 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion Groups General AviationLearningIFRHomebuiltSoaringUltralightRotary-wingCountry Specific Australian GroupUK GroupRelated Topics BoatsCarsMotorcyclesMore Topics ... |
Aviation Forum / General / Aviation / July 2009I would not have thought this was possible
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related And indeed, it's fake. Bummer. http://www.snopes.com/photos/airplane/onewing.asp rg >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > rg http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4 Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related > > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet > engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. Actually, I was under the impression that the sucked-into-jet-engine video was real. It's certainly plausible. Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to show that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. rg >> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >> > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >> Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet >> engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. > Actually, I was under the impression that the sucked-into-jet-engine > video was real. It's certainly plausible. That one actually happened :-) > Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to show > that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. > > rg > Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to show > that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. It's easy to be taken in by it, I agree, but I think that once you come to the proper realizations it's not too hard to see that it must be fake. To me, the most damning mistake in the video is the fact that the plane sits perfectly level after the landing. Wings are *heavy*. Having only one would make that plane tip right over onto its wingtip. Once I realized what I was looking at, this to me was ironclad proof that they were filming a plane with two intact wings, with the angle cleverly chosen to hide one, and the rest done by some special effects trickery.  SignatureMike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon >> Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to >> show that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > cleverly chosen to hide one, and the rest done by some special effects > trickery. People believe almost anything once they suspend common sense. Just look at a jet intake for 2 seconds. No calculations necessary. Here's another <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTzSxxH2s3U> And another cat fake: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dzi_8Rscfs> > People believe almost anything once they suspend common sense. Just look > at a jet intake for 2 seconds. No calculations necessary. Please explain. > Here's another <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTzSxxH2s3U> Again, explain how this is fake, too. Ricky >> People believe almost anything once they suspend common sense. Just look >> at a jet intake for 2 seconds. No calculations necessary. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ricky I don't have the time to explain the obvious, Monkey Heh! On Jul 13, 9:56 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > > Again, explain how this is fake, too. > > > Ricky > > I don't have the time to explain the obvious, Monkey Heh! I knew you couldn't...or wouldn't, because they are real. The guy getting lifted into the A-6 engine is authentic, it did happen and you are mistaken if you believe otherwise. As a mechanic I have heard extensive coverage of this story; it is widely used in training applications both civilian & military. The aerobatic plane landing after a wing departure is fake. You may call me any name you wish...it will only reinforce the fact that you need to grow up. Ricky > On Jul 13, 9:56 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I knew you couldn't...or wouldn't, because they are real. Monkey, if you think they are real, then you have confirmed that you are an idiot. > The guy getting lifted into the A-6 engine is authentic, it did > happen and you are mistaken if you believe otherwise. > As a mechanic I have heard extensive coverage of this > story; it is widely used in training applications both civilian > & military. Idiot. > The aerobatic plane landing after a wing departure is fake. That was real. > You may call me any name you wish...it will only reinforce > the fact that you need to grow up. > > Ricky Thanks, Idiot. On Jul 14, 9:45 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: >I don't have the time to explain the obvious, Monkey Heh! > Monkey, if you think they are real, then you have confirmed that you are > an idiot. > Idiot. > Thanks, Idiot. I rest my case. BTW does your mommy & daddy know you are using the computer? Ricky In article <99f99886-5209-458f-933e-dc1bc978493a@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, > On Jul 14, 9:45 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Ricky No, but when they find out, they're going to be *pissed*. It'll be grounded for a month, and no ice cream for dinner. > In article > <99f99886-5209-458f-933e-dc1bc978493a@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > It'll be grounded for a month, and no ice cream for dinner. For your sad info, my mother and father bothpassed dies before I was born. I was raised as an Army intelligence brat, *FYI* if you get my strong drift, Monkies. <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: >> In article >> <99f99886-5209-458f-933e-dc1bc978493a@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > born. I was raised as an Army intelligence brat, *FYI* if you get my > strong drift, Monkies. That's not what you've said in the past. I suppose socks invent stuff as they go along. Just like your flying ability. Looks like the miasma's hiatus hence was rather short-lived... sigh. On Jul 15, 11:06 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > > In article > > <99f99886-5209-458f-933e-dc1bc9784...@32g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>, > > >> On Jul 14, 9:45 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > >> wrote: On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > For your sad info, my mother and father bothpassed dies before I was > born. I was raised as an Army intelligence brat, *FYI* if you get my > strong drift, Monkies. "dies" before you were born? Learn some english, little boy. I assume you're saying your mommy & daddy died "days" (?) before you were born? Which means you were pulled from your dead mommy via C-section? Which means you lived through it? Damn! Wish you would've suffered the same fate. It's no wonder...it's obvious you were raised with no effective parenting. George > On Jul 15, 2:06 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Which means you lived through it? > Damn! Wish you would've suffered the same fate. See how I control you, Monkey? It's embarrassing, isn't it? > It's no wonder...it's obvious you were raised with no effective > parenting. > > George The Monkey Get back to me when you want to discuss aviation. Monkey. On Jul 16, 2:42 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > See how I control you, Monkey? > It's embarrassing, isn't it? The fact that you exist & are on rap is what's embarrassing. Ricky > On Jul 16, 2:42 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ricky Dear George or Ricky or Dudley Henriques or Whoever Sock Puppet you are this minute I'm sure you say you've never posted as anyone but yourself. However that denial doesn't prove anything. (1) If you were a sock then you can't actually able post because that's something your sockmaster would have to do. (2) If you were a liar, your claim to tell the truth could be a lie. --- Are you able to comment how you were posting for a period of 7 hours. Then only a few minutes after you stopped, the self-acknowledged sock "Dudley Henriques" posts suddenly started to post. He hadn't made a single post at any time in the previous 9 hours. And as he started to post, you completely stopped posting. That's a remarkable co-incidence. In fact, it's too remarkable. It's impossible. Such a pattern repeats itself over and over again. If two people were posting randomly, that pattern wouldn't occur. Is there anything else you want to say about this? On Jul 17, 11:45 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > > On Jul 16, 2:42 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > > Is there anything else you want to say about this? Why are you talking to UUnet? Go outside, play, run & jump. And it's random. And don't skip your meds again. > On Jul 17, 11:45 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > > And don't skip your meds again. Our companion Ricky/George/Richard may be a seemingly personable soul but we must take care not to let this obscure the fact that he is far too dense to realize he has long ago been out of his depth in this exchange. I think you could be wasting your time because Ricky/George/Richard lacks the basic personal equipment needed to comprehend these concepts. In other words, he has no brains. On Jul 18, 7:34 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: > In other words, he has no brains. Exactly. I lost most of my brains after completing my CFII, A&P, and a Master's in mechanical engineering. Actually, I am going to nix "George" on here since there seems to be another. I George is reading this, my apologies for using George as my moniker and I am going to use a different Usenet I.D. here from now on...maybe Franklin! George (last post here as George) > On Jul 18, 7:34 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > I lost most of my brains after completing my CFII, A&P, and a Master's > in mechanical engineering. Sorry to hear that, At least you had them for a little while, Monkey. > George (last post here as George) No worries, mate, Hey! You ID yourself with your shit4brains posting style. You're like the fat ugly chick in HS wasting her life constantly bitching about how snobby the cheerleaders are because she was too much of a butterball to fit in the uniform on tryout day. Too pathetic for words, to st00pid to stop obsessing. On Jul 18, 9:03 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> blabbed: > You're like the fat ugly chick........(rest of teenage childish insults snipped) Awww, did I finally push your button? I now realize the best way to respond to Frankie is......not to. Please, let's allow this troll no more attention from anyone here. I should have realized many keystrokes ago that RAP is not the place for attention-starved kids like Frankie. The more the baby is ignored, the less he'll cry. Forgive me for ever responding to him. Bye kid! It's been...uhh...kinda fun, actually. G > On Jul 18, 9:03 am, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > blabbed: [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > G Hi George, well done. You bested that troll. He must be feeling sore because I also gave him another spanking recently. That troll has posted in the aviation groups as Maxwell, Payton Bird, Ari and a long list of names. Now he's trying to sound like me but he's doing a crap job of it. > Exactly. > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > George (last post here as George) Don't worry about it. There are (for example) six King Georges and a whole bunch of others who share the erstwhile name. Its like the Monty Python Australian sketch where the entire family, their guests and neighbours are all Trevs (Trevors) >> Exactly. >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Its like the Monty Python Australian sketch where the entire family, > their guests and neighbours are all Trevs (Trevors) Hi George, well done. You bested that troll. He must be feeling sore because I also gave him another spanking recently. That troll has posted in the aviation groups as Maxwell, Payton Bird, Ari and a long list of names. Now he's trying to sound like me but he's doing a crap job of it. Franklin <"Franklin wrote: >> On Jul 19, 2:47 am, George <axtellgeo...@gmail.com> wrote: >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Now he's trying to sound like me but he's doing a crap job of it. Well said. Heh! You took the words out of my mouth. I bet you wish you thought them up. Unfortunately I wrote them and you didn't. > On Jul 16, 2:42 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Ricky Monkey, so defeated and deflated you can't find anything of substance to argue about, yet you're still unable to refrain from slobbering all over my dick. Here's a couple free clues for you pet: naw, hey you're a pathetic little bitch. Piss off. Bear Bottoms <never.c"@red.about.it> wrote: >> On Jul 16, 2:42 pm, Franklin <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> >> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Here's a couple free clues for you pet: naw, hey you're a pathetic > little bitch. Piss off. You're so pissed at my new name for you (Organ Grinder's Monkey) that you want to get rid of it and pass it on to someone else. Too bad. No matter what tantrums you throw, Monkey remains your nickname. Would you prefer it if you were called by the sock master's name, "Bear Bottoms"? http://groups.google.co.uk/group/alt.comp.freeware/msg/3d5703183eab2b11 Tell me if there's anything you don't understand in that link. > >> Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to > >> show that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > And another cat fake: <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5dzi_8Rscfs> What do you mean? Those videos are clearly real. rg > It's easy to be taken in by it, I agree, but I think that once you come > to the proper realizations it's not too hard to see that it must be [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > were filming a plane with two intact wings, with the angle cleverly > chosen to hide one, and the rest done by some special effects trickery. We regularly take wings off airplanes for repairs of one sort or another. The airplane does NOT tip onto its other wingtip. The density of wing structures is very light; like most of the rest of the airframe, it's nearly all airspace. A 172's wing weighs maybe 70 or 80 pounds, max. See this video about the wing-losing video, which was clearly faked. See especially the last few seconds: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I89EMDZ0dsc Dan In article <69534248-0869-4930-86a8-78f61667967f@13g2000prl.googlegroups.com>, > > It's easy to be taken in by it, I agree, but I think that once you come > > to the proper realizations it's not too hard to see that it must be [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > airframe, it's nearly all airspace. A 172's wing weighs maybe 70 or 80 > pounds, max. Huh, I never would have guessed. Even a relatively (compared to a 172) light single-place glider has wings much heavier than that. Maybe that'll teach me to generalize where it's not appropriate. However, doesn't that assume that it's empty of fuel? I assume having fuel in the tanks would change the picture substantially. SignatureMike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon > Huh, I never would have guessed. Even a relatively (compared to a 172) > light single-place glider has wings much heavier than that. Maybe > that'll teach me to generalize where it's not appropriate. > > However, doesn't that assume that it's empty of fuel? I assume having > fuel in the tanks would change the picture substantially. Even full fuel wouldn't change it much. 25 gallons of fuel weighs 150 lbs, right over the mainwheel. The 300-lb engine is well inside that wheel, as well as the rest of the fuselage. You'd have to hang yourself off the wingtip to get any tip. Dan >> Huh, I never would have guessed. Even a relatively (compared to a 172) >> light single-place glider has wings much heavier than that. Maybe [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Dan Dan, Mike's not a *real* pilot like you and I. > >> Huh, I never would have guessed. Even a relatively (compared to a 172) > >> light single-place glider has wings much heavier than that. Maybe [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Dan, Mike's not a *real* pilot like you and I. It's true! Unlike real pilots, I perform every takeoff and initial climbout in close formation with another plane. I use wits and weather to stay aloft rather than fuel. And I never, ever go around. :) SignatureMike Ash Radio Free Earth Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon >>>> Huh, I never would have guessed. Even a relatively (compared to a 172) >>>> light single-place glider has wings much heavier than that. Maybe [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > climbout in close formation with another plane. I use wits and weather > to stay aloft rather than fuel. And I never, ever go around. :) Too bad no one trusts you with powered flight. > Actually, I was under the impression that the sucked-into-jet-engine > video was real. It's certainly plausible. Real. The flash you see, as he goes in, is his helmet FOD'ing the engine. His shoulders were wider than the intake duct, which stopped him from going through the turbine. Sore and bruised, but lucky. SignatureJim in NC >> Actually, I was under the impression that the sucked-into-jet-engine >> video was real. It's certainly plausible. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Sore and bruised, but lucky. Wow - the whole issue is a mess of fact and fiction. Consider: 1) There appear to a bunch of obviously faked videos on Youtube of people getting "sucked" into jet engines. This makes it tedious to sort out the legit from the bogus. 2) Some videos, like this one showing a helmet (cranial) getting sucked off a guys head, seem perfectly legit: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OswpNAH9nrk 3) I believe the velocity of the suctioned air should fall off roughly with the inverse square of the distance from the intake - and so the suction force for a fixed area should be roughly proportional with inverse cube of the distance from the intake. Meaning you have to get dang close to suck in something as dense and heavy as a person! (I know I have problems vacuuming up heavy "grit"! Experiments with a vacuum cleaner are easy and I'm sure everyone is aware how quickly the suction force drops off.) 4) Although circumstances would make it rare, it appears it may have an been issue as long as a few decades ago because there appears to be an article titled "Survival after suction into jet engine intake" by Ayres, ML in the May 1973 journal "Injury": http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/4710924 This seems to indicate the article is case reports: http://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/ebm/record/4710924/full_citation/Survival _after_suction_into_jet_engine_intake_ "Jim Logajan" <JamesL@Lugoj.com> wrote in> Wow - the whole issue is a mess of fact and fiction. Consider: > 1) There appear to a bunch of obviously faked videos on Youtube of > people getting "sucked" into jet engines. This makes it tedious to sort [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > off a guys head, seem perfectly legit: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OswpNAH9nrk The case I saw might have been the Ayres incident you cited It has been a while since I saw it, but it was well documented. The person that was "sucked" was training a person, and stepped in to check the work, and was out of position. It seems the A-6's intake is in a position and has high velocity that makes a habit of sucking things into it. I first saw the incident on TV and did not see the part about him surviving, and had more than one nightmare about it. I was glad to later see that he did not get chopped up. I just remembered something else; he said his cranial came off and FODed the engine, the engine was shut down quickly. If it had not, it might have pulled him in the rest of the way. SignatureJim in NC >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Actually, I was under the impression that the sucked-into-jet-engine > video was real. It's certainly plausible. Then you were a fool. > Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to show > that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. > > rg Amateur hour. You need to see my aerobatic films. >>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >>>> [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > Amateur hour. You need to see my aerobatic films. Hello I'm Jeff. My cousin has let me use his PC. The best fakes I've seen are your posts. > >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related > >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Then you were a fool. Could be. But I'd be in good company. The consensus around the net seems to be that that clip is in fact real. > > Even the one-wing landing video requires fairly close inspection to show > > that it's a fake. It's quite well done IMHO. > > > > rg > > Amateur hour. You need to see my aerobatic films. That presents a logistical challenge since you posted semi-anonymously, and Jimmy Franklin is dead so you're probably not him. So who the f.ck are you, and where are we supposed to go to see your aerobatic films? rg >> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > > rg He's a prolific sock who posts here and in various groups such as alt.comp.freeware where I usually hang out. Dud and I had to teach him a few real basics about flying and that really upset him. He's trying to sound like me, Franklin. He claim he used to be Navy Seal but the only special operation he goes on is when his Mom tells him his dinner is ready. > >> >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related > >> >>> [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > He claim he used to be Navy Seal but the only special operation he goes on > is when his Mom tells him his dinner is ready. Yes, I realized this after I posted my reply. Sorry for feeding the troll. rg >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet > engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. It's REAL. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4 > > Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet > engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. "Franklin," why don't explain and entertain us with your theory behind this being a fake. How does "looking at a jet engine for 2 seconds" convince one to believe this accident was a fake? Franklin, the serviceman being sucked into the jet on-deck was real, very, very real. Ricky >> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> >> [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Ricky Hello sock. Why doesn't your organ grinder ask the questions rather than use his monkey? For me, it's too amazing that a guy working next to an Intruder gets sucked into one of its intakes with such massive force that it dragged him off the ground but afterwards he doesn't have any crush damage from jamming between the bullet cone and cowling and doesn't look like he been squeezed hard up against the stator vanes. http://www.imageno.com/k3bfdhgc73i0pic.html http://images.marketworks.com/hi/72/72196/KL37C03.jpg Maybe he's supposed to have squeezed through the low bypass compressor bleed channel to come out unscathed. Heh heh! Let's have that 2 second look at what those J52s on an Intruder really looks like ... http://www.imageno.com/pyopisgsihhtpic.html OK, so what passed through the engine to cause the rear flash in the vid? If anything solid went through that turbofan there'd likely be a blade-out which looks very different to the brief flare out in the vid. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcALjMJbAvU The vid shows our hero posing for a photo only hours afterwards. No shock, no crushed shoulders, no broken ribs, no split skull, no broken nose. Seemed to me the vid showed the mannequin had a floppy thigh bone but the guy looks fine afterwards, no bloodied clothing, no major abrasions. ... Just an arm sling and a bandage for a head graze. Gimme a break. He would be undergoing tests in ICU for the rest of the day and may be the day after that as well. A few hours afterwards he wouldn't be posing with his pals but he'd be filling in incidence reports, the safety officer would be going berserk and the carrier's senior officers would be doing some interviewing. The vid's date is Feb 20 1991 but the quality looks like it's from the 1960s. Most vids from 1991 are in color. Try frame advancing the spoof using this AVI rather than an FLV: <http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/sucked%20in% 20engine.avi> >>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> >>> [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > <http://www.alexisparkinn.com/photogallery/Videos/sucked%20in% > 20engine.avi> Certainly there are fake videos in the world. This one however is real. It has been featured on network news magazines (Don't know if it was 60 Minuites, Nightline, or what). It also is used as a training film in the military and most major airlines. This one is real. > >>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> > [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > military and most major airlines. > This one is real. I am almost positive that is was all done on a sound stage just look at the shadows! Kidding yes that is a very real incident. >>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> >>>> [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > military and most major airlines. > This one is real. You're full of it. I explained once and once was enough. > I explained once and once was enough. Thank goodness for small favors. >> I explained once and once was enough. > > Thank goodness for small favors. Which is what your wife said on your honeymoon. <"Franklin <never.c"@red.about.it>> wrote: >>> I explained once and once was enough. >> >> Thank goodness for small favors. > > Which is what your wife said on your honeymoon. Doesn't your organ grinder want to talk direct? Why does he need to use a sock? >>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> >>>>> [quoted text clipped - 64 lines] > > You're full of it. I explained once and once was enough. Ok folks I get it now. We are dealing with a Troll. I will stop feeding the Troll now. >>>>>> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4> >>>>>> [quoted text clipped - 67 lines] > Ok folks I get it now. We are dealing with a Troll. I will stop feeding > the Troll now. Typical, yell "troll" because you have been shown up as an aviation novice. > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_gpPbpONK4 > > Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet > engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. Are you suggesting that the referred video was a fake - I think it isn't - or that one can't at all be sucked into a jet engine? If the latter, you might be wrong. I seem to remember a Continental mechanic ending up inside one of their 737 turbines a few years ago (in Texas?). And didn't a sucked luggage container at LAX delay a JAL 747 the other day? That container didn't go through the blades of course but the human skeleton is less resistant to whirring fan blades. No I think you can maim yourself if you're in the intake draft cone of a turbine. Ramapriya >>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Some people WANT to believe this even though they need only look at a jet > engine for 2 seconds to know it's fake.. According to the Flight Safety Briefing I attended when I was still working for the Canadian Armed Forces, this is indeed real; military jets are not like civilian jets... Terry SignatureUsing Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ > >> In article <rNOSPAMon-5D205D.23072610072...@news.albasani.net>, > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > -- > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:http://www.opera.com/mail/ why are all you people arguing with this moron? On Jul 13, 4:58 pm, "Terry Aardema" <taard...@nrcan.gc.ca> wrote: > > Ron Garret wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > -- > Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client:http://www.opera.com/mail/ why are all you people arguing with this moron? Exactly. It's a Troll or a moron, or a moron Troll. Let it die >>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZiP4NaeYrE&feature=related >>> [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Terry Are you mixing up two vids? One shows a tech's cranial being sucked off his head into the intake. The other (far more improbable one) shows a man being sucked of the ground into the intake accompanied followed by a large flash and cloud of smoke. Like some sort of stage illusion. A few hours later he's shown posing for the camera with his arm in a sling and a simple bandage around his head. Perhaps the Flight Safety people were just trying to make you sit up and take notice of safety. > Are you mixing up two vids? > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Perhaps the Flight Safety people were just trying to make you sit up and > take notice of safety. A jet connected to an aircraft carriers catapult is at full power; that is a LOT of air being moved. Anyone that moves into that airflow within a foot or less of the lip of the intake is going into that intake. And if you've ever seen a military jet that's ingested a bird on take-off you'll know that the "stage illusion" is nothing of the sort; that flash and cloud of smoke is *exactly* what happens, along with emergency vehicle sirens, a hefty price tag, and a bunch of guys in uniform performing a FOD walk down the runway once the sirens wind down. What makes you think that a helmet and set of ear-defenders would cause less damage? Terry SignatureUsing Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ >> Are you mixing up two vids? >> [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Terry And the bird comes back out the rear with only a bandage on. Uh-huh. Sure, >> Are you mixing up two vids? One shows a tech's cranial being sucked >> off his head into the intake. [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Terry Hiya Terry. Sorry if I wasn't being clear. I was saying that the smoke and flash were just showy. I agree his helmet would probably cause as much damage as a birdstrike and even cause a bladeout. > I agree his helmet would probably cause as much damage as a birdstrike > and even cause a bladeout. Bladeout ???????????????? In article <c53edcec-7d83-4dc4-a003-c0ce51eae638 @j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, gblack@hnpl.net says... > > I agree his helmet would probably cause as much damage as a birdstrike > > and even cause a bladeout. > > Bladeout ???????????????? What the pilot does when a PAX does something really stupid - get the blade out. SignatureDuncan > In article <c53edcec-7d83-4dc4-a003-c0ce51eae638 > @j9g2000prh.googlegroups.com>, gblack@hnpl.net says... [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > What the pilot does when a PAX does something really stupid - get the > blade out. No, no, that's what a Flight Sim X player does when he gets bored. Franklin pulls his "blade out". |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2010 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.