![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Navy had a height restriction in the 50's, I believe it was 5'4".
Guys I knew close, like 5'2" used wads of paper in their socks. In the SNJ some used foot-blocks to get to the rudder pedals and/or cushios behind their backpack chutes to get closer to the action. The height limit was 6'4" I think. Supposedly you had to be less than 6'0 to fly a Tink (A-4) but that restriction went out the window when we started running short of Tink drivers on Yankee Station. Biggest guy I ever saw in a Tink was a CAG named "Tiny" Granning. At least 6'6" and 250, plane captains actually stuffed him in from both sides. His normal plane was the Demon them Phantom but I saw him CQ the Tink on the Tico and it was a wonderment. Another big long legged guy in Phantoms routinely blew out his tires when arresting because his feet just surged forward when the wire hit. Best size in most carrier planes was around 5'10", 150 pounds. Both the F-8 and F-4 had large roomy cockpits and would take the larger sized guys. I agree this whole G-lock phenomenom must have been a blue-suiter affliction. Most planes took some stick pull to get G's. Usually a guy who pulled to more G's than he could handle just eased off. Out cold you couldn't be pulling too hard. Releasing the G's normally brought you around pretty quick. Even very hungover from a big night of stingers I'd get a little tunnel vision around a G or so before any greying occurred. Maybe the blue suiters today just go from happy assing around to lala land without passing go. It's a mystery for sure. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mike Kanze wrote:
...And - if you DO keep your legs - lead weights make for an interesting swim once you splash. Naa, interesting walk. Hold your breath until the shore or run out of breath, whichever happens first ![]() (BTW, my reply only came up with your text, everything after the "--" got deleted- one more reason to use Netscape and not Explorer... neat trick!) |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
José Herculano wrote:
http://www.nomi.med.navy.mil/Nami/Wa...pics/exams.htm What a pain... I would have met this standards... failed my flight school application because I had 18/20 uncorrected in the right eye. Jose, the vision standards vary over time. The post-post cold war drawdown overmanning backlash has ended and a mini drawdown, if you will, seems to be the way things are headed right now. So I bet things like medical waivers may tighten up soon for a few years. Just my educated guess/opinion on the big picture. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Carriere wrote:
(BTW, my reply only came up with your text, everything after the "--" got deleted- one more reason to use Netscape and not Explorer... neat trick!) I don't know how to break this to you Jim, or more properly, these to you but; a) If by "Explorer" you mean Internet Explorer, it is not a news reader, aka news client. b) If by "Explorer" you mean Outlook Express, when I used it [for a very brief period before getting real email and news clients], it would, indeed, observe the "-- " [dash dash space] properly formed signature separator, and delete the sig. c) In fact, all self-respecting news clients have always recognized a properly formed sig separator, and deleted the sig when one replies to a Usenet post. It is not a "neat trick", it has been a part of the NNTP protocol since before there ever was a WWW, or Internet Exploder, or Lookout Express, or Netscrape. ObNostalgia: Bring back tin, bring back Mosaic, bring back ***CONNECTION LOST*** -- OJ III [Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading. Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.] |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Ed Rasimus" wrote in message news ![]() On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 22:19:03 GMT, "Aardvark J. Bandersnatch, MP, LP, BLT, ETC." wrote: "José Herculano" wrote in message .. . I remember reading that one of VF-17s Corsair pilots was so small he had to "get creative" to be able to use enough rudder on take off. Sometimes you see a picture in which it looks like there is a contortionist gorilla in the cockpit. I know there are some size guideliness, and also know that there are waivers signed here and there. My topic proposal is: Do you have some good stories to tell about guys that were really too big or too small to be in that particular cockpit? A long time ago, I knew an AF pilot at Tyndall who regularly flew with about ten pounds of lead weights in his speed jeans. One day he forgot to put the weights in, plane caught fire, he was too light to eject, rode that flaming beast (delta dart) all the way back, landed it, walked away smoking. "Too light to eject"??? Never heard of such a thing during 23 years of tactical aviation riding a whole variety of boom-seats. We had a maintainer commit suicide at Korat in '73 by prying the banana links off of the sear on a Martin-Baker in an F-4 while leaning over the canopy rail. Seat didn't seem to mind that nobody was sitting in it. The only thing lead weights in the pockets of the G-suit would do is insure severe leg fractures in any sort of high speed ejection. Not being the pilot-y type, I took him/them at his/their word. But I saw him bring that flaming screaming piece of trash back and down, so I figger he had a good reason not to punch the button. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
![]() "Pechs1" wrote in message ... aardvark- A long time ago, I knew an AF pilot at Tyndall who regularly flew with about ten pounds of lead weights in his speed jeans. One day he forgot to put the weights in, plane caught fire, he was too light to eject, BRBR Balderdash...there is no minimum weight to eject. Hmmm. Since you'r USN(ret), mayhap you knew an F-4 type name "hermit"? |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Ogden Johnson III wrote:
Jim Carriere wrote: (BTW, my reply only came up with your text, everything after the "--" got deleted- one more reason to use Netscape and not Explorer... neat trick!) I don't know how to break this to you Jim, or more properly, these to you but; a) If by "Explorer" you mean Internet Explorer, it is not a news reader, aka news client. b) If by "Explorer" you mean Outlook Express, when I used it [for a very brief period before getting real email and news clients], it would, indeed, observe the "-- " [dash dash space] properly formed signature separator, and delete the sig. Woops, I did mean Outlook Express. I fired it up to see if there as a difference, and it didn't clip after the "-- ". Must be something you can set on that program. Come to think of it, I used to know that. They say memory is the second thing to go, what was the first again? c) In fact, all self-respecting news clients have always recognized a properly formed sig separator, and deleted the sig when one replies to a Usenet post. It is not a "neat trick", it has been a part of the NNTP protocol since before there ever was a WWW, or Internet Exploder, or Lookout Express, or Netscrape. Right there with you on self respecting news clients. By the way, I'm not sure from your .sig whether you even bother to use Yahoo, but their spam filter is far far better now than about a year or two ago. I only get a few, uh, interesting emails a day, and some days none (at one point is was 10-20 a day). ObNostalgia: Bring back tin, bring back Mosaic, bring back ***CONNECTION LOST*** I first read this newsgroup (and many others) using tin... Brings a tear to my eye thinking about it, no mouse, no light, no motorcar ![]() |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
aardvark- Hmmm. Since you'r USN(ret), mayhap you knew an F-4 type name
"hermit"? BRBR Nope, but I knew more than a few little guys that didn't carry weights in their gsuit pockets. Also before the 'crack aviator' folly.... P. C. Chisholm CDR, USN(ret.) Old Phart Phormer Phantom, Turkey, Viper, Scooter and Combat Buckeye Phlyer |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Jim Carriere wrote:
Ogden Johnson III wrote: By the way, I'm not sure from your .sig whether you even bother to use Yahoo, but their spam filter is far far better now than about a year or two ago. I only get a few, uh, interesting emails a day, and some days none (at one point is was 10-20 a day). Yep. I do actually look in there at least once a day. I signed up during a transition [under pressure from competitors in the "freebie so we can talk them into a paid account" email market], the result of which, in short order, was that they improved their spam filtering, increased the size of free account storage, removed the trash and spam mailboxes from being counted against the users storage ... ... Nevertheless, I kept the sig in the faint hope that people would send email to where I can use my preferred email client - I don't really like yahoo but SVEN made me do it. Alas, the people who actually look and figure out the ojiii and the comcast.net seem to be few and far between. [For those that don't figure it out, I forward their email from Yahoo to my comcast address, and still use my preferred email client. ;-] ObNostalgia: Bring back tin, bring back Mosaic, bring back ***CONNECTION LOST*** I first read this newsgroup (and many others) using tin... Brings a tear to my eye thinking about it, no mouse, no light, no motorcar ![]() Yeah. Lotta emotional pain the day I finally canceled my unix shell account, abandoning tin, rtin, pine. But in all honesty, I'd never go back. ;- Getting too lazy now that I'm fully advancing into geezerhood. -- OJ III [Email to Yahoo address may be burned before reading. Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast.] |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|