Aviation crash videos on-line

"Morgans" wrote in message
...
|

| | Test drive before you buy. I have found that these things, in that
price
| range have CRAPPY resolution. DAMHIKT
| --
| Jim in NC
|
|
| ---


I must admit, that's something I didn't do, not that I could afford to
throw away $165 - but it's not that easy to do with an online store.
This crowd has a generous returns policy - if you're not happy with the
product.



I'm more than happy with the resolution, performance and the
associated editing software and I've since used half a dozen more (of this
brand) for work.



Certainly, yes, if you're buying it from a shopfront, see it first.



Cheers


Dave Kearton

Sorry, no sale! You made no mention to me about any ability to change
your wording on your site until this moment, and it was by sheer
accident I discovered those two words before joining you, which would
have been a HUGE mistake for me.

The only mistake you have made was not thinking before typing.

I invited you to write an "expert" safety commentary on each video. This
would have included pretty much anything you wanted to write.

Just be advised that you and I are not on friendly terms any longer.

I'll still be here, and there will still be a cold one waiting for you
whenever you come to Oshkosh or Iowa City -- but not till after they've
adjusted your meds.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:iXu%c.130211$9d6.82112@attbi_s54...
Man, I've got a couple of dozen hours of video, taken since 1990, all
analog. Everything from the birth of my two kids, to flights over the
Grand Canyon.

I'd love to convert them to digital, and put 'em on DVD. I wonder how
many
12-packs *that* would cost?

You should have bought a card before the school holidays and got
your son to do it. 25 cents per hour of video?

Paul

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:%wC%c.132129$9d6.177@attbi_s54...
Sorry, no sale! You made no mention to me about any ability to change
your wording on your site until this moment, and it was by sheer
accident I discovered those two words before joining you, which would
have been a HUGE mistake for me.

The only mistake you have made was not thinking before typing.

I invited you to write an "expert" safety commentary on each video.
This
would have included pretty much anything you wanted to write.

Listen up Jay, and see if you can get once and for all what I'm telling
you about you, your site, and how that relates to all this crap you're
trying to soft sell around here about flight safety being a "concern" of
yours and how I could have "contributed" to your site simply by
accepting your idiotic offer to me. I made it quite plain in my initial
answer to you but since flight safety was never really your reason for
making your "offer" in the first place, it must have gone right over
your head.
In viewing crash video in a flight safety context, to even begin to get
useful data from that video, it takes weeks of intensive work by a team
of experts using eye witness accounts coupled with more expert technical
opinion from factory reps and technicicans before even a glimmer of
factual information begins to emerge. There are literally hundreds of
factors to be considered before one...yes, I said ONE single useful
detail emerges that can be truthfully considered as a probable cause.
After THAT has taken place, the same experts have to gather again and
prepare a report that suggests the changes necessary to help prevent
that SPECIFIC accident from happening again.
Now, perhaps you can see why people in the flight safety business frown
on people like you pushing the flight safety issue as the excuse for
showing crash video on a public web site. The plain simple truth is that
there is no flight safety benefit derived from viewing these videos
simply from the video itself.
Sure, any moron can comment on the video. That doesn't take any brains
at all; but it's just conjecture, even if it's from an "expert" like me!
So don't try and push this "all you had to do was comment" thing at me
pal, I know better, and I hope some of the rest of the pilots around
here know better as well.
Crash video put up on a public web site is simply crash video. You can
spout off all day long about getting "experts" to comment for safety
reasons, but all that is from a professional viewpoint is an excuse for
showing the videos.
You "invited" me to join you on your web site and I declined for several
reasons. The above are the professional reasons. The personal reason was
because I realized your "invitation" to me was simply a "put up or shut
up" scenario, and I don't respond to that to begin with. Then, when I
discovered you had the words COOL and ENJOY on the site, your
"invitation" became the ultimate insult! No ligitimate person even
remotely involved in flight safety issues would even consider being
involved on a site like yours. If you doubt this, go find another
ligitimate safety expert who will accept your "offer" to comment on
crash video showing people dying on the same page as the words COOL and
ENJOY; then come back and let us now who he or she is. I'd like to meet
that person, and I'm betting there are others on this group who would
like to meet them too.


Just be advised that you and I are not on friendly terms any longer.

I'll still be here, and there will still be a cold one waiting for you
whenever you come to Oshkosh or Iowa City -- but not till after
they've
adjusted your meds.

No thank you. I have no control over who I have to deal with on Usenet,
but I can still pick with whom I want to share a drink. People who show
crash video on commercial hotel websites under the heading COOL and
ENJOY trying to involve my expertise to help sell hotel rooms I don't
drink with.
In closing, I have an invitation for you in front of this entire group.
If you're all that enamoured with my expertise as a flight safety
expert, and you have all this unbounded respect for my opinion on the
issue that caused you to invite me on your crash page with you; and have
so stated this high regard for my opinion on this newsgroup ; then after
what I've told you in this post about the uselessness of viewing crash
video on a public web page for safety reasons, let me now suggest that
you remove all crash video from your web site nor that you know it has
so little value in the flight safety context.
As they say in chess......CHECK!!!!
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship

Hi Jay,

I'm with you on this one. The fact of the matter is that those events
happened and were recorded on video. The act of watching that video
won't change the fact that the event happened, and is not in itself an
act of disrespect.

I think that Dudley's extreme reaction is probably due to a
realization that he has spent his life performing risky flight and
could have wound up in one of those videos. I recall reading a post
of his describing how he almost took a dirt bath while following a
lead plane through a low altitude loop and had to roll knife edge to
miss some trees. I don't understand the kind of mentality that would
lead someone to take such a risk as that, but he is definitely a
hypocrite to cry foul when someone else wants to watch video tapes of
accidents, or to make them available for viewing. Censorship is the
first step in the road to tyranny.

So Jay, just remember, "sticks and stones will break my bones by names
will never hurt me"! That's about as mature a response as Dudley
deserves for his rant.

Dean

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message news:Nuu%c.1949$D%.1269@attbi_s51...
Well, I'll give you this much Honek. I missed your "cool" sign for some
reason the first time I checked out your site and posted back on your
"request" that I join you in "changing" things I've already been
changing for the last fifty years; not realizing that sign was there. My
mistake!
I don't give a rat's ass how many posts have addressed this issue. One
fact remains for me when dealing with you on this, and that is the
simple fact that of all the titles you could have used for a site
showing people dying in airplanes you actively thought about it and
CHOSE the phrase "COOL".

You know, Dud, your hypocrisy is really starting to irk me.

1. I've tried to spoon-feed you the explanation for how the page -- an
insignificant page in a gigantic website -- evolved from "cool" videos to
what it is today -- an explanation you have disdained.

2. I have given you every opportunity to explain your ethical (and bizarre)
opposition to the viewing of these videos -- which you have refused to do.

3. I have put up with your condescending tone and sanctimonious attitude --
despite the fact that you quite obviously don't have a clue what you're
talking about.

4. Despite all this, I EVEN GAVE YOU THE CHANCE TO PUT YOUR PERSONAL
IMPRIMATUR ON EACH GOD DAMNED VIDEO, so that they would be truly "safety
oriented" -- an action which you decided you were not qualified to perform.

I have exercised extreme patience with someone I thought was worthy of
admiration and honor over the last several years, hoping that perhaps logic
and good spirits would prevail over irrationality and surliness.

Now you have the audacity and impudence to insult and threaten me, in this
public forum (AND in private email)?

At last your true colors are showing, sir. What a shame.

Now, perhaps you can see why people in the flight safety business frown
on people like you pushing the flight safety issue as the excuse for
showing crash video on a public web site. The plain simple truth is that
there is no flight safety benefit derived from viewing these videos
simply from the video itself.

First of all, I never claimed that my website had ANYTHING to do with
"flight safety" -- although I offered you the chance to help change that.

Putting that aside for the moment, let's see if I've got your new story
straight.

1. You started this thread by commenting that you "detest" people who show
aviation accident videos on the internet, because the videos have no
connection to flight safety.

2. You went on to say that you were fine with these videos, IF they were
presented in the context of flight safety. In other words, with proper
commentary.

3. You describe yourself as a "flight safety expert" -- but freely admit
that you're not "qualified" to intelligently comment on ANY of the videos.
How is this possible? The videos on our website depict some of the most
famous air disasters in recorded history -- yet you, an avowed "expert" in
the field, with 50 years of experience, cannot comment?

4. NOW you're stating that there can be NO flight safety benefit derived
from viewing these videos on-line, anywhere, ever?

Pardon me, but your slip is showing.

Crash video put up on a public web site is simply crash video. You can
spout off all day long about getting "experts" to comment for safety
reasons, but all that is from a professional viewpoint is an excuse for
showing the videos.

I had no intention of getting any "experts" to comment on any videos, until
you made your entry into this thread. The videos are on the site because
(a) I find them to be fascinating, and (b) they are extremely popular.

Whether you -- or any other "flight safety expert" comments on any of the
videos is of no consequence. I thought adding commentary was an idea with
some merit, as long as you and I happened to be discussing the issue --
nothing more, nothing less.

You "invited" me to join you on your web site and I declined for several
reasons. The above are the professional reasons. The personal reason was
because I realized your "invitation" to me was simply a "put up or shut
up" scenario, and I don't respond to that to begin with.

Doncha just hate that when someone calls your bluff? You were given the
opportunity to prove to the world (or, at least, this little worldwide
newsgroup) that you were indeed some sort of a "flight safety expert." You
had a perfect opportunity to correct what you had announced was a horrible
injustice, by helping to change our video page into a truly useful (rather
than just mildly interesting) web page -- but, as expected, you instead have
come up with a dozen bogus reasons why you can't do it.

Then, when THAT bluff was called, you went off on wild, raging tantrums,
simply to divert attention away from the fact that you really have no
interest in changing ANYTHING -- you just want to sit on the sidelines, and
throw stones.

Put up or shut up, indeed. Your chance has come, and -- thankfully -- gone.

In closing, I have an invitation for you in front of this entire group.
If you're all that enamoured with my expertise as a flight safety
expert, and you have all this unbounded respect for my opinion on the
issue that caused you to invite me on your crash page with you; and have
so stated this high regard for my opinion on this newsgroup ; then after
what I've told you in this post about the uselessness of viewing crash
video on a public web page for safety reasons, let me now suggest that
you remove all crash video from your web site nor that you know it has
so little value in the flight safety context.

My respect, admiration, and honor were sadly and clearly misplaced. After
reading your diatribes of the last several days, I can only thank God that
you declined my invitation.

As I've already stated, I will be making some minor changes to the wording
on the page, as my time permits.

As they say in chess......CHECK!!!!

Have a nice life, Dudley.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
news:kgF%c.2399$LT5.1907@attbi_s52...
Now, perhaps you can see why people in the flight safety business
frown
on people like you pushing the flight safety issue as the excuse for
showing crash video on a public web site. The plain simple truth is
that
there is no flight safety benefit derived from viewing these videos
simply from the video itself.

First of all, I never claimed that my website had ANYTHING to do with
"flight safety" -- although I offered you the chance to help change
that.

You began "pushing" the flight safety issue when you attempted to
involve me.

Putting that aside for the moment, let's see if I've got your new
story
straight.

1. You started this thread by commenting that you "detest" people who
show
aviation accident videos on the internet, because the videos have no
connection to flight safety.


2. You went on to say that you were fine with these videos, IF they
were
presented in the context of flight safety. In other words, with
proper
commentary.

Yes. Crash videos are useful, but NOT on the net outside the flight
safety context. I wasn't referring to web site videos when I said this.

3. You describe yourself as a "flight safety expert" -- but freely
admit
that you're not "qualified" to intelligently comment on ANY of the
videos.
How is this possible?

Actually, it's YOU who have described me as a flight safety expert. If
my involvement with flight safety issues makes me an "expert" so be it.

The videos on our website depict some of the most
famous air disasters in recorded history -- yet you, an avowed
"expert" in
the field, with 50 years of experience, cannot comment?

Don't wish to comment. Big difference! Don't like the venue.

4. NOW you're stating that there can be NO flight safety benefit
derived
from viewing these videos on-line, anywhere, ever?

Exactly. Unsubstantiated conjecture is the enemy of flight safety, and
the tool for web sites wishing to exploit carnage for the interest
value.

Pardon me, but your slip is showing.

I don't wear a slip.

Crash video put up on a public web site is simply crash video. You
can
spout off all day long about getting "experts" to comment for safety
reasons, but all that is from a professional viewpoint is an excuse
for
showing the videos.

I had no intention of getting any "experts" to comment on any videos,
until
you made your entry into this thread.

Obviously! You just put them out there for the interest value which is
what I've been saying all along isn't it?


The videos are on the site because
(a) I find them to be fascinating, and (b) they are extremely popular.

Obviously!

Whether you -- or any other "flight safety expert" comments on any of
the
videos is of no consequence.

Then why invite me on the site to comment?


I thought adding commentary was an idea with
some merit, as long as you and I happened to be discussing the
issue --
nothing more, nothing less.

No you didn't. You and I had already established our vast differences of
opinion about sites showing crash video for the interest factor. Your
"invitation" was nothing more that a weak attempt at a "put up or shut
up" routine and it didn't work.


You "invited" me to join you on your web site and I declined for
several
reasons. The above are the professional reasons. The personal reason
was
because I realized your "invitation" to me was simply a "put up or
shut
up" scenario, and I don't respond to that to begin with.

Doncha just hate that when someone calls your bluff? You were given
the
opportunity to prove to the world (or, at least, this little worldwide
newsgroup) that you were indeed some sort of a "flight safety expert."

Good God; you REALLY don't know me do you? I have nothing to "prove" to
anyone, least of all on this newsgroup :-)

You
had a perfect opportunity to correct what you had announced was a
horrible
injustice, by helping to change our video page into a truly useful
(rather
than just mildly interesting) web page -- but, as expected, you
instead have
come up with a dozen bogus reasons why you can't do it.

Take out the term "bogus" and you have the dozen ligitimate reasons I
don't wish to be a part of your site.

Then, when THAT bluff was called, you went off on wild, raging
tantrums,
simply to divert attention away from the fact that you really have no
interest in changing ANYTHING -- you just want to sit on the
sidelines, and
throw stones.

Nope. I just lost my temper. People do that from time to time you know.
They're human.
I've already explained that unassociated comment by anyone, me, or
anyone else not involved with a specific incident is just useless
conjecture. That is obvious to all who are involved in flight safety and
I won't state it again here.

Put up or shut up, indeed. Your chance has come, and -- thankfully --
gone.

Yes, I hope we can end this and go our separate ways now.

In closing, I have an invitation for you in front of this entire
group.
If you're all that enamoured with my expertise as a flight safety
expert, and you have all this unbounded respect for my opinion on the
issue that caused you to invite me on your crash page with you; and
have
so stated this high regard for my opinion on this newsgroup ; then
after
what I've told you in this post about the uselessness of viewing
crash
video on a public web page for safety reasons, let me now suggest
that
you remove all crash video from your web site nor that you know it
has
so little value in the flight safety context.

My respect, admiration, and honor were sadly and clearly misplaced.
After
reading your diatribes of the last several days, I can only thank God
that
you declined my invitation.

People should be close to God, that's true.

As I've already stated, I will be making some minor changes to the
wording
on the page, as my time permits.

Excellent idea!

As they say in chess......CHECK!!!!

Have a nice life, Dudley.

I already have. Full rich career, retired; fine home; wonderful family;
financial security; active in my field of expertise all around the
world; the whole nine yards :-)
Thank you for the kind thought anyway .
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship

"Martin Hotze" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

(...)
Then I'll do it again for you here and now, just as I've done it
several
times before this.
I don't object to crash video. I object to idiots like you presenting
it
under the words "COOL" and "ENJOY". Is that plain enough for you you
jerk?
(...)

PLONK!

Hey...another one!! Thank you. After all this is over, what's left will
be worth knowing. If you can't take the heat, or if it bothers you in
any way at all, you're doing the right thing. PLONK IT! The trouble with
you plonk people is that you never stay "plonked". For some reason you
just have to make that one more assertion of disgust for the world to
see.
Let's see if you REALLY stay plonked. I don't think you'll make it :-)))
Anyway...here's hoping!!!!! :-)
All the best to you,
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship

First "Dudley Henriques" writes:
Right! I'll inform the rest of the world immediately! They'll want to
retract fifty years of sought after professional advice.

Then he professionally advises:
Oh give me a ****ing break!
....and...
Who the hell do you think you're kidding?

He attempts to threaten:
and oh yes, you have ****ed off the worst person you could have
possibly picked to confront on this issue...trust me!!!

Continues professionally:
God, what a ****ing moron you are.

....and then retracts the threat:
Threatening my ass! The only threats
you have received from me is the threat that had I actually posted to
your site in the interest of flight safety; then discovered your use of
the two words "COOL" and "ENJOY" with my name under them; I would have
marched into your GD lobby with several dozen other "interested"
parties from the aviation community and demanded that you remove my name
and any reference of me from your website!
Go on moron, show us some more threats other than that!

Some unsolicited advice: think, _then_ post. You will come off
sounding much more reasoned and professional if you do.

Chris

(I happen to believe that Jay actually meant it when he said 'The
"Cool Videos" title pre-dates many of the tragic videos that are now
on that page. I shall change it to something more appropriate when I
get a minute.')
--
Chris Colohan Email: PGP: finger
Web: www.colohan.com Phone: (412)268-4751

"mike regish" wrote in message news:1Aq%c.148766$mD.109922@attbi_s02...
Actually, it was the autoland feature that crashed that plane. The computer
wouldn't let the pilot go around.

Actually, you are totally wrong.

"The newly delivered aircraft was to perform a charter flight on
behalf of the Mulhouse Flying Club. The crew was to overfly
Mulhouse-Habsheim airport two times (first at low speed, gear down at
100ft and the other at high speed in clean configuration) as part of
an airshow. The aircraft took off from Basle-Mulhouse at 2:41pm local
time and climbed to 1000 feet. The crew started the descent three
minutes later and Habsheim was in sight at 450ft agl. The first
officer informed the captain that the aircraft was reaching 100ft at
14:45:14. The descent continued to 50ft 8 seconds later and further to
30-35ft. Go-around power was added at 14.45:35. The A320 continued and
touched trees at the end of the runway at 14:45:40 with a 14° pitch
attitude and an engine speed of 83% N1. The plane sank slowly into the
forest and a fire broke out. Failure of the Captain to maintain
sufficient altitude and airspeed for recovery after a low approach to
a runway with obstacles near the departure end."

http://www.airdisaster.com/cgi_bin/v...ine=Air+France