Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show

[Chris G.]

Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show
http://www.katu.com/stories/87633.html

The plane crashed toward the end of the two-day Oregon International
Airshow, where the plane had been on display, but did not perform, said
Steve Callaway, an air show board member. Air show organizers canceled
the show immediately after the crash. It was the first crash in the
show's 19-year history.

[Robert M. Gary]

So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.

-Robert


Chris G. wrote:
> Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show
> http://www.katu.com/stories/87633.html
>
> The plane crashed toward the end of the two-day Oregon International
> Airshow, where the plane had been on display, but did not perform, said
> Steve Callaway, an air show board member. Air show organizers canceled
> the show immediately after the crash. It was the first crash in the
> show's 19-year history.

[gatt]

The local media is calling him a hero for avoiding the neighborhood; he
missed a friend's father's new house by several feet and struck three houses
a block or so away, but nobody was home. (Some door-to-door raffle kids had
just knocked on the door and gotten no answer before moving on, and they
were at the house right next door when it hit.)

He was obviously struggling to get airborne...his wings wobbled pretty
severely. He clearly lost altitude and power on downwind...nose pitched up
to about 30 degrees, gear extended. Appears he was aiming for a field which
wouldn't have done him any good but would have saved the houses.

By the way, ALL of those homes out there are newer than both the airport and
the airshow itself. No outcry from the local homeowner's
association...yet...


"Chris G." > wrote in message
reenews.net...
> Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show
> http://www.katu.com/stories/87633.html
>
> The plane crashed toward the end of the two-day Oregon International
> Airshow, where the plane had been on display, but did not perform, said
> Steve Callaway, an air show board member. Air show organizers canceled
> the show immediately after the crash. It was the first crash in the
> show's 19-year history.

[Chris G.]

I heard an interview with a person who was a part of the homeowners'
association and (from what I could tell) the association was suggesting
this was a tragedy, but that the airport and local officials are
prepared and that, while they do worry about this very thing, the
homeowners do understand there is risk. Basically, I felt they did a
good job of not immediately placing blame on the pilot, airshow, or airport.

Chris G.

gatt wrote:
> The local media is calling him a hero for avoiding the neighborhood; he
> missed a friend's father's new house by several feet and struck three houses
> a block or so away, but nobody was home. (Some door-to-door raffle kids had
> just knocked on the door and gotten no answer before moving on, and they
> were at the house right next door when it hit.)
>
> He was obviously struggling to get airborne...his wings wobbled pretty
> severely. He clearly lost altitude and power on downwind...nose pitched up
> to about 30 degrees, gear extended. Appears he was aiming for a field which
> wouldn't have done him any good but would have saved the houses.
>
> By the way, ALL of those homes out there are newer than both the airport and
> the airshow itself. No outcry from the local homeowner's
> association...yet...
>
>
> "Chris G." > wrote in message
> reenews.net...
>> Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show
>> http://www.katu.com/stories/87633.html
>>
>> The plane crashed toward the end of the two-day Oregon International
>> Airshow, where the plane had been on display, but did not perform, said
>> Steve Callaway, an air show board member. Air show organizers canceled
>> the show immediately after the crash. It was the first crash in the
>> show's 19-year history.
>
>

[Skylune[_1_]]

by "Robert M. Gary" > Jul 17, 2006 at 10:50 AM


So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.

<<

Critical distinction there. (Somewhere...) One home completely
destroyed. Two others aflame.

[Chris G.]

I didn't write the headline. It's a sad day, either way.

Chris G.

Robert M. Gary wrote:
> So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.
>
> -Robert
>
>
> Chris G. wrote:
>> Vintage Jet Slams Into Homes Near Air Show
>> http://www.katu.com/stories/87633.html
>>
>> The plane crashed toward the end of the two-day Oregon International
>> Airshow, where the plane had been on display, but did not perform, said
>> Steve Callaway, an air show board member. Air show organizers canceled
>> the show immediately after the crash. It was the first crash in the
>> show's 19-year history.
>

[Skylune[_1_]]

They obviously followed Boyer's EXPLICIT instructions, and contacted AOPA
before commenting on the "tragedy." The media that did so before
contacting AOPA must be held to account, for inaccurate reporting.

The headline should have read, "Great economic benefit from recent
airshow; minor damage to recently constructed homes located in vicinity
of airport."

[Robert M. Gary]

Using the word crash would miss the sensationalism. Gotta use the word
"slams". Comes from a special journalist's thesauruses.

-Robert



Skylune wrote:
> by "Robert M. Gary" > Jul 17, 2006 at 10:50 AM
>
>
> So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.
>
> <<
>
> Critical distinction there. (Somewhere...) One home completely
> destroyed. Two others aflame.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Yeah. Don't want to "sensationalize" a jet crashing into a (fortunately
vacant) home, and destroying it. Neighbors describing the "explosion"
should also be more understanding that words like that are inflammatory...

[john smith]

In article >,
"gatt" > wrote:

> By the way, ALL of those homes out there are newer than both the airport and
> the airshow itself. No outcry from the local homeowner's
> association...yet...

Using Google Earth, what airport/runway/direction/distance from the
airport?

[Robert M. Gary]

Skylune wrote:
> Yeah. Don't want to "sensationalize" a jet crashing into a (fortunately
> vacant) home, and destroying it.

Exactly. There is no need to add sensationalism.

-Robert

[gatt]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.

The house is a smoking hole. The houses on either side look like a jet
crashed into the house next door. The rest is semantics. There is almost
no debris field beyond those three or four houses.

-c

[gatt]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Using the word crash would miss the sensationalism. Gotta use the word
> "slams". Comes from a special journalist's thesauruses.

The journalists around Oregon were calling the guy a hero within an hour of
the crash. Give 'em a break.

I should also point out that, once footage of the crash taken from the
airshow came in, the Channel 8 News cut to their weatherman for comment.
Turns out he's a commercial pilot of 20 years as well, so he went through
the whole Minimum Controllable Airspeed discussion (wings wobbling on
takeoff, increasing angle of attack while descending)...

In this case, the local media did a very good job.

-c

[gatt]

"Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...

> Exactly. There is no need to add sensationalism.

They didn't. They described it. The jet very clearly slammed into the home.

-c

[gatt]

"Chris G." > wrote in message
reenews.net...
>I heard an interview with a person who was a part of the homeowners'
> association and (from what I could tell) the association was suggesting
> this was a tragedy, but that the airport and local officials are
> prepared and that, while they do worry about this very thing, the
> homeowners do understand there is risk. Basically, I felt they did a
> good job of not immediately placing blame on the pilot, airshow, or
> airport.

Yeah, I noticed that too. The media claimed that there had never been an
airshow accident and didn't mention the jet that crashed nearby recently or
the fact that a wingwalker fell off in '91 (some stunt pilots saved him.
Some viewers huddled around my little freq scanner, and remember those
discussions still turns my spine cold.)

It would be very unfair to villify the local media at this point. In fact,
the airshow has always been a local media darling.

-c

[Chris G.]

Who was that? Dave Salesky? I saw Ron Petersen's take on it and he
said "weather was perfect...mid-80's, blah blah". I don't think he is a
pilot. He didn't sound like one and, also, mid-80's is not perfect when
considering density altitude as a POTENTIAL factor. I know, HIO is not
high or humid, but it was hotter than standard temperature. ;)

Btw, I had a nice flight to Mulino for blueberry pancakes and then to
Evergreen for one last landing before it closes tomorrow for good.

Chris G.

gatt wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>> Using the word crash would miss the sensationalism. Gotta use the word
>> "slams". Comes from a special journalist's thesauruses.
>
> The journalists around Oregon were calling the guy a hero within an hour of
> the crash. Give 'em a break.
>
> I should also point out that, once footage of the crash taken from the
> airshow came in, the Channel 8 News cut to their weatherman for comment.
> Turns out he's a commercial pilot of 20 years as well, so he went through
> the whole Minimum Controllable Airspeed discussion (wings wobbling on
> takeoff, increasing angle of attack while descending)...
>
> In this case, the local media did a very good job.
>
> -c
>
>

[gatt]

"john smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "gatt" > wrote:
>
>> By the way, ALL of those homes out there are newer than both the airport
>> and
>> the airshow itself. No outcry from the local homeowner's
>> association...yet...
>
> Using Google Earth, what airport/runway/direction/distance from the
> airport?

I assume you've found Hillsboro Airport. He was using RWY 30, and he was
on downwind. If you look at Google Earth, you'll see a long, straight road
heading east/west to the east hangar city. That's Airport Road. On the
south side of Airport Road you will see two square suburban housing areas.
He struck on the east end of the east of the two square "blocks", very near
a grass field just east. In fact, he missed the field by a matter of yards.
The coordinates I show for the house are 45.32.10.99 N 122.55.11.66 W , so,
maybe .75 mile east and slightly southeast of the runway intersection.

http://katu.com/stories/87633.html shows a somewhat clear view of the
remains of the house. You can see the field just east on GoogleEarth and if
you note, just south of that is a parking lot and a shopping center. Had he
crashed south of the field instead of west, it could have been a major
disaster.

The suburbs have encroached on the airfield boundary but the city loves the
airshow, and every year people watch from their rooftops, swimming pools and
backyards (I lived very near in an apartment and one day a B-2 turned
downwind-to-base over our pool, which was even further east.) Nevertheless,
the local TV news was airing all kinds of calls from local witnesses who
described the pilot as heroic because they said he appeared to be aiming for
the grass field.

-c

[gatt]

"Chris G." > wrote in message
reenews.net...
> Who was that? Dave Salesky? I saw Ron Petersen's take on it and he
> said "weather was perfect...mid-80's, blah blah". I don't think he is a
> pilot.

Salesky or Zaffino, I'm pretty sure

> He didn't sound like one and, also, mid-80's is not perfect when
> considering density altitude as a POTENTIAL factor. I know, HIO is not
> high or humid, but it was hotter than standard temperature. ;)

I was pretty worried that it might have been a similar jet out of Troutdale.
He can't launch on hot days because he can barely clear the fence at the end
of the runway. In the Oregon sense of hot, this was one of those days, but
HIO's runway is twice as long.

> Btw, I had a nice flight to Mulino for blueberry pancakes and then to
> Evergreen for one last landing before it closes tomorrow for good.

I'm just down the road from Evergreen now. Didn't know it was closing.
It's a bad sign when they've mowed the weeds -around- the birds parked
there. I spent yesterday practicing for my commercial checkride.

For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?

-c

[Chris G.]

I know Dave Salesky *is* a pilot. He has an Aeronca Champ. A
coworker's husband met him who is a student pilot and he showed off the
plane that day.

Chris G.

gatt wrote:
> "Chris G." > wrote in message
> reenews.net...
>> Who was that? Dave Salesky? I saw Ron Petersen's take on it and he
>> said "weather was perfect...mid-80's, blah blah". I don't think he is a
>> pilot.
>
> Salesky or Zaffino, I'm pretty sure
>
>> He didn't sound like one and, also, mid-80's is not perfect when
>> considering density altitude as a POTENTIAL factor. I know, HIO is not
>> high or humid, but it was hotter than standard temperature. ;)
>
> I was pretty worried that it might have been a similar jet out of Troutdale.
> He can't launch on hot days because he can barely clear the fence at the end
> of the runway. In the Oregon sense of hot, this was one of those days, but
> HIO's runway is twice as long.
>
>> Btw, I had a nice flight to Mulino for blueberry pancakes and then to
>> Evergreen for one last landing before it closes tomorrow for good.
>
> I'm just down the road from Evergreen now. Didn't know it was closing.
> It's a bad sign when they've mowed the weeds -around- the birds parked
> there. I spent yesterday practicing for my commercial checkride.
>
> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
> something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
> watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
> they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
> below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>
> -c
>
>

[Don Tuite]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:16 GMT, "gatt"
> wrote:

>For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
>watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
>they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
>below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>
But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.

Is the crash site still identified as NE 58th? That's north of
Baseline, south of Cornell and a little west of 231st, essentially 1.5
miles off the approach end of 30. Just from a noise standpoint, that's
a dumb**** place to site housing.

Don

[gatt]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...

> Is the crash site still identified as NE 58th? That's north of Baseline,
> south of Cornell and a little west of 231st, essentially 1.5
> miles off the approach end of 30.

That's accurate. A wider pattern would have likely put him in the Intel
plant.

>Just from a noise standpoint, that's a dumb**** place to site housing.

Yeah...but, as my friends in the area like to point out, you get to watch
the airshow from your backyard. :/

-c
(The B-2, B-17, etc, generally flew wider patterns.)

[Emily[_1_]]

gatt wrote:
> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
>
>> Exactly. There is no need to add sensationalism.
>
> They didn't. They described it. The jet very clearly slammed into the home.
>
> -c

Slammed is a word that doesn't need to be included. It's pretty subjective.

[Emily[_1_]]

Don Tuite wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:16 GMT, "gatt"
> > wrote:
>
>> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>> something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
>> watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
>> they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
>> below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>>
> But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.

So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in
the process?

[Don Tuite]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:50:53 -0500, Emily >
wrote:

>Don Tuite wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:16 GMT, "gatt"
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>>> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>>> something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
>>> watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
>>> they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
>>> below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>>>
>> But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.
>
>So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in
>the process?

If we want to keep our airports from closing, we might reconsider
doing low-level aerobatics in clapped-out '50s-era warbirds when
encroaching subdivisions underlie the box.

I'd like to hear Dudley's take when he's ready to post.

Don

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
...

> Slammed is a word that doesn't need to be included. It's pretty
> subjective.

What exact difference does it make? What does it change? Journalists
aren't hired for their ability to undramatize the dramatic, and the jet
slammed into a house. It didn't strike, it didn't impact, it didn't bounce
off of, it didn't land on, they didn't collide...it smashed into the friggin
house.

It hit the house and friggin' exploded. Er, if that's too incriminating or
something, let's just say it combusted? The entire house is gone. Almost
no wreckage of the house remained an hour afterward, let alone the plane.
The houses next to it looked like a plane had crashed into them. The house
that the plane slammed into didn't look like it, 'cause there isn't much
left but scorched earth, dirt and random debris.

There's no point in dumbing down or deceiving the public. It slammed into
the house, and the last time I checked, slammed is a word and its primary
definition of slam is "strike." It would be ludicrous to deny that the
plane struck the house, and the word is no more subjective than "crashed
into."

-c

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..

>> But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.
>
> So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in the
> process?

Are we putting words into other people's mouths now?

-c

[gatt]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...

> If we want to keep our airports from closing, we might reconsider
> doing low-level aerobatics in clapped-out '50s-era warbirds when
> encroaching subdivisions underlie the box.

Unfortunately, as utterly unsympathetic as I am to people who willingly
build homes under the traffic pattern for the largest runway in the state
next to PDX International, it's already happening:

"Following the crash of a vintage jet at the Oregon International Air Show
on Sunday, the FAA and NTSB will investigate the incident and recommend any
changes that need to be made. Some residents think the area around the
airport is now too residential for the show to continue. "
http://www.katu.com

This reminds me of an incident across town where somebody developed the hill
immediately behind the Camp Withycomb rifle range. All these folks moved
into Oregon (or were dumb enough not to know that the Camp has been there
since WWII), bought these fancy brand new homes and then were Suddenly
Outraged to discover that their home was directly downrange from a military
installation. Talk about not doing your friggin' research. The rifle
range is no longer with us. The air show, at least in Hillsboro, has been
declining due to corporate stupidity for years now. (For example, last time
I went, you couldn't see the flight line from the static exhibits because of
the giant inflatable Chevy Suburban and MGD beer cans, and there was almost
TWO ground accidents because they were herding the warbirds through to make
sure there was time for the Rocket Powered Semi and the Truckasaurus
thingie.)

If the airshow goes, this crash was just one more nail in a nearly-complete
coffin. But still...

-c

[Emily[_1_]]

Don Tuite wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:50:53 -0500, Emily >
> wrote:
>
>> Don Tuite wrote:
>>> On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 19:40:16 GMT, "gatt"
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>>>> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>>>> something he loved after living a long, successful life. Meanwhile, we've
>>>> watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while
>>>> they jumped from the bridge and smacked their brains all over the rocks
>>>> below. Oregon is at, what, 20 drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>>>>
>>> But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.
>> So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in
>> the process?
>
> If we want to keep our airports from closing, we might reconsider
> doing low-level aerobatics in clapped-out '50s-era warbirds when
> encroaching subdivisions underlie the box.

Quite a few accidents of newer aircraft in previously straight and level
flight have killed people on the ground. It's just a dangerous line of
thought.

[Emily[_1_]]

gatt wrote:
> "Emily" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>> Slammed is a word that doesn't need to be included. It's pretty
>> subjective.
>
> What exact difference does it make? What does it change? Journalists
> aren't hired for their ability to undramatize the dramatic, and the jet
> slammed into a house. It didn't strike, it didn't impact, it didn't bounce
> off of, it didn't land on, they didn't collide...it smashed into the friggin

Yes, it did strike, it did impact, and it did collide. Yet the media
uses the word slammed.

You know, I grew up with a couple of military officers for parents, who
viewed the media as a necessary evil. I didn't understand why until I
started flying.

[Andrew Gideon]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 17:50:53 -0500, Emily wrote:

> So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in the
> process?

People need to stop living so as to avoid risk of injury or death.

- Andrew

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..

> Yes, it did strike, it did impact, and it did collide.

> Yet the media uses the word slammed.

Then what the hell difference does it make? Slammed is a dramatic, active
verb. All writers who paid attention in writing classes learned to avoid
weak verbs. If a jet plane flying into a house, exploding, incinerating the
house and leaving nothing but a smoking ruin -isn't- "slamming" into
something, nothing is.

Your opinion that "slammed" is subjective is subjective.

> You know, I grew up with a couple of military officers for parents, who
> viewed the media as a necessary evil.

Pilots are frequently of the arrogant opinion that the media somehow owes
them something. They just don't. Journalists earn livings and reputations
by writing vivid, truthful accounts. There is nothing untruthful about the
FACT that the jet SLAMMED INTO the house and no reason why a
journalist--especially after the treatment observed in this forum--should
feel an obligation to sugarcoat it for the sensitivies of the aviation
community.

A community journalist's job is to report to the community what happened.
Mission accomplished. Your sensibilities about what words is insignificant
compared whatever memories, pets or possessions the property holder lost
because of the accident. And the media has been calling it a tragic accident
AND calling the pilot a hero since it happened, so I don't see the point of
whining about media insensitivity.

-gatt

[Andrew Gideon]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 23:13:48 +0000, gatt wrote:

> Er, if that's too incriminating
> or something, let's just say it combusted?

Engaged in an uncontained but brief exothermic event?

> The entire house is gone.

House has received the beginning of a complete reconstruction. For free!

> Almost no wreckage of the house remained an hour afterward, let alone the
> plane.

The event was sanitary.

- Andrew

[.Blueskies.]

Sounds like the houses were incinerated when that jet slammed into them...


;-)


"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> by "Robert M. Gary" > Jul 17, 2006 at 10:50 AM
>
>
> So it "slams" in to a house vs. just "crashed" into a house.
>
> <<
>
> Critical distinction there. (Somewhere...) One home completely
> destroyed. Two others aflame.
>
>
>
>

[Dave Stadt]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
> something he loved after living a long, successful life.

I seriously doubt he loved losing control, knowing he was going to crash and
that his life was about to end.

[Emily[_1_]]

gatt wrote:
> "Emily" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>> Yes, it did strike, it did impact, and it did collide.
>
>> Yet the media uses the word slammed.
>
> Then what the hell difference does it make? Slammed is a dramatic, active
> verb. All writers who paid attention in writing classes learned to avoid
> weak verbs. If a jet plane flying into a house, exploding, incinerating the
> house and leaving nothing but a smoking ruin -isn't- "slamming" into
> something, nothing is.
>
> Your opinion that "slammed" is subjective is subjective.
>
>> You know, I grew up with a couple of military officers for parents, who
>> viewed the media as a necessary evil.
>
> Pilots are frequently of the arrogant opinion that the media somehow owes
> them something. They just don't. Journalists earn livings and reputations
> by writing vivid, truthful accounts.


Truthful? That's debateable.

Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..

> Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.

In other words, she can't handle an opposing opinion, couldn't think of a
way to argue like an adult, so she stuck her fingers in her ears and
resorted to name calling.

Whatever. I'm an idiot. With a degree in journalism and a passion for
aviation. I couldn't possibly have a little perspective on this issue. I
must just be an idiot because I disagree with her.

No skin off my back at all. I prefer to associate with mature adults.

-c

[gatt]

"Andrew Gideon" > wrote in message
...

>> Er, if that's too incriminating or something, let's just say it
>> combusted?
>
> Engaged in an uncontained but brief exothermic event?
>
>> The entire house is gone.
>
> House has received the beginning of a complete reconstruction. For free!
>
>> Almost no wreckage of the house remained an hour afterward, let alone the
>> plane.
>
> The event was sanitary.

LOL!

"A vintage jet suffered an engine problem today and caused mild damage to
three homes after an unscheduled off-runway touch down. The pilot expired
at the scene and a slight conflagration caused a fireball and a small cloud
of smoke to extend thousands of feet into the air. The damage to the house
is comprehensive and the resultant pyrotechnic event resulted in a
Three-Alarm on the job training exercise for local fire departments..."

Several aviators nationwide are seeking help for being slightly inconvience
by the mejia's choice of the word 'slammed'

-c

[Crash Lander[_1_]]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>
> It didn't strike, it didn't impact, it didn't bounce off of, it didn't
> land on, they didn't collide...it smashed into the friggin house.
>

Now you've gone and confused the whole issue! Did it "Slam" into the house,
or did it "Smash" into the house?
Crash Lander

[gatt]

"Crash Lander" > wrote in message
...

>> It didn't strike, it didn't impact, it didn't bounce off of, it didn't
>> land on, they didn't collide...it smashed into the friggin house.
>>
> Now you've gone and confused the whole issue! Did it "Slam" into the
> house, or did it "Smash" into the house?

I dunno, but this mejia sensationalism all started when some fool screamed
"OH, THE HUMANITY" during an unscheduled blimp unpleasantness.

The die was cast. Now, every time friggin' fighter jet falls into a
neighborhood and bounces off a gutter, douses everything with jet fuel and
then ignites, it's a "fire" and the airplane "struck" the house. Just
because the house was instantly crushed, consumed by fire and incinerated
doesn't mean the airplane "slammed into" it. That's, like, subjective and
stuff.

It -figuratively- slammed into the house. More accurately, it lost power,
drilled into the house, exploded, blew the house to hell and gone, blew most
of the house next to it away, blew a fireball thousands of feet into the air
and required three fire departments to extinguish the homes burning around
the crash site. But it sure didn't -slam- into anything, did it?

And, gawdam, it wasn't a "vintage jet." It was "retired from active
military service."

-c

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>>mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>>something he loved after living a long, successful life.
>
>
> I seriously doubt he loved losing control, knowing he was going to crash and
> that his life was about to end.

Which isn't what the above post said.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

gatt wrote:

> "Emily" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>
>>Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.
>
>
> In other words, she can't handle an opposing opinion, couldn't think of a
> way to argue like an adult, so she stuck her fingers in her ears and
> resorted to name calling.
>
> Whatever. I'm an idiot. With a degree in journalism and a passion for
> aviation. I couldn't possibly have a little perspective on this issue. I
> must just be an idiot because I disagree with her.
>
> No skin off my back at all. I prefer to associate with mature adults.

That's not true or you wouldn't be participating in usenet. :-)


Matt

[gatt]

"Morgans" > wrote in message
...

> I think the word the report was searching for, really, was "obliterated."

Well, at least they didn't say "completely destroyed" or "partially
destroyed."

(Things are either destroyed or they're not. Otherwise, they might be
nearly-destroyed, heavily damaged, etc., but you still hear the media mangle
that one up.)

-c
((In the old days, "nauseous" meant you made other people sick, and
"nauseated" meant you felt sick. But Average American, not being the
sharpest collective knife in the drawer, dumbed the language down yet again
because they couldn't handle such multisyllabic complexity.))

[gatt]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
.com...

>> For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>> mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>> something he loved after living a long, successful life.
>
> I seriously doubt he loved losing control, knowing he was going to crash
> and that his life was about to end.

If you want to split hairs over semantics, you just want to be obtuse or you
truly, absolutely don't know what the hell I'm talking about, please start
the discussion so people NOT following the thread can ridicule you too. If
you just need a clue, let me explain:

He died doing something he loved doing, which was flying his airplane. If
you truly don't understand that, I question your presence in this forum.

-c

[gatt]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...

>> No skin off my back at all. I prefer to associate with mature adults.
>
> That's not true or you wouldn't be participating in usenet. :-)

DOH! :> Man, some days I wonder...

-c

[Emily[_1_]]

Matt Whiting wrote:
> gatt wrote:
>
>> "Emily" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>>
>>
>>> Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.
>>
>>
>> In other words, she can't handle an opposing opinion, couldn't think
>> of a way to argue like an adult, so she stuck her fingers in her ears
>> and resorted to name calling.
>>
>> Whatever. I'm an idiot. With a degree in journalism and a passion for
>> aviation. I couldn't possibly have a little perspective on this
>> issue. I must just be an idiot because I disagree with her.
>>
>> No skin off my back at all. I prefer to associate with mature adults.
>
> That's not true or you wouldn't be participating in usenet. :-)
>
>
> Matt

Gee, thanks for letting that slip though.

Degree in journalism? That explains a lot.

(Not directed at you, of course)

[Jose[_1_]]

> caused a fireball and a small cloud
> of smoke to extend thousands of feet into the air.

Oh, stop being so melodramatic. "a small fraction of a mile".

:) Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jose[_1_]]

> He died doing something he loved doing, which was flying his airplane.

I'd rather do what I love doing, and not die until the next evening,
when I'm asleep. :)

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Dan Luke]

"Emily" wrote:



> Degree in journalism? That explains a lot.
>

What? That he knows what he's talking about?

While you, OTOH, are freaking out over a synonym?

Absurd.

[Morgans[_3_]]

"Crash Lander" > wrote

> Now you've gone and confused the whole issue! Did it "Slam" into the
house,
> or did it "Smash" into the house?

I think the word the report was searching for, really, was "obliterated."
--
Jim in NC

[Emily[_1_]]

Dan Luke wrote:
> "Emily" wrote:
>
>
>
>> Degree in journalism? That explains a lot.
>>
>
> What? That he knows what he's talking about?
>
> While you, OTOH, are freaking out over a synonym?
>
> Absurd.

Well, if you don't care how aviation is portrayed in the media, then be
my guest - be ok with it. I'm NOT ok with it.

[Andrew Gideon]

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 00:35:54 +0000, gatt wrote:

> And, gawdam, it wasn't a "vintage jet." It was "retired from active
> military service."

Why not "combat aircraft being operated by a civilian pilot for unknown
purposes"? Let's get some real Rovean fear going. Chicago needs an ADIZ,
after all.

- Andrew

[Montblack[_1_]]

("gatt" wrote)
> Whatever. I'm an idiot. With a degree in journalism and a passion for
> aviation. I couldn't possibly have a little perspective on this issue. I
> must just be an idiot because I disagree with her.


At least you're not a "bloviating idiot."


Montblack :-)

[RST Engineering]

No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the wounded.

Jim




>>> Whatever. I'm an idiot. With a degree in journalism and a passion for
>>> aviation. I couldn't possibly have a little perspective on this issue.
>>> I must just be an idiot because I disagree with her.

[Dave Stadt]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Stadt wrote:
>> "gatt" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>>For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>>>mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>>>something he loved after living a long, successful life.
>>
>>
>> I seriously doubt he loved losing control, knowing he was going to crash
>> and that his life was about to end.
>
> Which isn't what the above post said.
>
> Matt

Just what does "augered his jet and died doing something he loved" mean? I
love to fly but if I die in a hole in the ground I can guarandamntee you I
will not have died doing something I loved to do, long life or otherwise.

[Peter Duniho]

"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>> Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.
>
> In other words, she can't handle an opposing opinion, couldn't think of a
> way to argue like an adult, so she stuck her fingers in her ears and
> resorted to name calling.

Yup. Pretty much.

She's been going off half-cocked at any hint of disagreement. Pretty soon,
she'll be talking to herself, 'cause she won't be reading anyone else's
posts.

On the bright side, I think her attitude can be attributed to youthful
arrogance. At least she might grow out of it. We've got people here just
as bad who are way beyond growing out of anything of the sort. :)

> [...]
> No skin off my back at all. I prefer to associate with mature adults.

And yet you put up with us. :)

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..
> Well, if you don't care how aviation is portrayed in the media, then be my
> guest - be ok with it. I'm NOT ok with it.

That's what this temper tantrum is about? You feel that the use of the word
"slam" somehow portrays aviation in a poor light?

A jet friggin' DESTROYED a house. It caused major damage to at least a
couple of others. In what way is the word "slam" inappropriate in that
situation? If aviation is being portrayed in a poor light, it's because a
JET DESTROYED A HOUSE.

Duh.

[Peter Duniho]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message
...
> If we want to keep our airports from closing, we might reconsider
> doing low-level aerobatics in clapped-out '50s-era warbirds when
> encroaching subdivisions underlie the box.

This was not an aerobatic accident. The airplane was departing to return to
California. Could've happened anywhere, any time.

[Peter Duniho]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..
>>> [...] Meanwhile, we've watched teenagers use the "DO NOT JUMP FROM
>>> BRIDGE" sign as a handhold while they jumped from the bridge and smacked
>>> their brains all over the rocks below. Oregon is at, what, 20
>>> drowning deaths this year since June 1?
>>>
>> But they don't set fire to any houses when they go splat.
>
> So we should all stop flying because we *might* injure someone else in the
> process?

Who said that?

Gatt was providing "perspective" (his word). Don further enhanced the
perspective by pointing out the difference in the two situations. Both
points of view are valid contributions, and neither suggest that we should
all stop flying.

But Don's point is absolutely correct...if you want to compare aviation to
some other risky activity, it would make sense to at least acknowledge the
risk presented to others by aviation, as well as acknowledge the difference
in risk between the two compared situations. It's extremely rare that
innocent bystanders are hurt in aviation, but it does happen. More to the
point, on occasion large structures can be destroyed, as in this accident
(bridge-jumping is unlikely to cause major property damage, whatever else
the risks).

Of course, all that said, it's extremely rare that someone jumping off a
bridge hurts an innocent bystander, but that does happen too. So do
injuries to would-be rescuers when someone gets hurt jumping from a bridge
and someone else tries to help them.

Life is dangerous. Hiding from life doesn't make sense, but neither does
pretending the risks don't exist.

Pete

[Peter Duniho]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. net...
> Just what does "augered his jet and died doing something he loved" mean?

We had this thread already. I think it was covered pretty well.

> I love to fly but if I die in a hole in the ground I can guarandamntee
> you I will not have died doing something I loved to do, long life or
> otherwise.

In that moment before you die in a hole in the ground, will you find
yourself thinking "gee, I should never have taken up flying"?

[Morgans[_3_]]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote>
> This was not an aerobatic accident. The airplane was departing to return
to
> California. Could've happened anywhere, any time.

After viewing the takeoff, I can't help but think that it looks like he did
not have enough speed to fly, at rotation. Either he should have kept it on
the ground, or in ground effect, for a while. I wondered if he was running
out of runway, but I couldn't tell, viewing the replay. If he was out of
runway, he might should have aborted, perhaps because the engine was not
putting out? It could have been the good 'ole density altitude that got
him, with reduced engine performance, and less lift at the ground speed he
was accustomed to seeing. If it was the engine, from the looks of the
wreck, we will never know. It does appear as though the engine was about
the only thing that survived, in any sizable piece.

A shame, for him, his family and friends, and the whole aviation community.
May he Rest in Peace.
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_3_]]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote

> In that moment before you die in a hole in the ground, will you find
> yourself thinking "gee, I should never have taken up flying"?

When I have been involved in a car crash, I remember thinking, "O ****, this
is going to hurt!"

Really! Kinda funny, huh? Anyone else? What were your thoughts, in that
magical slowed down time, when everything was going wrong?
--
Jim in NC

[Morgans[_3_]]

"Morgans" > wrote

> What were your thoughts, in that
> magical slowed down time, when everything was going wrong?

Oh, then, right after the "Oh ****" part, I though about the need to keep on
driving it until it stopped.
--
Jim in NC

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> "Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>>Dave Stadt wrote:
>>
>>>"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>>>
>>>
>>>>For perspective, somebody died in the Sandy River again yesterday. I
>>>>mentioned to my wife that this old man augured his jet and died doing
>>>>something he loved after living a long, successful life.
>>>
>>>
>>>I seriously doubt he loved losing control, knowing he was going to crash
>>>and that his life was about to end.
>>
>>Which isn't what the above post said.
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> Just what does "augered his jet and died doing something he loved" mean? I
> love to fly but if I die in a hole in the ground I can guarandamntee you I
> will not have died doing something I loved to do, long life or otherwise.

It clearly indicated that flying was what he loved to do, not crashing.
Are you really this illiterate or are you just shooting for effect?

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

RST Engineering wrote:

> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the wounded.

Good one.

Matt

[Matt Whiting]

Morgans wrote:

> "Peter Duniho" > wrote
>
>
>>In that moment before you die in a hole in the ground, will you find
>>yourself thinking "gee, I should never have taken up flying"?
>
>
> When I have been involved in a car crash, I remember thinking, "O ****, this
> is going to hurt!"
>
> Really! Kinda funny, huh? Anyone else? What were your thoughts, in that
> magical slowed down time, when everything was going wrong?

I've fortunately been in one only car accident in 31 years of driving.
I had a drunk pull out in front of me. My last thought as I swerved was
that I just might miss him. Unfortunately, he came out at full throttle
and I couldn't swerve quite fast enough in a minivan. In a Corvette,
I'd have missed him. So, I guess I never really thought I was going to
be in a crash until the impact and the air bags came out.

My main thoughts were about swerving and looking for traffic in the
opposing lane. Thankfully, there was none as I had the wheels turned
about 25 degrees at impact and they were then locked in that position.
My van went across the opposing lane and into the guard rail.


Matt

[Dan Luke]

"RST Engineering" wrote:

> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the
> wounded.
>

So that's what Ernie Pyle was doing.

[Emily[_1_]]

Peter Duniho wrote:
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
>>> Sorry, I killfiled you before I read the rest of your drivel. Idiot.
>> In other words, she can't handle an opposing opinion, couldn't think of a
>> way to argue like an adult, so she stuck her fingers in her ears and
>> resorted to name calling.
>
> Yup. Pretty much.
>
> She's been going off half-cocked at any hint of disagreement. Pretty soon,
> she'll be talking to herself, 'cause she won't be reading anyone else's
> posts.
>
Oh, please. I just don't like journalists.

[Skylune[_1_]]

A suggested headline, which may pass AOPA reporter guidelines might be:

"Heroic effort by experienced pilot averts catastrophe and ground
casualties; Recently constructed home located near the 75-year old
airfield catches fire."

[Skylune[_1_]]

Its like when people say "near miss." What they actually mean is "near
hit."

[Jose[_1_]]

> Its like when people say "near miss." What they actually mean is "near
> hit."

No. There is no such thing as a "far hit". All hits are near... as
near as they can be. If you do not hit, you "nearly hit" but it is not
a "near hit'>

However, misses come in many forms. You can miss by a mile (which is a
near miss in transatlantic aviation, and a far miss when diving into a
swimming pool). You can miss by inches, which is a near miss when
aviating and a far miss when doing brain surgery. None of these "nearly
missed", they most definately missed.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Skylune[_1_]]

"Near miss" despite the grammatical error, implies a hit: it nearly
missed. i.e. it hit.

"Nearly hit" is what people mean when they say "near miss."

[alexy]

"gatt" > wrote:


>Well, at least they didn't say "completely destroyed" or "partially
>destroyed."
>
>(Things are either destroyed or they're not. Otherwise, they might be
>nearly-destroyed, heavily damaged, etc., but you still hear the media mangle
>that one up.)

Well, I don't think that kind of error is very unique. (g,d,&r)

(Things are either one of a kind (unique) or they are not. They may be
very unusual or nearly unique, but there are no degrees of
uniqueness.)

But I think you and I are on the losing side of the word purity
battle--incorrect usage repeated often enough becomes "common usage",
which in turn becomes "correct".

Same thing with using the ambiguous term "bi-annual" in place of
biennial.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Chris G.]

I agree with Peter. It could have happened anytime and anywhere. When
I saw the video, I had similar thoughts that Morgans wrote. I hope this
is not the end of the airshow, but, now that people have had time to
think and contact lawyers, I'm sure the show will be much smaller, even
though this was not really an airshow crash--just some jet (happens to
be a warbird) that crashed after takeoff.

May that pilot rest in peace and his family find the comfort they need.

Chris G.


Morgans wrote:
> "Peter Duniho" > wrote>
>> This was not an aerobatic accident. The airplane was departing to return
> to
>> California. Could've happened anywhere, any time.
>
> After viewing the takeoff, I can't help but think that it looks like he did
> not have enough speed to fly, at rotation. Either he should have kept it on
> the ground, or in ground effect, for a while. I wondered if he was running
> out of runway, but I couldn't tell, viewing the replay. If he was out of
> runway, he might should have aborted, perhaps because the engine was not
> putting out? It could have been the good 'ole density altitude that got
> him, with reduced engine performance, and less lift at the ground speed he
> was accustomed to seeing. If it was the engine, from the looks of the
> wreck, we will never know. It does appear as though the engine was about
> the only thing that survived, in any sizable piece.
>
> A shame, for him, his family and friends, and the whole aviation community.
> May he Rest in Peace.

[Jose[_1_]]

> "Near miss" despite the grammatical error, implies a hit: it nearly
> missed. i.e. it hit.

"Near miss" is not a grammatical error, and it does not imply a hit. It
implies (in fact, it also declares) a miss - a non-impact.

I don't know of anybody that interprets "near miss" as a hit, and "near"
is not the same as "nearly".

When I got lost at the zoo, I nearly got near the alligator.

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Tom Conner]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> A suggested headline, which may pass AOPA reporter
> guidelines might be:
>
> "Heroic effort by experienced pilot averts catastrophe and
> ground casualties; Recently constructed home located near
> the 75-year old airfield catches fire."
>

I prefer "Innocent, heroic pilot killed by negligent, irresponsible
homeowner."

[Don Tuite]

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 15:47:25 GMT, "Tom Conner" >
wrote:

>
>"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
>> A suggested headline, which may pass AOPA reporter
>> guidelines might be:
>>
>> "Heroic effort by experienced pilot averts catastrophe and
>> ground casualties; Recently constructed home located near
>> the 75-year old airfield catches fire."
>>
>
>I prefer "Innocent, heroic pilot killed by negligent, irresponsible
>homeowner."
>
Change "homeowner" to "developer and county planning commissioners."

Don

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..

> Gee, thanks for letting that slip though.
>
> Degree in journalism? That explains a lot.

Yeah, gee. Gawd forbid somebody with an actual college education and
experience in the subject comment on it.

-c

[gatt]

By way of trivia, y'all, it turns out it's the SECOND TIME that pilot had
crashed a jet into a house. The first was 17 years ago and he was flying
with his wife. Nobody on the ground died that time, so, you gotta give the
poor fellow credit; he sure knows how to crash a jet into a suburb without
hurting anybody but himself.

-c

[gatt]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in message
...
>
> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the
> wounded.

Tell it to Ernie Pyle. Somebody might have told you there were flying
saucers and little green men, too, but, y'know what? Ignorance isn't that
interesting.

Just so crybaby whiners like Emily know, I started my extracurricular days
of journalism in the United States Marine Corps.

If any of you have a problem with my service, my sense of patriotism, my
experience as a pilot or as a journalist, that's too damned bad.

-c

[gatt]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...

>> Well, if you don't care how aviation is portrayed in the media, then be
>> my guest - be ok with it. I'm NOT ok with it.
>
> That's what this temper tantrum is about? You feel that the use of the
> word "slam" somehow portrays aviation in a poor light?

Pretty much. I got killfiled and called an idiot for it, and then rather
than just agreeing to disagree, he/she/it came back in to trash-talk my
education, too. Meanwhile, he/she/it badmouths Journalism education and
then expects some sort of special kid glove respect by Journalists in
return.

Gee, why would anybody trust a journalist about matters of journalism?
That's rather like trusting an aviator about aviation. But the difference
between me and people who snivel about words like "slammed" is that I -do-
have military, civilian and academic experience in journalism and I
-do- have experience in aviation. So...

If those qualifications are insufficient, I'd like to know what his/her/its
qualifications are to discuss the subject.

-c

[gatt]

"Emily" > wrote in message
. ..

> Oh, please. I just don't like journalists.

The newsgroup has a new Political Correctness Officer. Please run all
future posts through Emily to make sure you're not offending anybody.

Also, and for the record, exactly one person in the world gives a damn what
Emily thinks about journalists.

-c

[gatt]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> "Near miss" despite the grammatical error, implies a hit: it nearly
> missed. i.e. it hit.
>
> "Nearly hit" is what people mean when they say "near miss."

Professors and editors have been going round and round about this forever.
It's one of those things where, at the end of the day, you just shrug it off
and say "The people have decided that 'near miss' means 'near hit' much as
the word 'awesome' now means 'cool' and 'hot.'")

-c

[gatt]

"alexy" > wrote in message
...

> But I think you and I are on the losing side of the word purity
> battle--incorrect usage repeated often enough becomes "common usage",
> which in turn becomes "correct".
>
> Same thing with using the ambiguous term "bi-annual" in place of biennial.

*shudder* Good example of one of those words where you have to pause,
figure out which it means, and then figure out what the person saying it
actually meant. "Now, you're saying bi-annual, right? Not biennial?"
("Yeah. Biannial.")

-c

[gatt]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. net...

> Just what does "augered his jet and died doing something he loved" mean?

"Auguered his jet and died doing something he loved."

I'm sorry if that's unclear.

> love to fly but if I die in a hole in the ground I can guarandamntee you I
> will not have died doing something I loved to do, long life or otherwise.

Yeah, well, we don't get to choose whether we die. It's going to happen.
The guy was in his 70s. He could have died of testicular cancer, emphysema,
bone cancer, alzheimers, he could have suffered from MS, he could have
fallen and hit his head in the bathtub, he could have had a stroke or an
aneurism or been paralyzed in a car accident. He could have been murdered
by a robber, he could have had a liver failure and died slowly and painfully
in his own systemic toxins.

He died flying. He loved flying. I have relatives dying of stomach cancer.
They don't love stomach cancer. Are we on the same page now?

-c
"If you wish to be a gray-haired wonder, keep your nose out of the blue"

[Jim Logajan]

"gatt" > wrote:
> Gee, why would anybody trust a journalist about matters of journalism?

"... If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the
public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent
simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up
journalism on their way to the poorhouse. ..." -- Samuel Langhorne Clemens

I guess I could claim to have been a "journalist" too. Even a publisher.
The problem being, as Mark Twain understood (having been a journalist
himself) is that it appears takes no qualifications to become one.

> That's rather like trusting an aviator about aviation. But the
> difference between me and people who snivel about words like "slammed"
> is that I -do- have military, civilian and academic experience in
> journalism and I -do- have experience in aviation. So...

I'm afraid I see no real difference between you and those "snivelers".
Sorry.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Boyer would approve of that headline also.

Or: "Home recently constructed in vicinity of airport destroys vintage
jet and kills experienced hero pilot."

[Skylune[_1_]]

The guy is obviously rich and has a set a brass ones. But 73 years old,
flying a vintage fighter jet.....

[alexy]

Jim Logajan > wrote:

>"gatt" > wrote:
>> Gee, why would anybody trust a journalist about matters of journalism?
>
>"... If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the
>public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent
>simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up
>journalism on their way to the poorhouse. ..." -- Samuel Langhorne Clemens
>
>I guess I could claim to have been a "journalist" too. Even a publisher.
>The problem being, as Mark Twain understood (having been a journalist
>himself) is that it appears takes no qualifications to become one.
>
>> That's rather like trusting an aviator about aviation. But the
>> difference between me and people who snivel about words like "slammed"
>> is that I -do- have military, civilian and academic experience in
>> journalism and I -do- have experience in aviation. So...
>
>I'm afraid I see no real difference between you and those "snivelers".
>Sorry.

IMHO, you are showing your ignorance. In fact, most of the
non-journalists here have agreed that "slammed" is a perfectly
appropriate word to describe what happened.

I am not a journalist, and I certainly deplore the bad examples of
journalists (which exist, just as in any other profession, although
much more visible in theirs).

But it strikes me that a good journalist does what I could never
accomplish--get a good, fast, surface level grasp of a situation and
describe it so that those with no background can understand it. In a
way, it is kinda like a CPA--requiring extensive, but not very deep
knowledge. And like a CPA, they are continually harangued about their
lack of knowledge in particular areas in which the haranguer has much
more knowledge.

Next time you want to jump on the bashing bandwagon when a particular
journalist shows a lack of knowledge in a field you know well, look at
his or her last few assignments and see if you know as much about
those areas as the journalist.

P.S. None of this is intended in any way to deny the existence of
dimwits in journalism.
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Maybe two. She has an ally in Boyer, who believes journalists should first
contact AOPA before writing on anything GA related.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Yeah. I'm just picking up on what an English professor used to rant
about...

He also used to get on weathermens' cases and sportscasters. He got riled
up when an announcer would say the baserunner has "good speed" or when a
weather broadcaster would say "shower activity" instead of "rain."

(Since you are a journalist, you might like the old set of Edwin Newman
books, "Strictly Speaking" and "A Civil Tongue." Newman, correctly IMO,
has great criticism for those who wreck the language. )

[Jose[_1_]]

> Yeah. I'm just picking up on what an English professor used to rant
> about...

Right... like "higher" has two syllables, and "fire" has one. So what
about "hire"?

And don't get me started about clocks running "fast". :)

Jose
--
The monkey turns the crank and thinks he's making the music.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Now we will just have to see how much money the former pilots' estate sues
the homeowner and developers for.

Its only right. Whenever an airfield exerts its legal right to expand
using our tax dollars, a certain number of surrounding homes and
businesses should then be taken by eminent domain and demolished, in the
name of economic development.

If that damned house was not there, who knows?, the pilot may have been
able to recover. Clearly, the homeowner and zoning board are responsible
for this tragedy.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Exactly. My favorite is people who use the word "further" instead of
"farther."

[gatt]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...

> Its only right. Whenever an airfield exerts its legal right to expand
> using our tax dollars, a certain number of surrounding homes and
> businesses should then be taken by eminent domain and demolished, in the
> name of economic development.

The airport and the airshow itself were there long before the homes. Most
of those neighborhoods are under ten years old, supporting the new Intel
factory and associated high-tech sprawl out there. Ten or twelve years
ago, those neighborhoods were meadow, farm, forest or wetland.

The airport itself is in no jeopardy; it serves the corporate headquarters
and executives of Intel, Nike, Tektronix, the Jailblazers (Paul Allen's
other hobby), LP and other major corporate jets. The airshow is a matter
of insurance, which may restrict performances to the point where all that's
left are the inflatable beer cans and SUVs, which blocked my view the last
time I went when I was volunteering with the Evergreen P-38.

The media has been reporting that 80% of the calls coming in from residents
in the area are strongly in support of continuance of the airshow.

-c

[Don Tuite]

On Tue, 18 Jul 2006 18:11:04 GMT, Jose >
wrote:

>> Yeah. I'm just picking up on what an English professor used to rant
>> about...
>
>Right... like "higher" has two syllables, and "fire" has one. So what
>about "hire"?
>
>And don't get me started about clocks running "fast". :)

This looks like fun. How about syllables and hyphenation in
theater/theatre?

That PED tag is hard to resist.

Don

[gatt]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message
.. .

>> Gee, why would anybody trust a journalist about matters of journalism?
>
> "... If you don't want to work, become a reporter. That awful power, the
> public opinion of the nation, was created by a horde of self-complacent
> simpletons who failed at ditch digging and shoemaking and fetched up
> journalism on their way to the poorhouse. ..." -- Samuel Langhorne
> Clemens

Sam Clemens, you should note, was a journalist. He was making fun of himself
the way he made fun of his service as a Confederate officer.

> The problem being, as Mark Twain understood (having been a journalist
> himself) is that it appears takes no qualifications to become one.

I should also remind you that Sam Clemens predates both the airplane and
modern media. If you think it takes no qualification to be a news reporter
for a syndicated network, you simply haven't tried.

> I'm afraid I see no real difference between you and those "snivelers".

*shrug* That's up to you, but I won't call you an idiot or killfile you
like Emily did to me. If you find that the word "slammed" is more
offensive than the idea of a restored fighter jet exploding in a suburb,
that's your choice. Your comparison between me and those "snivelers" is a
nonsequitor.

-c

[Flyingmonk[_1_]]

alexy wrote:

>
> But I think you and I are on the losing side of the word purity
> battle--incorrect usage repeated often enough becomes "common usage",
> which in turn becomes "correct".
>

You mean like "Analyzating" or when Bush says "nuculer" when he means
"nuclear" or "subliminate" when he means "subliminal?" Or why he mixes
up
perseverance and preservation? Why does he mangle the English language
often enough for Slate Editor Jacob Weisberg to produce three books of
Bushisms such as "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your
family."

8^)

Monk

[gatt]

"alexy" > wrote in message
...

> Next time you want to jump on the bashing bandwagon when a particular
> journalist shows a lack of knowledge in a field you know well, look at
> his or her last few assignments and see if you know as much about
> those areas as the journalist.
>
> P.S. None of this is intended in any way to deny the existence of
> dimwits in journalism.

I agree with you 100%. There are dimwits, there are talking heads, there
are journalists who are gravely unaware of their own bias or ignorance.

Journalists don't fly airplanes into houses, fly into the sides of
mountains, get disoriented in clouds, buzz friends and auger into trees and
do all the things that -some pilots- do.

We as aviators would not tolerate the idea that because -some- pilots are
careless or undertrained or incompetent that -all- pilots are as a whole. As
a matter of personal integrity I cannot tolerate the same applied to
journalism.

-c

[gatt]

"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...

>> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
>> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the
>> >wounded.
>
> Good one.

Based on what? Give us an actual anecdote.

Somebody once told me that when she never saw so cocaine until her mom was
dating an airline pilot and throwing them parties in Orange County, CA back
in the early '80s, and that those airline pilots put away more cocaine in a
single party than she saw in her entire life since. Is that too a "Good
One"? Are pilots drug addicts bcause of what somebody once told me about
them?

-c

[gatt]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...

>> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those noble
>> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the
>> wounded.
>>
> So that's what Ernie Pyle was doing.

Trivia: A journalist riding in high-risk B-17 combat missions with the 92nd
BG once tried to bail out of the nose over England to be the first to get
the story of the air battle to the newswire. The pilot, who lives in
Portland, had a service weapon he gave to the bombardier or navigator with
instructions that nobody leaves his airplane until he says they do, and
nobody was leaving until they landed. The passenger, Mr. Cronkite, would
have to wait. (I can't remember which airplane he said it was...either
Nine-O-Nine or Outhouse Mouse.)

-c

[gatt]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
. net...
>
> I do believe he died in a crash, slam or whatever you want to call it and
> I seriously doubt he loved it. The flying part I will buy but that's not
> >what he died from.

Wow, no ****. Really? You suppose?

Nobody's saying he loved crashing. We're saying he loved flying, which is
exactly what he WAS DOING up until the instant that he struck---Is that
Politically Correct enough?--the house.

> The oft repeated statement "He died doing what he loved" when someone
> augers in is one of those idiotic aviation statements that just goes on
> and on and on and on.

Then ignore it and go on and on yourself. The rest of us here know what we
mean.

-c

[gatt]

"Skylune" > wrote in message
lkaboutaviation.com...
> The guy is obviously rich and has a set a brass ones. But 73 years old,
> flying a vintage fighter jet.....

Yeager...

-c

[Skylune[_1_]]

I saw the community support for the airport. Glad co-existence is working
well there.

Unfortunately, that is not the case everywhere. I have lived near three
GA airports (well, one was about 50% GA and the remainder commercial).
Only at one of those three did the airport noise present a problem,
because the management at that airport won't do a thing about noise is a
waste of a dime....

[Skylune[_1_]]

by "gatt" > Jul 18, 2006 at 07:33 PM


"Matt Whiting" > wrote in message
...

>> No offense, but somebody once told me that journalists were those
noble

>> warriors who came out on the field after the battle to bayonet the
>> >wounded.
>
> Good one.

Based on what? Give us an actual anecdote.

Somebody once told me that when she never saw so cocaine until her mom
was

dating an airline pilot and throwing them parties in Orange County, CA
back
in the early '80s, and that those airline pilots put away more cocaine in
a
single party than she saw in her entire life since. Is that too a "Good
One"? Are pilots drug addicts bcause of what somebody once told me
about
them?

<<

No. But there are some clowns out there. The final straw when I dropped
out of training during the 90s was when the CFI jerk I was using (I won't
mention the chain's name, for libel purposes) showed up one morning
smelling of bourbon or scotch or something. After his earlier stunts (I
won't repeat them), I decided I wanted no part of this thing. Too
unprofessional, too easy to get a ticket to kill yourself, etc.

Now, I only fly occassionally in the right seat with my VFR trained buddy.
And, I won't go with him when its hazy out, or conditions are marginal
(even slight crosswinds). He flies just enough to be dangerous, and I
fear he will wind up as a dead Kennedy one day. His confidence is way
bigger than his experience level.

[Larry Dighera]

On 18 Jul 2006 12:29:42 -0700, "Flyingmonk" >
wrote in om>::

>Why does he mangle the English language
>often enough for Slate Editor Jacob Weisberg to produce three books of
>Bushisms such as "I know how hard it is for you to put food on your
>family."

Given that this message thread is now protected from readership
protest by it's 'POL' notation, perhaps it's safe enough to post some
more Bush quotes:


"We need an energy policy that encourages consumption"
-- George W. Bush.


"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we.
They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country
and our people, and neither do we." - George W. Bush


According to Abbas, immediately thereafter Bush said: "God told me to
strike at al Qaida and I struck them, and then he instructed me to
strike at Saddam, which I did, and now I am determined to solve the
problem in the Middle East. If you help me I will act, and if not, the
elections will come and I will have to focus on them."


===========================
http://www6.lexisnexis.com/publisher/EndUser?Action=UserDisplayFullDocument&orgId=574&topicId=100010487&docId=l:408095480&start=2
BUDDIES Tony Blair and George Bush were deeply embarrassed last night
after being caught using distinctly undiplomatic remarks in some
off-guarded moments.

Their expletive-ridden chat at the G8 Summit moved on from how they
could solve the Middle East crisis to the serious matter of the
sweater that the Prime Minister had given the US President as a gift.

Aides are now battling to repair the damage after the two leaders
spoke frankly, and somewhat fruitily, over lunch in St Petersburg,
unaware their remarks were being recorded by a TV microphone.
....

Bush: Yo Blair how are you doing?

Blair: I'm just. . .

Bush: You're leaving?

Blair: No, no, no not yet. On this trade thingy. . .

Bush: Yeah I told that to the man

Blair: Are you planning to say that here or not?

Bush: If you want me to

Blair: Well, it's just that if the discussion arises. . .

Bush: I just want some movement.

Blair: Yeah

Bush: Yesterday we didn't see much movement

Blair: No, no, it may be that it's not, it maybe that it's impossible

Bush: I am prepared to say it

Blair: But it's just I think what we need to be an opposition

Bush: Who is introducing the trade

Blair: Angela

Bush: Tell her to call 'em

Blair: Yes

Bush: Tell her to put him on them on the spot. Thanks for the sweater.
It's awfully thoughtful of you

Blair: It's a pleasure

Bush: I know you picked it out yourself

Blair: Oh, absoultely, in fact - in fact I knitted it! ! !

Bush: What about Kofi Annan - he seems alright. I don't like his
ceasefire plan. His attitude is basically ceasefire and everything
sorts out. . . . But I think. . .

Blair: Yeah the only thing I think is really difficult is that we
can't stop this without getting international presence agreed. I think
what you guys have talked about which is the criticism of the
(inaudible word). I am perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of
the land is, but you need that done quickly because otherwise it will
spiral.

Bush: Yeah

Blair: I don't know what you guys have talked about but as I say I am
perfectly happy to try and see what the lie of the land is but you
need that done quickly because otherwise it will spiral

Bush: I think Condi is going to go pretty soon

Blair: But that's, that's, that's all that matters. But if you, you
see it will take some time to get that together

Bush: Yeah, yeah

Blair: But at least it gives people. . .

Bush: It's a process, I agree. I told her your offer too. . .

Blair: Well it's only if she needs the ground prepared as it were.

If she goes out she has to succeed whereas I can just go and talk.

Bush: You see, the . . . thing is what they need to do is to get
Syria, to get Hezbollah to stop doing this s*** and it's over

Blair: Dunno. . . Syria. . . .

Bush: Why?

Blair: Because I think this is all part of the same thing

Bush: (with mouth full of bread) Yeah.

Blair: What does he (Kofi Annan) think? He thinks if Lebanon turns out
fine, if we get a solution in Israel and Palestine, Iraq goes in the
right way. . .

Bush: Yeah, yeah, he is sweet

Blair: He is honey. And that's what the whole thing is about. It's the
same with Iraq

Bush: I felt like telling Kofi to call, to get on the phone to Bashad
(Bashir Assad) and make something happen

Blair: Yeah Bush: We're not blaming Israel.

We are not blaming the Lebanese government

Blair: Is this. . . ? (at this point Blair taps the microphone in
front of him and the sound is cut. )

[Al[_1_]]

"Crash Lander" > wrote in message
...
> "gatt" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> It didn't strike, it didn't impact, it didn't bounce off of, it didn't
>> land on, they didn't collide...it smashed into the friggin house.
>>
>
> Now you've gone and confused the whole issue! Did it "Slam" into the
> house, or did it "Smash" into the house?
> Crash Lander

Gee, I don't know. I crashed once, it sure felt like "slammed" to me.

Al G

[Skylune[_1_]]

Blah, blah, blah. And John F. Kennedy, who you may have heard of,
pronounced Cuba as Cuber. Who gives a rat's ass?? Talk about non-
issues....

But, I expect that Bush's poor grammar/diction constitutes PROOF to you
that he is somehow stupid/incompetent, etc. Just another form of
character assisination, rather than debating ideas and policies. Low, but
typical lefty stuff.



From the more educated words from the mouths of some of the Elitists:

Slick Willie: "I was never in the hotel alone with that woman."
Translation: other people were in the hotel.

Slick Hillie: "We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the
common good." This needs no translation, and speaks for itself.

[Skylune[_1_]]

Does this mean I can post Boyerisms here?? Cool. In the meantime, since
you are putting up meaningless drivel, here is some meaningless drivel
from a Lefty:

"I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it."
- John Kerry - New York Times
I will stand up and struggle, as others have, to try to get that right
balance between violence, and sex, and things.
- John Kerry - ABC News

"The vast majority of our imports come from outside the country."

- John F. Kerry



"This president always makes decisions late after things have happened
that could have been different had the president made a different decision
earlier."

- John Kerry in Washington Post



I don't own an SUV,'' said Kerry, who supports increasing existing fuel
economy standards to 36 miles per gallon by 2015 in order to reduce the
nation's dependence on foreign oil supplies.

Kerry thought for a second when asked whether his wife, Teresa Heinz
Kerry, had a Suburban at their Ketchum, Idaho, home. Kerry said he owns
and drives a Dodge 600 and recently bought a Chrysler 300M. He said his
wife owns the Chevrolet SUV.

"The family has it. I don't have it,'' he said.
- John Kerry - Guardian Unlimited

"If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure."

- John F. Kerry



"One word sums up probably the responsibility of any Governor, and that
one word is 'to be prepared'."

- John F. Kerry



"I have made good judgments in the past. I have made good judgments in the
future."

- John F. Kerry



"The future will be better tomorrow."

- John F. Kerry



"We're going to have the best educated American people in the world."

- John F. Kerry



"I stand by all the misstatements that I've made."

- John F. Kerry



"We have a firm commitment to NATO, we are a part of NATO. We have a firm
commitment to Europe. We are a part of Europe."

- John F. Kerry



"Public speaking is very easy."

- John F. Kerry



"A low voter turnout is an indication of fewer people going to the polls."


- John F. Kerry



"We are ready for any unforeseen event that may or may not occur."

- John F. Kerry



"For NASA, space is still a high priority."

- John F. Kerry



"Quite frankly, teachers are the only profession that teach our children."


- John F. Kerry



"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the impurities in
our air and water that are doing it."

- John F. Kerry



"It's time for the human race to enter the solar system."

- John F. Kerry

"I am for raising that minimum wage. But you have to do it a rate where
you're not creating upheaval in the economy. But in many public places, we
have living wages already being put in place. … So I am very much in favor
of individual efforts—federal government and others—moving to help create
the ability for people on the wage to be able to make it and do better.
But within the private sector, I think we have to ratchet it up at a rate
that is acceptable to the marketplace so we don't have an economic
dislocation. But we have to start to get people able to earn more."

- John F. Kerry

[Matt Whiting]

Skylune wrote:
> Its like when people say "near miss." What they actually mean is "near
> hit."
>

No, near is modifying either miss or hit. A near hit means that you
actually had to hit something.

Matt

[alexy]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote:

>
>"gatt" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> "alexy" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>> But I think you and I are on the losing side of the word purity
>>> battle--incorrect usage repeated often enough becomes "common usage",
>>> which in turn becomes "correct".
>>>
>>> Same thing with using the ambiguous term "bi-annual" in place of
>>> biennial.
>>
>> *shudder* Good example of one of those words where you have to pause,
>> figure out which it means, and then figure out what the person saying it
>> actually meant. "Now, you're saying bi-annual, right? Not biennial?"
>> ("Yeah. Biannial.")
>>
>>
>
>The bad part is the dictionary now says they are both right.
>
>bi·an·nu·al (bi-an'yu-?l)
>adj.
> 1.. Happening twice each year; semiannual.
> 2.. Occurring every two years; biennial.
>
Yes, which is why some people (see above) may refer to it as an
"ambiguous term". <g>
--
Alex -- Replace "nospam" with "mail" to reply by email. Checked infrequently.

[gatt]

"Gig 601XL Builder" <wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net> wrote in message
...

> The bad part is the dictionary now says they are both right.
>
> bi·an·nu·al (bi-an'yu-?l)
> adj.
> 1.. Happening twice each year; semiannual.
> 2.. Occurring every two years; biennial.

That's unacceptable, but a prime example. Linguistic liberalism, as it
were. When language is modified as an improvement, that's great. When
it's modified such that discrete words are obscured so it's easier for
people to use them, that's not.

"Nauseous" is still my example. If "nauseous" meant you felt ill, we
wouldn't need "nauseated." We have both because, once upon a time, one
referred to something that caused nausea and the other described a state of
nausea. Thankfully we haven't dumbed down "noxious" and "toxic" yet.

-c

[David CL Francis]

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 at 17:50:05 in message
>, Emily
> wrote:
>gatt wrote:
>> "Robert M. Gary" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>>
>>> Exactly. There is no need to add sensationalism.
>> They didn't. They described it. The jet very clearly slammed into
>>the home.
>> -c
>
>Slammed is a word that doesn't need to be included. It's pretty subjective.

I always thought that Slams was a word that is often picked because it
is relatively short and fits into headlines better.

Political headline: 'A slams B over case'.

Slam and its variations is a multi-purpose word.
--
David CL Francis

[vincent p. norris]

>> Same thing with using the ambiguous term "bi-annual" in place of biennial.

I have been reading the draft of a usage dictionary written by a
friend an former colleague. I quote:

"According to dictionaries, 'biannual' means 'twice a year' and
'biennial' means 'every two years.' Those definitions invite
confusion, so writers should avoiding using... [them]."

vince norris

[[email protected]]

Emily wrote:
> Dan Luke wrote:
>> "Emily" wrote:
>>> Degree in journalism? That explains a lot.
>>
>> What? That he knows what he's talking about?
>> While you, OTOH, are freaking out over a synonym?
>> Absurd.
>
> Well, if you don't care how aviation is portrayed in the media, then be
> my guest - be ok with it. I'm NOT ok with it.
> [...]
> I just don't like journalists.

Yeah, citizens of a free country should not be subjected to information
they'd prefer to remain ignorant of. Worst of all are Activist
Journalists, like the one under discussion here who displays a clear
bias against catastrophic accidents. A more appropriate, more neutral
description would have been "The jet performed a precautionary landing
on a residential vertical surface. The landing fully complied with all
applicable laws of physics."

--Gary

[Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX N2469R]

Looking at video of the crash scene, "incinerated"
comes to mind. The Hunter was loaded with fuel for
the return trip to California.


--
Chuck Forsberg www.omen.com 503-614-0430
Developer of Industrial ZMODEM(Tm) for Embedded Applications
Omen Technology Inc "The High Reliability Software"
10255 NW Old Cornelius Pass Portland OR 97231 FAX 629-0665