• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Facebook was a basket of fruit this morning.

Endicott Peabody Davison was the son of F. Trubee Davison. Trubee formed the First Yale Unit, a group of Yale undergraduates who financed their own training and became the nucleus of naval aviation. I attended the 50th anniversary of naval aviation at the Waldorf-Astoria Hotel in New York. Cardinal Cushing was there along with surviving members of the Unit and glittering admirals and generals. It was an amazing experience.
 
***He enlisted in the United States Coast Guard, later transferring to the United States Marine Corps, where he trained as a fighter pilot, developing a reputation as a 'hot pilot' (famously looping the Golden Gate Bridge).

Probably not too many can claim that item checked on their bucket list.
I was told the fellow who built my former airport 28M looped the Golden Gate in an F-86. I have no proof other than knowing he was the type who would.
 
This wasn’t found on Facebook but it certainly could be.

“Passed this on 287 between Dumas and Amarillo. That’s a Lycon crate on a Lincoln. Cooler than a horse trailer on a Cadillac. That would double the value of my truck if it was in the bed.”
IMG_9724.webp
 
Ran across this on marketplace this am. No nothing about it but figured someone here might want some strut pods.

 

Attachments

  • IMG_9748.webp
    IMG_9748.webp
    812.6 KB · Views: 48
I largely agree with this point of view.

And I also attribute some of the “attraction” of all the idiots posting accidents and incidents to the demographic that social media is funneled to.

 
There is no difference between what is stated in that video than the methods which the general mainstream media has been following forever. They all love accidents and seem to relish other people's misfortunes. What is imbedded within most of the stories is the lack of understanding of the topic by the author.
 
Pete, I see a difference due to the medium that it is on.
- In the traditional news outlets it was reported by anywhere from 1 to maybe 500 sources worldwide, depending on the impact of the incident. That number diminished rather quickly over time as impact of the incident lessened and other news arrived.
- in the social media world the algorithm is such that if the immediate impact of any particular source is enough, or, a particular post gains traction, that info is fed into more and more personal news feeds. Based on how many people it is shown too and how many then click on it, even for a second, tells it how much more to publicise it. And it takes a very long time to dissipate.

From there it’s a snowball and fodder for anyone with an account, as thousands don’t care about the content, but they see a cash cow and dramatize the words, illustrations, opinions, and controversy because as revenue is paid to them for views.

There are people posting nothing but runway proximity incidents derived from ATC Live and some computer simulation modeling. Same thing ATC interactions in general.
 


at least one if not both should be viewable without an account.
 


at least one if not both should be viewable without an account.
From here the descent rate didn't appear to be high enough to break off a gear. Do you suppose he was too far to the right and caught the wing tip in a snow bank? Those planes have long low wings, it wouldn't be too difficult to drag a wing tip, then if it hit a snow bank, the impact could be strong enough with the long leverage arm to break it off at the root. They were lucky the fire was contained to the fuel in the wing.
 
Pete, while I feel it was a bit of a carrier landing, I too was wondering if even they ended up too far right and caught the gear on something.
Whatever the root cause that gear and wing were gone in a heartbeat.

The other video floating out there from behind shows both engines torching themselves on gear touchdown, somewhat confirming a very hard impact vertically.
 
Most manuals for airlines currently state to land firmly when hydroplaning is a factor. They had blowing snow in a crosswind. Not necessarily hydroplaning conditions but perhaps they felt that merited a "firm" landing Vs a greaser. They obviously misjudged "firm".
Also, as engines have become larger (hi bypass Vs earlier turbo jet) the cowlings are closer to the ground. Thus you have little ability to lower a wing in a crosswind. In many airliners more than about 8* bank will scrape the nacelle. Thus you must land in a crab in a crosswind. Conditions like the mishap do require a high level of stick and rudder skills that are no longer taught or commonly held by the newer generation of pilots. That situation would require a crab approach into a minor flare, kick out the crab, drop the wing just a little, and land with about 200 or 300 FPM descent. All that action occurs in the flare and happens in about 2 seconds.

SJ knows I can make a "firm" landing. LOL

We are Blessed there were no fatalities.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sj
Absolutely terrifying. Can you imagine being in a window seat watching (and feeling the heat of) the fireball as it engulfed your entire world? God forbid.
 
The best one I heard was the "explosive bolts" that airliners have so the wing breaks off keeping us safe (CNN live), he mentioned them for the engines too - yes the engines are designed to break off the pylon at certain catastrophic vibration levels - but no airliner I know of has 'explosive bolts' anywhere. I had to turn it off.
 
Back
Top