From: "Marvin Kaye" <marv@lancaironline.net>
Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Roseville Glasair crash
To: lml
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 00:21:47 -0500
Message-ID: <web-996473@logan.com>
In-Reply-To: <HKEALNOJJECFFEKDNHAGKEBDGDAA.farnsworth@charter.net>
References: <HKEALNOJJECFFEKDNHAGKEBDGDAA.farnsworth@charter.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Posted for "Farnsworth" <farnsworth@charter.net>:

  Jeff,
  
  I didn't realize that we were playing a "ball game" here with this
  discussion, but since the "ball is now in my court" I guess I'll send it
  back your way.
  
  I'm sure there are many examples of people who have killed themselves by
  making "sharp pull ups" followed by, stall, spin, fireball. There have also
  been a great number who have done the "stall, spin, fireball" from a base
  turn.
  
  Since  a "stall, spin, fireball" can be entered from a "normal" base turn
  perhaps it should be labeled dangerous too?
  
  I can assure you that it doesn't take "4 Gs and 70 degrees of bank" to
  reduce airspeed to flap and gear operating range in my Legacy (using an
  overhead pattern) .  45 -50 degrees of bank and less than 2Gs will easily be
  enough.  If I start from a missed approach and fly a closed pattern it is
  even less that that.
  
  The FAA has picked 200KIAS as a safe pattern airspeed. If I am at or below
  200KIAS, then I am, by FAA definition, at a safe airspeed. I haven't exceed
  60 degrees of bank or 30 degrees of pitch so I haven't broken any rules
  there. If I haven't broken a rule I must still be safe. Right??? I didn't
  interfere with other traffic in the pattern. No rules broken there, so still
  safe. Right?? To top it all off, I even manage to avoid the "stall, spin,
  fireball" in the turn to final and execute an uneventful landing. There was
  NO "ass shining" here, just airplane flying!
  
  I think the only complaint you could have  with my "safe uneventful" flight
  is that I didn't enter traffic the way that "YOU" deem is the "correct" way
  and so it must be unsafe.
  
  The real cause of these accidents is that people are exceeding the
  capabilities of their aircraft and, or their own personal capabilities.
  There are people and airplanes that "shine their asses" all the time with
  the approval of the powers that be. Ever been to an air show? Do the
  performers have a death wish, or is it that, just maybe, they are trained
  and abide by the laws of physics and aerodynamics.
  
  I must admit to "shining my ass", once. There was a North Vietnamese gunner
  that hosed me down  (missed). I had to go back by his place of employment
  right after that event, so I did some aileron rolls as I went by.  UP YOURS
  is what it meant!!!!!!!!!!
  
  I am very conservative in the way I fly, and I don't fly to "shine my ass".
  
  The only correlation between the Glassair accident and the original subject
  of this thread is that aircraft are involved. The Glassair event appears to
  be a case of "ass shining". George Shattuck's pattern entry was not.
  
  As far as "shock cooling" being "BS" I might agree with you, but there are
  many who don't and so operate their aircraft with that in mind. Many people
  don't think much of operating lean of peak either. That is fine.
  
  I have been trained to fly an overhead pattern, as well as a closed pattern.
  They are both safe, and useful, when flown properly. They, in and of
  themselves, are not "ass shining". Your painting with a broad brush not
  withstanding. Your saying they are "ass shining" is "BS".    (:
  
  Regards,
  
  Lynn Farnsworth