![]() |
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 |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Bob F. writes:
First an "experimental" aircraft in aviation talk is just another classification. The characteristics may be well known and just doesn't fit into any other class. My impression is that many aircraft are called experimental in order to get around certain troublesome regulations. Secondly, I have personally flown a number of experimental Boeing aircraft into LAX when I worked for the flight test group there. I believe B747-100 s/n 1 is still classified as experimental. And I flew B401, 2 and 3 (the first 3 747-400 designated a/c). They too were classified as experimental and flew into a lot of large airports with heavy population. How many hours had they flown elsewhere before they visited those large airports? |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
BT writes:
NTSB statistics prove that of the 37 accidents at this airport since the county took over in 1982, only 3 were experimental aircraft. What percentage of all aircraft movements were experimental aircraft during the same period? |
#33
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:42:43 GMT, Steve Foley wrote:
"T. "Tim" Timothy Haag aka HyoogeUmp56" wrote in message ... http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1199-full.html#198676 'Clark County Aviation Director Randy Walker said he thinks experimental airplanes should be restricted to airports that are located in less densely populated areas. "I think the regulatory process on airport systems need to be revisited in the coming weeks. I am going to ask to meet with the members of our congressional delegation to see if something can be done," he said at a news conference. "I do not believe under our circumstances that experimental and high-risk aircraft operations, such as training and solo flights, belong in an urban airport," he said.' Seems pretty short-sighted for an Aviation Director. I also think it's naive for him to think that anything will be done "in the coming weeks". It's his ass, he's loolking to dump the problem out of range. |
#34
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In rec.aviation.owning Mxsmanic wrote:
Bob F. writes: First an "experimental" aircraft in aviation talk is just another classification. The characteristics may be well known and just doesn't fit into any other class. My impression is that many aircraft are called experimental in order to get around certain troublesome regulations. And your "impression" is wrong. It does not mean the airplane is "experimental" in the sense of being unknown, new, or unproven, nor does it mean that it is home built. All experimental means is that the manufacturer, whoever that may be, didn't go through the process to certify the aircraft in one of the other catagories with the FAA. The Anatov AN-2 has been made for about 50 years by several former Soviet block countries, has been used the world over for everything from transport, military, and airline use, and is probably the most produced aircraft in history. Since the Soviet countries had no interest in certifying their aircraft with the FAA and there were no reciprocal agreements as there are with some other countries, guess what it is registered as if you buy one and register it in the US? -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#35
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article ,
Jeff wrote: On Thu, 28 Aug 2008 23:42:43 GMT, Steve Foley wrote: "T. "Tim" Timothy Haag aka HyoogeUmp56" wrote in message ... http://www.avweb.com/eletter/archives/avflash/1199-full.html#198676 'Clark County Aviation Director Randy Walker said he thinks experimental airplanes should be restricted to airports that are located in less densely populated areas. "I think the regulatory process on airport systems need to be revisited in the coming weeks. I am going to ask to meet with the members of our congressional delegation to see if something can be done," he said at a news conference. "I do not believe under our circumstances that experimental and high-risk aircraft operations, such as training and solo flights, belong in an urban airport," he said.' Seems pretty short-sighted for an Aviation Director. I also think it's naive for him to think that anything will be done "in the coming weeks". It's his ass, he's loolking to dump the problem out of range. Then, let his ass be fired -- or placed in charge of clearing the streets of stray animals! Just get him the hell away from aviation! Why not stsrt a petition in lark County to get him reassigned? -- Remove _'s from email address to talk to me. |
#36
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#37
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message
... "Mike" wrote in message news:s9Stk.1198$Ro1.612@trnddc04... "Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message news ![]() "Mike" wrote in message news:tNRtk.1134$w51.346@trnddc01... "Bob Noel" wrote in message ... In article Y4Htk.1161$Ro1.744@trnddc04, "Mike" wrote: Nobody wants to give up their "right" to drive with a cell phone, ignore speed limits, run stop lights, etc. even though such activity puts other people at risk. "drive with a cell phone" .... ohmygawd. Hey, what about drive with one of those GPS thingies, or changing CDs or scanning thru XM radio or....? Maybe we should require a sterile car so that nothing, absolutely nothing can distract the driver. (yep - this crusade about talking on a cellphone is a hot button for me). Crusade all you want. Argue from silly extremes all you want. Talking on the phone while driving increases risk of having a serious accident by 4-5 times. But you prove my point beautifully. People don't really give a rat's arse about being safer if it inconvieniences them, even if the inconvienience is slight. Got any data to support that? Yes. Your google broke? Do your own homework piggy. Put up, shut, or you my bitch. No problem. www.google.com Chinese Proverb: Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. |
#38
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"John" wrote in message news:0rVtk.9$Af3.5@trnddc06...
"Mike" wrote in message news:s9Stk.1198$Ro1.612@trnddc04... "Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message news ![]() "Mike" wrote in message news:tNRtk.1134$w51.346@trnddc01... "Bob Noel" wrote in message ... In article Y4Htk.1161$Ro1.744@trnddc04, "Mike" wrote: Nobody wants to give up their "right" to drive with a cell phone, ignore speed limits, run stop lights, etc. even though such activity puts other people at risk. "drive with a cell phone" .... ohmygawd. Hey, what about drive with one of those GPS thingies, or changing CDs or scanning thru XM radio or....? Maybe we should require a sterile car so that nothing, absolutely nothing can distract the driver. (yep - this crusade about talking on a cellphone is a hot button for me). Crusade all you want. Argue from silly extremes all you want. Talking on the phone while driving increases risk of having a serious accident by 4-5 times. But you prove my point beautifully. People don't really give a rat's arse about being safer if it inconvieniences them, even if the inconvienience is slight. Got any data to support that? Yes. Your google broke? Your bluffs been called, show your cards or fold your hand. I don't play that game. I feel no obligation to be your personal research service on a subject that has been widely reported. But if you explain how you're too inept to use google, I'll be glad to talk about it. Cell phones + driving + risks yields 264,000 results including numerous studies published in peer reviewed publications on the subject. PS. We have laws about proper vehicle operation already, we don't need new laws that call out specific activiries. Enforce what we have already That's your opinion, unsupported by facts. As I said, you've already proven my point beautifully. All you want to do now is go off topic. |
#39
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote in
: Bob F. writes: First an "experimental" aircraft in aviation talk is just another classification. The characteristics may be well known and just doesn't fit into any other class. My impression is that many aircraft are called experimental in order to get around certain troublesome regulations. That's because you're clueless. Bertie |
#40
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Mike" wrote in news:qJXtk.23$393.21@trnddc05:
"Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message ... "Mike" wrote in message news:s9Stk.1198$Ro1.612@trnddc04... "Ramsey" @##@.^net wrote in message news ![]() "Mike" wrote in message news:tNRtk.1134$w51.346@trnddc01... "Bob Noel" wrote in message ... In article Y4Htk.1161$Ro1.744@trnddc04, "Mike" wrote: Nobody wants to give up their "right" to drive with a cell phone, ignore speed limits, run stop lights, etc. even though such activity puts other people at risk. "drive with a cell phone" .... ohmygawd. Hey, what about drive with one of those GPS thingies, or changing CDs or scanning thru XM radio or....? Maybe we should require a sterile car so that nothing, absolutely nothing can distract the driver. (yep - this crusade about talking on a cellphone is a hot button for me). Crusade all you want. Argue from silly extremes all you want. Talking on the phone while driving increases risk of having a serious accident by 4-5 times. But you prove my point beautifully. People don't really give a rat's arse about being safer if it inconvieniences them, even if the inconvienience is slight. Got any data to support that? Yes. Your google broke? Do your own homework piggy. Put up, shut, or you my bitch. No problem. www.google.com Chinese Proverb: Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Thing is, Maxie thinks that fishing is best done by poisoning the pond. Plenty of fish for about a day and a half....but of course those aren't any good either.. Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
2nd cellphone for retrieve/rural areas US | chris | Soaring | 6 | May 4th 08 07:47 PM |
Experimentals down in Fla | stol | Home Built | 26 | March 10th 08 02:52 PM |
Red Arrows banned from olympics - British PC strikes again | stevehaley | Soaring | 13 | October 5th 07 07:01 PM |
Has Southwest Airlines banned aspartame from the cockpit? | Dylan Smith | Piloting | 42 | August 31st 04 03:10 PM |
Airshows should be banned...Now! | Tetherhorne P. Flutterblast | Military Aviation | 28 | June 15th 04 02:43 AM |