Lidle crash: who is wrong?

[Blasto]

Confusing reports on the Lidle crash-- Mayor Bloomberg, sounding
utterly confident in his sources, says the plane took off from
Teterboro, circled the Statue of Liberty, flew up (south-to-north) the
East River, then into the building. A few minutes earlier, a CNN
reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the plane tracked
straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and followed the
East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into the
building. Given that the impact was on the building's north face, the
latter account seems more likely.

Anyone have newer info?

--
B

[Peter R.]

Blasto > wrote:

> A few minutes earlier, a CNN
> reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the plane tracked
> straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and followed the
> East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into the
> building. Given that the impact was on the building's north face, the
> latter account seems more likely.

That is not how the Passur data depicts the several minutes prior to the
crash. The Mayor's account is what is depicted.

--
Peter

[Blasto]

Peter R. wrote:
> Blasto > wrote:
>
> > A few minutes earlier, a CNN
> > reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the plane tracked
> > straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and followed the
> > East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into the
> > building. Given that the impact was on the building's north face, the
> > latter account seems more likely.
>
> That is not how the Passur data depicts the several minutes prior to the
> crash. The Mayor's account is what is depicted.
>
> --
> Peter

Well, one thing that's needed is a definite time for the crash. If you
set Passur for 2:38 you'll see a plane following the CNN account
(although CNN has now switched to the Mayor's version)... In fact if
you just stare at Passur for a little while you'll see planes all over
the place dropping from the display where there are no airports.

So assuming the up-the-East-River account is correct, how did Lidle (or
the instructor) manage to hit the north face of the building? That
seems an impossibly tight turn.

--
B

[Blasto]

oops.. I meant 2:28. Then at 2:30 you'll see a plane disappear pretty
much right 72nd and the river.

--
B

[Gary Drescher]

"Blasto" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> So assuming the up-the-East-River account is correct, how did Lidle (or
> the instructor) manage to hit the north face of the building? That
> seems an impossibly tight turn.

It's not impossibly tight if it's planned and executed properly. In fact,
there's no (legal) choice but to make the turn. The VFR corridor over the
East River ends at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island. At that point, you
either make a U-turn or bust LGA's Class B (unless you have a clearance).

--Gary

[Peter R.]

Blasto > wrote:

> In fact if
> you just stare at Passur for a little while you'll see planes all over
> the place dropping from the display where there are no airports.

Aircraft appear and disappear in Passur presumably due the sporadic radar
returns caused by the low altitudes flown by aircraft in those VFR
corridors combined with the tall buildings of the area.

> So assuming the up-the-East-River account is correct, how did Lidle (or
> the instructor) manage to hit the north face of the building? That
> seems an impossibly tight turn.

As Gary indicated, aircraft flying up the east side of Manhattan in
the VFR corridor are required to turn around and fly back to the south,
as the corridor ends around the north end of Roosevelt Island.

How does an aircraft hit the north face of a building along the river
there? One possibility is that the pilot lost control of the aircraft
during the turn, say due to a stall. Another possibility is that the pilot
misjudged the point at which to begin the turn.

--
Peter

[Roy Smith]

"Gary Drescher" > wrote:
> It's not impossibly tight if it's planned and executed properly. In fact,
> there's no (legal) choice but to make the turn. The VFR corridor over the
> East River ends at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island. At that point, you
> either make a U-turn or bust LGA's Class B (unless you have a clearance).

Or land.

[Gary Drescher]

"Peter R." > wrote in message
...
> As Gary indicated, aircraft flying up the east side of Manhattan in
> the VFR corridor are required to turn around and fly back to the south,
> as the corridor ends around the north end of Roosevelt Island.
>
> How does an aircraft hit the north face of a building along the river
> there? One possibility is that the pilot lost control of the aircraft
> during the turn, say due to a stall. Another possibility is that the
> pilot
> misjudged the point at which to begin the turn.

My guess is that they flew too fast and failed to remember that the turn
radius increases with the square of the airspeed. When they saw the
buildings coming, they banked steeply, causing them to descend and possibly
stall. (A witness on the ground who is also a pilot reported seeing the
plane in an unusually steep bank just before impact.)

--Gary

[Jim Macklin]

Google for "524 e 72nd st.,new york city" and look at the
sat photo. There is a soccer field just northeast across
the river. IF they were having some engine problem, that
could have looked like the best place to land. Passing the
tops of the buildings and with probable winds aloft being
twice as strong as surface winds [maybe 25 kts. ] and the
venturi effect, the plane could have easily been turned
directly into the building. Just a guess.



"Blasto" > wrote in message
ups.com...
| Confusing reports on the Lidle crash-- Mayor Bloomberg,
sounding
| utterly confident in his sources, says the plane took off
from
| Teterboro, circled the Statue of Liberty, flew up
(south-to-north) the
| East River, then into the building. A few minutes earlier,
a CNN
| reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the
plane tracked
| straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and
followed the
| East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into
the
| building. Given that the impact was on the building's
north face, the
| latter account seems more likely.
|
| Anyone have newer info?
|
| --
| B
|

[James Robinson]

"Blasto" > wrote:

> Well, one thing that's needed is a definite time for the crash. If you
> set Passur for 2:38 you'll see a plane following the CNN account
> (although CNN has now switched to the Mayor's version)... In fact if
> you just stare at Passur for a little while you'll see planes all over
> the place dropping from the display where there are no airports.
>
> So assuming the up-the-East-River account is correct, how did Lidle (or
> the instructor) manage to hit the north face of the building? That
> seems an impossibly tight turn.

You get different data from the different airports in Passur. If you use
EWR as the base airport, you can see the plane made two turns around the
Statue of Liberty, which you can't see from the other airports.

If look at the LaGuardia feed, you can not only use the 10 mile scale, you
can also see the aircraft fly up to Roosevelt Island, then make a 180 turn
toward the left before disappearing.

[Bucky]

Gary Drescher wrote:
> It's not impossibly tight if it's planned and executed properly. In fact,
> there's no (legal) choice but to make the turn. The VFR corridor over the
> East River ends at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island. At that point, you
> either make a U-turn or bust LGA's Class B (unless you have a clearance).

thanks for the very insightful post.

[Gary Drescher]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:YLhXg.2547$XX2.2048@dukeread04...
> Google for "524 e 72nd st.,new york city" and look at the
> sat photo. There is a soccer field just northeast across
> the river. IF they were having some engine problem, that
> could have looked like the best place to land. Passing the
> tops of the buildings and with probable winds aloft being
> twice as strong as surface winds [maybe 25 kts. ] and the
> venturi effect, the plane could have easily been turned
> directly into the building. Just a guess.

I don't understand your scenario. They'd have been flying north along the
east shore of the narrow river, then making a U-turn to fly south along the
west shore. Aside from the river itself, plausible nearby landing sites are
along the east shore and on the island in the middle of the river; I don't
see how heading for those sites would have led them to crash on the west
side of the river. (Plus, there was no distress call or other indication of
engine problems.)

If they flew too fast, making the turn too wide (which is my guess), they'd
have hit the north side of a building on the west shore--which they did.

--Gary

>
>
>
> "Blasto" > wrote in message
> ups.com...
> | Confusing reports on the Lidle crash-- Mayor Bloomberg,
> sounding
> | utterly confident in his sources, says the plane took off
> from
> | Teterboro, circled the Statue of Liberty, flew up
> (south-to-north) the
> | East River, then into the building. A few minutes earlier,
> a CNN
> | reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the
> plane tracked
> | straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and
> followed the
> | East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into
> the
> | building. Given that the impact was on the building's
> north face, the
> | latter account seems more likely.
> |
> | Anyone have newer info?
> |
> | --
> | B
> |
>
>

[Jim Macklin]

I'm just trying to understand what happened. Looked at the
Google sat photo, the soccer field looked like the best and
closest landing area. Not really sure if the locations is
totally correct. All I know for sure is that the news media
hires idiots who can fill hours with nothing.

I do know from experience that winds around the buildings
can cause lots of turbulence which could cause control
problems.

Just where the airplane was when the problem began is
unknown, all we know for sure is where it ended up.

All my flying in the NYC area has been in King Air and
Beechjet aircraft, have not run the VFR corridors. Don't
have a current chart and not sure what they did and what the
rules are. Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
NYC chart that shows the area in question?



"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
. ..
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:YLhXg.2547$XX2.2048@dukeread04...
| > Google for "524 e 72nd st.,new york city" and look at
the
| > sat photo. There is a soccer field just northeast
across
| > the river. IF they were having some engine problem,
that
| > could have looked like the best place to land. Passing
the
| > tops of the buildings and with probable winds aloft
being
| > twice as strong as surface winds [maybe 25 kts. ] and
the
| > venturi effect, the plane could have easily been turned
| > directly into the building. Just a guess.
|
| I don't understand your scenario. They'd have been flying
north along the
| east shore of the narrow river, then making a U-turn to
fly south along the
| west shore. Aside from the river itself, plausible nearby
landing sites are
| along the east shore and on the island in the middle of
the river; I don't
| see how heading for those sites would have led them to
crash on the west
| side of the river. (Plus, there was no distress call or
other indication of
| engine problems.)
|
| If they flew too fast, making the turn too wide (which is
my guess), they'd
| have hit the north side of a building on the west
shore--which they did.
|
| --Gary
|
| >
| >
| >
| > "Blasto" > wrote in message
| >
ups.com...
| > | Confusing reports on the Lidle crash-- Mayor
Bloomberg,
| > sounding
| > | utterly confident in his sources, says the plane took
off
| > from
| > | Teterboro, circled the Statue of Liberty, flew up
| > (south-to-north) the
| > | East River, then into the building. A few minutes
earlier,
| > a CNN
| > | reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off
the
| > plane tracked
| > | straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right
and
| > followed the
| > | East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right
into
| > the
| > | building. Given that the impact was on the building's
| > north face, the
| > | latter account seems more likely.
| > |
| > | Anyone have newer info?
| > |
| > | --
| > | B
| > |
| >
| >
|
|

[Gary Drescher]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote in message
news:4ApXg.2566$XX2.1045@dukeread04...
> All my flying in the NYC area has been in King Air and
> Beechjet aircraft, have not run the VFR corridors. Don't
> have a current chart and not sure what they did and what the
> rules are. Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
> NYC chart that shows the area in question?

http://skyvector.com/

[Ron Natalie]

Peter R. wrote:

>
> How does an aircraft hit the north face of a building along the river
> there? One possibility is that the pilot lost control of the aircraft
> during the turn, say due to a stall. Another possibility is that the pilot
> misjudged the point at which to begin the turn.
>

Accellerated stall is a possibility. Overbank an already tight turn.
Remember that once the stall occurs it's not only altitude that is lost,
lift is what is turning the aircraft.

[Roy Smith]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote:

> Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
> NYC chart that shows the area in question?

http://skyvector.com/

[Matt Barrow]

"Jim Macklin" > wrote:
>
> Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
> NYC chart that shows the area in question?

http://aviationtoolbox.org/raw_data/FAA/sectionals/current/Terminal-Area-Charts/New%20York%20TAC%2069.tif
(31MB)

[Roy Smith]

Tom Fleischman > wrote:

> The corridor [...]
> includes helicopter and sometimes seaplane traffic.

Sometimes? I used to have an office overlooking the East River a few
blocks from the 23rd street SPB. Seaplanes come in and out on a regular
basis all day long. Scheduled service out to the Hamptons. Mostly Cessna
Caravan amphibians. I chatted with one of the pilots one day. He said the
float system cost as much as the rest of the airplane.

[Kingfish]

Roy Smith wrote:
>
> Sometimes? I used to have an office overlooking the East River a few
> blocks from the 23rd street SPB. Seaplanes come in and out on a regular
> basis all day long. Scheduled service out to the Hamptons. Mostly Cessna
> Caravan amphibians. I chatted with one of the pilots one day. He said the
> float system cost as much as the rest of the airplane.

I did some flying with an operator out of Bridgeport CT (BDR) that flew
Caravan amphibs into the 23rd St dock. We flew commuters back & forth
to Easthampton (HTO). And yes, the Wipline amphib floats aren't cheap,
they cost about 250k for the pair (A tad less than a $1.5M C208 though)

[Marco Leon]

Gary Drescher wrote:
>
> I don't understand your scenario. They'd have been flying north along the
> east shore of the narrow river, then making a U-turn to fly south along the
> west shore. Aside from the river itself, plausible nearby landing sites are
> along the east shore and on the island in the middle of the river; I don't
> see how heading for those sites would have led them to crash on the west
> side of the river. (Plus, there was no distress call or other indication of
> engine problems.)
>
> If they flew too fast, making the turn too wide (which is my guess), they'd
> have hit the north side of a building on the west shore--which they did.
>
> --Gary

Also, the winds were coming from ENE gusting to 22. Going northbound on
the west fork of the East River and making a lefthand turn, the turning
radius would be significantly wider. This would have contributed to the
"surprise" factor as well (not unlike the typical overshooting the
final in a crosswind situation).

Marco

[Jim Macklin]

Thanks
"Gary Drescher" > wrote in message
. ..
| "Jim Macklin" > wrote
in message
| news:4ApXg.2566$XX2.1045@dukeread04...
| > All my flying in the NYC area has been in King Air and
| > Beechjet aircraft, have not run the VFR corridors.
Don't
| > have a current chart and not sure what they did and what
the
| > rules are. Anybody know of a free download for a
terminal
| > NYC chart that shows the area in question?
|
| http://skyvector.com/
|
|

[Jim Macklin]

Thanks again.
"Roy Smith" > wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" >
wrote:
|
| > Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
| > NYC chart that shows the area in question?
|
| http://skyvector.com/

[Jim Macklin]

Mucho gratis
"Matt Barrow" > wrote in message
...
| "Jim Macklin" >
wrote:
| >
| > Anybody know of a free download for a terminal
| > NYC chart that shows the area in question?
|
|
http://aviationtoolbox.org/raw_data/FAA/sectionals/current/Terminal-Area-Charts/New%20York%20TAC%2069.tif
| (31MB)
|
|

[Blasto]

Peter R. wrote:

> How does an aircraft hit the north face of a building along the river
> there? One possibility is that the pilot lost control of the aircraft
> during the turn, say due to a stall. Another possibility is that the pilot
> misjudged the point at which to begin the turn.
>
> --
> Peter

Thanks Peter and others for your answers. I'm no pilot, just trying to
understand. Sadly I'm incapacitated by effects of
cancer/cancer-treatment and I basically lie about looking out my 20th
floor window over the Hudson at the Holland Tunnel. It's a rare day I
don't flinch at least once from a small plane or chopper suddenly
looming what seems to be a bit too large in my window... But it's
funny, I would not support clapping new restrictive measures on General
Aviation around Manhattan. As this brutal illness in my early 40s has
taught me (well, I knew it before, but not so deeply), there is an
irreducible risk simply to being a meat creature in a world of such
physical forces and programmed mortality. Much, I'm afraid most, of
reality is bleak and we should preserve the aspects of our culture that
allow at least some of us to rise above it some of the time. You folks
in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
than exists to date.

Hmm sorry for the speech. One must vent occasionally. Back to the
issue... it seems a fair speculation from a few of the comments above
that the existence of this particular VFR corridor border at this
particular spot may have been a determining factor. Maybe Lidle was a
crash waiting to happen, but his rendevous with this exact building on
this day could have been a function of corridor layout. Maybe there
should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?

--
B

[James Robinson]

James Robinson > wrote:

> "Blasto" > wrote:
>
>> Well, one thing that's needed is a definite time for the crash. If
>> you set Passur for 2:38 you'll see a plane following the CNN account
>> (although CNN has now switched to the Mayor's version)... In fact if
>> you just stare at Passur for a little while you'll see planes all
>> over the place dropping from the display where there are no airports.
>>
>> So assuming the up-the-East-River account is correct, how did Lidle
>> (or the instructor) manage to hit the north face of the building?
>> That seems an impossibly tight turn.
>
> You get different data from the different airports in Passur. If you
> use EWR as the base airport, you can see the plane made two turns
> around the Statue of Liberty, which you can't see from the other
> airports.
>
> If look at the LaGuardia feed, you can not only use the 10 mile scale,
> you can also see the aircraft fly up to Roosevelt Island, then make a
> 180 turn toward the left before disappearing.

To correct my earlier post, Lidle's aircraft only made one turn around
the Statue. I was confused by the three aircraft that were in the area
at the time.

As far as the time of the accident, on the LGA feed, you can see the
aircraft make a left turn over Roosevelt Island just after 14:41

http://www4.passur.com/lga.html

[Jay Honeck]

> Much, I'm afraid most, of
> reality is bleak and we should preserve the aspects of our culture that
> allow at least some of us to rise above it some of the time. You folks
> in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
> freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
> than exists to date.
>
> Hmm sorry for the speech.

That's a speech that needs to be heard more often. Thanks for sharing
it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Peter R.]

Blasto > wrote:

> Thanks Peter and others for your answers. I'm no pilot, just trying to
> understand. Sadly I'm incapacitated by effects of
> cancer/cancer-treatment

Wow, I am very sorry to read this. My thoughts are with you.

> and I basically lie about looking out my 20th
> floor window over the Hudson at the Holland Tunnel. It's a rare day I
> don't flinch at least once from a small plane or chopper suddenly
> looming what seems to be a bit too large in my window...

Not something that you are able to get used to, but rest assured that those
pilots are very alert to the surrounding buildings in that area. This is
especially notable of the helicopter pilots, who fly that airspace many
times a day.

<snip>
> You folks
> in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
> freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
> than exists to date.

I have read of airplanes experiencing engine failure that resulted in a
ditching in the Hudson, but AFAIK, this is the first fatality in a fixed
wing aircraft over the VFR corridor in many years. Keep in mind that this
is a very popular flight with pilots and many make it each day.

<snip>
> Maybe Lidle was a
> crash waiting to happen, but his rendevous with this exact building on
> this day could have been a function of corridor layout. Maybe there
> should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
> high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?

In looking at the NY Times animation of the flight path, which most likely
contains inaccuracies, a thought occurred to me: Given that there was a
CFI aboard, I wonder if the Cirrus purposely avoided flying directly over
Roosevelt Island and instead remained west of the island and over the
water, which significantly reduced what little airspace they had to make
the U-turn?

The only time I flew up the East River corridor (three or four years ago
and in a C172), my decision where to U-turn , which I had thought of when
planning the flight, involved doing so well south of Roosevelt Island, over
what seemed to be the widest point of the East River. Mind you, I am not
at all meaning to compare decision-making skills, but rather to demonstrate
that I was concerned both about remaining well clear of the Class B
airspace at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island and to be over a wide
enough point of the river in which to execute the turn.

Admittedly, in thinking of this accident I discovered that my one major
weakness in flying the East River that day was the fact that I never even
gave the winds aloft any thought and I, too, turned into Manhattan to make
the turn. At the time I probably only had about 100 hours.


--
Peter

[Matt Barrow]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> Much, I'm afraid most, of
>> reality is bleak and we should preserve the aspects of our culture that
>> allow at least some of us to rise above it some of the time. You folks
>> in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
>> freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
>> than exists to date.
>>
>> Hmm sorry for the speech.
>
> That's a speech that needs to be heard more often. Thanks for sharing
> it.

Very much along those lines...
http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10122006.html#crash

Neil Boortz is a 2500 hr pilot.

[Ron Natalie]

Matt Barrow wrote:

>
> Very much along those lines...
> http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10122006.html#crash
>
> Neil Boortz is a 2500 hr pilot.
>

Instructor just identified. California-based instructor
(who also held an A&P cert.).

[Blasto]

Peter R. wrote:
> Blasto > wrote:
>
> > Thanks Peter and others for your answers. I'm no pilot, just trying to
> > understand. Sadly I'm incapacitated by effects of
> > cancer/cancer-treatment
>
> Wow, I am very sorry to read this. My thoughts are with you.
>

Thanks very much. I try not to mention this on Usenet but sometimes the
need for a touch of sympathy gets the upper hand.

<snip>.
>
> I have read of airplanes experiencing engine failure that resulted in a
> ditching in the Hudson, but AFAIK, this is the first fatality in a fixed
> wing aircraft over the VFR corridor in many years. Keep in mind that this
> is a very popular flight with pilots and many make it each day.
>
> <snip>
> > Maybe Lidle was a
> > crash waiting to happen, but his rendevous with this exact building on
> > this day could have been a function of corridor layout. Maybe there
> > should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
> > high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?
>
> In looking at the NY Times animation of the flight path, which most likely
> contains inaccuracies, a thought occurred to me: Given that there was a
> CFI aboard, I wonder if the Cirrus purposely avoided flying directly over
> Roosevelt Island and instead remained west of the island and over the
> water, which significantly reduced what little airspace they had to make
> the U-turn?
>
> The only time I flew up the East River corridor (three or four years ago
> and in a C172), my decision where to U-turn , which I had thought of when
> planning the flight, involved doing so well south of Roosevelt Island, over
> what seemed to be the widest point of the East River. Mind you, I am not
> at all meaning to compare decision-making skills, but rather to demonstrate
> that I was concerned both about remaining well clear of the Class B
> airspace at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island and to be over a wide
> enough point of the river in which to execute the turn.
>
> Admittedly, in thinking of this accident I discovered that my one major
> weakness in flying the East River that day was the fact that I never even
> gave the winds aloft any thought and I, too, turned into Manhattan to make
> the turn. At the time I probably only had about 100 hours.
> --
> Peter

While reading the above I thought of the video snippets of Lidle in the
cockpit played yesterday by CNN. In one, he's over Philly and says
something to the effect it's too bad the stadium (where he pitched for
the Phillies) was off-limits. He looks almost tempted for a second to
say "what the hell" and head there anyway... Now it appears he, unlike
your equivalently inexperienced self, followed the corridor to the
utmost northern extremity right over Roosevelt Island, maybe to get
that last glimpse of Babe's house before decamping for the off-season
and a distinct chance the Yanks wouldn't be bringing him back for `07?

It's stuff like this that leads me to worry even less as I watch all
the hurtling steel and composite out my window. Celebrities and
athletes are odd, rare cases, so I feel the great majority of pilots
are more reliable, conscientious, etc.,. It makes me want to say
something like "Maybe there should be a rule requiring anybody from a
non-aviation background with fewer than 100 hours to be accompanied by
an instructor over the Hudson and East River", but of course Lidle
*was*.... I can see the instructor taking over just 4 seconds too late.
After all, they missed safety only by about 50 horizontal feet. That
much and they would have just cleared the NE corner, casting a shadow
on the strip of grass between the building and the river and then
getting back over the water.

--
B

[Gary Drescher]

"Blasto" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> You folks
> in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
> freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
> than exists to date.

Thanks for the eloquent post! Best wishes to you.

> Maybe there
> should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
> high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?

If our speculations about a too-wide turn are indeed correct, it might point
to the need for additional training on that issue (although even on the East
River--which is about the tightest turn I know of that a pilot would
ordinarily need to make other than in mountain flying--I'm not aware of any
other crashes caused by the tight turn).

--Gary

[Ron Natalie]

Gary Drescher wrote:

>> Maybe there
>> should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
>> high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?
>
> If our speculations about a too-wide turn are indeed correct, it might point
> to the need for additional training on that issue (although even on the East
> River--which is about the tightest turn I know of that a pilot would
> ordinarily need to make other than in mountain flying--I'm not aware of any
> other crashes caused by the tight turn).
>
Well a lot of people drop it in making too tight base-to-final turns.
Balling it up on the ground just doesn't make the news like hitting
a building in the process.

[EridanMan]

To the pilots who fly the area regularly-

That turn looks to me like it needs to be handled as a base-final
turn... get flaps out 10 (maybe even 25) and stabalized at ~60 knots
(my pa28-140 speeds), and make a nice crisp pattern turn (I know, most
pattern turns are 90 then 90, but you get my drift).

Is this a safe assessment?

An A.net guy calculated his speed based on the returns, he was doing
almost 120 knots up the east river until immediately before the turn,
then he abruptly slowed to 90... we were wondering if he would have had
time to get the plane stabalized before initiating the turn.

At that point, all he needed was a bit of poor pilotage (something I
myself must admit too on occasion)- he initiates a tight turn too
quickly, does not hold enough back preassure on the yoke, finds himself
suddenly in a skyscraper forest, panics- firewall the throttle and turn
hard to avoid a looming monolith in front of him... stall... and
physics does the rest.

Blasto wrote:
> Confusing reports on the Lidle crash-- Mayor Bloomberg, sounding
> utterly confident in his sources, says the plane took off from
> Teterboro, circled the Statue of Liberty, flew up (south-to-north) the
> East River, then into the building. A few minutes earlier, a CNN
> reporter using PASSUR asserted that after taking off the plane tracked
> straight west-to-east over Central Park, turned right and followed the
> East River (north-to-south) and suddenly banked right into the
> building. Given that the impact was on the building's north face, the
> latter account seems more likely.
>
> Anyone have newer info?
>
> --
> B

[Matt Barrow]

"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>>
>> Very much along those lines...
>> http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10122006.html#crash
>>
>> Neil Boortz is a 2500 hr pilot.

Also, a member of a couple airport authorities, now and in the past.

>>
>
> Instructor just identified. California-based instructor
> (who also held an A&P cert.).

Won't make a damn bit of difference to the shrills (see article above).

[Matt Whiting]

Peter R. wrote:

> Blasto > wrote:
>
>
>>Thanks Peter and others for your answers. I'm no pilot, just trying to
>>understand. Sadly I'm incapacitated by effects of
>>cancer/cancer-treatment
>
>
> Wow, I am very sorry to read this. My thoughts are with you.
>
>
>>and I basically lie about looking out my 20th
>>floor window over the Hudson at the Holland Tunnel. It's a rare day I
>>don't flinch at least once from a small plane or chopper suddenly
>>looming what seems to be a bit too large in my window...
>
>
> Not something that you are able to get used to, but rest assured that those
> pilots are very alert to the surrounding buildings in that area. This is
> especially notable of the helicopter pilots, who fly that airspace many
> times a day.
>
> <snip>
>
>>You folks
>>in your flying machines represent that to me, and any assault on your
>>freedoms would need to be justified by a much denser history of mishaps
>>than exists to date.
>
>
> I have read of airplanes experiencing engine failure that resulted in a
> ditching in the Hudson, but AFAIK, this is the first fatality in a fixed
> wing aircraft over the VFR corridor in many years. Keep in mind that this
> is a very popular flight with pilots and many make it each day.
>
> <snip>
>
>>Maybe Lidle was a
>>crash waiting to happen, but his rendevous with this exact building on
>>this day could have been a function of corridor layout. Maybe there
>>should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
>>high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?
>
>
> In looking at the NY Times animation of the flight path, which most likely
> contains inaccuracies, a thought occurred to me: Given that there was a
> CFI aboard, I wonder if the Cirrus purposely avoided flying directly over
> Roosevelt Island and instead remained west of the island and over the
> water, which significantly reduced what little airspace they had to make
> the U-turn?
>
> The only time I flew up the East River corridor (three or four years ago
> and in a C172), my decision where to U-turn , which I had thought of when
> planning the flight, involved doing so well south of Roosevelt Island, over
> what seemed to be the widest point of the East River. Mind you, I am not
> at all meaning to compare decision-making skills, but rather to demonstrate
> that I was concerned both about remaining well clear of the Class B
> airspace at the northern tip of Roosevelt Island and to be over a wide
> enough point of the river in which to execute the turn.
>
> Admittedly, in thinking of this accident I discovered that my one major
> weakness in flying the East River that day was the fact that I never even
> gave the winds aloft any thought and I, too, turned into Manhattan to make
> the turn. At the time I probably only had about 100 hours.

And in a 172 you have quite an advantage over the Cirrus with regard to
turn radius.

Matt

[Morgans[_2_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote

> That's a speech that needs to be heard more often. Thanks for sharing
> it.

What he said!

Also, good luck, and best wishes in your current situation, and fight. I hope
things turn to the better with you!
--
Jim in NC

[Bob Chilcoat]

The fact that he's from California might explain why they went up the East
river. He might not have known the area well enough to know that they were
heading into a box canyon.

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Ron Natalie" > wrote in message
...
> Matt Barrow wrote:
>
>>
>> Very much along those lines...
>> http://boortz.com/nuze/200610/10122006.html#crash
>>
>> Neil Boortz is a 2500 hr pilot.
>>
>
> Instructor just identified. California-based instructor
> (who also held an A&P cert.).

[.Blueskies.]

"Bob Chilcoat" > wrote in message ...
: The fact that he's from California might explain why they went up the East
: river. He might not have known the area well enough to know that they were
: heading into a box canyon.
:
: --
: Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)
:
:

Plenty of box canyons in CA that have planes in them, but those don't make the news like this one....

[Mxsmanic]

..Blueskies. writes:

> Plenty of box canyons in CA that have planes in them, but those
> don't make the news like this one....

How many of the box canyons have multimillion-dollar apartments in
high-rises as well?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Blanche]

112 mph, 30 deg bank = 3000 ft turn diameter
112 mph, 45 deg bank = 2000 ft turn diameter
112 mph, 60 deg bank = 1000 ft turn diameter

So, if the "canyon" is 2000 ft wide, and they were traveling
up the middle, incredibly difficult to make the turn safely.

www.csgnetwork.com/aircraftturninfocalc.html

[Blanche]

Next time you have a day or two out of the hospital, let us know.
Someone in the area would be delighted to take you for a flight.
Up the west side of Manhattan, of course. Or across Long Island.
Or further west.

[Gary Drescher]

"Blanche" > wrote in message
...
> 112 mph, 30 deg bank = 3000 ft turn diameter
> 112 mph, 45 deg bank = 2000 ft turn diameter
> 112 mph, 60 deg bank = 1000 ft turn diameter
>
> So, if the "canyon" is 2000 ft wide, and they were traveling
> up the middle, incredibly difficult to make the turn safely.
>
> www.csgnetwork.com/aircraftturninfocalc.html

I wouldn't characterize a 45-60 degree bank as "incredibly difficult". But
if there was an easterly wind, then their margin would have been reduced by
several hundred feet; that could've been part of the problem.

--Gary

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

Mxsmanic wrote:
> .Blueskies. writes:
>
>> Plenty of box canyons in CA that have planes in them, but those
>> don't make the news like this one....
>
> How many of the box canyons have multimillion-dollar apartments in
> high-rises as well?
>


There are a few folks in LA with money. <G>

[Blasto]

Blanche wrote:
> Next time you have a day or two out of the hospital, let us know.
> Someone in the area would be delighted to take you for a flight.
> Up the west side of Manhattan, of course. Or across Long Island.
> Or further west.

Blanche, bless hearts like yours.

I'm actually at home in a high-rise on the Jersey side (although my
last hospital stay had a view of the "Lidle crash building"). I'm very
touched by your offer and have no doubt you and/or those you mention
would make good on it. Without getting into details, let's just say I
have certain permanent surgical complications that rule out such a
trip. Even if I felt I had the strength and wanted to trade the
sickness for the experience, I'd be too embarrassed to cause anyone to
take a slop bucket to their shiny Cessna or Cirrus. It's ok. I was
blessed with a cinematic imagination, and seeing you out my window is
almost like flying myself.

Thanks again,
Jim ("Blasto")

[Blasto]

Gary Drescher wrote:
> "Blanche" > wrote in message
> ...
> > 112 mph, 30 deg bank = 3000 ft turn diameter
> > 112 mph, 45 deg bank = 2000 ft turn diameter
> > 112 mph, 60 deg bank = 1000 ft turn diameter
> >
> > So, if the "canyon" is 2000 ft wide, and they were traveling
> > up the middle, incredibly difficult to make the turn safely.
> >
> > www.csgnetwork.com/aircraftturninfocalc.html
>
> I wouldn't characterize a 45-60 degree bank as "incredibly difficult". But
> if there was an easterly wind, then their margin would have been reduced by
> several hundred feet; that could've been part of the problem.
>
> --Gary

The winds here are usually S or N Easterly, but on that day in the
afternoon were very light with weak infrequent gusts.

The margins you guys are talking about seem awful tight, but that's why
you're pilots and I'm not. I can calculate pretty well in my head and
have good technical ability (was a contributor to the original Ethernet
standard that became the Internet), but hurtling along in the sky
trying to figure and implement turning radii? Forget about air over the
wing plane, my gray matter wuold go into a stall. Yet, the record is
what it is and it's obvious almost all of you manage just fine. Plainly
there is an almost pure Darwinian selection that goes on and you people
who end up at the throttle have passed through filters within filters.
This even more than licensing is what gives you the right. This is also
why celebrities, athletes and perhaps the occasional type-A
businessman/woman are a bit worrisome-- they have the means and status
to sidestep some of these filters. What we may need here is a
contribution from some of our better legal minds: can you craft an
enforceable law making it a little harder for new GA pilots from
non-aviation backgrounds to zip next to skyscrapers, all without being
communistic or fascistic about it?

--
B

--
B

[Andrew Gideon]

On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 04:45:14 +0000, Blanche wrote:

> Up the west side
> of Manhattan, of course. Or across Long Island. Or further west.

Or over the East River but in the class B. It just means spending a few
electrons on the radio.

- Andrew

[Gary Drescher]

"Blasto" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
>> "Blanche" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > 112 mph, 30 deg bank = 3000 ft turn diameter
>> > 112 mph, 45 deg bank = 2000 ft turn diameter
>> > 112 mph, 60 deg bank = 1000 ft turn diameter
>> >
> The margins you guys are talking about seem awful tight, but that's why
> you're pilots and I'm not. I can calculate pretty well in my head and
> have good technical ability (was a contributor to the original Ethernet
> standard that became the Internet), but hurtling along in the sky
> trying to figure and implement turning radii?

You'd want to plan it in advance, not calculate it in real time. (In fact,
it is just such a calculation--in combination with other factors, such as
the high-density traffic--that convinced me in the past that there's not
enough of a safety margin, so I've chosen to avoid the East River.)

> What we may need here is a
> contribution from some of our better legal minds: can you craft an
> enforceable law making it a little harder for new GA pilots from
> non-aviation backgrounds to zip next to skyscrapers, all without being
> communistic or fascistic about it?

Such a law would be neither necessary nor sufficient to address the risk.
Small planes have been flying along the Hudson River and East River for
decades, and this is the first such crash I'm aware of; so there seems to be
no necessity for tighter restriction. Further, such a restriction would be
insufficient to prevent this sort of accident. After all, Lidle was flying
with an experienced CFI (flight instructor). But (apart from mountain-canyon
flying) a pilot's experience almost never addresses a situation like this,
so years of prior flying wouldn't necessarily help. In fact, this is the
sort of thing that a new pilot might even better at than a moderately
experienced one, because students are drilled in all sorts of obscure
matters that they soon forget because those matters don't come up in the
course of ordinary flying.

--Gary

[Judah]

"Blasto" > wrote in
oups.com:

> Peter R. wrote:
>
> Hmm sorry for the speech. One must vent occasionally. Back to the

Don't be sorry. We all vent, and it was a good speech.

> issue... it seems a fair speculation from a few of the comments above
> that the existence of this particular VFR corridor border at this
> particular spot may have been a determining factor. Maybe Lidle was a
> crash waiting to happen, but his rendevous with this exact building on
> this day could have been a function of corridor layout. Maybe there
> should not be seams in VFR corridors obliging pilots to negotiate
> high-skill turns over ultra-populated ground?

There are various types of aircraft that can navigate the East River corridor
without difficulty, even some smaller, slower planes. It's the responsibility
of the pilot to make sure

[Judah]

Judah > wrote in
:

Sorry, sometimes the fingers are too fast... :)

There are various types of aircraft that can navigate the East River corridor
without difficulty, even some smaller, slower planes. It's the responsibility
of the pilot to make sure that he and his equipment are capable of flying the
maneuvers required to do so safely under the prevailing conditions (ie: wind,
ceilings, etc).

This is probably why Mr. Lidle had an instructor in the plane - he wanted to
have someone with experience at his side to teach him how to navigate the VFR
corridors.

I'm not intensely familiar with the Cirrus, but my guess is that the
instructor didn't consider the prevailing wind conditions nor did he consider
the higher minimum speeds of the Cirrus as compared to a similar equipped
Cessna 172. I also question whether or not he had any Canyon flying training
/ experience, which may have helped make it possible for that plane to safely
perform a U-Turn over the East River... I don't know if the instructor and
Mr. Lidle had known each other, or

It's a terrible shame. But closing the corridor because of one unfortunate
accident reminds me of a situation a few years back that happened nearby.

The Cross County Parkway and the Major Deegan Expressway in Yonkers are
linked together by a short traversal onto Route 100 - which at that point is
almost like a service road. If you are going West on the Parkway and want to
go South on Route 100, you get stuck behind a traffic light on Route 100
following the posted signs. Alternatively, you could exit for the Deegan
North, and then make a Michigan U-Turn (I think that's what they call it -
it's a U-Turn lane through the median - almost like a jughandle style lane
but over the center median to the left instead of around to the right).

The U-Turn lane culminated in a Yield followed by a quick entrance onto the
Deegan. I used it for many years driving to school in Washington Heights and
driving to New Jersey. It was more convenient and I never thought twice about
it.

A few years ago, at around 4am, a Fuel Truck was making that U-Turn, and a
driver in a small car was coming South on Route 100. I don't know if they
ever really assigned fault, but the bottom line is that the car hit the
truck, and it caused an explosion of the fuel truck and many months of
rebuilding an overpass over the U-Turn lane. When they rebuilt it, they
closed off the U-Turn lane indefinitely, citing that it was too dangerous.

I don't think it's any more dangerous than any other posted yield sign - if
people don't pay proper attention to the signage, someone is going to get
hurt. But government officials needed to demonstrate their reaction to the
"horrible accident" to save face with the media, and now I have to wait at
that stupid light every time I go to New Jersey (it's one of those lights
that happens to ALWAYS be Red whenever you get there!)

Unfortunately, not enough people felt strongly enough about it to get them to
re-open it, probably because there are other acceptable ways to get on the
highway. Now there is grass in that median, and there is no sign of the U-
Turn.

I suspect the same may hold true for the East River corridor, especially
since seaplanes and helicopters are not part of the exclusion. Quite frankly,
I think it was pretty well known among the pilots in the area that the East
River corridor is very narrow, and most safely navigated while talking to LGA
Tower. I've flown the Hudson River corridor many times, but I've never flown
the East River corridor without being on with ATC. I once took a Canyon
flying course in Colorado, but I wouldn't want to worry about dodging tour
helicoptors in a Canyon turn...

The reality is, though, that had this happened pre 9/11 and had it been just
an average joe instead of a super-star athlete, it would have been an
unfortunate accident and written off.

We've become a bunch of cowardly lions...

[Don Tuite]

On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:50:14 GMT, Judah > wrote:

>Judah > wrote in
:
>
>It's a terrible shame. But closing the corridor because of one unfortunate
>accident reminds me of a situation a few years back that happened nearby.
>
>The Cross County Parkway and the Major Deegan Expressway in Yonkers are
>linked together by a short traversal onto Route 100 . . . etc.

This may have been covered in another post that I skipped, but I'll
make the question short, and you seem like a good guy to ask.

If the VFR corridor is mainly to save the LGA controllers the
distraction of talking to planes on floats and helos using that short
strecth of the East River, and the only thing you can do without
busting the LGA bravo is fly up and make a U-turn, why does anybody do
that? Are they still burning that stuff under the 59th St bridge?


>We've become a bunch of cowardly lions...

Sixth-graders packing heat? Scares *me*.

Don

[Judah]

Don Tuite > wrote in
:

> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:50:14 GMT, Judah > wrote:
>
> This may have been covered in another post that I skipped, but I'll
> make the question short, and you seem like a good guy to ask.

Thanks. But are you sure you know me well enough to make that claim? :)

> If the VFR corridor is mainly to save the LGA controllers the
> distraction of talking to planes on floats and helos using that short
> strecth of the East River, and the only thing you can do without
> busting the LGA bravo is fly up and make a U-turn, why does anybody do
> that? Are they still burning that stuff under the 59th St bridge?

I'm not sure. The only time I ever did it was on a return trip to White
Plains from I think Atlantic City when I was cleared that way. They either
give you the over-water route or over-land route and the over land route
takes you way out of the way...

>>We've become a bunch of cowardly lions...
>
> Sixth-graders packing heat? Scares *me*.

My sixth-grader doesn't pack heat. But it's OK to be scared of one who
does. Should they close the school system down because of it?

New Yorkers (and Americans in general) used to talk about how tough we are,
being a super-power and all. Cowboy Bush runs around making all his threats
and acts like he doesn't have to answer to anybody. Then when it comes time
to execute he botches the job, dumps all our resources into the wrong war,
and loses all credibility. Now America looks like a bunch of irrational
yahoos who could go off like a time-bomb at any moment, exploding on
whichever "enemy" the boss thinks is the bad guy today. He thinks he is
making this country feel safer and stronger, but he just snorted away too
many brain cells.

Deep down, it seems we're all just looking for a little bit of c-c-c-c-
courage. In fact, we're so afraid of another terrorist attack that
everybody goes into a panic when they see a little bit of smoke in a
building. The first comment after every accident, explosion or flatulent
emmission is, "Authorities believe it doesn't look like a terrorist
attack."

America. What a country.

[Don Tuite]

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:29:57 GMT, Judah > wrote:

>Don Tuite > wrote in
:
>
>> On Mon, 16 Oct 2006 22:50:14 GMT, Judah > wrote:
>>
>> This may have been covered in another post that I skipped, but I'll
>> make the question short, and you seem like a good guy to ask.
>
>Thanks. But are you sure you know me well enough to make that claim? :)

I meant you are familiar with the terrain.

>> If the VFR corridor is mainly to save the LGA controllers the
>> distraction of talking to planes on floats and helos using that short
>> strecth of the East River, and the only thing you can do without
>> busting the LGA bravo is fly up and make a U-turn, why does anybody do
>> that? Are they still burning that stuff under the 59th St bridge?
>
>I'm not sure. The only time I ever did it was on a return trip to White
>Plains from I think Atlantic City when I was cleared that way. They either
>give you the over-water route or over-land route and the over land route
>takes you way out of the way...

That's different. I meant like, you fly up the Hudson at a certain
altitude any you self-announce, and you start at, say Staten Island,
and you wind up at Tarrytown, and you've gone from here to there and
seen sights. You go up the East River a little bit and turn around,
and what's the point? It's an architectural revelation?


>>>We've become a bunch of cowardly lions...
>>
>> Sixth-graders packing heat? Scares *me*.
>
>My sixth-grader doesn't pack heat. But it's OK to be scared of one who
>does. Should they close the school system down because of it?

But now we've got loonies want to arm the kids so they can "take down"
the school invaders. Or arm the coaches or the football team or
something. I'd say "Welcome to Dodge," except in Dodge, they made the
cowboys turn in their hardware when they got to town.

Don

[Judah]

Don Tuite > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 00:29:57 GMT, Judah > wrote:
>
>>Thanks. But are you sure you know me well enough to make that claim? :)
>
> I meant you are familiar with the terrain.

I know. Hence the smiley.

> That's different. I meant like, you fly up the Hudson at a certain
> altitude any you self-announce, and you start at, say Staten Island,
> and you wind up at Tarrytown, and you've gone from here to there and
> seen sights. You go up the East River a little bit and turn around,
> and what's the point? It's an architectural revelation?

I can't really see the point either. I guess there might be some ego lift
in flying over the bridges (Brooklyn Bridge, Manhattan Bridge, Williamsburg
Bridge, and Queensboro Bridge) and they are pretty and all. There's
Roosevelt Island, and the Tram. But the "lane" seems just too curvy and
narrow to sightsee while you fly - especially if there is any other traffic
in there. I don't think the skyline view is any better than from the
Hudson, and I've always felt it's just not worth the risk.

>>>>We've become a bunch of cowardly lions...
>>>
>>> Sixth-graders packing heat? Scares *me*.
>>
>>My sixth-grader doesn't pack heat. But it's OK to be scared of one who
>>does. Should they close the school system down because of it?
>
> But now we've got loonies want to arm the kids so they can "take down"
> the school invaders. Or arm the coaches or the football team or
> something. I'd say "Welcome to Dodge," except in Dodge, they made the
> cowboys turn in their hardware when they got to town.

Based totally in irrational fear. Cowardly lions now teaching their cubs to
roar loud too. Amazing. My wife got my son a cell phone for his 11th
birthday over the summer. I was concerned that he might not be mature
enough to use it properly. I can't imagine trusting him with a lethal
weapon.

[Dana M. Hague]

On Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:02:05 GMT, Judah > wrote:
>...My wife got my son a cell phone for his 11th
>birthday over the summer. I was concerned that he might not be mature
>enough to use it properly. I can't imagine trusting him with a lethal
>weapon.

I guess it depends on the kid... I gave my daughter a shotgun for her
12th birthday; neither my wife nor I had any doubt that she would use
it responsibly. Raised some eyebrows when she told classmates and
teachers what she got for her birthday, though... :)

-Dana

--
--
If replying by email, please make the obvious changes.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If the government doesn't trust us with our guns, why should we trust them with theirs?

[Mxsmanic]

Dana M. Hague <d(dash)m(dash)hague(at)comcast(dot)net> writes:

> I guess it depends on the kid... I gave my daughter a shotgun for her
> 12th birthday; neither my wife nor I had any doubt that she would use
> it responsibly. Raised some eyebrows when she told classmates and
> teachers what she got for her birthday, though... :)

In today's climate, I'm surprised she wasn't arrested and detained
without charge.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

[Blanche]

Blasto > wrote:
>Blanche wrote:
>> Next time you have a day or two out of the hospital, let us know.
>> Someone in the area would be delighted to take you for a flight.
>> Up the west side of Manhattan, of course. Or across Long Island.
>> Or further west.
>
>Blanche, bless hearts like yours.
>
>I'm actually at home in a high-rise on the Jersey side (although my
>last hospital stay had a view of the "Lidle crash building"). I'm very
>touched by your offer and have no doubt you and/or those you mention
>would make good on it. Without getting into details, let's just say I
>have certain permanent surgical complications that rule out such a
>trip. Even if I felt I had the strength and wanted to trade the
>sickness for the experience, I'd be too embarrassed to cause anyone to
>take a slop bucket to their shiny Cessna or Cirrus. It's ok. I was
>blessed with a cinematic imagination, and seeing you out my window is
>almost like flying myself.

Jim:

I always have a good supply of barf bags. And my cherokee is not
terribly shiny -- haven't waxed it in ages.

[Kingfish]

Dana M. Hague (dash dash at dot) wrote:
>
> I guess it depends on the kid... I gave my daughter a shotgun for her
> 12th birthday

Great... but didn't she ask for a cell phone?? <g>

[Roger (K8RI)]

On 19 Oct 2006 10:44:10 -0700, "Kingfish" >
wrote:

>
>Dana M. Hague (dash dash at dot) wrote:
>>
>> I guess it depends on the kid... I gave my daughter a shotgun for her
>> 12th birthday
>
>Great... but didn't she ask for a cell phone?? <g>

I received a 22 cal rifle for my 12th and a 16 ga shotgun for my 14th.
birthday. No I didn't ask for a cell phone or a computer.<:-))
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com