FYI: Dec 12 MythBusters: Airplane Hour

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Looked it up. The Stanleys set a record in 1906 of 127 mph.
Interestingly, in the very early days, land speed records were
dominated by electric cars, the fastest of which was 65.79 mph in
1899..



Bertie



Can you imagine what it must have felt like for those early guys at
127 indicated on that frame and chassis? Those guys had guts!!


They don't call it the heroic age for nothing. I have driven a 1911 car
at about 70 and that was actually not too bad at all. Braking was not
what you could call the best . I once drove this car dwon the side of a
mountain with the wrong gear selected at the top and didn't dare try to
change once i had ealised I was going too fast. It had a transmission
brake as well as the tiny rear wheel brakes, but they were all on fire
and almost completely useless by the time I reached the bottom. The cars
handled better than you might imagine, though. There were no shocks on
them, but the leaf springs were very long and very supple and that
damped out the ride better than you might imagine. The steering was
fairly good on many of them as well. Tires were skinny, but they were
usually about 45 psi or moe on the larger cars so didn;t deform much on
corners, so that was usually OK. the brakes, though...

the other big concern was that if you had artillery wheels (wood) they
could collapse under side loads. IIRC this was th ecause of the very
first auto fatality.

Bertie

Mxsmanic wrote:
"Jim Macklin" writes:


What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person with
some level experience with a cockpit display can control an airliner. Most
FAA controllers would not have the experience to describe the cockpit and
give useful instruction in how to manually fly with the autopilot or where
the switches are located, or how to use the radio to even start the
"rescue."


FAA controllers can find pilots and put them on the radio, if required.


Who is this fool????

Mxsmanic wrote in
:

"Jim Macklin" writes:

What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person
with some level experience with a cockpit display can control an
airliner. Most FAA controllers would not have the experience to
describe the cockpit and give useful instruction in how to manually
fly with the autopilot or where the switches are located, or how to
use the radio to even start the "rescue."

FAA controllers can find pilots and put them on the radio, if
required.


Yeah, john wayne, robert stack and randolph scott on speed dial just in
case they all have the fish.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Looked it up. The Stanleys set a record in 1906 of 127 mph.
Interestingly, in the very early days, land speed records were
dominated by electric cars, the fastest of which was 65.79 mph in
1899..



Bertie



Can you imagine what it must have felt like for those early guys at
127 indicated on that frame and chassis? Those guys had guts!!


They don't call it the heroic age for nothing. I have driven a 1911 car
at about 70 and that was actually not too bad at all. Braking was not
what you could call the best . I once drove this car dwon the side of a
mountain with the wrong gear selected at the top and didn't dare try to
change once i had ealised I was going too fast. It had a transmission
brake as well as the tiny rear wheel brakes, but they were all on fire
and almost completely useless by the time I reached the bottom. The cars
handled better than you might imagine, though. There were no shocks on
them, but the leaf springs were very long and very supple and that
damped out the ride better than you might imagine. The steering was
fairly good on many of them as well. Tires were skinny, but they were
usually about 45 psi or moe on the larger cars so didn;t deform much on
corners, so that was usually OK. the brakes, though...

the other big concern was that if you had artillery wheels (wood) they
could collapse under side loads. IIRC this was th ecause of the very
first auto fatality.

Bertie

Sounds exciting. Best I've ever done on land was a souped up 500
Kawasaki racing cycle. I got it through the gears balanced on the rear
suspension then took it out to well over 100 and developed a "vibration"
in the front forks. I'll tell you the truth, it was as scary as I've
ever been in or on a machine :-) How those guys ride those things at
Daytona, fall off and survive is beyond me. You see it happen and watch
them get up and back on a bike. More nerve than sense I guess.
I really shouldn't talk. Putting a fighter on her back at 100 feet
didn't scare me a bit.....but I wouldn't want to do it TODAY :-)))

--
Dudley Henriques

cavelamb himself wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote:
"Jim Macklin" writes:


What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person
with some level experience with a cockpit display can control an
airliner. Most FAA controllers would not have the experience to
describe the cockpit and give useful instruction in how to manually
fly with the autopilot or where the switches are located, or how to
use the radio to even start the "rescue."


FAA controllers can find pilots and put them on the radio, if required.


Who is this fool????



:-)) Welcome to the club!

--
Dudley Henriques

Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Looked it up. The Stanleys set a record in 1906 of 127 mph.
Interestingly, in the very early days, land speed records were
dominated by electric cars, the fastest of which was 65.79 mph in
1899..



Bertie



Can you imagine what it must have felt like for those early guys at
127 indicated on that frame and chassis? Those guys had guts!!


They don't call it the heroic age for nothing. I have driven a 1911
car at about 70 and that was actually not too bad at all. Braking was
not what you could call the best . I once drove this car dwon the
side of a mountain with the wrong gear selected at the top and didn't
dare try to change once i had ealised I was going too fast. It had a
transmission brake as well as the tiny rear wheel brakes, but they
were all on fire and almost completely useless by the time I reached
the bottom. The cars handled better than you might imagine, though.
There were no shocks on them, but the leaf springs were very long and
very supple and that damped out the ride better than you might
imagine. The steering was fairly good on many of them as well. Tires
were skinny, but they were usually about 45 psi or moe on the larger
cars so didn;t deform much on corners, so that was usually OK. the
brakes, though...

the other big concern was that if you had artillery wheels (wood)
they could collapse under side loads. IIRC this was th ecause of the
very first auto fatality.

Bertie

Sounds exciting. Best I've ever done on land was a souped up 500
Kawasaki racing cycle. I got it through the gears balanced on the rear
suspension then took it out to well over 100 and developed a
"vibration" in the front forks. I'll tell you the truth, it was as
scary as I've ever been in or on a machine :-) How those guys ride
those things at Daytona, fall off and survive is beyond me. You see it
happen and watch them get up and back on a bike. More nerve than sense
I guess. I really shouldn't talk. Putting a fighter on her back at 100
feet didn't scare me a bit.....but I wouldn't want to do it TODAY
:-)))

Yeah, it's all what you're comfortble with. I've been over 100 on a bike
and it felt fine, but the terrifying aspect is other road users. All it
takes is some asshole in an SUV to be at the wrong place at the wrong
time!
I can;t even imagine doing aerobatics below 500 feet nowadays.. In fact,
i doubt I'd do them below 1500 when I get going again. (the airplane is
moving along anyway.. )


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Mxsmanic wrote in
:

"Jim Macklin" writes:

What they showed with landing the NASA simulator is that any person
with some level experience with a cockpit display can control an
airliner. Most FAA controllers would not have the experience to
describe the cockpit and give useful instruction in how to manually
fly with the autopilot or where the switches are located, or how to
use the radio to even start the "rescue."

FAA controllers can find pilots and put them on the radio, if
required.


Yeah, john wayne, robert stack and randolph scott on speed dial just
in case they all have the fish.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Yeah, john wayne, robert stack and randolph scott on speed dial just
in case they all have the fish.



You forgot Moses, errrr, Charlton Heston.............. ****, anyone that
can be air dropped into a 747 can't be all bad!

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 01:09:24 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip
wrote:

snip

Reminds me of my first time in a full flight simulator, 12 years ago.

During the course of my pilot training, the school organized an visit
to a flight simulator manufacturer.

Each student got a chance to shoot an approach in a CRJ FFS. At that
point of our training, we all had over 100 hours, all had our private
pilot license and where on our way to our commercial.

The guy trying it out just before me was doing the bush-pilot
specialization, and had time in light singles, and in a Cessna 185, on
wheel and on float. He overcontroled the aircraft so much on short
final, he basically rolled it and crashed on the runway.

Me (with multi-engine experience), I managed to put the aircraft down
correctly, only to roll pass the end of the runway thanks to not
applying enough brake pressure and/or engaging the thrust reverser too
late.

Goes to show that it's not as easy as it might seem.


Yeah, you don't have to be superman, but Anthony's suggestions are just
ludicrous.

Bertie

Don't know what he suggested, because I don't read any of his stuff.

My first experience in a sim was allegedly in '87. Lear 24 series. Am
not a pro pilot, can't tell you what "generation" it was. I do
remember that in the same FSafety (across the street from Lear in
Wichita) they had just installed their first sim that needed literally
a hole in the ceiling to clear the movement of the "cabin".

This one was not that complex.

I took off in VFR/night conditions went "around the patch" at about
3.000 feet, and landed after about a 5 mile final.

At that time, my flying experience was what I had learned flying along
right seat in whatever piston-pounder was hauling auto parts wherever
in the wee hours.

Allegedly did the same thing in a BAe 800A sim ("later" generation,
lots more movement, still night only) about 7 years ago in Wilmington.

On that take-off, however, was in the sh** at around 800 feet AGL
'cause the instructor hadn't cleaned things up before I took off. I
levelled off at 3000 feet 90 degrees left of the runway heading until
he magically turned the weather back into VFR.

Circled back and landed. Scariest part of that "flight" was when the
instructor turned the motion off on the sim while I was turning
base-to-final, instant nausea. At that time I allegedly had a PPSEL
and about 125 hours in my logbook, and a lot more time goofing around
in the right (and left) seat of whatever piston-pounder was hauling
auto parts wherever in the wee hours.

Can't claim to have much knowledge of the systems/cockpit layout/etc.,
'cause in both cases had just finished up a maintenance initial on a
new-to-me type, and "flew" after spending time doing sim ground runs,
etc. etc.

Fukk Anthony, but don't assume because someone doesn't earn his living
as a pilot, he can't "fly" or that playing even in a jen-yoo-wine sim
necessarily means jakk****e...

Regards;

TC

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Dudley Henriques wrote in
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Looked it up. The Stanleys set a record in 1906 of 127 mph.
Interestingly, in the very early days, land speed records were
dominated by electric cars, the fastest of which was 65.79 mph in
1899..



Bertie



Can you imagine what it must have felt like for those early guys at
127 indicated on that frame and chassis? Those guys had guts!!

They don't call it the heroic age for nothing. I have driven a 1911
car at about 70 and that was actually not too bad at all. Braking was
not what you could call the best . I once drove this car dwon the
side of a mountain with the wrong gear selected at the top and didn't
dare try to change once i had ealised I was going too fast. It had a
transmission brake as well as the tiny rear wheel brakes, but they
were all on fire and almost completely useless by the time I reached
the bottom. The cars handled better than you might imagine, though.
There were no shocks on them, but the leaf springs were very long and
very supple and that damped out the ride better than you might
imagine. The steering was fairly good on many of them as well. Tires
were skinny, but they were usually about 45 psi or moe on the larger
cars so didn;t deform much on corners, so that was usually OK. the
brakes, though...

the other big concern was that if you had artillery wheels (wood)
they could collapse under side loads. IIRC this was th ecause of the
very first auto fatality.

Bertie

Sounds exciting. Best I've ever done on land was a souped up 500
Kawasaki racing cycle. I got it through the gears balanced on the rear
suspension then took it out to well over 100 and developed a
"vibration" in the front forks. I'll tell you the truth, it was as
scary as I've ever been in or on a machine :-) How those guys ride
those things at Daytona, fall off and survive is beyond me. You see it
happen and watch them get up and back on a bike. More nerve than sense
I guess. I really shouldn't talk. Putting a fighter on her back at 100
feet didn't scare me a bit.....but I wouldn't want to do it TODAY
:-)))

Yeah, it's all what you're comfortble with. I've been over 100 on a bike
and it felt fine, but the terrifying aspect is other road users. All it
takes is some asshole in an SUV to be at the wrong place at the wrong
time!
I can;t even imagine doing aerobatics below 500 feet nowadays.. In fact,
i doubt I'd do them below 1500 when I get going again. (the airplane is
moving along anyway.. )


Bertie
That's good. Stay up there out of the marbles. It's a lot better on your
health for sure. If I had it to do over again I'd take it up higher
myself as the average air show fan wouldn't know the difference anyway.

--
Dudley Henriques