Coming home from Houston Sunday...

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

....32C and bumpy at 5500 feet.

10 kts more headwind every 2,000 feet higher.

Un-freakin' fair.

I hate summer.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Gene Seibel]

On Jul 22, 3:08*pm, "Dan Luke" > wrote:
> ...32C and bumpy at 5500 feet.
>
> 10 kts more headwind every 2,000 feet higher.
>
> Un-freakin' fair.
>
> I hate summer.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM

Didn't realize you were at BFM. Parked the Cherokee there a few days
earlier this month to take a cruise.
--
Gene Seibel
Gene & Sue's Aeroplanes - http://pad39a.com/gene/planes.html
Because we fly, we envy no one.

[BT]

Try 40C with roving rain showers.. talk about bumps and humidity..
BT

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...
> ...32C and bumpy at 5500 feet.
>
> 10 kts more headwind every 2,000 feet higher.
>
> Un-freakin' fair.
>
> I hate summer.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM
>

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> Try 40C with roving rain showers.. talk about bumps and humidity..

Try Oshkosh today. 65 degrees, light winds, no humidity. Picture-perfect
day in the upper Midwest.

Our son is flying the Ercoupe up to OSH today... Once the fog along the
Mississippi lifts, he's wheels up and camping in Vintage until we follow him
up on Sunday...

:-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:eRFhk.266207$yE1.74809@attbi_s21:

>> Try 40C with roving rain showers.. talk about bumps and humidity..
>
> Try Oshkosh today. 65 degrees, light winds, no humidity.
> Picture-perfect day in the upper Midwest.
>
> Our son is flying the Ercoupe up to OSH today... Once the fog along
> the Mississippi lifts, he's wheels up and camping in Vintage until we
> follow him up on Sunday...

you bought an Ercoupe with retracts?

Fjukkwit.


Bertie

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Gene Seibel" > wrote in message
...
On Jul 22, 3:08 pm, "Dan Luke" > wrote:
> ...32C and bumpy at 5500 feet.
>
> 10 kts more headwind every 2,000 feet higher.
>
> Un-freakin' fair.
>
> I hate summer.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM

< Didn't realize you were at BFM. Parked the Cherokee there a few days
< earlier this month to take a cruise.

That's actually a mistake; I forgot to change my sig on this machine. I'm
parked at 4R4 across the bay, now.

Holler next time you come to town.

--
Dan
T-182T at 4R4

[RST Engineering]

He didn't say GEAR up, he said WHEELS up, idiot. Learn the Iggirish
language the way you supposed to speak her.

Jim

--
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
without accepting it."
--Aristotle


"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...


>>
>> Our son is flying the Ercoupe up to OSH today... Once the fog along
>> the Mississippi lifts, he's wheels up and camping in Vintage until we
>> follow him up on Sunday...
>
> you bought an Ercoupe with retracts?
>
> Fjukkwit.
>
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in
m:

> He didn't say GEAR up, he said WHEELS up, idiot. Learn the Iggirish
> language the way you supposed to speak her.
>
> Jim
>

Wheels up means gear up, period.


Bertie

[george]

On Jul 24, 8:35 am, "RST Engineering" > wrote:
> He didn't say GEAR up, he said WHEELS up, idiot. Learn the Iggirish
> language the way you supposed to speak her.
>

I guess every-one here uses language to mean what they want it to
mean.
Or what it meant at some time in the past
There are enough pillocks on the side line who don't understand the
evolution of animals let alone the evolution of language...
At first sight (to me) wheels up means gear retracted until I saw what
it was..

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

george > wrote in news:2c49e274-c435-4693-9dbb-fd4c86b64f73
@x29g2000prd.googlegroups.com:

> On Jul 24, 8:35 am, "RST Engineering" > wrote:
>> He didn't say GEAR up, he said WHEELS up, idiot. Learn the Iggirish
>> language the way you supposed to speak her.
>>
>
> I guess every-one here uses language to mean what they want it to
> mean.
> Or what it meant at some time in the past
> There are enough pillocks on the side line who don't understand the
> evolution of animals let alone the evolution of language...
> At first sight (to me) wheels up means gear retracted until I saw what
> it was..
>

What it was was Jay distorting an aviation term to sound hip.


Bertie

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
>
> Wheels up means gear up, period.

I learned it as "departing the field".

Sorry!

[RST Engineering]

Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing a
runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever became a
pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid form?

Jim

--
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
without accepting it."
--Aristotle






> What it was was Jay distorting an aviation term to sound hip.
>
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

B A R R Y > wrote in news:yvPhk.14041$cW3.8544
@nlpi064.nbdc.sbc.com:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>>
>> Wheels up means gear up, period.
>
> I learned it as "departing the field".
>
> Sorry!
>

That'd be "Airborne"

Bertie

[[email protected]]

On Jul 23, 8:11 pm, "RST Engineering" > wrote:
> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing a
> runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever became a
> pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid form?
>
> Jim
>
> --
> "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
> without accepting it."
> --Aristotle
>
> > What it was was Jay distorting an aviation term to sound hip.
>
> > Bertie

You'd have to look pretty far to find a pilot who was confused by
Jay's wheels up comment when talking about that airplane. If it's
understood, it's good communication. Let's do a poll -- all who
understood it meant departing, remain sitting comfortably. All who
didn't, let's see -- yes, move to Paris.

[B A R R Y[_2_]]

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>
> That'd be "Airborne"

I can't count the times I've hear instructors say:

"I want to be be wheels-up by 1930..." To tell a student to be ready to
be ready to go.

Maybe it's regional, but I don't think so!

[[email protected]]

On Jul 23, 8:19 pm, wrote:
> On Jul 23, 8:11 pm, "RST Engineering" > wrote:
>
> > Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing a
> > runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
> > students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever became a
> > pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid form?
>
> > Jim
>
> > --
> > "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
> > without accepting it."
> > --Aristotle
>
> > > What it was was Jay distorting an aviation term to sound hip.
>
> > > Bertie
>
> You'd have to look pretty far to find a pilot who was confused by
> Jay's wheels up comment when talking about that airplane. If it's
> understood, it's good communication. Let's do a poll -- all who
> understood it meant departing, remain sitting comfortably. All who
> didn't, let's see -- yes, move to Paris.

But, "take off" would have been better!

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

B A R R Y > wrote in news:tTPhk.18342$Ri.7069
@flpi146.ffdc.sbc.com:

> Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>>
>> That'd be "Airborne"
>
> I can't count the times I've hear instructors say:
>
> "I want to be be wheels-up by 1930..." To tell a student to be ready to
> be ready to go.
>
> Maybe it's regional, but I don't think so!
>

Nah, it's common enough. it's further of evidence of terminology going down
the ****ter.


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in
m:

> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing
> a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever
> became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid
> form?
>

Only 5,000 hours and 45 years?

OK sonny.




Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

wrote in
:

> On Jul 23, 8:11 pm, "RST Engineering" > wrote:
>> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft
>> departing a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a
>> few hundred students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before
>> you ever became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still
>> in liquid form?
>>
>> Jim
>>
>> --
>> "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
>> without accepting it."
>> --Aristotle
>>
>> > What it was was Jay distorting an aviation term to sound hip.
>>
>> > Bertie
>
> You'd have to look pretty far to find a pilot who was confused by
> Jay's wheels up comment when talking about that airplane.


I wasn't confused at all. It identified him as a tit straight off!

'course I already knew that.


Bertie

[f-newguy]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
> m:
>
>> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing
>> a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
>> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever
>> became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid
>> form?
>>
>
> Only 5,000 hours and 45 years?
>
> OK sonny.

That's about normal for a private pilot, no?

I've got 1,300 in 10.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"f-newguy" > wrote in news:-
:

>
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
>> m:
>>
>>> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing
>>> a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
>>> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever
>>> became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid
>>> form?
>>>
>>
>> Only 5,000 hours and 45 years?
>>
>> OK sonny.
>
> That's about normal for a private pilot, no?

Prolly, but beside the point...
>
> I've got 1,300 in 10.

Well done!

Bertie

[RST Engineering]

--
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought
without accepting it."
--Aristotle


"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
> m:
>
>> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing
>> a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
>> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever
>> became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid
>> form?
>>
>
> Only 5,000 hours and 45 years?

Yeah, sonny, 5000 hours and 45 years. SOme of those were chock-full of
students and stuff and some of them were very lean between aircraft and
opportunites to teach. You got a problem with that? Right now I'm very
lean between a sick bird and opportunity. Next year looks good. You got a
problem with that?

BTW, did you pay for EVERY STINKING HOUR YOU FLEW unless the student paid
for it? Otherwise, I don't want to have any grief from you.

Jim

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"RST Engineering" > wrote in
m:

>
>

Good grief.



I was pointing out that if you gotta tell 'em who ya are...



In any case the term is crap and poor usage coming from a percieved need to
"sex it up"

Bertie

[Gig 601Xl Builder]

f-newguy wrote:
> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
>> m:
>>
>>> Excuse me, sir, I've used it to refer to fixed gear aircraft departing
>>> a runway for some 45 years and 5000 hours, taught it to a few hundred
>>> students, and was taught it by MY instructors long before you ever
>>> became a pilot methinks ... or perhaps while you were still in liquid
>>> form?
>>>
>> Only 5,000 hours and 45 years?
>>
>> OK sonny.
>
> That's about normal for a private pilot, no?
>
> I've got 1,300 in 10.
>
>

Actually it is high, as is yours.

[Andy Hawkins]

Hi,

In article >,
> wrote:
> That's about normal for a private pilot, no?
>
> I've got 1,300 in 10.

Blimey, 130 hours a year for a private? I wish I could afford over 10 hours
a month, but sadly it's gonne be more like 3 or 4 :(

Andy (in the UK to put costs into perspective)

[Jay Honeck[_2_]]

> BTW, did you pay for EVERY STINKING HOUR YOU FLEW unless the student paid
> for it? Otherwise, I don't want to have any grief from you.

Jim, Jim, JIM. I appreciate your spirited defense, but it's really not
necessary or even desirable here.

You're getting all worked into a lather over the response of a mentally ill
troll who gets off on watching YOUR response. Shouting him down is like
jacking him off -- he loves every minute of it, and you're just enabling his
disease.

See ya over on Pilots of America...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
Ercoupe N94856
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Bertie the Bunyip[_25_]]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:Y_0ik.267734$yE1.51580@attbi_s21:

>> BTW, did you pay for EVERY STINKING HOUR YOU FLEW unless the student
>> paid for it? Otherwise, I don't want to have any grief from you.
>
> Jim, Jim, JIM. I appreciate your spirited defense, but it's really
> not necessary or even desirable here.
>
> You're getting all worked into a lather over the response of a
> mentally ill troll who gets off on watching YOUR response. Shouting
> him down is like jacking him off -- he loves every minute of it, and
> you're just enabling his disease.


Actually, this is the bi ti like.
>
> See ya over on Pilots of America..

You already have.

Bertie

[george]

On Jul 25, 1:48 am, Andy Hawkins > wrote:
> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> > wrote:
>
> > That's about normal for a private pilot, no?
>
> > I've got 1,300 in 10.
>
> Blimey, 130 hours a year for a private? I wish I could afford over 10 hours
> a month, but sadly it's gonne be more like 3 or 4 :(
>
> Andy (in the UK to put costs into perspective)

Looks like there's a microlight in your future then :-)

[Andy Hawkins]

Hi,

In article >,
> wrote:
> Looks like there's a microlight in your future then :-)

Unlikely, as I want four seats and the ability to travel abroad. Unless they
change the rules so that hours in a microlight count towards currency for
the PPL(A) then it's a non-starter really.

Andy

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Andy Hawkins > wrote in
:

> Hi,
>
> In article
> >,
> > wrote:
>> Looks like there's a microlight in your future then :-)
>
> Unlikely, as I want four seats and the ability to travel abroad.
> Unless they change the rules so that hours in a microlight count
> towards currency for the PPL(A) then it's a non-starter really.

In that case you should think about a group with a Piper Tri Pacer or
something. they're quite cheap to buy and run!


Bertie

[Andy Hawkins]

Hi,

In article >,
Bertie the > wrote:
> In that case you should think about a group with a Piper Tri Pacer or
> something. they're quite cheap to buy and run!

Yeah, I'm already looking at a couple of groups. One a PA-28 180 that comes
out at £75 an hour, and a C172 that is a similar hourly rate. That's not far
off half what I'm paying now.

If you factor in the higher monthly charges, I'll only have to do about 8
hours a year to break even (assuming I'd get most of the cost of the share
back should I decide to sell up in future).

Andy

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Andy Hawkins > wrote in
:

> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Bertie the > wrote:
>> In that case you should think about a group with a Piper Tri Pacer or
>> something. they're quite cheap to buy and run!
>
> Yeah, I'm already looking at a couple of groups. One a PA-28 180 that
> comes out at £75 an hour, and a C172 that is a similar hourly rate.
> That's not far off half what I'm paying now.
>
> If you factor in the higher monthly charges, I'll only have to do
> about 8 hours a year to break even (assuming I'd get most of the cost
> of the share back should I decide to sell up in future).
>

Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially in your
part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to chip in
for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate all inclusive?


Bertie

[Andy Hawkins]

Hi,

In article >,
Bertie the > wrote:
> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially in your
> part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to chip in
> for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate all inclusive?

There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance and
'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly payment to build up
an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced. However, some
groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is better in the group
members accounts earning interest, than in the group account (better for the
members that is).

It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though, whether
the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a contingency.

As you say, finding out the mix of people in the group is also important.
I'm going looking at one on Tuesday where there are 8 members (total) in the
group. There are 3 others that do the majority of the flying, two of whom
are retired and the other is an airline pilot. That bodes well for a weekend
warrior like me (hopefully).

Most shareoplanes I've looked at only seem to do about 150 hours a year
though, so availability hopefully won't be too much of an issue.

Andy

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

Andy Hawkins > wrote in
:

> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Bertie the > wrote:
>> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially
>> in your part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have
>> to chip in for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate
>> all inclusive?
>
> There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance and
> 'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly payment to
> build up an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced.
> However, some groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is
> better in the group members accounts earning interest, than in the
> group account (better for the members that is).
>
> It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though,
> whether the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a
> contingency.
>
> As you say, finding out the mix of people in the group is also
> important. I'm going looking at one on Tuesday where there are 8
> members (total) in the group. There are 3 others that do the majority
> of the flying, two of whom are retired and the other is an airline
> pilot. That bodes well for a weekend warrior like me (hopefully).
>
> Most shareoplanes I've looked at only seem to do about 150 hours a
> year though, so availability hopefully won't be too much of an issue.


Yeah, probably depends on who you're in with. I'm in with two other guys
and as often as not I'll be flying during the week and they're both 9-5
so it should work well. It's helpful to have a god mix of skills in the
group too. A good mechanic in a group is worth his weight in gold as is
a good instructor. Having sadi that, the road can be fraught with peril
too. I know someone in the UK who has a Vampire. One of the group was an
ex RAF instructor who was supposed to make sure the other guys were
proficient and safe. Guess who damaged the airplane?
Anyhow, it's fixed and flying now. I really must go and fly the thing
one day!

Bertie

[george]

Aha.
The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force

Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds over
Wanaka.
They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

george > wrote in news:5b0ac7ca-6f0a-4a77-8a7d-cd38289a8fd9
@z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:

> Aha.
> The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force
>
> Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds over
> Wanaka.
> They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
> And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...
>

Yeah, I've seen the Polikarpovs on TV. Amazing recreations!
There's been quite a few reproductins of fighters down there.. Too much
time and money on your hands!

Bertie

[george]

On Jul 26, 8:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> george > wrote in news:5b0ac7ca-6f0a-4a77-8a7d-cd38289a8fd9
> @z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>
> > Aha.
> > The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force
>
> > Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds over
> > Wanaka.
> > They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
> > And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...
>
> Yeah, I've seen the Polikarpovs on TV. Amazing recreations!
> There's been quite a few reproductins of fighters down there.. Too much
> time and money on your hands!

Not reproductions they were dug out of deepest Siberia, rebuilt and
shipped out here

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

george > wrote in
:

> On Jul 26, 8:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> george > wrote in
>> news:5b0ac7ca-6f0a-4a77-8a7d-cd38289a8fd9
>> @z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> > Aha.
>> > The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force
>>
>> > Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds
>> > over Wanaka.
>> > They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
>> > And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...
>>
>> Yeah, I've seen the Polikarpovs on TV. Amazing recreations!
>> There's been quite a few reproductins of fighters down there.. Too
>> much time and money on your hands!
>
> Not reproductions they were dug out of deepest Siberia, rebuilt and
> shipped out here


OK. But there's very little left of the originals, eh?

I read about them years ago when tye were first done and have seen some
video of them flying OK. I must look up some detailed info on them
There was an FW 190 project down there as well, wasn't there?


Bertie

[Mike[_22_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
> m:
>
>>
>>
>
> Good grief.
>
>
>
> I was pointing out that if you gotta tell 'em who ya are...
>
>
>
> In any case the term is crap and poor usage coming from a percieved need
> to
> "sex it up"

Civil Air Patrol reports "wheels up" and "wheels down" times back to mission
base and has ever since their planes have had radios. Practically every one
of their fleet of over 500 aircraft are fixed gear. I've also heard
Blackhawk helicopter crews use the term as well.

I've never thought of the term as all that sexy, but whatever does it for
you.

[george]

On Jul 26, 12:15 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> george > wrote :
>
>
>
> > On Jul 26, 8:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
> >> george > wrote in
> >> news:5b0ac7ca-6f0a-4a77-8a7d-cd38289a8fd9
> >> @z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>
> >> > Aha.
> >> > The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force
>
> >> > Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds
> >> > over Wanaka.
> >> > They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
> >> > And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...
>
> >> Yeah, I've seen the Polikarpovs on TV. Amazing recreations!
> >> There's been quite a few reproductins of fighters down there.. Too
> >> much time and money on your hands!
>
> > Not reproductions they were dug out of deepest Siberia, rebuilt and
> > shipped out here
>
> OK. But there's very little left of the originals, eh?
>
> I read about them years ago when tye were first done and have seen some
> video of them flying OK. I must look up some detailed info on them
> There was an FW 190 project down there as well, wasn't there?
>

What mark was the Stuka trainer?
It's one of them

[Mike[_22_]]

"Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
...
> Hi,
>
> In article >,
> Bertie the > wrote:
>> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially in
>> your
>> part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to chip in
>> for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate all inclusive?
>
> There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance and
> 'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly payment to build
> up
> an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced. However, some
> groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is better in the
> group
> members accounts earning interest, than in the group account (better for
> the
> members that is).
>
> It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though, whether
> the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a contingency.

Back when I belonged to a club they really had their act together. The
monthly payment covered hangar, insurance, and some of the maintenance. So
your monthly dues covered all of the costs to keep the plane airworthy if it
flew 0 hours per year. The hourly rate included all of the costs associated
with operating the plane, including an engine fund, a prop fund, and a
general maintenance fund. The fixed costs just covered what a "basic"
annual would cost.

They also charged a wet rate that changed each month if the price of fuel
changed on the field. If you refueled somewhere else, they only reimbursed
at up to the home field rate. Paying a wet rate actually worked out better
because you didn't have to worry about someone else shorting you on fuel and
if you brought the plane back after the FBO closed, it was no big deal.

The problem with throwing "extra" into the monthly rate as a contingency is
it means everyone pays that equally, but it's really those who put the most
time on the plane who should be paying more if the plane breaks. Putting
the "contingency" on the hourly rate works out to be a bit more fair.

The biggest problem I had with the club environment is sometimes it's hard
to get people to go along with making improvements to the plane. If you
want something like an HSI or a nice autopilot, but most of the members are
VFR only, you can forget it.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Mike" > wrote in news:qFwik.67$JH5.22@trnddc06:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
>> m:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Good grief.
>>
>>
>>
>> I was pointing out that if you gotta tell 'em who ya are...
>>
>>
>>
>> In any case the term is crap and poor usage coming from a percieved
>> need to
>> "sex it up"
>
> Civil Air Patrol reports "wheels up" and "wheels down" times back to
> mission base and has ever since their planes have had radios.

Oh well, if the sily ass patrol does it, then it must be standard..



> Practically every one of their fleet of over 500 aircraft are fixed
> gear. I've also heard Blackhawk helicopter crews use the term as
> well.
>
> I've never thought of the term as all that sexy, but whatever does it
> for you.

Not me...


Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

george > wrote in
:

> On Jul 26, 12:15 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> george > wrote
>> innews:5c4baaa9-36dc-41fa-9897-01f9ba30db81
@z6g2000pre.googlegroups.co
>> m:
>>
>>
>>
>> > On Jul 26, 8:43 am, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>> >> george > wrote in
>> >> news:5b0ac7ca-6f0a-4a77-8a7d-cd38289a8fd9
>> >> @z26g2000pre.googlegroups.com:
>>
>> >> > Aha.
>> >> > The Vampire -was- the jet fighter of choice for our Air Force
>>
>> >> > Bertie you've got to save your pennies and come out to Warbirds
>> >> > over Wanaka.
>> >> > They generally have two Vampires and sometimes a Venom.
>> >> > And lots of twitchy little Russian beasties (Polykarpovs)...
>>
>> >> Yeah, I've seen the Polikarpovs on TV. Amazing recreations!
>> >> There's been quite a few reproductins of fighters down there.. Too
>> >> much time and money on your hands!
>>
>> > Not reproductions they were dug out of deepest Siberia, rebuilt and
>> > shipped out here
>>
>> OK. But there's very little left of the originals, eh?
>>
>> I read about them years ago when tye were first done and have seen
>> some video of them flying OK. I must look up some detailed info on
>> them There was an FW 190 project down there as well, wasn't there?
>>
>
> What mark was the Stuka trainer?
> It's one of them


Stuka trainer? You lost me there. They used a 190 as a Stuka trainer?


Bertie
>
>

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Mike" > wrote in news:xCxik.44$iM5.32@trnddc07:

> "Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
> ...
>> Hi,
>>
>> In article >,
>> Bertie the > wrote:
>>> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially
>>> in your
>>> part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to
>>> chip in for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate all
>>> inclusive?
>>
>> There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance
>> and 'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly payment
>> to build up
>> an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced. However,
>> some groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is better
>> in the group
>> members accounts earning interest, than in the group account (better
>> for the
>> members that is).
>>
>> It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though,
>> whether the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a
>> contingency.
>
> Back when I belonged to a club they really had their act together.
> The monthly payment covered hangar, insurance, and some of the
> maintenance. So your monthly dues covered all of the costs to keep
> the plane airworthy if it flew 0 hours per year. The hourly rate
> included all of the costs associated with operating the plane,
> including an engine fund, a prop fund, and a general maintenance fund.
> The fixed costs just covered what a "basic" annual would cost.
>
> They also charged a wet rate that changed each month if the price of
> fuel changed on the field. If you refueled somewhere else, they only
> reimbursed at up to the home field rate. Paying a wet rate actually
> worked out better because you didn't have to worry about someone else
> shorting you on fuel and if you brought the plane back after the FBO
> closed, it was no big deal.
>
> The problem with throwing "extra" into the monthly rate as a
> contingency is it means everyone pays that equally, but it's really
> those who put the most time on the plane who should be paying more if
> the plane breaks. Putting the "contingency" on the hourly rate works
> out to be a bit more fair.
>
> The biggest problem I had with the club environment is sometimes it's
> hard to get people to go along with making improvements to the plane.
> If you want something like an HSI or a nice autopilot, but most of the
> members are VFR only, you can forget it.
>

How do you reckon they're improvements?

More weight, for one thing..


Bertie
>

[Mike[_22_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike" > wrote in news:xCxik.44$iM5.32@trnddc07:
>
>> "Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> In article >,
>>> Bertie the > wrote:
>>>> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s, especially
>>>> in your
>>>> part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to
>>>> chip in for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate all
>>>> inclusive?
>>>
>>> There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance
>>> and 'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly payment
>>> to build up
>>> an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced. However,
>>> some groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is better
>>> in the group
>>> members accounts earning interest, than in the group account (better
>>> for the
>>> members that is).
>>>
>>> It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though,
>>> whether the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a
>>> contingency.
>>
>> Back when I belonged to a club they really had their act together.
>> The monthly payment covered hangar, insurance, and some of the
>> maintenance. So your monthly dues covered all of the costs to keep
>> the plane airworthy if it flew 0 hours per year. The hourly rate
>> included all of the costs associated with operating the plane,
>> including an engine fund, a prop fund, and a general maintenance fund.
>> The fixed costs just covered what a "basic" annual would cost.
>>
>> They also charged a wet rate that changed each month if the price of
>> fuel changed on the field. If you refueled somewhere else, they only
>> reimbursed at up to the home field rate. Paying a wet rate actually
>> worked out better because you didn't have to worry about someone else
>> shorting you on fuel and if you brought the plane back after the FBO
>> closed, it was no big deal.
>>
>> The problem with throwing "extra" into the monthly rate as a
>> contingency is it means everyone pays that equally, but it's really
>> those who put the most time on the plane who should be paying more if
>> the plane breaks. Putting the "contingency" on the hourly rate works
>> out to be a bit more fair.
>>
>> The biggest problem I had with the club environment is sometimes it's
>> hard to get people to go along with making improvements to the plane.
>> If you want something like an HSI or a nice autopilot, but most of the
>> members are VFR only, you can forget it.
>>
>
> How do you reckon they're improvements?
>
> More weight, for one thing..

They aren't. They just make IFR flying more difficult and less practical.
I don't know what I was thinking.

[Mike[_22_]]

"Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
...
> "Mike" > wrote in news:qFwik.67$JH5.22@trnddc06:
>
>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
>>> m:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Good grief.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was pointing out that if you gotta tell 'em who ya are...
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In any case the term is crap and poor usage coming from a percieved
>>> need to
>>> "sex it up"
>>
>> Civil Air Patrol reports "wheels up" and "wheels down" times back to
>> mission base and has ever since their planes have had radios.
>
> Oh well, if the sily ass patrol does it, then it must be standard..

The CAP squadron I belong to has retired airline captains, and professional
pilots, and no cadets as members. All but one of the members are pilots and
almost all have advanced ratings including several ATPs and CFIIs. We also
have a B17 pilot from WWII who still has a current medical and more than one
pilot who has > 30,000 hrs. We fly all types of missions on a regular basis
including disaster relief, search and rescue, fire spotting, low level
military route surveys, and searching for missing pieces of space shuttle
Columbia, just to name a few. Perhaps you think that's silly, but then you
spend a good proportion of your time trolling usenet desperately in search
of something you think is clever to say, so I'll consider the source.
Perhaps sometimes you succeed, but in this case you're waffling, but not man
enough to admit it.

>
>
>
>> Practically every one of their fleet of over 500 aircraft are fixed
>> gear. I've also heard Blackhawk helicopter crews use the term as
>> well.
>>
>> I've never thought of the term as all that sexy, but whatever does it
>> for you.
>
> Not me...
>
>
> Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Mike" > wrote in news:WZDik.88$aA5.82@trnddc05:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Mike" > wrote in news:xCxik.44$iM5.32@trnddc07:
>>
>>> "Andy Hawkins" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Bertie the > wrote:
>>>>> Yeah, it's the way to go if the other guys aren't ****s,
>>>>> especially in your
>>>>> part of the world where the costs are outrageous. Do you have to
>>>>> chip in for things like rebuilds on top of that, or is that rate
>>>>> all inclusive?
>>>>
>>>> There's usually a monthly payment that covers hangarage, insurance
>>>> and 'routine' maintenance. Some groups also use this monthly
>>>> payment to build up
>>>> an engine fund for when the donkey needs to be replaced. However,
>>>> some groups *don't* do this, on the theory that the money is better
>>>> in the group
>>>> members accounts earning interest, than in the group account
>>>> (better for the
>>>> members that is).
>>>>
>>>> It's something I always check when enquiring about a group though,
>>>> whether the monthly payment includes some sort of 'extra' as a
>>>> contingency.
>>>
>>> Back when I belonged to a club they really had their act together.
>>> The monthly payment covered hangar, insurance, and some of the
>>> maintenance. So your monthly dues covered all of the costs to keep
>>> the plane airworthy if it flew 0 hours per year. The hourly rate
>>> included all of the costs associated with operating the plane,
>>> including an engine fund, a prop fund, and a general maintenance
>>> fund.
>>> The fixed costs just covered what a "basic" annual would cost.
>>>
>>> They also charged a wet rate that changed each month if the price of
>>> fuel changed on the field. If you refueled somewhere else, they
>>> only reimbursed at up to the home field rate. Paying a wet rate
>>> actually worked out better because you didn't have to worry about
>>> someone else shorting you on fuel and if you brought the plane back
>>> after the FBO closed, it was no big deal.
>>>
>>> The problem with throwing "extra" into the monthly rate as a
>>> contingency is it means everyone pays that equally, but it's really
>>> those who put the most time on the plane who should be paying more
>>> if the plane breaks. Putting the "contingency" on the hourly rate
>>> works out to be a bit more fair.
>>>
>>> The biggest problem I had with the club environment is sometimes
>>> it's hard to get people to go along with making improvements to the
>>> plane. If you want something like an HSI or a nice autopilot, but
>>> most of the members are VFR only, you can forget it.
>>>
>>
>> How do you reckon they're improvements?
>>
>> More weight, for one thing..
>
> They aren't. They just make IFR flying more difficult and less
> practical. I don't know what I was thinking.
>
>

there ya go.

Bertie

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

"Mike" > wrote in news:rhEik.91$aA5.57@trnddc05:

> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Mike" > wrote in news:qFwik.67$JH5.22@trnddc06:
>>
>>> "Bertie the Bunyip" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> "RST Engineering" > wrote in
>>>> m:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Good grief.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I was pointing out that if you gotta tell 'em who ya are...
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> In any case the term is crap and poor usage coming from a percieved
>>>> need to
>>>> "sex it up"
>>>
>>> Civil Air Patrol reports "wheels up" and "wheels down" times back to
>>> mission base and has ever since their planes have had radios.
>>
>> Oh well, if the sily ass patrol does it, then it must be standard..
>
> The CAP squadron I belong to has retired airline captains, and
> professional pilots, and no cadets as members. All but one of the
> members are pilots and almost all have advanced ratings including
> several ATPs and CFIIs. We also have a B17 pilot from WWII who still
> has a current medical and more than one pilot who has > 30,000 hrs.
> We fly all types of missions on a regular basis including disaster
> relief, search and rescue, fire spotting, low level military route
> surveys, and searching for missing pieces of space shuttle Columbia,
> just to name a few. Perhaps you think that's silly, but then you
> spend a good proportion of your time trolling usenet desperately in
> search of something you think is clever to say, so I'll consider the
> source. Perhaps sometimes you succeed, but in this case you're
> waffling, but not man enough to admit it.
>

Nope.

Bertie
>

[george]

On Jul 26, 9:23 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:

> Stuka trainer? You lost me there. They used a 190 as a Stuka trainer?
>

The aircraft in question is a Messerschmitt Bf-108 Taifun
See http://www.warbirdsoverwanaka.co.nz/article_2006.asp?id=aircraft.

[Bertie the Bunyip[_24_]]

george > wrote in news:e08ec72c-2688-447c-9c4f-31f590146625
@a21g2000prf.googlegroups.com:

> On Jul 26, 9:23 pm, Bertie the Bunyip > wrote:
>
>> Stuka trainer? You lost me there. They used a 190 as a Stuka trainer?
>>
>
> The aircraft in question is a Messerschmitt Bf-108 Taifun
> See http://www.warbirdsoverwanaka.co.nz/article_2006.asp?id=aircraft.
>
>
>

OK, but i doubt they ever used that as a Stuka trainer either. That's still
considered to be one of the most efficient airplanes ever made and I cringe
to think what would happen if you pointed it straight down for any length
of time!
Mostly the Taifun was used as a liason aircraft. I doubt many were used as
trainers. Mostly they used the FW 44 for that. Come to think if it that
would make a good dive bomber trainer.


Bertie