Go Back   Sports Car Forum - MotorWorld.net > General Discussion > General Chat

General Chat General chat about anything that doesn't fit in another section here



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-19-2005, 07:00 PM   #31
FoxFour
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Charleston, S.C. USA
Posts: 985
Default

So far, the area around the crash site has been blocked off by the Air Force. Even local authorities are not allowed near it. They said it was carrying ordinance. I don't know if that means bombs/ cannon shells or both. They are also looking for the black box. Here's another TV report.
rtsp://mgs.mgbg.com/wcbd/video/Apr05/crash_andy_041905.rm
__________________
1996 Mustang Cobra. Vortech Kompressor installed.
Many pilots of the time were the opinion that a fighter pilot in a closed cockpit was an impossible thing, because you should smell the enemy. You could smell them because of the oil they were burning.
Adolf Galland
FoxFour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2005, 07:10 PM   #32
gobs3z
Regular User
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 1,590
Default

Originally Posted by FoxFour
Hmm, much to say. First off, in a combat environment I personally would love to have a combat aircraft with two engines. Redundancy and all that. The safety record of the Harrier has not been all that great through the years, mainly due to the fact that most crashes have occurred during the transition period from vertical take-off to regular fixed wing flight and vice versa. The Marine Corps has strict requirements for people that are allowed to train in the Harrier.
Now, to general aviation aircraft. According to the NTSB, general aviation aircraft that incorporate single-engines are safer. The crash statistics confirm it. The majority of crashes are due to pilot error and twin-engine aircraft are more accident prone, mainly in the take off and landing phases. More so during takeoff because the aircraft has many things stacked up against them, low airspeed (flight controls are slow to respond) high angle of attack, P-factor from the propeller(s), spiral prop wash and the rotational torque from the engine(s) as well as heavy fuel loads during takeoff.
When flying a twin, you have to be at the top of your game when something goes wrong. Like instrument flying, you can't become rusty or when a problem arises the chance of something fatal to happen goes way up.
Agreed
__________________

"If we could read the secret histories of our enemies, we would find in each story enough sorrow and suffering to disarm all hostility." Longfellow
gobs3z is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-19-2005, 11:31 PM   #33
FerrariFerrari
Regular User
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 309
Default

the one advantage of a twin engine aircraft is that when one engine goes out the other
takes you straight to the scene of the crash, no need for a search party.

I am not to familiar with the air force but in general aviation most crashes are do to
the pilot getting over confident in him self and his abilities or just plane getting
Leasy. I read an article one time in a magazine about about someone who crashed
because he had a habbit of taking cat naps while he was flying. If you read
the crash reports you'll find that almost %100 of all crashes could have been prevent
if the pilot just followed the standard procedures. The engines in single engine planes
like Cessnas if kept properly should never fail. When a plane like a Cessna has an
engine failure you can usually glide about one mile per 1000 ft of altitude.
FerrariFerrari is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump