Your opinion on this landing

http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359

Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359




It looks like the place is reusable, so it's fine. G

"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359


It looks like the place is reusable, so it's fine. G

was that a typo or a new definition of a good landing ?(ie only the place ,
not the plane has to be reusable.. :)
terry

d&tm wrote:
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
...
Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359


It looks like the place is reusable, so it's fine. G

was that a typo or a new definition of a good landing ?(ie only the place ,
not the plane has to be reusable.. :)
terry



I always heard it like this:

"Any landing you walk away from is good"
"Any landing where they can reuse the plane is great"

Reusing the PLACE puts a whole 'nuther light on the subject! G

"Sheista" wrote in message
ups.com...
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359




Does not appear to have resulted from a landing, looks more like a ground
handling accident.

Does not appear to have resulted from a landing, looks more like a ground
handling accident.

What do you all figure the ground handler was making per hour?

-c

Sheista wrote
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359

Photograph had nothing to do with a "landing".

N366PX
The "Ditch Witch" This aircraft was left unchocked in MEM and rolled into
a ditch.

Bob Moore

Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359




I know this already, but it always amazes me to see
the wing holding up the plane. It's propped off of
the ground on the one wing. I know this happens in
the air, it's just neat to see how strong the wings
actually are.

In a previous article, Erik said:
Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359




I know this already, but it always amazes me to see
the wing holding up the plane. It's propped off of
the ground on the one wing. I know this happens in
the air, it's just neat to see how strong the wings
actually are.

In the air, the load is distributed along the length of the wing, rather
than just on the wing tip. So this wing is taking more torque than a wing
in the air.


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
"Cause geeks like us, baby we can hack the Sun" - Joe Thompson

Paul Tomblin wrote:
In a previous article, Erik said:
Sheista wrote:
http://www.thepollspace.com/polls.php?pollid=1359



I know this already, but it always amazes me to see
the wing holding up the plane. It's propped off of
the ground on the one wing. I know this happens in
the air, it's just neat to see how strong the wings
actually are.

In the air, the load is distributed along the length of the wing, rather
than just on the wing tip. So this wing is taking more torque than a wing
in the air.

Only if you consider an air load of 1G. I'd have to do that calculation
to be sure, but I'm fairly confident that 4G in the air is more moment
at the wing root than is 1G at the tip.

Matt