"Capt.Doug" wrote in message ...
"Larry Fransson" wrote in message Not quite. According to the report,
they were trying to determine the minimum horizontal distance required for
landing.

Not quite-
It's an example of what my co-pilots try to do to me every day.

D. :-)

Funny Doug, I was just wondering what your reaction would be. :^D I'm
impressed with you "flying stovepipe" pilots. Is PIO easy in that
thing?

The clip kinda reminded me of a typical f/o approach into Kaohsiung
(one-way airport ILS) with 18kt tailwind shearing to ten on ground.
1000 fpm down, no real flare, hope I don't have to take it away
again... But the old gen of airplanes 9's, L-10's (jmpstng) 72's,
10's, 74's & early buses seemed stouter and could take a real
earthquake.

It looked O.K. untill the last very last part when the tires did the
cartoon thing and the tail fell off. ;-) Mr. Douglas really had a
knack for stretching things didn't he? The MD-11 drivers tell me it's
"one of those airplanes" (that's dangerous to land) since the stab is
so small, and if the tail software load screws up, you hit hard (no
elev authority) and then if one wing spar cracks, the other keeps
flying and you wind up on your head.

Yikes is right.

pac "high blood pressure" plyer

(Those Edwards guys broke the tst MD-11 in half during hard ldg tsts,
1400fpm in flare, plated it back together and we bought it. gulp.)