Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:05:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

If, in fact, the opposite is true, meaning the *left* handle bar
is nudged forward slightly with the right handle bar pulled back
an equal amount and you make a *left* turn ... that is counter steering.

===

That is what I meant by "nudging the left handlebar". Since the
handlebar is one continuous unit, it necessarily follows that the
right side would move back although I wasn't conciously pulling it
that way. My boat bike tends to be a bit top heavy so the motion on
the handlebar is very slight.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On 2/18/2015 10:47 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:05:41 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

If, in fact, the opposite is true, meaning the *left* handle bar
is nudged forward slightly with the right handle bar pulled back
an equal amount and you make a *left* turn ... that is counter steering.

===

That is what I meant by "nudging the left handlebar". Since the
handlebar is one continuous unit, it necessarily follows that the
right side would move back although I wasn't conciously pulling it
that way. My boat bike tends to be a bit top heavy so the motion on
the handlebar is very slight.


Same as on a motorcycle.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On 2/19/2015 1:46 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:29:39 -0500, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:13:06 -0500, KC wrote:

On 2/18/2015 4:05 PM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:37:57 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:07:12 -0500, wrote:

All the work needs to be done by a licensed mechanic and parts make
boat parts look like peanuts.

===

Every single part has to be certified and traceable back to its place
and date of manufacture.

You can't buy 'em out behind the shed from someone's trunk at a 'plane show' in
Virginia?

Well, ****. Guess I'll have to do without.


There are a lot of very airworthy and proven "experimental" aircraft out
there. Are they held to the same standard as registered aircraft? There
is a huge rc club down by our practice track. I have seen everything
from gas and electric rc planes to manned single seat eggbeaters and
several kinds of ultra light paragliders, etc take off and fly around there.

===

I'm not an expert on the regulations but I do know that experimental
aircraft are not held to the same standards. Whether they are truly
airworthy or not could be debated. I believe that John Denver died
flying an experimental aircraft, and a former neighbor of mine almost
killed himself crashing an ultra light last year. Another former
neighbor was left crippled for life after crashing a home built
(experimental) plane.

I knew a Gyrocopter guy at IBM. He had a leg that will never be the
same from crashing on the Garden State Tpk.
Another IBM guy was paralysed from the neck down from an ultralight
crash. The 3d guy is a friend of my neighbor and he is still
successfully flying untralights.
The last time I saw him it was the parachute and motor on your back
thing. He was talking about a pontoon "plane".
They all say there was virtually no effective regulation.
You build these things from kits, They said they got a cursory
inspection from the FAA guy, he watches you fly around a little and if
you don't crash, you are licensed. It may be a little more
complicated than they described but not much.



If it's a single person or single seat ultralight no license is required
at all. No registration, no flight worthiness certification, no
inspection. Nothing. Just build it and fly it. No training,
certificate or medical required of the pilot. The ultralight must
meet the FAA definition of an ultralight however (less than about 250
lbs, fuel capacity, etc.) and they can only be flown during daylight hours.

Maybe local laws in your area are different but the FAA requires no
inspection or license.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:42:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:15:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The term "seat of the pants" in flying doesn't refer to physical input
data. It refers to flying naturally without having to think about
every step you are taking. I was never very good at it.

===

I understand your point but I always thought "seat of the pants"
flying referred mostly to banking the plane at the right angle for the
turn radius, i.e., banking it so that you don't slide in your seat one
way or the other.

I would think that the butt's reaction to banking an airplane would be the same as
the reaction to banking a motorcycle. The force is directly into the seat, so no
sliding occurs.
--

Guns don't cause problems. The behavior
of certain gun owners causes problems.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:53:27 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 2/18/2015 8:58 AM, Abit Loco wrote:
On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 20:41:57 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Tue, 17 Feb 2015 17:10:34 -0500, Keyser Söze
wrote:

This is really funny stuff...thanks, Luddite. :) And remember, driving
that RC boat in a swimming pool is just like driving a real boat through
a ferocious inlet. I mean, what's the difference?

===

What the heck would you know about driving a *real* boat through a
ferocious inlet? Really.

With regard to Dick's suggestion about taking a flying lesson, I
highly recommend it. Introductory lessons are usually priced at
reasonable rates and it will give you a taste of the real deal. You'll
find it quite interesting. My first lesson was in a Piper J3 tail
dragger with no doors or windows and controlled with a "stick".
It was about as basic as you can get short of an ultra light.

I'd like to find someone who would take me and a couple grandkids up in one of those
piper style airplanes.



Any flight school would be happy to accommodate you. In my check out
flight in the Piper Warrior my younger son and son-in-law were in the
back seat.


Missed this. Thank you.
--

Guns don't cause problems. The behavior
of certain gun owners causes problems.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 06:38:02 -0500, Stick Left-Steer Left
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:42:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:15:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The term "seat of the pants" in flying doesn't refer to physical input
data. It refers to flying naturally without having to think about
every step you are taking. I was never very good at it.

===

I understand your point but I always thought "seat of the pants"
flying referred mostly to banking the plane at the right angle for the
turn radius, i.e., banking it so that you don't slide in your seat one
way or the other.

I would think that the butt's reaction to banking an airplane would be the same as
the reaction to banking a motorcycle. The force is directly into the seat, so no
sliding occurs.

===

Thats the ideal situation, zero lateral G forces. Apparently that
happens automagically on a motorcycle just like it seems to on a fast
moving boat. On an airplane it's entirely possible to be banked at
the wrong angle for the rate of turn.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 08:27:55 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 06:38:02 -0500, Stick Left-Steer Left
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:42:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:15:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The term "seat of the pants" in flying doesn't refer to physical input
data. It refers to flying naturally without having to think about
every step you are taking. I was never very good at it.

===

I understand your point but I always thought "seat of the pants"
flying referred mostly to banking the plane at the right angle for the
turn radius, i.e., banking it so that you don't slide in your seat one
way or the other.

I would think that the butt's reaction to banking an airplane would be the same as
the reaction to banking a motorcycle. The force is directly into the seat, so no
sliding occurs.

===

Thats the ideal situation, zero lateral G forces. Apparently that
happens automagically on a motorcycle just like it seems to on a fast
moving boat. On an airplane it's entirely possible to be banked at
the wrong angle for the rate of turn.

Yup, you're right. I suppose a hard rudder with no banking would have you sliding in
the seat.
--

Guns don't cause problems. The behavior
of certain gun owners causes problems.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

On 2/19/2015 8:57 AM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 08:27:55 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Thu, 19 Feb 2015 06:38:02 -0500, Stick Left-Steer Left
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 22:42:36 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 21:15:04 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

The term "seat of the pants" in flying doesn't refer to physical input
data. It refers to flying naturally without having to think about
every step you are taking. I was never very good at it.

===

I understand your point but I always thought "seat of the pants"
flying referred mostly to banking the plane at the right angle for the
turn radius, i.e., banking it so that you don't slide in your seat one
way or the other.

I would think that the butt's reaction to banking an airplane would be the same as
the reaction to banking a motorcycle. The force is directly into the seat, so no
sliding occurs.

===

Thats the ideal situation, zero lateral G forces. Apparently that
happens automagically on a motorcycle just like it seems to on a fast
moving boat. On an airplane it's entirely possible to be banked at
the wrong angle for the rate of turn.

Yup, you're right. I suppose a hard rudder with no banking would have you sliding in
the seat.



I think I've mentioned this before but here's a personal example of
"seat of the pants" flying:

Plymouth airport has two runways, one running South/North, the other
East/West. they cross each other in the middle.

I was returning from a scenic flight and was in the downwind leg of the
active runway. I turned base, then final, announcing my positions and
intentions on the radio. As I lined up in the final I noticed a larger,
twin engined airplane also in his final but lined up for the inactive
runway.

Plymouth is not a controlled airport but there are usually people there
watching what is going on and monitoring activity. They called out to
the larger plane at about the same time that I saw him. The larger
plane had not announced his intentions or position previously that I
know of. He was advised he was on final to an inactive runway and
traffic was landing (me) on the active. No response.

They then called me and asked me to hold "short" upon landing.

I briefly thought of aborting and pulling up but realized the other
guy might do the same thing and we'd hit 100 feet above the runways
instead of on them.

I executed a beautiful slow speed, full flaps landing, literally
stalling the Cessna just over the numbers. It literally fell the last
foot to the ground and probably rolled no more than 30 feet. Even I was
impressed.

Received a "thank you, good job" from the guy in the tower. The guy in
the other plane received a request to meet the airport manager after
parking.

That's "seat of the pants" flying.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

Wayne.B wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 20:13:06 -0500, KC wrote:

On 2/18/2015 4:05 PM, Stick Left-Steer Left wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:37:57 -0500, Wayne.B wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 15:07:12 -0500, wrote:

All the work needs to be done by a licensed mechanic and parts make
boat parts look like peanuts.

===

Every single part has to be certified and traceable back to its place
and date of manufacture.

You can't buy 'em out behind the shed from someone's trunk at a 'plane show' in
Virginia?

Well, ****. Guess I'll have to do without.


There are a lot of very airworthy and proven "experimental" aircraft out
there. Are they held to the same standard as registered aircraft? There
is a huge rc club down by our practice track. I have seen everything
from gas and electric rc planes to manned single seat eggbeaters and
several kinds of ultra light paragliders, etc take off and fly around there.

===

I'm not an expert on the regulations but I do know that experimental
aircraft are not held to the same standards. Whether they are truly
airworthy or not could be debated. I believe that John Denver died
flying an experimental aircraft, and a former neighbor of mine almost
killed himself crashing an ultra light last year. Another former
neighbor was left crippled for life after crashing a home built
(experimental) plane.

John Denver forgot to check the fuel level. We were just down Pacific
Grove and were reminded that Denver crashed near there. Was a memorial
bench in the Monarch Butterfly grove.

Navy Carrier Pilots - Overpaid?
 

wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 14:44:12 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

BTW ... in response to someone else's comment ... I
pursued and got my ticket years before I had much extra $$ to spend.
It was a dream I had since I was a little kid and I am very glad to have
accomplished it even though it turns out it was not something I wanted
to stay heavily involved in.


I know several pilots and they all say it is a rich man's hobby. Just
keeping one of those little "Buddy Holly" planes up to FAA specs is
like owning a second home.
All the work needs to be done by a licensed mechanic and parts make
boat parts look like peanuts.

All the work has to be inspected by a licensed person. Inspected, not
done. I have a friend who is in partners with 2 others, and he is not
rich. But cheaper to rent. As they say, if it flys, floats or fornicates
it is cheaper to rent.