Lost stories here

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007 17:13:36 -0500, "Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe" The Sea
Hawk at wow way d0t com wrote in
:

"mad8" wrote in message
ups.com...

Danny Deger wrote:
Post your lost story here, so we can all laugh at them.

what's annoying is that rec.aviation.stories is (almost) completely
empty because of moderation...


It was empty for a long time for lack of a moderator. But, that problem has
been recently rectified. I was thinking myself that that is where this
thread should have been.

The rec.aviation.stories newsgroup is not for follow up discussion, so
it may not have been the right forum for this thread depending on what
the OP had in mind when he started this message thread.

Here's some information about the rec.aviation.stories newsgroup as
written by the late Mr. Geoff Peck creator of the rec.aviation.*
newsgroup hierarchy:

CHARTER
-------
rec.aviation.stories (MODERATED)
A home for one of the greatest strengths of rec.aviation --
longer postings of stories and experiences, including
descriptions of cross-country trips, "I learned about flying from
that", airshow reports, and so on. The moderator will reject
shorter articles and subjects which aren't appropriate to the
group, and will ensure that articles meet minimum readability
standards (i.e., line lengths).

Follow-ups will be directed to other groups. It is expected that
this group will typically contain only one or two articles a
week.

Articles for anonymous posting will be accepted.

....

rec.aviation.stories
A number of netters brought up this group as a very strong desire
at Oshkosh. People felt that one of the greatest strengths of
the net was the "I was there" stories -- stories which are very
different from the semi-sanitized accounts one sees in commercial
magazines. The desire was to have a forum for these longer
stories, one in which (a) it could be ensured that they'd be
easily found, (b) they wouldn't be intermixed with other stuff,
and (c) they wouldn't get drowned out by follow-ups.

A moderated newsgroup makes sense in this case, and also will
allow a final formatting check to be done to ensure that the
articles are easy to read (line lengths, etc.).

....

Q: "Why _three_ moderated groups?"

A: The three groups serve quite distinct purposes. Most readers
will probably place .announce near the top of their reading
lists, since it will be low-volume and will contain short
articles. Readers will accord .stories a special place, since
they'll want to take the time to sit down and enjoy the few
articles which are posted to that group. And readers will want
to consult .answers when they have a particular question which
they may guess has been asked before -- or when they wish to
start exploring a new area.

Q: "Why aren't there more moderated groups?"

A: I believe that on the most part that we have a really good
group of individuals on the net, and trust them to post
appropriately. Sometimes, this doesn't happen, but this is
relatively rare. In my opinion, a group should be moderated only
when the group's charter inherently requires careful filtering of
content -- announcements (i.e., rec.aviation.events), automated
dissemination (rec.aviation.answers), editing
(rec.aviation.digest), or editorial style control
(rec.aviation.stories). Ideally, a moderated group would
should [sic] sufficiently low traffic that most readers are happy
to read it first -- before any unmoderated groups.

An alternative philosophy to group moderation is to use it as a
mechanism to reduce "noisy" posts. One caveat here is that one's
person signal may be another person's noise. If a group which is
created by this re-organization turns out to be "noisy", an
RFD/CFV can be done to convert that troup [sic] to moderated. I
suggest that it's preferable to try most groups as an unmoderated
group first and see if (a) moderation is _really_ necessary and
(b) a moderator volunteers.
....

In a previous article, "d&tm" said:
Lost story of a somewhat more serious nature. In 1981 a Cessna 210 with 5
POB was lost in bad weather over land ( thick forest) in Australia, never
to be seen again, despite regular searches to this day. I believe it is
the only aircraft lost on land in Aus never to be found. There was another
case of an aircraft lost for 30 odd years and found by a forest worker on
the side of a mountain. I know several aircraft have gone missing without
trace in New Zealand. What about the USA? any dissapeared definately over
land without trace? It is hard to imagine in this day and age that this can
still happen. Over water i can understantd

There was that Lear that disappeared in Lebanon New Hampshire while on an
IFR approach on Christmas Eve that wasn't found for some years afterwards.


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Medication did wonders for me, Dave. Perhaps it could for you, if a
crowbar and half a pound of axle grease counts as medication.
-- Red Drag Diva

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
In a previous article, "d&tm" said:
Lost story of a somewhat more serious nature. In 1981 a Cessna 210 with 5
POB was lost in bad weather over land ( thick forest) in Australia, never
to be seen again, despite regular searches to this day. I believe it is
the only aircraft lost on land in Aus never to be found. There was another
case of an aircraft lost for 30 odd years and found by a forest worker on
the side of a mountain. I know several aircraft have gone missing
without
trace in New Zealand. What about the USA? any dissapeared definately
over
land without trace? It is hard to imagine in this day and age that this
can
still happen. Over water i can understantd

There was that Lear that disappeared in Lebanon New Hampshire while on an
IFR approach on Christmas Eve that wasn't found for some years afterwards.


There was the story a year or so ago about the aircraft lost in 1942 and
just found up in the glacial area of the Sierra Nevada range. The lone body
recovered was remarkably well preserved from being frozen for over 60 years.

I've heard of a few airplanes lost in Canada that still haven't been
recovered, and there are many in the US and Canada in the rockies that
have been found... but are so inaccesible that they will never be
brought back.

John Clear wrote:

On my long cross country (Aertz (Lafayette, IN) to Springfield, IL
to Lawerenceville, IN), on the Springfield to Lawerenceville leg,
I applied the magentic variation wrong.

I did my ASEL training out of San Antonio TX. During one of my long
cross-countries, I read my next heading from the wrong column, so I was
off course by the amount of the windage. I got to where the small town
of Three Rivers was, but it wasn't.

Now, I wasn't really lost. Honest! And I had a couple or three
methods of getting unlost pretty easily. One method I had never used
was talking to Center and asking for assistance. So I did that--just
for the practice, mind you. They didn't seem busy, so I called up with
a bit of levity (I think).

"Houston Center, Cessna 123. Student pilot. I'm looking for Three
Rivers. They moved it before I got here. Do you know which way it
went?"

I heard him chuckle, and I got my assistance.

Danny Deger wrote:
Post your lost story here, so we can all laugh at them.

My first one is "The lake that shouldn't be there". I was flying from north
of the Dallas/Fort Worth area to my home port of Luck Field which is south
of Fort Worth. No radios of any type in my little Taylorcraft. All was
well. A nice day with reasonable visibility. Some haze but strong VFR.

About halfway to Dallas I come over a lake. A big lake. One that would be
HUGE on my sectional. It was not on the map. I had just been flying for
about 45 minutes on a magnetic heading and keeping close track of time.
There was NO way this lake could be on the ground but not on my map. The
vis was such I couldn't see the buildings of Dallas or Fort Worth. I was
convinced somehow I had gotten lost. I thought maybe the compass was stuck
on the wrong heading. I did a couple of small turns to see if the compass
moved. The compass passed this test.

But my training kicked in -- if in doubt, fly the heading needed and keep
track of time. I did this. After about 20 minutes I got to another lake
and this one was on the map. I was on course.

It turns out my mystery lake was new and not on the maps yet. My map was
current. I swear it was. I never use out of date maps. That's my story
and I am sticking to it :-)

Anyway I was where I thought I was, but very concerned for a while when I
saw that damned lake under me that wasn't supposed to be there.

What is your favorite "lost" story?

Danny Deger

Not lost but terrain avoidance of a sort...

RAF Shackleton on a long transit flight - point A to point B - straight
line - Very bored Navigator.

Nav has some lunch.

Course alteration 90 deg Port

Course alteration 90 deg Starboard

Course alteration 90 deg Starboard

Course alteration 90 deg Port

The Log entry read 'altered course to avoid baked bean'

guy

In a previous article, "guy" said:
Not lost but terrain avoidance of a sort...

RAF Shackleton on a long transit flight - point A to point B - straight
line - Very bored Navigator.

Nav has some lunch.

Course alteration 90 deg Port

Course alteration 90 deg Starboard

Course alteration 90 deg Starboard

Course alteration 90 deg Port

The Log entry read 'altered course to avoid baked bean'

So of like the "no **** story" I heard some years ago. Navigator says
"change course 1 degree to port". Pilot says "I can't change course 1
degree". Navigator says "change course 5 degrees to starboard", and pilot
complies. Then the navigator immediately says "change course 6 degrees to
port".


--
Paul Tomblin http://blog.xcski.com/
Better to teach a man to fish than to give him a fish. And if he can't
be bothered to learn to fish and starves to death, that's a good enough
outcome for me. -- Steve VanDevender

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
So of like the "no **** story" I heard some years ago. Navigator says
"change course 1 degree to port". Pilot says "I can't change course 1
degree". Navigator says "change course 5 degrees to starboard", and pilot
complies. Then the navigator immediately says "change course 6 degrees to
port".

That's they way they did radar vectors in the old days (still??) when the
adjustment was only a degree or two.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Paul Tomblin" wrote in message
...
So of like the "no **** story" I heard some years ago. Navigator says
"change course 1 degree to port". Pilot says "I can't change course 1
degree". Navigator says "change course 5 degrees to starboard", and
pilot
complies. Then the navigator immediately says "change course 6 degrees
to
port".

That's they way they did radar vectors in the old days (still??) when the
adjustment was only a degree or two.

--
Matt
---------------------
Matthew W. Barrow
Site-Fill Homes, LLC.
Montrose, CO (MTJ)


Yeah, I was always taught that you couldn't (shouldn't) give a one degree
turn on a PAR or ASR. Rather turn three degrees one way and two back.

When I asked why I was told the stick actuator couldn't do it or it was
easier for him.

Always thought that was BS.

Either because it wasn't up to me to decide what he was capable of doing or
if it really was easier he'd already know that and do it on his own to get
to the assigned heading.

Then there were always the issues of whether the hold-on heading really was
just one degree off or whether the guy could fly within one degree in the
first place. The old measuring with a micrometer and cutting with a
chainsaw thing.

But if you want to pass your rating eval you stick to the conventional
wisdom (at least until you're working on your own ticket ;-)