Good, but not great landing.

R Hubbell

It's a F-16.

Big John



On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0800, "R. Hubbell"
wrote:



This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again) All aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...h_sth105.jp g
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again) All aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...h_sth105.jp g
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

Gig

Hubbell listed two URLs in his post.

The first was photo of a burned aircraft gear up in the 'weeds'.

Second was news article about the Lear.

I just identified the F-16 photo since it was so badly burned that
about only thing you could use to identify was the tail in planform
view.

Big John


On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:09:34 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
wrote:

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said it
was a Lear 24
"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
R Hubbell

It's a F-16.

Big John



On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0800, "R. Hubbell"
wrote:



This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again) All
aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...511121648.illi
nois_plane_crash_sth105.jpg
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said it
was a Lear 24
"Big John" wrote in message
...
R Hubbell

It's a F-16.

Big John



On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0800, "R. Hubbell"
wrote:



This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again) All
aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!


http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...511121648.illi
nois_plane_crash_sth105.jpg
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

Gig

I'll stand in the corner and accept my 20 lashes.

That's what I get for jumping to conclusions because the media almost
always gets it wrong (

Big John

On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 13:28:40 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
wrote:

John... That was a photo of the Lear... Here is a better link to the same
photo. It does look like a F16 though.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sth10511121648


"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
Gig

Hubbell listed two URLs in his post.

The first was photo of a burned aircraft gear up in the 'weeds'.

Second was news article about the Lear.

I just identified the F-16 photo since it was so badly burned that
about only thing you could use to identify was the tail in planform
view.

Big John


On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:09:34 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
wrote:

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said
it
was a Lear 24
"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
R Hubbell

It's a F-16.

Big John



On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0800, "R. Hubbell"
wrote:



This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again)
All
aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!



http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...0511121648.ill
i
nois_plane_crash_sth105.jpg
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

John... That was a photo of the Lear... Here is a better link to the same
photo. It does look like a F16 though.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...sth10511121648


"Big John" wrote in message
...
Gig

Hubbell listed two URLs in his post.

The first was photo of a burned aircraft gear up in the 'weeds'.

Second was news article about the Lear.

I just identified the F-16 photo since it was so badly burned that
about only thing you could use to identify was the tail in planform
view.

Big John


On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 12:09:34 -0600, "Gig Giacona"
wrote:

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said
it
was a Lear 24
"Big John" wrote in message
.. .
R Hubbell

It's a F-16.

Big John



On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:42:57 -0800, "R. Hubbell"
wrote:



This would be a good landing, (since the plane can't be used again)
All
aboard
looked to have survived.

Wow!



http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com...0511121648.ill
i
nois_plane_crash_sth105.jpg
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...is_plane_crash


R. Hubbell

In article , Big John
wrote:

I just identified the F-16 photo since it was so badly burned that
about only thing you could use to identify was the tail in planform
view.

John, I see what confused you in the photo..
The Lear's vertical and horizontal stabilizer are laying over away from
the camera, giving the illusion that the tail is taller and thinner and
not a T-tail.
Although the wrap-around cockpit glass is definitely Lear sillouette.

Gig Giacona wrote:

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said it
was a Lear 24

Yeah, but the photo doesn't look like anything Lear ever built.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money prolonging
the problem.

Big John wrote:
Gig

I'll stand in the corner and accept my 20 lashes.

That's what I get for jumping to conclusions because the media almost
always gets it wrong (

Big John

I'll be the first to agree that the media needs to hold itself to
higher standards of accuracy in all of its reporting. But at the same
time, I hope this illustrates just how tough a job the average
reporter has. They turn to experts to get their facts, so when the
experts can't get it right, it's no surprise that the media can't
either. Does this exonerate the media from its errors? Of course not –
but they shouldn't be crucified for them either.

Despite the mistakes that can be found in the media, we would be
awfully ignorant in a lot of areas if it weren't for the job they do.

"G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message
...


Gig Giacona wrote:

The news I saw last night said it was a Lear. The quoted news story said
it
was a Lear 24

Yeah, but the photo doesn't look like anything Lear ever built.

George Patterson
If you're not part of the solution, you can make a lot of money
prolonging
the problem.

It was the angle...I saw a shot taken from helicopter from above and in
front it was a Lear.