Why didn't the Cessna 337 make it?

I can see the mountian flying course set in that area......G

Ben
sitting here looking at the 14,000' Grand Teton about three miles away
and wondering what a 2800 foot mountian looks like.. Oh there's one,
naw it is just a ant hill..





Ken Reed wrote:
I once had an engine failure while IFR over the mountains of Arkansas.

The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call that a mountain ?
---
Ken Reed
M20M, N9124X

The whole state of Colorado seems to be vertical, even if
the eastern 1/4 is just a long slope from Kansas to the
granite range. But people think about the mountains and the
need to be higher.
In flat land areas pilots fly along safely and happy at
1,000 AGL, watching for towers and nude beaches/resorts. So
when a little hill is there, they run into it.

Perhaps if the first people to get to Arkansas had known
about the Rocky Mountains, they would have called the
Arkansas mountains BFHills, but when you die, does it matter
what you call the rock you ran into?


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


wrote in message
oups.com...
|I can see the mountian flying course set in that
area......G
|
| Ben
| sitting here looking at the 14,000' Grand Teton about
three miles away
| and wondering what a 2800 foot mountian looks like.. Oh
there's one,
| naw it is just a ant hill..
|
|
|
|
|
| Ken Reed wrote:
| I once had an engine failure while IFR over the
mountains of Arkansas.
|
| The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call
that a mountain ?
| ---
| Ken Reed
| M20M, N9124X
|

I respect those cumulogranite clouds alot........... Remember, it's not
the crash that kills ya, it is the sudden stop..G


Jim Macklin wrote:
The whole state of Colorado seems to be vertical, even if
the eastern 1/4 is just a long slope from Kansas to the
granite range. But people think about the mountains and the
need to be higher.
In flat land areas pilots fly along safely and happy at
1,000 AGL, watching for towers and nude beaches/resorts. So
when a little hill is there, they run into it.

Perhaps if the first people to get to Arkansas had known
about the Rocky Mountains, they would have called the
Arkansas mountains BFHills, but when you die, does it matter
what you call the rock you ran into?


--
The people think the Constitution protects their rights;
But government sees it as an obstacle to be overcome.
some support
http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.htm
See http://www.fija.org/ more about your rights and duties.


wrote in message
oups.com...
|I can see the mountian flying course set in that
area......G
|
| Ben
| sitting here looking at the 14,000' Grand Teton about
three miles away
| and wondering what a 2800 foot mountian looks like.. Oh
there's one,
| naw it is just a ant hill..
|
|
|
|
|
| Ken Reed wrote:
| I once had an engine failure while IFR over the
mountains of Arkansas.
|
| The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call
that a mountain ?
| ---
| Ken Reed
| M20M, N9124X
|

On 2006-06-02, Ken Reed wrote:
I once had an engine failure while IFR over the mountains of Arkansas.

The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call that a mountain ?

If it's over 1,000 feet from the base to the top, it's a mountain.
North Barrule in the Isle of Man is only about 1700 feet from base to
top. I'm sure the pilot of the Cessna 337 that ploughed into the side of
it after making a navigational error in IMC would have called it a
mountain had he survived the experience. It has very sheer faces and
kills every bit as effectively as Mt. McKinley if you fly a plane into
the side of it. It also generates mountain wave, rotor, ridge lift and
severe sink.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

I once had an engine failure while IFR over the mountains of Arkansas.

The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call that a mountain ?

If it's over 1,000 feet from the base to the top, it's a mountain.

According to ?
---
Ken Reed
M20M, N9124X

Ken Reed wrote:

I once had an engine failure while IFR over the mountains of Arkansas.


The highest point in Arkansas is 2753 feet, you call that a mountain ?


If it's over 1,000 feet from the base to the top, it's a mountain.


According to ?

whom

On 2006-06-07, Ken Reed wrote:
If it's over 1,000 feet from the base to the top, it's a mountain.

According to ?

Poking around the Internet, there appears to be many definitions for a
mountain - 1000 feet is what they told us at school (probably because we
lived within sight of the Malvern Hills, which are a little over 1000
feet and defined locally as 'mountains'), and probably due to the old
Ordnance Survey definition (more on that later).

Wikipedia says that "In the United States, a mountain is 1,000 feet
(304.4 metres) or more in height from bottom to summit. A hill is 500
(152.4 metres) to 999 (304 metres) feet. A discernible hill that is less
than 500 feet high is a knoll" (with the caveat 'citation needed').
However, the USGS says there is no official definition as to what makes
a mountain a mountain and not merely a hill - it seems to be locally
defined.

In the UK, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs defines
mountain as all land over 600 m. This is a close metric equivalent
of 2,000 ft (which is 609.6 metres). The British Ordnance Survey (the
people who do all the surveying and mapping in the UK) used to define a
mountain as being 1000 feet or more, but no longer appear to have an
official definition of what makes a mountain.

So, in summary - if you're in the US, anything over 1000 feet bottom to
top is a mountain, in the UK - if you're following the old OS
definition, also 1000 feet. But you need 2000 feet if you're following
DEFRA's definition.

Online dictionaries are rather vague - "A natural elevation of the
earth's surface having considerable mass, generally steep sides, and a
height greater than that of a hill."

In any case, if it's steep sided and you run a plane into the side of
it, you're going to be just as dead whether the definition of mountain
is 1000 feet or 2000 feet over the prevailing terrain, or not officially
defined at all. Even small mountains, such as Snaefell in the Isle of
Man (just over 2,000 feet) generate the usual mountain effects -
downdrafts, rotor, mountain wave, local weather variations etc. so not
respecting the smaller mountains is foolish.

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de

Instructors don't like 337's. Reason? No respect in an airline
interview for centerline thrust time due to no VMC issues. In fact, you
are better off just leaving the time off entirely as it is frequently
the butt of jokes. Not fair? Perhaps. But that's the way it is in macho
land.

As a personal twin it is fine. Good shortfield performance. Decent
single engine performance. Turbo and pressurized options. No VMC issues
on engine out. What is not to like?

PP-DQA wrote:
My instructor has over 100 hrs on the Skymaster, and he always said
that the problem with the Skymaster crashes were untrained piltos who
didn't take imemdiate actions when needed. He mentioned the
Synchrophaser gauge, that would show you which engine was doing the
work. IT either pointed forward or aft, so looking at it, you'd know
which engine is not working. He also mentioned that to keep the aft
engine cool he would run up the aft engine after running the front,
then shut it off, taxi with front engine on, and start the aft when
he is rady for take off before entering the runway. It's common
practice for many airlines, so it shoudln't be a problem for a
properly trained Skymaster pilot...

On 2006-06-01, Doug wrote:
Instructors don't like 337's. Reason? No respect in an airline
interview for centerline thrust time due to no VMC issues.

That's interesting. Say you have 1000 hours of multi time outside of the
flight training environment (i.e. real going places flying) - and have
never had an engine failure. Why does it matter whether the plane was
centreline thrust or not?

--
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de