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 |
#101
|
|||
|
|||
(Robert Bonomi) wrote: majority snipped for brevity The 'far frontiers' *ARE* an "attractive nuisance". They draw the kooks, loonies, and glory-seekers like a magnet. *WITHOUT* considering whether Mr. Johanson fits that description, It *is* a fact that "helping" him return from his botched 'adventure' *WOULD* cause those who _do_ fit the "kooks, loonies, and glory-seekers" categorization to be more likely to make their own *ill-prepared* attempts. Resulting in _bigger_ drains on the *limited* resources available. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ It appears.... There are two very polorized groups here. Neither will be swayed. At best, you are preaching to the choir. Barnyard BOb -- choir boy |
#102
|
|||
|
|||
nafod40 wrote
Way back when I was just a tadpole on my pappy's knee, he was an aviator in VX-6, the Navy's Antarctic Exploration Squadron (formerly known as the Puckered Penguins, which had a cool patch that showed a shnockered penguin with a bottle of XXX in one flipper and a cigar in the other, which they then changed later to a kinder/gentler "Ice Pirates", which sure sounded a little too much like A-- Pirates to me). Those guys flew down to "the ice" in their DC-4s, with a few weather ships stationed along the way, and their spinning compasses, etc. Once there after many turnbacks at the point-of-no-return, they would lose a few planes each season, as they went where no man had gone before. High adventure, baby! I have a special place in my heart for Antartic aviators. I applaud our Aussie friend for going for it, treaties and weather be damned. Rules are for regular people. He took the big odds in a calculated risk. Power to him. I can just imagine hour after hour over the loneliest, most unfriendly to life terrain on this planet, bar no other. Like an endless 0/0 night carrier landing. In a homebuilt that could have come out of my garage, if I had half the cajones. I salute you, my friend. Mike Man you said it Mike. In my opinion we should accomplish the following: 1. Submit the intrepid Azzie's name to the National Geographic Society for an award and televised follow up. This would: 2. Publicly embarrass those worthless, arrogant, self-serving government "Alpha Hotels" at the U.S facility down there. 3. Offer a formal apology to the fine man and his government. 4. Ship those self-rightous *******s home with a severence package minus Polly's expenses to ship and store fuel. 5. Privatize the facility, staff it with private-sector FBO talent that can show a little humanity from time to time. 6. Prospect and drill for Oil to take the entire enterprise out of U.S. gov hands. (highest int'l bidder gets the oil tracts.) 7. France and Germany need not be involved since there's no need to sell weapons to the indigenous cigar-smoking penguins down there. DC-4's to Antartica! Man, the Duke would be proud. (but I must confess: the only round-motors I want to fly anymore are the kinds you can see through! ;-) Especially when its sub-zero down there! Had a number of Polar flights and could never understand why we were studying Grid navigation with 3 INS's (what are those odds?). One day we ran into unforecast headwinds PANC-EGSS and couldn't make it. Had to land in Keflevick unannounced in a white out situation. Durring the roll out could not see the runway at all. Almost lost my cool. No, the artic/antartic wastes should not be little kingdoms for the bueracrats.. Jon's flight is the kind of flight free men occationally take. Let's all buy him a Foster's just for pulling it off. pacplyer - out The definition of a plan: A place to start making changes |
#103
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Ed Wischmeyer wrote: From a purely professional point of view - There are no reasons to outrun your fuel supply... only excuses. That kind of pontification might well wait until some facts are in. For example, suppose headwinds are forecast are 40 knots, his contingency planning is 60 knots, and the winds turn out to be 100 knots? A few facts might make a lot of difference in this discussion. The kind of scenario you offer as a possibility would appear to just show "sadly deficient" contingency planning. If he ran into headwinds that were SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER than _anything_ _ever_previously_recorded_, one can "possibly" make a case, depending on the quality of the historical data. However, CONTINUING to push ahead, in the face of such =unanticipated= obstacles, _past_ the "point of no return" to a safe harbor can only be described as "stupid". This is not to say that Johanson is that kind of "stupid". Available reportage indicates that 'higher than anticipated/forecast' headwinds were encountered, and after pressing to a point where it became clear that he could not complete the original flight, he diverted to a *pre-planned* emergency abort point. Available evidence indicates he "assumed", *without* *confirming*, that persons there "would" provide assistance for him to get the rest of the way 'back to civilization'. |
#104
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Stealth Pilot wrote: On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 03:12:52 +0000, (Robert Bonomi) wrote: In article , Stealth Pilot wrote: On Sun, 14 Dec 2003 02:26:37 +0000, (Robert Bonomi) wrote: munch Since it'll have to be shipped in *regardless*, why shouldn't _Johnson_ have to arrange the shipping for "his own consumables"? What would he do if the base facilities _weren't_ there? If there's "no space available" on the inbound transport, that _would_ seem to be a good reason for not selling 'already delivered' supplies to Johnson -- they *cannot* be replaced. you really are a typical yank. Ex-kiwi, thank you. the guy's name is Jon Johanson. Johnson are the guys who market floor wax. there is a difference there that even you should find obvious. You're quite correct. D*mn spell-checker 'fixed' things, and I didn't catch it. |
#105
|
|||
|
|||
"Robert Bonomi" wrote in message
news:a9d88$3fe12310 Available reportage indicates that 'higher than anticipated/forecast' headwinds were encountered, and after pressing to a point where it became clear that he could not complete the original flight, he diverted to a *pre-planned* emergency abort point. Available evidence indicates he "assumed", *without* *confirming*, that persons there "would" provide assistance for him to get the rest of the way 'back to civilization'. I dunno... let's look at this emperically... He diverted to a pre-planned emergency landing site, he obtained fuel, he continued on his way and completed his journey. Forgiveness wins out over permission again! Eric |
#106
|
|||
|
|||
AVweb quotes an EAA staffer in saying that they don't even stock avgas down there. What's needed is space on a cargo plane for hauling it down there, and I suspect there's more too it than just throwing some jerry cans on a pallet. Even so, it sounds like the NSF is being its old hidebound self. There's a good book out, written by an ex-Navy pilot who used be one of the Hercules pilots down the _Flying Upside Down_, by Mark A. Hinebaugh. He really makes the NSF (the agency in charge of US operations in Antarctica) sound like a bunch of idiots. Ron Wanttaja They are. I worked on this problem with the Governor of Nevada last week and many retired politicians that I know. They applied a lot of pressure but really got nowhere. I am out of town right now but I heard from Jarvis that Jon got out of there by getting fuel from an English woman on an Around the world flight who was on the continent at the same time. Anyone know the details? Bill |
#107
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
nafod40 wrote: Robert Bonomi wrote: ET wrote: Yeah, but to not even sell the guy fuel is bad form...... *WHY* ?? I'd suggest it is far _worse_ form for the PIC *not* to have "made sure of" the necessary resources =in=advance=/ If a pilot makes an "emergency" (or otherwise) landing in a farmer's field, is that farmer obligated in any way to sell him fuel from his farm holding tank, so he can fly the plane back out? If the farmer is smart, he'll sell it to him for ten times what he paid to get it to his farm/polar ice cap, and then go back and buy a ten year's supply of gas. Postulate it's 'planting time', his next delivery is in 5 days, and he has just enough 'on hand' to fuel his tractors till the scheduled delivery. Supplying the pilot would idle a tractor for a day. That can translate to _tens_of_thousands_ of dollars of lost revenue at harvest. At $500/gal. one might be approaching the 'opportunity cost' of selling that fuel to the plane owner. Still think he's "smart" to sell the fuel at 'only' 10x cost? |
#108
|
|||
|
|||
|
#109
|
|||
|
|||
heard from Jarvis that Jon got out of there by getting fuel from an
English woman No problem. A girl bailed him out, very graciously. She's a 99. The Flyin Wimmen will come through for you! Here's the latest on her...and I rather wonder why we don't hear much about her project. http://www.worldwings.org/ |
#110
|
|||
|
|||
"Big John" wrote in message ... To give closure. OBE as one of my old bosses used to say. Big John ??? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|