Something not being mentioned so far is that there was an unsuccessfull deployment of the chute on an SR-22 earlier in the year. It resulted in an A.D. (Airworthiness Directive - read mandatory maintenance).
Also this year, there was an A.D. related to the trim system on the airplane that required removal of the left aileron. The pilot of the October flight was returning home after having the mechanics perform the A.D. maintenance on his plane. They had apparently not tightened/safety-wired the attachments for the left aileron, resulting in separation after departure.
Fortunately, the other A.D. seemed to do the trick.
I agree. I'm a CFI (Certificated Flight Instructor) and we do indeed train for engine failures. The problem is that training is no guarantee of anything. Terrain, weather, obstacles, these things are not controlled by the pilot.
One of the hard facts of life that we have to teach students is that they may not find a good field when the engine quits. They may just have to find the field that sucks the least. Even more aggravating, the perfect field may lie only 100 yards beyond a point you can reach safely; but you must choose the field you can reach, then do your best to ensure survivability.
It is by no means a cut and dried procedure, or a sure thing. The idiot who simply spouted out "What kind of pilot can't dead stick?" obviously has no idea how complex the task can be.
As for the chutes, the design in the Cirrus is good. It destroys the airframe upon deployment. This will (hopefully) prevent people from just pulling the handle as soon as something makes them nervous.
The pilot in this case should be applauded. He didn't just pop the chute when the problem occurred (and it was a MAJOR problem). He used his own skills to fly the airplane to a less populated area. He demonstrated a great deal of composure and guts; but I doubt he could have dead sticked the airplane in its condition. Does that somehow make him a bad pilot?
There was an unsuccessful deployment earlier this year (July?) that resulted in an A.D. (Airworthiness Directive, read - mandatory maintenance). An unrelated A.D. was also issued this year regarding the trim system on the airplane. Complying with this second A.D. necessitated removal of the left aileron.
The pilot who successfully used his BR chute over Dallas was in fact picking his airplane up from the maintenance shop after having them perform the work for the A.D.s. Apparently somebody hadn't tightened/safety-wired the bolts that hold the aileron to the wing. It separated, causing him to use the chute, which thankfully worked.
The ntsb.gov page that gives the synopses of accidents can be found here. Just click on the link for synopses, and search for sr22's in 2002.
While I'm apalled at some of the things the Patriot Act allows, I can think of no better way to further alienate yourself from the average citizen than to publicly oppose something named the "Patriot Act" and enacted in response to so horrible a deed as 9-11.
I hope they make reasonable and careful arguments, or they'll become the poster children for what's wrong with people who oppose the act.
I think it was misguided; but to add an excessively high cost to the behavior you're trying to curb is not necessarily a "power trip."
Again, I think it was a bad idea. It says that the good work you did has less positive value than the poor work you did has negative. That's a bit convoluted but... you get the idea. It devalues doing good work.
Cap it at 0. A kid's grade should be able to suffer one lower grade. If the kid continues to do it on subsequent papers, then the grade is their own fault.
If that half-witted busybody had been right, and nobody had done anything about it, you'd be complaining about the government spending its money doing stupid things like regulating roller-coasters instead of protecting us.
Momentary and transient G-loads are something that have been fairly well documented. However, the "plopping in the chair" theory still doesn't exactly hold water in this case.
If you get a transient 10-g load by plopping into your chair, what do you suppose you incurr when you get banged around in the coaster?
I don't think you get brain damage; but I also think that you should be able to build an exciting coaster without having excessive g-loads. Sustained loads of 4-5 g's can be very exciting.
Snort will also catch bad traffic buried in protocols that are allowed through your firewall.
For instance, http is probably something that you're going to allow through your firewall. Snort can detect nimda signatures in the http traffic. You're firewall won't.
I'll admit to not having read the article, mostly because the description seems very close to what we do at my job. We use Snort on an interface that has no ip address, and plug it into a port on the switch that mirrors the traffic from the router. This is done at every entry point into our network, and a few internal points as well. The logs are sent through a second ethernet card (with ip) to a mysql database using ACID (Analysis Console for Intrusion Detection.) Once we got the rules tweaked, it became a fairly useful and easy tool to use.
I will watch some of the programming, as a way of keeping the incident fresh in my memory; but I do object to some of the tone of the programming. Perhaps the best way to show our strength is to appear less wounded.
We've done a great deal of healing since the attack; and if I felt we had a statement for Bin Laden, it would be that we are not nearly as wounded as he might think we are.
Please understand that I'm not minimizing any of the hurt or loss; but look at us. We're arguing over what to rebuild at the site. We're flocking to the movies on weekends. We're gonna put Martha Stewart in the hoosgow. We're still driving from state to state without papers, and even still teaching people how to fly. Bin Laden failed to be as big a hazard as even traffic accidents last year; but look at what he and his organization have suffered. Outside of radical Islamic circles, he has lost any credibility he had. He's far from being ineffective; but his work is in fact very restricted compared to a year ago. Overall, he's a failure.
So perhaps we should advertise our healing as well as our pain.
I need more evidence before I'm ready to support attacking Iraq; but I acknowledge that it "could" be a valid course of action.
The lack of a 9-11 link, or even a solid Al-Queda link is the crux of my difficulty with attacking Iraq. If we use our righteous rage to justify whatever actions we want to take against anybody, then we've become no different than the terrorists.
Back to our original point, I have no way to argue the level of Christian devotion that Bush, his staff, or Congress has; and I'm not sure anybody could measure it. But I don't see them going after Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Aboriginal religions, or even satanists.
I wish I had points to mod you up. Your post was cogent and insightful.
The only thing I would disagree with is that the war between the U.S. and Iraq would be a religous war. If you meant that a U.S. attack would spark a religous war, then I would agree; but we won't attack Iraq for being Islamic.
The nearest weather report we have is Ketchikan, which is 30 miles from the crash site. My understanding is that the crash site is next to a lake, which means that you could have very localized conditions of fog or clouds.
As far as ice, carb ice is very possible. Surface icing is possible if the temperature is low, and if you're flying in visible moisture. You won't get surface icing in the 60's.
The truth is, we really don't have any idea what caused the accident. The NTSB does wonderful work. The field investigators and the lab technicians are magicians. There's no burning immediate need to find the cause, so let's wait for their report next year.
Seemingly irrelevant car fires occurringly safely off the side of the highway back up traffic for miles as traffic around the incident slows to a crawl. This behavior mimics that of seismic activity and internet traffic slowdowns.
Internet experts now warn you in the event of a car fire, to stand in a doorway or underneath another heavy structure.
Do you ever just completely blow a dish? Experience, I'm sure, makes your mistakes different than mine; but do you ever just taste soemthing you've cooked and say "God. What did I do to that?
Slashdot Mirror
How soon before your computer just points a gun at you and takes money out of your wallet?
Even if Moore's Law were to prove too difficult to keep up with... so what? It's an arbitrary figure anyhow.
Exactly.
I am the reason people here at the office don't have to deal with spam, and I certainly DO spend quite a bit of time fighting it.
On an average day, we accept about 15k e-mails and reject about 20k.
It certainly isn't a matter of the spammers leaving the workplace alone.
Something not being mentioned so far is that there was an unsuccessfull deployment of the chute on an SR-22 earlier in the year. It resulted in an A.D. (Airworthiness Directive - read mandatory maintenance).
Also this year, there was an A.D. related to the trim system on the airplane that required removal of the left aileron. The pilot of the October flight was returning home after having the mechanics perform the A.D. maintenance on his plane. They had apparently not tightened/safety-wired the attachments for the left aileron, resulting in separation after departure.
Fortunately, the other A.D. seemed to do the trick.
I agree. I'm a CFI (Certificated Flight Instructor) and we do indeed train for engine failures. The problem is that training is no guarantee of anything. Terrain, weather, obstacles, these things are not controlled by the pilot.
One of the hard facts of life that we have to teach students is that they may not find a good field when the engine quits. They may just have to find the field that sucks the least. Even more aggravating, the perfect field may lie only 100 yards beyond a point you can reach safely; but you must choose the field you can reach, then do your best to ensure survivability.
It is by no means a cut and dried procedure, or a sure thing. The idiot who simply spouted out "What kind of pilot can't dead stick?" obviously has no idea how complex the task can be.
As for the chutes, the design in the Cirrus is good. It destroys the airframe upon deployment. This will (hopefully) prevent people from just pulling the handle as soon as something makes them nervous.
The pilot in this case should be applauded. He didn't just pop the chute when the problem occurred (and it was a MAJOR problem). He used his own skills to fly the airplane to a less populated area. He demonstrated a great deal of composure and guts; but I doubt he could have dead sticked the airplane in its condition. Does that somehow make him a bad pilot?
There was an unsuccessful deployment earlier this year (July?) that resulted in an A.D. (Airworthiness Directive, read - mandatory maintenance). An unrelated A.D. was also issued this year regarding the trim system on the airplane. Complying with this second A.D. necessitated removal of the left aileron.
The pilot who successfully used his BR chute over Dallas was in fact picking his airplane up from the maintenance shop after having them perform the work for the A.D.s. Apparently somebody hadn't tightened/safety-wired the bolts that hold the aileron to the wing. It separated, causing him to use the chute, which thankfully worked.
The ntsb.gov page that gives the synopses of accidents can be found here. Just click on the link for synopses, and search for sr22's in 2002.
Virtual protesting might not work; but I bet we could find some virtual extremist to firebomb the virtual Mickey D's.
Christopher Moltisante: "You mean that was real?! I saw that movie. I thought it was bullshit."
He was heard saying afterwards:
"And when we're done with RIAA, we should think about a first strike with nuclear weapons in Korea, and in manchuria."
While I'm apalled at some of the things the Patriot Act allows, I can think of no better way to further alienate yourself from the average citizen than to publicly oppose something named the "Patriot Act" and enacted in response to so horrible a deed as 9-11.
I hope they make reasonable and careful arguments, or they'll become the poster children for what's wrong with people who oppose the act.
I think it was misguided; but to add an excessively high cost to the behavior you're trying to curb is not necessarily a "power trip."
Again, I think it was a bad idea. It says that the good work you did has less positive value than the poor work you did has negative. That's a bit convoluted but... you get the idea. It devalues doing good work.
Cap it at 0. A kid's grade should be able to suffer one lower grade. If the kid continues to do it on subsequent papers, then the grade is their own fault.
If that half-witted busybody had been right, and nobody had done anything about it, you'd be complaining about the government spending its money doing stupid things like regulating roller-coasters instead of protecting us.
It seems the government can't win in some cases.
Momentary and transient G-loads are something that have been fairly well documented. However, the "plopping in the chair" theory still doesn't exactly hold water in this case.
If you get a transient 10-g load by plopping into your chair, what do you suppose you incurr when you get banged around in the coaster?
I don't think you get brain damage; but I also think that you should be able to build an exciting coaster without having excessive g-loads. Sustained loads of 4-5 g's can be very exciting.
They are in airplanes.
Snort will also catch bad traffic buried in protocols that are allowed through your firewall.
For instance, http is probably something that you're going to allow through your firewall. Snort can detect nimda signatures in the http traffic. You're firewall won't.
I'll admit to not having read the article, mostly because the description seems very close to what we do at my job. We use Snort on an interface that has no ip address, and plug it into a port on the switch that mirrors the traffic from the router. This is done at every entry point into our network, and a few internal points as well. The logs are sent through a second ethernet card (with ip) to a mysql database using ACID (Analysis Console for Intrusion Detection.) Once we got the rules tweaked, it became a fairly useful and easy tool to use.
I will watch some of the programming, as a way of keeping the incident fresh in my memory; but I do object to some of the tone of the programming. Perhaps the best way to show our strength is to appear less wounded.
We've done a great deal of healing since the attack; and if I felt we had a statement for Bin Laden, it would be that we are not nearly as wounded as he might think we are.
Please understand that I'm not minimizing any of the hurt or loss; but look at us. We're arguing over what to rebuild at the site. We're flocking to the movies on weekends. We're gonna put Martha Stewart in the hoosgow. We're still driving from state to state without papers, and even still teaching people how to fly. Bin Laden failed to be as big a hazard as even traffic accidents last year; but look at what he and his organization have suffered. Outside of radical Islamic circles, he has lost any credibility he had. He's far from being ineffective; but his work is in fact very restricted compared to a year ago. Overall, he's a failure.
So perhaps we should advertise our healing as well as our pain.
I'll have to try something similar at home.
"Up to twelve inches long, depending on usage."
Or to preempt some action from Saddam.
I need more evidence before I'm ready to support attacking Iraq; but I acknowledge that it "could" be a valid course of action.
The lack of a 9-11 link, or even a solid Al-Queda link is the crux of my difficulty with attacking Iraq. If we use our righteous rage to justify whatever actions we want to take against anybody, then we've become no different than the terrorists.
Back to our original point, I have no way to argue the level of Christian devotion that Bush, his staff, or Congress has; and I'm not sure anybody could measure it. But I don't see them going after Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, Aboriginal religions, or even satanists.
I wish I had points to mod you up. Your post was cogent and insightful.
The only thing I would disagree with is that the war between the U.S. and Iraq would be a religous war. If you meant that a U.S. attack would spark a religous war, then I would agree; but we won't attack Iraq for being Islamic.
The weather speculation is pretty specious here.
The nearest weather report we have is Ketchikan, which is 30 miles from the crash site. My understanding is that the crash site is next to a lake, which means that you could have very localized conditions of fog or clouds.
As far as ice, carb ice is very possible. Surface icing is possible if the temperature is low, and if you're flying in visible moisture. You won't get surface icing in the 60's.
The truth is, we really don't have any idea what caused the accident. The NTSB does wonderful work. The field investigators and the lab technicians are magicians. There's no burning immediate need to find the cause, so let's wait for their report next year.
Seemingly irrelevant car fires occurringly safely off the side of the highway back up traffic for miles as traffic around the incident slows to a crawl. This behavior mimics that of seismic activity and internet traffic slowdowns.
Internet experts now warn you in the event of a car fire, to stand in a doorway or underneath another heavy structure.
Perhaps when the lone creator of the religion declared it false?
Exactly. I think the difference between pressure and density is causing confusion.
Yeah, when did Don King start submitting articles to Slashdot anyhow?
Presumably the nuclear waste isn't completely spent. Could you use the remaining energy in the waste for propulsion, somehow?
Do you ever just completely blow a dish? Experience, I'm sure, makes your mistakes different than mine; but do you ever just taste soemthing you've cooked and say "God. What did I do to that?