Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Location
    Bay Area, Ca, USA
  • Interests
    PC games, Reading, Fishing, Motorcycle Riding, Flying.

Soback's Achievements

LT. Commander

LT. Commander (4/8)

  1. In a helicopter engine out, the pilot doesn't bank the helo, he just changes the pitch of the rotor blades. Like when you are going down the freeway, and have your hand out the window, if your hand is almost paralel to the wind, you feel a little resistance, put it pependicular to the wind, and your hand gets pushed back, hard. Same with the helicopter. The pilot changes the pitch of the blades, and makes them almost paralel with the ground (less resistance, the blades spin up, and the helicopter falls faster). The faster the blades spin the more stored energy he has, when he gets close to the ground, he increases the pitch of the blades (makes them more perpendicular to the ground) and in turn the blades create lift (push air down, like a fan in your home does, the higher the pitch/speed of the fan, the more air it pushes), slowing the fall of the helo. Just like your hand gets pushed back when you tilt it against the wind, so does the helicopter gets a push "up" (rather slows it's rate of descent) when he increases the pitch of his blades. As far as that deadstick goes, http://www.mfs.com.au/MFS_Glossary.htm#D I should've looked it up first.
  2. Mmmm... "Dead stick" would be when controls are unresponsive and you have to fly the aircraft by trim/throttle inputs. But hey, like the media ever knows anything.
  3. Yeah, Aramike, way to debate with facts. Facts are, our government is corrupt. Facts are, if you don't have accountability on the personal level, and there's no repricussions for violating the law, the criminals run rampant and missconduct is common. It's elementary. The punishment prevents the crime. If you could rob a bank, shoot 10 people, and the max sentence you could get is a year in prison, this type of crime would be common, everyday occurence. Therefore, if you can steal, cheat the taxpayers, not do your job and collect a paycheck, abuse the power of your position, and not even be fired, then all that would be a common occurence, which it already is. Clinton lied, and not went to jail. Senators steal, take bribes, and don't lose their jobs, at most they "appologise" and maybe step down (which is laughable). We the people get abused, and are ALWAYS just one beurocrat (judge, policeman, IRS agent, ect..) away from having ALL our posessions confiscated, land siezed, life ruined, and time in prison. And that's an everyday occurence. Starting from the immenent domain law, going through the fees/taxes bleed, and ending like those ranchers (in Arizona was it, or New Mexico), having their property confiscated because they kicked ILLEGALS off of it. Now THAT's a police state. A state where the government (the state) is POLICING it's citizens. Don't know what police state you don't want to live in. However, a country where the people are not afraid of their government, and the power is FROM the people (like it was intended), is a good place to be. Don't try to justify something just because it's the government that's doing it. You tried it with when you defended the selloff of OUR highways, the ones WE paid for, to private companies, so that we can continue to pay MORE, and now you are trying to make one phrase of "police state" argue the whole point for you. Look up "Police state" aramike. It's when the CITIZENS are oppressed by the government, NOT when the government is accountable TO the citizens.
  4. What a fallacy, to justify a wrongdoing by pointing out a worse wrongdoing. It's like saying that Sadam wasn't bad because when compared to Stalin or Hitler, he only killed a couple of million as opposed dozens of million. Or how about, "Hey, my house was robbed, but it's ok because they only took the tv and some jewlery. The neighbors house on the other hand was cleaned out. So I don't mind." Wouldn't be suprised if in a decade there will be insurgency, trying futilely to expose and overthrow this corrupt, illegitimate goverment, by force. That's why accountability on personal level, and extreemly tough sentences need to be imposed and enforced on every government employee. If a government employee (appointed, elected or hired) knowingly violates the Constitution, it's execution time. Corrupt/illegal conduct = labor camp. Willfull incompetence = prison time. Gross incompetence = termination without any further ability in government employment, for life. Only then will you get a clean government. There will NEVER be responsibility without accountability, those two go hand in hand. Without these ideas being instituted, we the sheep will always be getting fleeced and abused.
  5. LOL, Do you know where your Ipod has been? Don't touch anyone elses Ipod, evar....
  6. Did you not watch the video? The guy is not LISTENING and ABIDING. Tasering is the least they should've done. If people don't abide the law officers there would be chaos. As far as your better alternative goes. Don't just say "I am sure there was a better alternative". PRESENT your better alternative of how to get a moron to comply. What you think the cops just showed up there for no reason and started tasering and dragging the guy out? Did you not read the link? They asked him for ID, he didn't show it. They ASKED him to leave. He refused. So they cuffed him, he dropped down on the floor. They told him to stand up, he wouldn't. So they tasered him to try and get him to obbey. Which obviously WORKED. The only reason this story is even getting attention is because this guy is Iranian (looks middle eastern).
  7. Yeah, I upgraded to 7 too. All kinds of little things. Overall it's nice, but creates minute lag on all the windows it opens, ect... About the cookies, is it possible that if you set "delete history" after one day, it deletes the cookies too?
  8. Yeah, pretty sure in US there is no such thing as a fine for insulting a public official. It's just something that the socialists dreamed up. Gotta mulk the money somehow. What Jack did is expressed his opinion. As long as he didn't write any lie and state it as a matter of fact, he has the right to express his opinion. ESPECIALLY about a public figure. This is one of the big things US was/is founded on.
  9. First, you need to get an idea who you are talking to here. I am a pilot, and know a lot more about Federal Aviation Regulations than you can begin to even understand, and you quoting me a little paragraph that is not even from the book, means nothing. VFR is NOT a loophole. What those idiots are proposing is to make Visual Flight Rules to be more like Instrument Flight Rules, where you have to file a flight plan and be in constant contact with ATC. So it would make no sense to change VFR rules for the sake of preventing terrorist attacks, or preventing accidents. Like I aldready said, those guys weren't following the regulations already in place, by flying too low over LAND (they were supposed to stay over water), the regulations ALREADY in place for VFR prevent things like this from happening. THAT is why I mentioned IFR. A terrorist could as well file IFR, BE in constant communications with ATC, BE under radar contact, he can violate every single rule, and STILL cause damage. However, the thing is, you can't cause much damage with a piston plane. Even if you load it up with explosives, a piston engine aircraft doesn't have the penetration force necessary, nor does it have much payload. THAT is why I am telling you about a truck. Have you already forgotten how after 9/11, some dumb kid crashed a Cessna 172 into an office building. Do you remember the results of that? The office was barely damaged, let alone anything done to the building. So, I am not going to educate you on FAR's or on aircraft performance in this post. What I am telling you, as a professional pilot, is the crap that everyone keeps talking about, like imposing some idiotic regulations for aircraft operating under VFR will do zilch to prevent terrorists from doing what they want to do. Nor will it prevent accidents like this, because not only is this an accident, it happened why the pilots DISREGARDED the regualations already in place, so imposing any additional beurocratic bull is not going to prevent anything, it will only make it harder for pilots without adding any safety margin. Also, a light piston twin barely has the power to lift 3 people, to lift 4 it will have to trade the weight of the 4th one by not taking on fuel, so the notion of causing any substantial damage with it is laughable. All this talk does is highlight the ignorance of the people who open their mouth (especially the politicians) and put forth the ideas that imerged from their jumbled brains without a centilla of knowledge on the subject. [ 10-19-2006, 11:23 PM: Message edited by: Soback ]
  10. First of all, VFR is by far not the wild west of aviation. VFR stands for "Visual Flight Rules". RULES stands for "An authoritative, prescribed direction for conduct, especially one of the regulations governing procedure in a legislative body or a regulation observed by the players in a game, sport, or contest. " That being said, it's far from everyone doing their own thing. It starts from as simple as what altitude you will fly at depending on which direction you are traveling in, to something as complex as those VFR corridors and airspace regulations. Also, the fact that there was a certified instructor with him, and an accident happened. It REINFORCES the notion that whatever happened wasnt just because this guy was a low time pilot, because obviously even the flight instructor couldn't save them. What would prevent a terrorist from filing a flight plan, taking off, then flying into a building anyway. You do know that ALL the aircraft involved in 9/11 attacks were flying under IFR, were in ATC contact, and had IFR flight plans on file. Well, maybe you didn't. Oh, and one more thing, a Beechcraft Baron weighs a maximum of 5,524 lbs. http://www.raytheonaircraft.com/beechcraft...ifications.aspx By comparison a Ford 150, the smallest weighs 6,500 pounds (not counting what it could tow), to 8,200 lbs (bigger engine/hp etc...). Do your math on what would be simpler and cause more damage.
  11. It was an accident. Simple as that. He was flying that low, becaues the corridor SPECIFIES that he stay under 1,200 feet. It's TOTALLY fine when you are flying right above the water, which he was doing. That's EXACTLY what this corridor is designed for. Low flying traffic over the water. It all went awry when he got over land. He broke the rules already IN PLACE, and he paid the ultimate price for it. There's no new rules nor regulations needed, as there's nothing that will stop a terrorist from breaking them all to cause death and damage. This is the same as the laws that prohibit normal law abiding citizens from owning firearms, while the criminals go right ahead, get firears and commit crimes with them on those same law abiding citizens. The politicians who have no knowledge in aviation writing laws for us aviators to follow will not do anything to protect this nation from an internal terrorist attack. All it will do is hinder normal law abiding pilots, cause more congestion in already high traffic areas, cause bussiness/taxes and revenue loss, ect.... So stop all this silly panicking till you familiarize yourself with aviation and gain some knowledge on this area, and not from the "facts" that are portrayed on the news. PS, how many fatal accidents are there on the US roads and freeways? The ratio is hundreds of times higher than aviation accidents (even if you count the non fatal ones). If you are going to use the analogy that "the plane he got was a little 'racy', it's like just getting your drivers license and jumping into a ferrari", then why don't you say something like "When people get their drivers license, they shouldn't be allowed to drive anything but a 1970's VW bug with less that 100 horsepower, AND push your politicians to scream "US roads are not secure, any terrorist could get a drivers license and drive a truck loaded with "explosives, biological, or nuclear" material into a building. That is by far a more realistic scenario. Instead, they all keep quite, while illegals without insurance are driving all over US, causing traffic, accidents, deaths, and all kinds of damage. The politicians are all hush, and people are like sheep "all is quite, then all is well" LOL, wait till a small plane that weights less than a Ford 150 crashes and kill the two pilots on board, and we have a panic that the sky is falling down. ROFL
  12. What loophole are you talking about? There is no loopholes. He got his license, he bought a plane, and he was flying it with a CFI (CERTIFIED FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR). Somehow everyone just seems to ignore the fact taht during this ACCIDENT, there was an actual experienced, FLIGHT INSTRUCTOR at the controls with this private pilot. As far as VFR corridors go, they are just that, VFR corridors. They are designed to route VFR traffic (aircraft flying under visual flight rules) through designated area. It reduced congestion in the overall area, and reduced the workload on ATC so that it can actually dedicate attention to where it's needed, instead of spending time yaking to a guy flying along a designated corridor. How is required ATC contact going to prevent a terrorist attack? EVERY aircraft flying in that area is already UNDER RADAR CONTACT. There's absolutly NOTHING an ATC controller can do to prevent a terrorist from doing anything, just by being in radio contact with him. All it is are some idiots who have zero knowledge in aviation, voicing their interpretations on how things should be. These talking idiots, talking, spitting and trying to design Aviation Regulations are akin to a guy with no mechanical skills, telling an actual mechanic how to fix his car.
  13. Let's Say I Break Into Your House... > > Recently large demonstrations have taken place across the country protesting the fact that Congress is finally addressing the issue of illegal immigration. Certain people are angry that the U.S. might protect its own borders, might make it harder to sneak into this country and, once here, to stay indefinitely. Let's see if we can correctly understand the thinking behind these protests: > Let's say I break into your house. Let's say that when you discover me in your house, you insist that I leave. But I say, "I've made all the beds and washed the dishes and did the laundry and swept the floors; I've done all the things you don't like to do. I'm hard-working and honest (except for when I broke into your house). > According to the protesters, not only must you let me stay, you must add me to your family's insurance plan, educate my kids, and provide other benefits to me and to my family (my husband will do your yard work because he too is hard-working and honest, except for that breaking in part). If you try to call the police or force me out, I will call my friends who will picket your house, carrying signs that proclaim my right to be there. > It's only fair, after all, because you have a nicer house than I do, and I'm just trying to better myself. I'm hard-working and honest, um, except for well, you know. > And what a deal it is for me!! I live in your house, contributing only a fraction of the cost of my keep, and there is nothing you can do about it without being accused of selfishness, prejudice and being an anti-housebreaker. Oh yeah, and I also want you to learn my language so you can communicate with me. > Why can't people see how ridiculous this is?! Only in America.... ---> Cut and paste from an e-mail
  • Create New...