winsor

you must mean 335HP? Likely not. The idea behind turbocharging aircraft engines is usually to avoid power dropoff with altitude, rather than to increase power overall. Higher power settings generally entail higher heat generation and dissipation requirements. Since most air-cooled aircraft engines have a tough time staying in the green zone on the oil temp as it is, upping the temperature is likely to require an overhaul just that much sooner. As far as heat generation goes, I would be leery of any turbocharger installation without an intercooler. IIRC, adiabatic compression of air at altitude can result in temperatures much higher than at sea level, to the detriment of performance and engine life. Having been impressed with just how much it costs to keep aloft a normally-aspirated aircraft with fixed landing gear and a fixed-pitch prop, I am not easily assured that an added bit of complexity won't result in crippling costs. I consider shaft-powered superchargers to be a bad idea in general (e.g. those on the GSIO engines, found on Twin Bonanzas and Queen Airs, that have failed catastrophically all too often). I agree that turbochargers are the way to go for altitude flight with recips, and that a pilot that knows what he/she is doing is critical if the engine is going to survive. A panacea it is not - there is no free lunch (if God had meant man to fly, He would have given him more money). Blue skies, Winsor

psi Looms? That's likely "Cyalume." My guess is it comes from "cyano," as in cyanide, but I haven't investigated quite what chemical reaction results in light emission. I would, however, advise against eating the stuff. Blue skies, Winsor

Anyone that believes Mrs. Kerry has any involvement with the management of Heinz is seriously misinformed. Anyone trying to make political points from it is . Ah, for the good old days where political jokes didn't even have to stand for election. My favorite bit of brand-name recognition associated with the White House was a former president, who said "I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln." IIRC, I blew soda out my nose when he said that. Blue skies, Winsor

Wingsuits. t Excuse the stupid less than one year in this sport newbie question. But do you think someone will land a wingsuit in the near future? If so then is that the way this sport is heading, i.e., landing w/o a canopy. I'm sure someone will land a wingsuit in the very near future. Landing a wingsuit is no big deal. The trick is surviving it. Blue skies, Winsor

FWIW, "ich bin ein Berliner" means "I am a jelly donut." "Ich bin Berliner" in German means "I am a Berliner" in English. The article is significant; it's like the difference between saying "I am Danish" and "I am a Danish." Blue skies, Winsor

A Catholic priest, a Baptist minister and a rabbi walk into a bar. The bartender says "what is this, a joke?"

"Yes, after all they spend all their time naked and just reproducing like rabbits. You know being the savages they are and all. Can you pour some more tea for me, James"? One does NOT address servants by their given names, nor does one enquire regarding the ability to perform their duties. Thus, it would be "more tea, Ruggles." Blue skies, Winsor

yes Tony Blair John Major Margaret Thatcher James Callaghan Edward Heath

Mark Kruse came up with a fundraising idea to cover medical expenses resulting from someone' landing that didn't go quite as planned. The basic idea was that we all pitched in ten or twenty dollars, which went into a pot. Craig was to put half of a freshly cut habenero pepper in his mouth. If he could somehow keep it in his mouth for (I think it was) two minutes, he got to keep half the pot and the rest went to medical expenses. If he lasted less than two minutes, all the money went to medical expenses. I was made the timekeeper since I was wearing my NASA chronograph, so Mark put the pepper in Craig's mouth and called time. Craig immediately chewed it up and swallowed it, thus earning his half of the pot the hard way. As Craig sat in front of the hangar with tears streaming down his face, I went into the restaurant to get something to deal with the damage he had inflicted on himself. I got him a chocolate muffin, and the guy in the restaurant wouldn't let me pay for it. He considered it first aid. As Craig ate the muffin, someone asked him if he would do it again. He though for a moment, grinned and said "yeah!" I must admit, it wasn't boring when he was around. BSBD

Well, we saw that when guns were banned and confiscated in England, that gun crime went up! So we figured we'd try the opposite approach and give everyone an automatic machine gun, so that crime would go down. An armed society is a polite society.

"I'm not bad. I'm just drawn that way."

Identical twins are, in effect, clones. The question reflects a Dark Ages mindset. You'd have to refer to theological treatises ca. three-digits AD to get a definitive treatment of the subject. Blue skies, Winsor

The four stages of Tequila: 1) I'm rich 2) I'm good looking 3) I'm bulletproof 4) I'm invisible

W. C. Fields

Having spent a number of trips to France driving around battlefields from The Great War, Parts I and II, I think the impression that the French soldiers were anything but valiant and tenacious is inaccurate. The U.S. cemetery at Omaha Beach is very impressive. However, compared to the French military cemeteries on the Western Front, it is about mid-size. The Americans were engaged in combat for a period of months in 1918, and were very impressed with themselves (not to denigrate anyone who endured that appalling conflict). The French, OTOH, were engaged in a slugfest/bloodbath for YEARS, enduring despite the (largely successful) German attempt to bleed them white ("weissbluten"). A simplistic view of the failure of France to successfully defend itself against Blitzkrieg on the second go-around may be appealing, but it fails to distinguish between the gallantry of the French fighting men and the incompetence of the French high command. FWIW, Haig was no prize, either. Blue skies, Winsor

My reaction to fatalities is hardly uniform. The loss of a friend can leave me in tears; even now the memory of a farewell that turned out to be the last makes my throat tight, and I am grateful that I had the opportunity to say how much I valued them. OTOH, I am devoid of sympathy for some people whose Darwinian exploits left but a legacy of destruction in their wake. The guy who put his body in the way of the 412 rotor at the Convention comes to mind. In general, I am concerned that people's sentimentality gets in the way of their objectivity. They can't separate the facts surrounding the loss of someone from their emotional attachment to them. I have lost friends who didn't have a chance, such as when aircraft have crashed, as well as friends who made a couple of mistakes and ran out of options. I do not think I have to pretend that those who died as a result of bad choices really did not err in order to grieve their loss. In fact, I think denial is one of the most dangerous pitfalls of losing someone close, since it can blind one to very real dangers that we all face. The best and the brightest are not immune to the results of a lapse on any particular jump. I can think of a list of world champions who are no longer with us as a result of easily avoidable circumstances. My reaction to people bouncing is to work with the people around me to increase the likelihood that we will all survive each and every jump. When I ask people to check their gear a couple of minutes before exit, the only people who give me a hard time are friends - while they're checking their gear. Enough potential problems have shown up that I think the effort is worthwhile. As far as botched swoops and panic turns, we have a long way to go to get a handle on the issue of high-speed dirt under a good canopy. The reality is that the equipment has evolved faster than has the skillset of the jumping population, and it is going to take some years to stabilize. In any event, when people die in the sport there should be both a clinical analysis of the circumstances of their death and the search for lessons to learn, as well as a mechanism to deal with the grief of the survivors. These functions are both important, and should not interfere with each other. Blue skies, Winsor

Some of my rigs: Main - 99 /reserve - 175 Main -99/reserve - 218 Main - 175/reserve - 200 Main - 220/reserve - 202 Main - 250/reserve - 240 Main - 282/reserve -294 I don't ALWAYS have a larger reserve than main, simply as a matter of mixing and matching what I have available. The 175, FWIW, is my first square reserve, and I have landed it successfully more than once. so I haven't traded up with that one. Regardless of what I'm jumping for a main, I try to have a reserve that gives me a chance of survival if I get a collarbone or arm broken during a violent exit or whatever, and have to land with a minimum of steering and no flare. I also want something I can sink into someone's back yard without having to eat a fence. That's just me. YMMV. Blue skies, Winsor

In politics the scum rises to the top. What else is new?

Since they were riding on the same parachute, they'd be in violation since they were (theoritically) jumping two single harness dual parachute systems, an 'experimental' animal I'd say. Now, if they were jumping a Tandem system (dual harness, dual - main/reserve - parachute), and the passenger was unlatched and then rode down on the TMs shoulders, that (in theory) would be legal since it's a dual harness, dual parachute system, right? They were following the letter of the rules... Actually, no. Some time ago, when tandems had a higher age restriction (I don't recall what it was - I've never made a tandem jump), this age restriction was circumvented by having the passenger/student in an appropriate parachute harness, attached to the tandem master. This was researched pretty carefully beforehand, and was done (repeatedly) in accordance with BSRs and FARs. The BSR does NOT say you must open above a given altitude, it says you CANNOT open below that altitude. A tandem passenger/student on the shoulders of the tandem master is in violation of SOPs and thus either or both FARs and BSRs. Regardless of whether it was a good idea or not, landing the Mr. Bill did not, in and of itself, break any rules. Blue skies, Winsor

What a bunch of non sequiter bullshit. I didn't bitch or whine so don't spin it out like I was. I simply stated facts. Us and Them huh?.......it's that easy all I have to do is join "them" fuck I wish someone would have told me that a long time ago. Please tell me the solution to a 4 year old child calling me nigger how do I fix that? take her away from her parents and never let them reproduce again? I don't give a fuck if you ever jump with me or what your reasons were if you didn't I never mentioned skydiving in my post you just threw that out there. More spin? Oh by the way you can go fuck yourself (twice even) if you think I'm about feeling sorry for myself once agian I notice that I'm accused of felling sorry for myself or being melodramatic but not the person who started this thread explain that shit to meQuote Poor baby. Evarybody's being mean to you.

I will as soon as society and your government stop practicing institutional racisim. That way I won't have to be hit, called names, followed through stores like a criminal, ignored when trying to get seating in a nice restaurant, jacked up and searched by police for walking down the street, pulled over by police for DWB, simply because of the color of my skin There's only two kinds of people on this earth, US and THEM. To a great extent it is up to you whether you are one of us or one of them. If you want to bitch about how tough it is to be one side of the black/white divide, I'm sure I can match you case for case, personally, from the other standpoint if I were so inclined. I contend that it's a cop out, and I challenge you to focus on solutions rather than problems. The "civil rights activists" have a conflict of interest when it comes to resolving differences between groups. In fact, they have a vested interest in keeping the various factions polarized and at each other's throats. If everyone gets along, they're out of a job. If you think the Government is picking on you - News Flash! the Government fucks over EVERYBODY! That's what they do! Deal with it! Many (most) movements are based on a combination of real issues and misconceptions/misrepresentations. If it makes you happy to buy into it hook and sinker, knock yourself out. At the DZ, I'll jump with you if you have a good attitude toward safety and like to have fun. I don't give a rat's ass if you are male, female, Irish, Albanian, Zulu, Tibetan, Shinto, Zoroastrian, Mormon or Animist. If I won't jump with someone it's because they scare me in the air - even if I like them on the ground. I voted to axe Roger Nelson when he fucked up on a par with other people who had been axed - and I certainly didn't take into account his race, religion or sexual preferences. If you want to feel sorry for yourself, you are on your own. If you want to let that shit go and join in the festivities, you might note that you really don't have a much tougher time than people who aren't bitching about it. Blue skies, Winsor

Because unlike the FAA's rules which don't say you must actually open a parachute at all, I interperate the BSR's to mean Minimum container opening altitudes above the ground no matter what the speed. Otherwise the action was a "Tandem Skidive" and was definately in violation of both BSR's and FAR's. Tanedm skydive? They were both wearing approved, in-date dual container parachute systems. They just landed under the same parachute, and it was open per BSRs.

As I'm sure people will try. Just as a note to everyone, it is a stunt that is against the USPA BSR's specifiacly this one: Waiverable only by.... So kids make sure you try it only at a NON USPA DZ. Why? Nobody opened below the hard deck.

I like the abuse. Anyways, thanks to everyone for their insight. Basically, I was telling Phil about my dream where someone died while doing cocaine. He said that maybe Stacy (our invisible coworker) replaced the cocaine with Comet, and that's what killed him. I said that snorting Comet wouldn't kill you, and it looks like (big surprise), I was right! Snorting a gram of primo blow in two half-gram lines would be one hell of a lot likelier to freeze your heart than would dying from the same amount of Comet. Bleaching the hell out of your sinuses would be bad news, but hardly a COD. Blue skies, Winsor

If you are pretending to be clueless, you are most convincing. At best you sound petulant. It is not purely down to jump numbers - there are people who have 1,000 jumps, and those who have 100 jumps ten times - but jump numbers can generally give a pretty good idea of what is one's perspective, regardless of innate ability. Talent is all well and good, and some people can have extensive experience without catching on. All skydivers are not created equal. Nevertheless, people with the ego level necessary to skydive tend to confuse luck with ability. After sticking around a while, the difference can become more apparent. I've known too many "naturals" who are no longer in the sport because they pushed their luck too long and it ran out. Life is a series of lessons - the ones you miss get repeated and get harder. Some are not surviveable the first time around. FWIW, I thought the Mr. Bill was a lot more impressive than the LOW opening, and generally agree with Chris. I'm not sure that I'm all that confident that one or both of these guys won't guess wrong and try something that is, in fact, fatal, but my reaction while watching it was anything but righteous indignation. I don't feel like trying to duplicate their results, but thought it was great entertainment. As an aside, I will be interested if your standpoint remains the same if you stick around long enough to achieve some kind of senior status. Nobody I know has done so, but you may be different. Blue skies, Winsor