NY Times GA feature

[xxx]

The New York Times today has a feature article on general aviation and
the
quest for burgers:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/travel/escapes/26burger.html

[Larry Dighera]

On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 12:22:32 -0700, xxx > wrote
in . com>:

>The New York Times today has a feature article on general aviation and
>the
>quest for burgers:
>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/26/travel/escapes/26burger.html

It sure paints personal aviation pilots as elites who clog the NAS to
feed their whims:

That probably explains why most people who fly small planes are
middle-age to elderly men who have money to burn. Planes can cost
anywhere from $20,000 for a decades-old Cessna to well over $1
million for a speedy turboprop. And jets? Forget about it.

BUT the hamburger hunt has changed since the 1970s. The number of
student pilots is less than half the level of 1980, Mr. Dancy
said, and starting in the 1990s about two small airports have
closed each month, mostly because of encroaching real estate
development.

Even so, there is still a sense of romance and freedom in flying
small planes, concepts long divorced from commercial travel.

You might sense it while sitting at the softly lighted bar at
Jonesy’s at Napa County Airport, where Judy Padis, who splits her
time among the California towns of Napa, Danville and Palm
Springs, and her party were boarding a Pilatus turboprop after a
day out in the wine country.

“We all have all the homes we want,” Ms. Padis said. “So we
decided to get a plane.”

Jonesy’s is no greasy spoon. On any weekend many millions of
dollars’ worth of Bombardiers, Gulfstreams and other private jets
are parked wing to wing outside the restaurant.


I doubt the piece will garner admiration of GA from airline passengers
suffering through delays.

[Mxsmanic]

Larry Dighera writes:

> It sure paints personal aviation pilots as elites who clog the NAS to
> feed their whims ...

It's mostly correct. That's how the demographics look. That's also why
private GA is withering.

> I doubt the piece will garner admiration of GA from airline passengers
> suffering through delays.

I don't even think GA is on the radar for airline passengers. The article
portrays GA as a hobby for quirky, rich geeks, and they just don't make a dent
in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing 737s on grass strips.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> Larry Dighera writes:
>
>> It sure paints personal aviation pilots as elites who clog the NAS to
>> feed their whims ...
>
> It's mostly correct. That's how the demographics look. That's also
> why private GA is withering.

no, it isn't.


>
>> I doubt the piece will garner admiration of GA from airline
>> passengers suffering through delays.
>
> I don't even think GA is on the radar for airline passengers. The
> article portrays GA as a hobby for quirky, rich geeks, and they just
> don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing 737s
> on grass strips.
>

Yes, they are.

I've done it.


Bertie

[James Sleeman]

On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing 737s
> > on grass strips.
>
> Yes, they are.
>
> I've done it.

Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
thought?

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

James Sleeman > wrote in
oups.com:

> On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing 737s
>> > on grass strips.
>>
>> Yes, they are.
>>
>> I've done it.
>
> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
> thought?
>
>

Yeah, it was. The airplane had low floatation tires, a gravel shield around
the nosewheel and vortex killers under the engines. It was a -15 powered
200.


I won't say where, but there is a lot of oil there...

Bertie

[James Sleeman]

On Oct 27, 7:54 pm, Richard Riley > wrote:
>
> I've seen one operate on gravel, I haven't seen it on grass.
> http://www.b737.org.uk/unpavedstripkit.htm
>

Learn something new every day. Looks like they just about need to
rebuild that runway every day too!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:31:19 -0700, James Sleeman
> > wrote:
>
>>On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing
>>> > 737s on grass strips.
>>>
>>> Yes, they are.
>>>
>>> I've done it.
>>
>>Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
>>thought?
>
> I've seen one operate on gravel, I haven't seen it on grass.

Well, it'd be a stretch to call it either, really!

Actualyl some of the paved strips we operated off of there were worse thna
the unpaved ones.
One was paved on half it's length and the bump you got when you hit the lip
in the transition was bone jarring. It wasn't as bad as th pothole shortly
after it, however.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 26 Oct 2007 23:31:19 -0700, James Sleeman
> > wrote:
>
>>On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing
>>> > 737s on grass strips.
>>>
>>> Yes, they are.
>>>
>>> I've done it.
>>
>>Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
>>thought?
>
> I've seen one operate on gravel, I haven't seen it on grass.
>
> http://www.b737.org.uk/unpavedstripkit.ht

Intersting site, but the screens inside the wheel well were on all -200s
of the period. They aren't for gravel protection, they are to protect
the hydraulics in the event of a tire burst. If they are badly
disturbed, there's a warning in the office to say so. Later ones didn't,
but on those, most of the hydraulics and the aileron actuator were
forward of the wheel well bulkhead.
the gravel deflector on the nosewheel is huge compred to the one we had.
Our's retracted inside the wheel well, unless i'm remember ing it wrong.
I have a pic of the airplanes somewhere.
It doesn't show the vortx killers under the nacelles. They looked like
long pitot tubes that stuck out a couple of feet in front of the intakes
and used bleed air in some mystical way to keep dust from coming into
the engines. They may have workedm but you could shave with a fan blade
after six months of operaton in fine dust and sand.
I never even noticed the fence on the ends of the flaps, though. We
might not have had 'em. and the 1.8 EPR they mention is considerably
more than idle! We didn't worry too much about fod from reverse. It
wasn't as bad as hitting something landing on a hot day at max landing
weight on a short runway.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8LICWf1QZY


eah, landing in the snow with those -200s was even more fun. the sleeve
reversers on most airplanes just blow snow sideway, but the bucket on
the 73 blew it all out in front fo you and to the sides, f there was no
crosswind. If there was a strong crosswind, you were blind.


Bertie

[Maxwell]

"James Sleeman" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing 737s
>> > on grass strips.
>>
>> Yes, they are.
>>
>> I've done it.
>
> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
> thought?
>

Many years ago, the AP ran a story on a 737 dead stick landing in the south.
Perhaps Mississippi, Louisiana? It think the pilot put it down on a levee or
something if I recall. The photo showed the main gear buried to the top of
the tires, without folding the gear. That pilot was both very lucky, and
very good. It think all souls walked away. I still can't imagine it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

"Maxwell" > wrote in
:

>
> "James Sleeman" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
>> On Oct 27, 6:33 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>> > don't make a dent in the nation's air traffic. Nobody is landing
>>> > 737s on grass strips.
>>>
>>> Yes, they are.
>>>
>>> I've done it.
>>
>> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
>> thought?
>>
>
> Many years ago, the AP ran a story on a 737 dead stick landing in the
> south. Perhaps Mississippi, Louisiana? It think the pilot put it down
> on a levee or something if I recall. The photo showed the main gear
> buried to the top of the tires, without folding the gear. That pilot
> was both very lucky, and very good. It think all souls walked away. I
> still can't imagine it.
>
>

We do it in the sim farily frequently, though at the time that happened
deadstick landings weren't usually on the list of things to do.
If the ground is anyway soft, they will sink, and badly. Quite a few pilots
have made a corner too sloppily and put a gear leg off the taxiway and got
stuck. not surprising with tire pressures as high as 270 psi (the 737's is
considerbly, less, though I can't remember the number)
Hard packed earth will support one though.

Bertie

[Rich Ahrens[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Intersting site, but the screens inside the wheel well were on all -200s
> of the period. They aren't for gravel protection, they are to protect
> the hydraulics in the event of a tire burst. If they are badly
> disturbed, there's a warning in the office to say so. Later ones didn't,
> but on those, most of the hydraulics and the aileron actuator were
> forward of the wheel well bulkhead.
> the gravel deflector on the nosewheel is huge compred to the one we had.
> Our's retracted inside the wheel well, unless i'm remember ing it wrong.
> I have a pic of the airplanes somewhere.
> It doesn't show the vortx killers under the nacelles. They looked like
> long pitot tubes that stuck out a couple of feet in front of the intakes
> and used bleed air in some mystical way to keep dust from coming into
> the engines. They may have workedm but you could shave with a fan blade
> after six months of operaton in fine dust and sand.

Alaska Airlines used to operate some combis fitted out with all that
gear. I've been a passenger on them in the past in some of their smaller
stations. Here's a photo of one showing the vortex killers as well as
the nosewheel deflector:

http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=459024

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Rich Ahrens > wrote in
. net:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Intersting site, but the screens inside the wheel well were on all
>> -200s of the period. They aren't for gravel protection, they are to
>> protect the hydraulics in the event of a tire burst. If they are
>> badly disturbed, there's a warning in the office to say so. Later
>> ones didn't, but on those, most of the hydraulics and the aileron
>> actuator were forward of the wheel well bulkhead.
>> the gravel deflector on the nosewheel is huge compred to the one we
>> had. Our's retracted inside the wheel well, unless i'm remember ing
>> it wrong. I have a pic of the airplanes somewhere.
>> It doesn't show the vortx killers under the nacelles. They looked
>> like long pitot tubes that stuck out a couple of feet in front of the
>> intakes and used bleed air in some mystical way to keep dust from
>> coming into the engines. They may have workedm but you could shave
>> with a fan blade after six months of operaton in fine dust and sand.
>
> Alaska Airlines used to operate some combis fitted out with all that
> gear. I've been a passenger on them in the past in some of their
> smaller stations. Here's a photo of one showing the vortex killers as
> well as the nosewheel deflector:
>
> http://www.jetphotos.net/viewphoto.php?id=459024
>

Yeah, that one also has the large nosewhel gravel deflector. I'm almost
positive our's didn't, but I could be mistaken. Been years since I've seen
them. Al the same, our gear extension speed was quite low, 210 knots, IIRC
as opposed to 250 or 270 normally. One of our guys, who was fond of putting
it out at a reltively high altitude for a steeper initial approach, took to
using th emergency extension onthe mains only until he was on final.
This one doesn't seem to have the elephant ears posted previously. the kits
must have been ala carte..

Bertie

[Mxsmanic]

James Sleeman writes:

> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
> thought?

There's a kit for unpaved strips, but I rather doubt that most grassy surfaces
would be hard enough to resist the weight of the aircraft.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Mxsmanic > wrote in
:

> James Sleeman writes:
>
>> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
>> thought?
>
> There's a kit for unpaved strips, but I rather doubt that most grassy
> surfaces would be hard enough to resist the weight of the aircraft.
>


We'll you'll never find out, because you'll nev er fly.


Ever


I, OTOH, have done it.



Bertie

[george]

On Oct 28, 8:10 am, Richard Riley > wrote:

>
> Now that's not fair, Bertie. I'm sure he's flown.
>
> Bought a ticket and everything.

ROTFL

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 19:02:25 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>Mxsmanic > wrote in
:
>>
>>> James Sleeman writes:
>>>
>>>> Do tell. It'd have to be a pretty hard packed grass strip I'd have
>>>> thought?
>>>
>>> There's a kit for unpaved strips, but I rather doubt that most grassy
>>> surfaces would be hard enough to resist the weight of the aircraft.
>>>
>>
>>
>>We'll you'll never find out, because you'll nev er fly.
>>
>>
>>Ever
>>
>>
>>I, OTOH, have done it.
>
> Now that's not fair, Bertie. I'm sure he's flown.
>
> Bought a ticket and everything.

Wouldn't he have to leave his bedroom for that?


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 19:51:44 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>
>>Wouldn't he have to leave his bedroom for that?
>>
>
> Yeah, but didn't he move from the US to France? I doubt he went over
> on a tramp steamer.

True. I forgot about that.He has more nerve than I gave him credit for.

Maybe they put a computer and some Backstreet Boys posters inside a
container and shipped him.



Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 20:57:19 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>>Richard Riley > wrote in
:
>>
>>> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 19:51:44 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>Wouldn't he have to leave his bedroom for that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yeah, but didn't he move from the US to France? I doubt he went over
>>> on a tramp steamer.
>>
>>True. I forgot about that.He has more nerve than I gave him credit for.
>>
>>Maybe they put a computer and some Backstreet Boys posters inside a
>>container and shipped him.
>
> That's possible. I was figuring a thorazine at the boarding gate.
>

For th eflight attendants and the poor ******* next to him, of course.


Bertie

[george]

On Oct 28, 10:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
> For th eflight attendants and the poor ******* next to him, of course.
>
The eflight attendants huh...
I believe I believe

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

george > wrote in news:1193541354.654755.115590
@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

> On Oct 28, 10:17 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>>
>> For th eflight attendants and the poor ******* next to him, of course.
>>
> The eflight attendants huh...
> I believe I believe
>
>
>

trole rule number one, tpyos are your friend.



Bertie

[TheSmokingGnu]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> trole rule number one, tpyos are your friend.

But not nearly as good as erros or misteaks.

;P

TheSmokingGnu

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

TheSmokingGnu > wrote in
news:RYTUi.2634$Q%3.1863@trnddc04:


Or top poasting.



Bertie









> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> trole rule number one, tpyos are your friend.
>
> But not nearly as good as erros or misteaks.
>
> ;P
>
> TheSmokingGnu
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_19_]]

Richard Riley > wrote in
:

> On Sat, 27 Oct 2007 21:17:22 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip >
> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>For th eflight attendants and the poor ******* next to him, of course.
>
> For them I was thinking O2 masks.



They'll probably pull them off so they don't have to listen to him explain
why the airplane flies and how he hopes the crew both had the fish.


Bertie