>
> Well, I never really trusted them.
>
Don't trust them if you want, but don't blame them for this one.
The infants are not ticketed passengers and therefore are not listed on the
manifest given to the media.

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
ups.com...
>>>>I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old airframes
> didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.<<<
>
> Turbines run a whole lot smoother than the round Pratts that were on
> originally. They don't have the power pulses that radial engines have.

I assume he was referring to the increased thrust that was probably obtained
with the turbine installation, which would create higher forces on the
structure transmitting that thrust to the airframe.

Of course, one would think that in a turbine retro-fit, that structure would
be upgraded to compensate. Hopefully, that's not actually the problem.

But I don't think Otis was suggesting that turbines would cause more fatigue
due to vibration than the original engines.

Pete

[[email protected]]

>>>I assume he was referring to the increased thrust that was probably obtained
with the turbine installation, which would create higher forces on the
structure transmitting that thrust to the airframe.<<<

I assumed the same. The round Pratts were 550hp engines, and the STC'd
PT6A-27 engines are flat-rated to 650hp. While the increased thrust
might add stress, my assumption was the weight reduction of the
turbines and their much smoother operation might nullify the power
increase as it relates to airframe stresses. It seemed a safe
assumption that that's what he was suggesting.

[Peter Duniho]

> wrote in message
oups.com...
>>>>I assume he was referring to the increased thrust that was probably
>>>>obtained
> with the turbine installation, which would create higher forces on the
> structure transmitting that thrust to the airframe.<<<
>
> I assumed the same.

Curious you would introduce "run a whole lot smoother" and "power pulses"
then, if you thought those issues weren't relevant. Very odd. Even
stranger that those issues were the sum total of your rebuttal to his post.

> The round Pratts were 550hp engines, and the STC'd
> PT6A-27 engines are flat-rated to 650hp. While the increased thrust
> might add stress, my assumption was the weight reduction of the
> turbines and their much smoother operation might nullify the power
> increase as it relates to airframe stresses. It seemed a safe
> assumption that that's what he was suggesting.

I don't see how the smoothness of the operation of the engine relates.

As far as the weight reduction goes, if anything that would exacerbate the
problem, especially if that weight reduction is permitted to be moved over
to useful load. A heavier engine will dampen the initial acceleration (a
certain amount of the thrust is applied to accelerating the engine, rather
than the airframe to which it's attached), while a heavier airframe (ie
higher useful load) will allow higher forces to occur during that initial
acceleration.

Of course, once acceleration is relatively constant, the only real
difference is the difference in thrust, but again 100 more hp certainly
translates to more acceleration, and thus more force on the airframe.

All that said, as I mentioned before, I would expect certification of the
engine to take all of that into account.

Pete

[Michael Ware]

One news report was watching last night mentioned 'the NTSB is attempting to
recover the cockpit voice recorder'. Are these small charter lines equipped
with those?

[Jack]

Peter Duniho wrote:

> A heavier engine will dampen the initial acceleration (a
> certain amount of the thrust is applied to accelerating the engine, rather
> than the airframe to which it's attached), while a heavier airframe (ie
> higher useful load) will allow higher forces to occur during that initial
> acceleration.

Really?

Just how elastic do you think the connections between the airframe and
the engine are? When it comes to acceleration, they better form pretty
much one piece, don't you think?

Gross weight is what we accelerate, not components.

Or are you speaking metaphysically?


Jack

[Jim Macklin]

FAR 135 and 121 require cockpit voice recorders on turbine
powered aircraft. They are very simple, just a microphone
and an armored box.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P



"Michael Ware" > wrote in message
m...
| One news report was watching last night mentioned 'the
NTSB is attempting to
| recover the cockpit voice recorder'. Are these small
charter lines equipped
| with those?
|
|

[Morgans]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote
>
> The wing clearly departed the airframe before the crash. I wonder if
these
> old birds are simply fatigued?

I wonder about catastrophic unconfined engine failure, severing the spar.
There was an account of the sound and sight of an explosion before the wing
departed, wasn't there?
--
Jim in NC

[[email protected]]

>>>Curious you would introduce "run a whole lot smoother" and "power pulses"
then, if you thought those issues weren't relevant. Very odd. Even
stranger that those issues were the sum total of your rebuttal to his
post<<<

Ya got me there Pete... nothing escapes your eagle-eyed gaze, eh?

Not really sure where I was going with that. On reflection, Otis' post
would suggest the higher power turbine conversion might have have an
adverse effect on the old Mallard airframe, even though as you
mentioned the STC should include reinforcing mounts, spars etc. to
allow for the increased stress on the airframe. If anything, I'd guess
the smoother running turbines should stress the airframe less than the
throbbing & vibrating radials in spite of their higher power.

(Disclaimer: I'm not an engineer, just an aero turbine analyst)

[Big John]

Jay

A monday morning WAG.

Turbine (disk) blew up and destroyed enough of the wing structure that
it failed.

Fuel tank(s) in wing then dumped fuel on hot parts of turbine and
caught fire.

Wingless (one wing) fuselage impacted water and broken off wing
floated down burning until it hit the water.

Lets see if my years of experience with accidents guessed right on
this bad accident.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````

On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:08:24 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
> wrote:

>> My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
>> caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire melted
>> the spar enough for it to fail.
>
>Boy, I sure hope that's "all" it was. (Who'd ever think we'd be saying that
>kind of stuff?)
>
>With everyone describing an "explosion" (which the video tends to
>support) -- and Chalk's not having to do much in the way of security
>screening, as a small carrier -- this could easily have been some kind of a
>nut-job with a shoe bomb and a "cause".
>
>And *then* we'd start seeing all sorts of stupid proposals for "enhanced
>security" that we don't want or need.
>
>Sad to say, a mechanical problem is the best-case scenario.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article >,
"Morgans" > wrote:

> "Jay Honeck" > wrote
> >
> > The wing clearly departed the airframe before the crash. I wonder if
> these
> > old birds are simply fatigued?
>
> I wonder about catastrophic unconfined engine failure, severing the spar.
> There was an account of the sound and sight of an explosion before the wing
> departed, wasn't there?

Snapping structures sound a lot like explosions -- especially to
nonexpert witnesses.

--
Remve "_" from email to reply to me personally.

[Jim Macklin]

The PT6 is mounted above and forward of the wing leading
edge, if the turbine had a failure, the bits and pieces are
not likely to impact the wing. But, if that happened
there will be positive evidence.

The PT6 is a pretty small turbine, they don't have many
problems internal to the engine.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Big John" > wrote in message
...
| Jay
|
| A monday morning WAG.
|
| Turbine (disk) blew up and destroyed enough of the wing
structure that
| it failed.
|
| Fuel tank(s) in wing then dumped fuel on hot parts of
turbine and
| caught fire.
|
| Wingless (one wing) fuselage impacted water and broken off
wing
| floated down burning until it hit the water.
|
| Lets see if my years of experience with accidents guessed
right on
| this bad accident.
|
| Big John
|
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` `````````````
|
| On Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:08:24 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
| > wrote:
|
| >> My guess is that they had a loose or broken fuel line,
| >> caught fire and the fuel vapor exploded and the fire
melted
| >> the spar enough for it to fail.
| >
| >Boy, I sure hope that's "all" it was. (Who'd ever think
we'd be saying that
| >kind of stuff?)
| >
| >With everyone describing an "explosion" (which the video
tends to
| >support) -- and Chalk's not having to do much in the way
of security
| >screening, as a small carrier -- this could easily have
been some kind of a
| >nut-job with a shoe bomb and a "cause".
| >
| >And *then* we'd start seeing all sorts of stupid
proposals for "enhanced
| >security" that we don't want or need.
| >
| >Sad to say, a mechanical problem is the best-case
scenario.
|

[Peter Duniho]

"Jack" > wrote in message
. net...
> [...]
> Just how elastic do you think the connections between the airframe and the
> engine are? When it comes to acceleration, they better form pretty much
> one piece, don't you think?

For the sake of this discussion, it doesn't really matter. The difference
in forces may be negligible, but *inasmuch as they might not be*, a lighter
engine doesn't help, it hurts.

Still, your comment about elasticity is irrelevant.

> Gross weight is what we accelerate, not components.

The components are connected by structure designed for specific forces.

For example, I can add a one ounce weight to the back of my airplane with
some scotch tape, and it won't fall off, no matter how fast I accelerate.
But if I tried to pull the entire airplane by pulling on that one ounce
weight, the tape will fail, even at extremely low acceleration.

Pete

[[email protected]]

This news article
(http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/20/D8EKBRTG0.html) says that the
wing was recovered from the water today, and the engine and prop are
still attached. There's even a photo showing it. Looks like the wing
separated pretty well inboard of the engine. At this point,
speculation seems that either a fuel leak/fire melting the spar... or
perhaps just simple plain structural failure of the spar with the fire
happening afterwards could both possibly explain the wing separation.


Jim Macklin wrote:
> More likely that a fuel line was not properly safetied or
> otherwise failed. Turbine engines have fuel pressures as
> high a 1,000 PSI, so the fuel system in the engine is highly
> stressed. The fuel supply pumps are high capacity and 50 to
> 100 PSI, so again, the fuel connections and lines are
> stressed.
>
> If there was a fuel leak into the nacelle, wing root area,
> any source of ignition could cause an explosion and the
> resulting fire would soften the aluminum spar quickly. The
> emergency procedure for a fire is to shut off the fuel
> valves, but if the failure was between the tank and fuel
> tank or the valve was damaged, it might not be possible to
> shut the fuel off.
>
> The NTSB is very good at investigating this type of failure,
> the will track melted and bent metal, see the pattern of
> soot and follow the fractures in the metal.
>

[Jim Macklin]

The Chalk Island web site says that their airplanes were in
the shop for the engine changes and complete mechanical
refurbishment and new paint/interiors.

There should be some preliminary data released by the NTSB
before Christmas or New Year, I would expect.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
> wrote in message
ps.com...
| This news article
| (http://www.breitbart.com/news/2005/12/20/D8EKBRTG0.html)
says that the
| wing was recovered from the water today, and the engine
and prop are
| still attached. There's even a photo showing it. Looks
like the wing
| separated pretty well inboard of the engine. At this
point,
| speculation seems that either a fuel leak/fire melting the
spar... or
| perhaps just simple plain structural failure of the spar
with the fire
| happening afterwards could both possibly explain the wing
separation.
|
|
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > More likely that a fuel line was not properly safetied
or
| > otherwise failed. Turbine engines have fuel pressures
as
| > high a 1,000 PSI, so the fuel system in the engine is
highly
| > stressed. The fuel supply pumps are high capacity and
50 to
| > 100 PSI, so again, the fuel connections and lines are
| > stressed.
| >
| > If there was a fuel leak into the nacelle, wing root
area,
| > any source of ignition could cause an explosion and the
| > resulting fire would soften the aluminum spar quickly.
The
| > emergency procedure for a fire is to shut off the fuel
| > valves, but if the failure was between the tank and fuel
| > tank or the valve was damaged, it might not be possible
to
| > shut the fuel off.
| >
| > The NTSB is very good at investigating this type of
failure,
| > the will track melted and bent metal, see the pattern of
| > soot and follow the fractures in the metal.
| >
|

[Ron Natalie]

wrote:
>>>> I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old airframes
> didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.<<<
>
> Turbines run a whole lot smoother than the round Pratts that were on
> originally. They don't have the power pulses that radial engines have.
>
Not that they aren't subject to resonance issues. Remember the Electra?

[Jim Macklin]

Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they
found a fatigue crack in the main spar, maybe the conversion
was not done well or the maintenance was not though enough.
I'll bet the fleet is grounded and they require immediate,
"before further flight" NDT inspections of the wings, etc.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin


"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
m...
| wrote:
| >>>> I'm wondering if fitting turbine engines on the old
airframes
| > didn't pull something loose in the wing/mount.<<<
| >
| > Turbines run a whole lot smoother than the round Pratts
that were on
| > originally. They don't have the power pulses that radial
engines have.
| >
| Not that they aren't subject to resonance issues.
Remember the Electra?

[George Patterson]

Jim Macklin wrote:
> Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they
> found a fatigue crack in the main spar, maybe the conversion
> was not done well or the maintenance was not though enough.
> I'll bet the fleet is grounded and they require immediate,
> "before further flight" NDT inspections of the wings, etc.

Chalk's has voluntarily grounded thier Mallards and is performing an exhaustive
test of the spars on one of them now. The NTSB rep voiced the opinion that age
alone would not be sufficient to cause this failure; some additional stress
would be required.

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

[Jim Macklin]

That is probably true. The odds are that inspections will
not find any other similar cracks in the rest of the Chalk
fleet, I imagine that every Mallard, worldwide, will be
inspected soon. It is even possible that the crack that was
found was recent, metallurgical tests will have to be done
to know for sure. It is even possible that it was caused by
some defect dating back 50 years and was not visible on the
surface.

I'm sure that it will be fixed, too bad, a wing coming off
has only one recovery mode, parachute a la Cirrus.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:ixoqf.29956$CL.291@trnddc04...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| > Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they
| > found a fatigue crack in the main spar, maybe the
conversion
| > was not done well or the maintenance was not though
enough.
| > I'll bet the fleet is grounded and they require
immediate,
| > "before further flight" NDT inspections of the wings,
etc.
|
| Chalk's has voluntarily grounded thier Mallards and is
performing an exhaustive
| test of the spars on one of them now. The NTSB rep voiced
the opinion that age
| alone would not be sufficient to cause this failure; some
additional stress
| would be required.
|
| George Patterson
| Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by
rights belong to
| your slightly older self.

[Matt Whiting]

George Patterson wrote:

> Jim Macklin wrote:
>
>> Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they found a
>> fatigue crack in the main spar, maybe the conversion was not done well
>> or the maintenance was not though enough. I'll bet the fleet is
>> grounded and they require immediate, "before further flight" NDT
>> inspections of the wings, etc.
>
>
> Chalk's has voluntarily grounded thier Mallards and is performing an
> exhaustive test of the spars on one of them now. The NTSB rep voiced the
> opinion that age alone would not be sufficient to cause this failure;
> some additional stress would be required.

A pretty irresponsible statement for an NTSB person. Fatigue can cause
a stressed member to fail at a very low load, much less than even flight
loads. I seem to remember a picture of a Buff whose wing had failed on
the ground. It has been years and I don't remember the details, but it
seems like it was due to something fairly innocous such as refueling. I
believe fatigue was determined to be the root cause.


Matt

[Kyle Boatright]

"George Patterson" > wrote in message
news:ixoqf.29956$CL.291@trnddc04...
> Jim Macklin wrote:
>> Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they found a fatigue
>> crack in the main spar, maybe the conversion was not done well or the
>> maintenance was not though enough. I'll bet the fleet is grounded and
>> they require immediate, "before further flight" NDT inspections of the
>> wings, etc.
>
> Chalk's has voluntarily grounded thier Mallards and is performing an
> exhaustive test of the spars on one of them now. The NTSB rep voiced the
> opinion that age alone would not be sufficient to cause this failure; some
> additional stress would be required.
>
> George Patterson
> Coffee is only a way of stealing time that should by rights belong to
> your slightly older self.

How frequently were these airplanes operated off of water? Wouldn't water
takeoff's and landings typically be more stressful (because you're getting
bashed around by waves) than landing on a nice smooth runway? I suspect it
would be even worse if you dug in a wing float or hit a wave with a wing
float "at speed".

KB

[Capt.Doug]

>"Kyle Boatright" wrote in message
> How frequently were these airplanes operated off of water? Wouldn't water
> takeoff's and landings typically be more stressful (because you're getting
> bashed around by waves) than landing on a nice smooth runway? I suspect
it
> would be even worse if you dug in a wing float or hit a wave with a wing
> float "at speed".

The fleet operates off the water every day. Chalks opts to land on the water
at stations were runways are available. It's part of the experience for the
passengers. Seaplane operations are much more demanding than landplane
operations, particularly in sal****er environs. These airplanes were built
tough, but they were designed when finite element analysis was in it's
infancy.

What the press hasn't mentioned, because they don't know, is that seaplane
operations have more incidents than similar landbased operations. It comes
with the territory. Chalks has had numerous hard landings were floats have
been knocked off. A Chalk's Mallard hit a bridge piling with a wingtip
during take-off from Paradise Island a few years back. It happens much more
often at Chalks than at other South Florida operators because of the water
environment. That's just the way it is. Grumman seaplanes are tough, but
there has been additional stress applied to Chalk's spars. I suspect that
the NTSB rep's opinion may be correct. Additionally, there are areas of the
spar that are difficult to inspect visually. Even with a proper inspection
revealing no cracks, work hardening of the metal may have been reaching
catastrophic limits. How does one inspect metal spars for work hardening if
there are no cracks? How long does it take for a crack to propagate to
catastrophic lengths?

The recent ADs for the T-34 and T-6 fleets, and the Aero-Commander 500 fleet
before that (the spar cracks AD, not the dissimilar metal corrosion AD),
should have instigated more research into aging aircraft and work hardening
of the spars. Perhaps this tragedy will be the catalyst.

D.

[Matt Whiting]

>Merry Christmas
>Have a Safe and Happy New Year
>Live Long and Prosper
>Jim Macklin


Go **** yourself

[Matt Whiting]

Matt Whiting wrote:

>>Merry Christmas
>>Have a Safe and Happy New Year
>>Live Long and Prosper
>>Jim Macklin
>
>
>
> Go **** yourself
>

I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows if they will
do anything about it.

Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over the
years, knows that I don't use language like this.

Matt

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>>>Merry Christmas
>>>Have a Safe and Happy New Year
>>>Live Long and Prosper Jim Macklin
>>
>>
>>
>> Go **** yourself
>>
>
> I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows if they will do
> anything about it.
>
> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over the
> years, knows that I don't use language like this.
>
> Matt

You need to report him to Google as it looks like that is where he was
posting from.

[Matt Whiting]

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Matt Whiting wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>Merry Christmas
>>>>Have a Safe and Happy New Year
>>>>Live Long and Prosper Jim Macklin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Go **** yourself
>>>
>>
>>I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows if they will do
>>anything about it.
>>
>>Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over the
>>years, knows that I don't use language like this.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> You need to report him to Google as it looks like that is where he was
> posting from.

Yes, I did that as well as soon as I looked at the full header. Thanks.

Matt

[Darrel Toepfer]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> Gig 601XL Builder wrote:
>
>> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> Matt Whiting wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> Merry Christmas
>>>>> Have a Safe and Happy New Year
>>>>> Live Long and Prosper Jim Macklin
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Go **** yourself
>>>>
>>>
>>> I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows if they
>>> will do anything about it.
>>>
>>> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over
>>> the years, knows that I don't use language like this.
>>>
>>> Matt
>>
>>
>> You need to report him to Google as it looks like that is where he was
>> posting from.
>
> Yes, I did that as well as soon as I looked at the full header. Thanks.

It originates in Reston Va. with Level3 Communications

4.249.57.148

[Peter R.]

Darrel Toepfer > wrote:

> It originates in Reston Va. with Level3 Communications
>
> 4.249.57.148

Level3's applicable TOS:

Spoofing/Fraud
A User may not attempt to send e-mail messages or transmit any electronic
communications using a name or address of someone other than the User for
purposes of deception. Any attempt to impersonate someone else by altering
a source IP address information or by using forged headers or other
identifying information is prohibited. Any attempt to fraudulently conceal,
forge, or otherwise falsify a User's identity in connection with use of the
Service is prohibited.


Looks like the fake MW is jeopardizing his dial-up Internet account. I
didn't think anyone in the US used dial-up anymore, what with cheap
broadband almost ubiquitous.

--
Peter

[Darrel Toepfer]

Peter R. wrote:

> Looks like the fake MW is jeopardizing his dial-up Internet account. I
> didn't think anyone in the US used dial-up anymore, what with cheap
> broadband almost ubiquitous.

Not everybody lives in the city, even some that do prefer the cheaper
dialup vs the more expensive always on...

WiFi holds the most potential for broadband if you have line of sight...

[Jim Macklin]

At my age, I'll probably have to.



"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
oups.com...
| >Merry Christmas
| >Have a Safe and Happy New Year
| >Live Long and Prosper
| >Jim Macklin
|
|
| Go **** yourself
|

[Jim Macklin]

Here is the header info from the imposter...
Path:
dukenews1.cox.net!duke.cox.net!filt01.cox.net!peer 01.cox.net!cox.net!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!b order1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!pos tnews.google.com!g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: "Matt Whiting" >
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: Seaplane down off Miami Beach....
Date: 22 Dec 2005 09:07:23 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 8
Message-ID:
. com>
References:
. com>
>
>
<0jJpf.5163$vJ4.3811@trnddc07>
<ExLpf.414921$084.377502@attbi_s22>
<BUNpf.29689$QW2.12841@dukeread08>
<aASpf.660077$xm3.524670@attbi_s21>
<bGTpf.29718$QW2.22965@dukeread08>
>
<SoVpf.29738$QW2.2110@dukeread08>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 4.249.57.148
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1135271248 17795 127.0.0.1 (22
Dec 2005 17:07:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To:
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:07:28 +0000 (UTC)
In-Reply-To: <SoVpf.29738$QW2.2110@dukeread08>
User-Agent: G2/0.2
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows
NT 5.1; SV1),gzip(gfe),gzip(gfe)
Complaints-To:
Injection-Info: g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com;
posting-host=4.249.57.148;
posting-account=SGs8yg0AAABIH8xK_bnpCLn5e3cw-CM9
X-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:08:36 EST
(dukenews1.cox.net)

Here is the real...
Path:
dukenews1.cox.net!duke.cox.net!filt01.cox.net!peer 01.cox.net!cox.net!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!n ntp.giganews.com!feed.cgocable.net!news2.epix.net! news1.epix.net!not-for-mail
From: Matt Whiting >
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040804 Netscape/7.2 (ax)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: rec.aviation.piloting
Subject: Re: Seaplane down off Miami Beach....
References:
. com>
>
>
<0jJpf.5163$vJ4.3811@trnddc07>
<ExLpf.414921$084.377502@attbi_s22>
<BUNpf.29689$QW2.12841@dukeread08>
<aASpf.660077$xm3.524670@attbi_s21>
<bGTpf.29718$QW2.22965@dukeread08>
>
<SoVpf.29738$QW2.2110@dukeread08>
. com>
In-Reply-To:
. com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 19
Message-ID: >
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 17:23:44 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.37.139.216
X-Complaints-To:
X-Trace: news1.epix.net 1135272224 216.37.139.216 (Thu, 22
Dec 2005 12:23:44 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:23:44 EST
X-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2005 12:24:52 EST
(dukenews1.cox.net)

Note the places to report abuse is Google on the spoofed
post.



--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
| Matt Whiting wrote:
|
| >>Merry Christmas
| >>Have a Safe and Happy New Year
| >>Live Long and Prosper
| >>Jim Macklin
| >
| >
| >
| > Go **** yourself
| >
|
| I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows
if they will
| do anything about it.
|
| Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.*
newsgroups over the
| years, knows that I don't use language like this.
|
| Matt

[Peter R.]

Jim Macklin > wrote:

> Here is the header info from the imposter...

Not needed. News readers, including Google's web based reader, all offer a
simple way to browse headers.

> Note the places to report abuse is Google on the spoofed
> post.

Why not go for the root of the problem and report the spoofing to his
dial-up ISP, given that he is in violation of a few of their TOS rules.
It's too easy to create another newsgroup posting ID on Google after the
original is closed.

Go here: http://incident-report.level3.com/

or email his entire post and headers to here:

--
Peter

[Jim Macklin]

Very true, just thought that some, including the impostor,
would like to see the info that is available to catch them.
He might even be in violation of Federal law and face some
time in prison.


--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin > wrote:
|
| > Here is the header info from the imposter...
|
| Not needed. News readers, including Google's web based
reader, all offer a
| simple way to browse headers.
|
| > Note the places to report abuse is Google on the spoofed
| > post.
|
| Why not go for the root of the problem and report the
spoofing to his
| dial-up ISP, given that he is in violation of a few of
their TOS rules.
| It's too easy to create another newsgroup posting ID on
Google after the
| original is closed.
|
| Go here: http://incident-report.level3.com/
|
| or email his entire post and headers to here:

|
| --
| Peter

[Big John]

Matt

Center point refueling didn't shut off when tank was full and Ka-boom
went the wing.

Big John
`````````````````````````````````````````````````` ```````````````````````

On Thu, 22 Dec 2005 03:14:07 GMT, Matt Whiting >
wrote:

>George Patterson wrote:
>
>> Jim Macklin wrote:
>>
>>> Reports I saws this morning said that the NTSB said they found a
>>> fatigue crack in the main spar, maybe the conversion was not done well
>>> or the maintenance was not though enough. I'll bet the fleet is
>>> grounded and they require immediate, "before further flight" NDT
>>> inspections of the wings, etc.
>>
>>
>> Chalk's has voluntarily grounded thier Mallards and is performing an
>> exhaustive test of the spars on one of them now. The NTSB rep voiced the
>> opinion that age alone would not be sufficient to cause this failure;
>> some additional stress would be required.
>
>A pretty irresponsible statement for an NTSB person. Fatigue can cause
>a stressed member to fail at a very low load, much less than even flight
>loads. I seem to remember a picture of a Buff whose wing had failed on
>the ground. It has been years and I don't remember the details, but it
>seems like it was due to something fairly innocous such as refueling. I
>believe fatigue was determined to be the root cause.
>
>
>Matt

[George Patterson]

Matt Whiting wrote:

> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over the
> years, knows that I don't use language like this.

It *was* a bit surprising!

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

[George Patterson]

Peter R. wrote:

> Looks like the fake MW is jeopardizing his dial-up Internet account. I
> didn't think anyone in the US used dial-up anymore, what with cheap
> broadband almost ubiquitous.

"Cheap" broadband costs twice what dial-up does. In addition, rural telcom
networks usually can't handle DSL and those same areas are likely to be outside
the cable service areas. That leaves satellite, which has it's own set of
problems (including the cost).

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

[George Patterson]

Peter R. wrote:

> or email his entire post and headers to here:

Does it help in these cases if several people complain?

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

[Peter R.]

George Patterson > wrote:

> "Cheap" broadband costs twice what dial-up does. In addition, rural telcom
> networks usually can't handle DSL and those same areas are likely to be outside
> the cable service areas. That leaves satellite, which has it's own set of
> problems (including the cost).

Verizon DSL just dropped their ~760 KB/sec download speed to $14.95/month.
For those dial-up customers, including the fake MW out of the Virginia/DC
metro area, who live in a DSL-served area, there is now no excuse to remain
with dial up.

Verizon FiOS (fiber optic broadband, to which I just started subscribing)
is being rolled out nationwide. When it is complete, expect to see cable
broadband come down to remain competitive, since they really cannot raise
download speeds tremendously to compete. There was also a rumor that
Verizon FiOS will offer a 1 MB/s download speed for $9.99/month to grab
local dial-up customers.

Yes, I am aware that there are many out in the boonies that will never see
cable, DSL, or fiber broadband. My original comments were actually meant
as a dig only to the fake MW who thought he was being totally anonymous,
but I see that I could have worded it a little better.


--
Peter

[Jim Macklin]

I do hope that all those phishing letters I get weekly and
that I immediately report, with full headers
[properties-message source] to the appropriate ISP and
government agencies at least slow the flow.


To those who use bad language and try to insult me, I've got
a very thick skin and never take an insult personally.



--
Merry Christmas To ALL.
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Morgans" > wrote in message
...
|
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:49Dqf.30336$QW2.5169@dukeread08...
| > Very true, just thought that some, including the
impostor,
| > would like to see the info that is available to catch
them.
| > He might even be in violation of Federal law and face
some
| > time in prison.
|
| Don't hold your breath, Jim. Internet jailings are few
and far in-between,
| and usually reserved for sex crimes.
|
| Shoot, we can't even keep murder convicts in jail for
their full terms.
| --
| Jim in NC
|

[Peter R.]

George Patterson > wrote:

> Peter R. wrote:
>
>> or email his entire post and headers to here:
>
> Does it help in these cases if several people complain?

Sure, why not join the party? Imagine what the fake MW's parents are
going to say when their little high-school aged boy costs them their
dial-up service.

--
Peter

[Morgans]

"Peter R." > wrote

> I didn't think anyone in the US used dial-up anymore, what with cheap
> broadband almost ubiquitous.

Cheap? Not here!

Still, to use dial up, means that you don't get to use much of the Internet,
because of the speed. (or lack there of)
--
Jim in NC

[Jim Macklin]

I sure like my 4 Mbit/sec cable, but I still have a 56 K
dial up as a backup, for $75 a year from the local college.
That's one reason I didn't want the cable telephone service,
I like redundant services in airplanes and on the ground.


--
James H. Macklin
ATP,CFI,A&P

--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
| George Patterson > wrote:
|
| > "Cheap" broadband costs twice what dial-up does. In
addition, rural telcom
| > networks usually can't handle DSL and those same areas
are likely to be outside
| > the cable service areas. That leaves satellite, which
has it's own set of
| > problems (including the cost).
|
| Verizon DSL just dropped their ~760 KB/sec download speed
to $14.95/month.
| For those dial-up customers, including the fake MW out of
the Virginia/DC
| metro area, who live in a DSL-served area, there is now no
excuse to remain
| with dial up.
|
| Verizon FiOS (fiber optic broadband, to which I just
started subscribing)
| is being rolled out nationwide. When it is complete,
expect to see cable
| broadband come down to remain competitive, since they
really cannot raise
| download speeds tremendously to compete. There was also a
rumor that
| Verizon FiOS will offer a 1 MB/s download speed for
$9.99/month to grab
| local dial-up customers.
|
| Yes, I am aware that there are many out in the boonies
that will never see
| cable, DSL, or fiber broadband. My original comments
were actually meant
| as a dig only to the fake MW who thought he was being
totally anonymous,
| but I see that I could have worded it a little better.
|
|
| --
| Peter

[Morgans]

Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.*
newsgroups over the
years, knows that I don't use language like this.

Matt

Right, Matt. Sometimes you p*ss me off, but you do it politely! <bfg>

I've not been nice to people at times, but I usually feel like I was
provoked into the rudeness. Never-the-less, my New Years Resolution is to
try and have a longer fuse, so, to all "I" have p*ssed off, try me again,
and I'll try to be better!
--
Jim in NC

[Matt Whiting]

Morgans wrote:

>
> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.*
> newsgroups over the
> years, knows that I don't use language like this.
>
> Matt
>
> Right, Matt. Sometimes you p*ss me off, but you do it politely! <bfg>
>
> I've not been nice to people at times, but I usually feel like I was
> provoked into the rudeness. Never-the-less, my New Years Resolution is to
> try and have a longer fuse, so, to all "I" have p*ssed off, try me again,
> and I'll try to be better!

Sure, Jim, sure! :-)

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Morgans wrote:

> "Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
> news:49Dqf.30336$QW2.5169@dukeread08...
>
>>Very true, just thought that some, including the impostor,
>>would like to see the info that is available to catch them.
>>He might even be in violation of Federal law and face some
>>time in prison.
>
>
> Don't hold your breath, Jim. Internet jailings are few and far in-between,
> and usually reserved for sex crimes.
>
> Shoot, we can't even keep murder convicts in jail for their full terms.

Yes, it is probably some teen thinking he or she is being cool. They
will tire of using my name after a while and move on to the next cheap
thrill.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

George Patterson wrote:

> Matt Whiting wrote:
>
>> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over
>> the years, knows that I don't use language like this.
>
>
> It *was* a bit surprising!

I hope so! I love a good argument and will churn it up with the best,
but I don't use vulgarity and try very hard to even avoid a personal
insult. I won't claim to always be successful on the latter, but I
think I've been about 100% successful on the former.


Matt

[Morgans]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:49Dqf.30336$QW2.5169@dukeread08...
> Very true, just thought that some, including the impostor,
> would like to see the info that is available to catch them.
> He might even be in violation of Federal law and face some
> time in prison.

Don't hold your breath, Jim. Internet jailings are few and far in-between,
and usually reserved for sex crimes.

Shoot, we can't even keep murder convicts in jail for their full terms.
--
Jim in NC

[Darrel Toepfer]

Morgans wrote:
> "Peter R." > wrote
>
>> I didn't think anyone in the US used dial-up anymore, what with cheap
>> broadband almost ubiquitous.
>
> Cheap? Not here!

Header makes it look like your on through Charter...

> Still, to use dial up, means that you don't get to use much of the Internet,
> because of the speed. (or lack there of)

Gimme an area code and a prefix, I'll see what I can offer...

[Peter R.]

Jim Macklin > wrote:

> I sure like my 4 Mbit/sec cable, but I still have a 56 K
> dial up as a backup, for $75 a year from the local college.

Do a few speed tests to see if you are actually getting close to that 4mbps
speed they are advertising.

http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
http://ciseweb100.cise-nsf.gov:7123/

When I was a Time Warner Road Runner cable broadband customer, they claimed
4mbps, too, but in reality I was seeing a consistent 1.5 mbps (190
Kbytes/sec) down and a dismal 300kbps (38kbytes/sec) up.


--
Peter

[Darrel Toepfer]

Peter R. wrote:

> Verizon DSL just dropped their ~760 KB/sec download speed to
> $14.95/month. For those dial-up customers, including the fake
> MW out of the Virginia/DC metro area, who live in a DSL-served
> area, there is now no excuse to remain with dial up.

I wish for a day that I don't see spam with Verizon routing in it...

Its like having our own bit of China/Korea/Japan/Brazil/Nigeria right
here at home...

[Peter R.]

Darrel Toepfer > wrote:

> I wish for a day that I don't see spam with Verizon routing in it...

And you are confident that those headers weren't spoofed?

> Its like having our own bit of China/Korea/Japan/Brazil/Nigeria right
> here at home...

Spam is a part of life online these days. A good spam filter, like a good
killfile, goes a long way in reducing stress. :)

--
Peter

[Darrel Toepfer]

Peter R. wrote:

>> I wish for a day that I don't see spam with Verizon routing in it...
>
> And you are confident that those headers weren't spoofed?
>
>> Its like having our own bit of China/Korea/Japan/Brazil/Nigeria right
>> here at home...
>
> Spam is a part of life online these days. A good spam filter, like a good
> killfile, goes a long way in reducing stress. :)

I've had a few that came from Verizon servers, the majority is from
their clients direct:

Received: from pool-70-105-16-229.rich.east.verizon.net ([70.105.16.229])
From: "Amado Holloway" >
Return-Path: >

Verizon now verifies all incoming mail, shame my "major provider" email
accounts don't do the same...

Charter and Adelphia outpaced Verizon today, a rare day...

[Jim Macklin]

I've run the tests and also have AnalogX's NetsStatLive
program. Speed varies, depending on the server I'm
downloading from and the time of day. I consistently see
over 300 KByte/sec on most servers and on a good server,
I've seen about 575 KByte/sec (the meter on FreshDownload).
Just plain timing a 7 MB download of a video, is fast.


--
Merry Christmas
Have a Safe and Happy New Year
Live Long and Prosper
Jim Macklin
"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin > wrote:
|
| > I sure like my 4 Mbit/sec cable, but I still have a 56 K
| > dial up as a backup, for $75 a year from the local
college.
|
| Do a few speed tests to see if you are actually getting
close to that 4mbps
| speed they are advertising.
|
| http://www.speakeasy.net/speedtest/
| http://ciseweb100.cise-nsf.gov:7123/
|
| When I was a Time Warner Road Runner cable broadband
customer, they claimed
| 4mbps, too, but in reality I was seeing a consistent 1.5
mbps (190
| Kbytes/sec) down and a dismal 300kbps (38kbytes/sec) up.
|
|
| --
| Peter

[Morgans]

"Peter R." > wrote
>
> When I was a Time Warner Road Runner cable broadband customer, they
claimed
> 4mbps, too, but in reality I was seeing a consistent 1.5 mbps (190
> Kbytes/sec) down and a dismal 300kbps (38kbytes/sec) up.

Similar figures with charter. What you get when you ping a test site, or
whatever rare fast server is not the real test of what you are able to do,
in reality.

In reality, (so I've been told) the majority of servers limit your rates,
usually in the 350 to 780 range. For the occasional super fast download, I
find it hard to justify the extra cost, but I still pay it...sigh.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Peter R." > wrote

> Spam is a part of life online these days. A good spam filter, like a good
> killfile, goes a long way in reducing stress. :)

I hate to go OT on this, but I have to admit that a good spam filter would
increase my quality of life. <g> What do you use?

I'm running OE.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Darrel Toepfer" > wrote

> Header makes it look like your on through Charter...

Yep. Just a harvesting spoof.

> Gimme an area code and a prefix, I'll see what I can offer...

eight tow ate -seven fibe ate
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote

> Sure, Jim, sure! :-)

Honest! ;-0)

Granted it is hard, sometimes, when I come home from teaching, and feel like
I had to restrain myself from beating some snot-nosed kid to a pulp (that
the parents should have done already), and have to restrain. There is only
so much restraint in a day!
--
Jim in NC

[RST Engineering]

Was that ate too ate - ceven fife ate?

Won
Too
Tree
Fore
Fife
Sex
Ceven
Zip (alternate zeerow)

>
> eight tow ate -seven fibe ate
> --
> Jim in NC

[Jose]

> Was that ate too ate...

Regional accent.

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Morgans]

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
> > Was that ate too ate...
>
> Regional accent.

All'ya'all crack me up! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans]

"RST Engineering" > wrote \

> Won
> Too
> Tree
> Fore
> Fife
> Sex
> Ceven
> Zip (alternate zeerow)

<chuckle> I never even thought of using that method! <g>
--
Jim in NC

[Montblack]

("Matt Whiting" wrote)
> I've reported this impersonater to hotmail, but who knows if they will do
> anything about it.
>
> Hopefully, anyone who has read my posts in the r.a.* newsgroups over the
> years, knows that I don't use language like this.


I didn't know what to think:

....The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002) ?

Gollum: What?
Smeagol: LEAVE NOW AND NEVER COME BACK!
[Gollum screams in frustration]
Smeagol: LEAVE NOW AND NEVER COME BACK!
[Silence]
Smeagol: We told him to go away... and away he goes! Gone, gone, gone!
Smeagol is free!


....or "Timmy" on MST3K ?
Episode: 416 FIRE MAIDENS OF OUTER SPACE


Montblack <g>

[Peter R.]

Morgans > wrote:

> I hate to go OT on this, but I have to admit that a good spam filter would
> increase my quality of life. <g> What do you use?

Personally, I don't use OE, but I have read some good things about this
free spam filter for OE:

http://popfile.sourceforge.net/old_index.html


--
Peter

[Peter R.]

Morgans > wrote:

> I hate to go OT on this, but I have to admit that a good spam filter would
> increase my quality of life. <g> What do you use?

Oh, you also might want to consider using Mozilla's free email
client/newsreader, called Thunderbird, which is like OE on steroids. It
contains a spam filter that is always learning. Thunderbird has a very
similar feel to OE so the learning curve is very small, yet the rewards
much greater.

http://www.mozilla.com/thunderbird/

I installed T-bird on my father-in-law's PC and the one-time OE user and PC
novice was a quick convert.


--
Peter

[Morgans]

"Peter R." > wrote

> Personally, I don't use OE, but I have read some good things about this
> free spam filter for OE:
>
> http://popfile.sourceforge.net/old_index.html

Thanks-I'll take a look.
--
Jim in NC

[.Blueskies.]

I heard that a crack was found in the spar...in 1993...and no logbook entry indication it was fixed. Anybody else hear
this?


"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message oups.com...
> http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051219/ap_on_re_us/plane_crash
>
> Dang. It was one of Chalk's famous seaplanes, too... Two confirmed
> dead, thus far.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>