Real, live, flying BD-10 jet?
Juan Jimenez
That kit on the web site was sold before I moved to Texas, I'm currently
in the process of purchasing a finished airframe, ex-Keith Hinshaw.
Juan
Richard Lamb wrote:
>
> Hey Juan,
> Cruised thru your site. Thanks man. I'd almost forgotton
> how much "sizzle" Bede put into that little package.
> Nice work. What engine are you going to install?
>
> Richard
Mike Rapoport
knowledge, experience or capability to design a jet, let alone a supersonic
one, but that didn't stop him. I think the unfortunate test pilot is buried
somewhere around here.
Mike
MU-2
Juan Jimenez wrote in message <36D89CC0...@home.com>...
>For anyone who might be interested, I've updated the main picture on the
>home page of my web site at http://www.bd5.com. If you've never seen a
>picture of a real, flying BD-10 jet, now's your chance. It's the first
>picture of a real BD-10 that I've ever had a chance to get my hands on.
>
>While you're there, check out the classified section. I just put up an
>ad for an experimental I'd never heard about until a few weeks ago, a
>"ChuckBird." Cool plane!
>
>Juan
David Hyde
> Unfortunately, Jim Bede didn't have the
> knowledge, experience or capability to design a jet, let alone a supersonic
> one, but that didn't stop him.
No, that didn't stop him, but aerodynamics did (in the 'supersonic' case).
All my references indicate that the airplane as designed by Bede was not
capable of matching the performance claims made initially, including
'super'sonic flight.
Dave 'squirrel cage' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
Pat Barry
Saturday and the fuel trucks weren't operating).
I wandered into a hangar where a team was working feverishly on an airframe, and
they said it was a Jim Bede jet. A new design, built of five different trypes of
materials.
I read later of a prototype Bede jet disintergrating when it broke the speed of
sound - I assumed it was this aircraft that I saw.
Did the plane ever :
a) get into production?,
b) fly?
Pat
Juan Jimenez
Richard Lamb
Cruised thru your site. Thanks man. I'd almost forgotton
how much "sizzle" Bede put into that little package.
Nice work. What engine are you going to install?
Richard
Juan Jimenez
>
> No, that didn't stop him, but aerodynamics did (in the 'supersonic' case).
> All my references indicate that the airplane as designed by Bede was not
> capable of matching the performance claims made initially, including
> 'super'sonic flight.
Which references are you talking about? I'd like to get the list as
well.
Juan
Juan Jimenez
>
> The BD-10 indeed had "sizzle". Unfortunately, Jim Bede didn't have the
> knowledge, experience or capability to design a jet, let alone a supersonic
> somewhere around here.
The BD-5J has been flying for many, many years, Mike.
Do you know how many pilots are buried in cemeteries all over the world
who were last seen flying an a/c that was meant to be supersonic?
Juan
Joe Hovel
Juan ,
what qa great picture! What did Bob Hoover get grounded for? I saw him last
weekend here in Avalon (near Melbourne, Australia) performing at our great
international airshow. He was doing terriffic aerobatics in a twin Shrike
Commander! Not bad for an old bloke! :) I wish I can do that at his age!
Joe
Juan Jimenez
something like 380 mph, the two prototypes broke up in mid air and
killed the test pilots. After that someone else bought the rights but I
haven't heard of any further development. Several have flown.
Juan Jimenez
a big fight with the FAA. Bob won and is flying again. But I don't know
the details of why Bob was grounded in the first place. Perhaps someone
else can fill you in.
Juan
David Hyde
>the two prototypes broke up in mid air and
> killed the test pilots.
Only one broke up in flight with a fatality. The other fatality was
the result of a split (i.e. asymmetric) flap condition after an
actuator bolt or pin or similar sheared in flight.
Also note that the inflight breakup occurred around 380 KIAS at 15K ft.
Assuming small position errors, this works out to around 0.75 Mach...an
area of performance that's been well-trod.
Dave 'subsonic' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
George R. Patterson III
>
> Some years ago I was at Mojave, wandering around trying to buy fuel (it was
> Saturday and the fuel trucks weren't operating).
> I wandered into a hangar where a team was working feverishly on an airframe, and
> they said it was a Jim Bede jet. A new design, built of five different trypes of
> materials.
> I read later of a prototype Bede jet disintergrating when it broke the speed of
> sound - I assumed it was this aircraft that I saw.
The prototype crashed when the engine came apart. Nobody ever tried to
take it supersonic. The FAA refused to certify it for supersonic flight.
> Did the plane ever :
> a) get into production?,
No. It was being tested by a company which bought the rights from Bede.
If I remember correctly, the company president was killed in the crash.
> b) fly?
I saw it fly at Sun'n Fun in 1996. It was also on static display there
in 1994. My photo of it is at
http://home.earthlink.net/~grpphoto/photos/BDten.htm
George Patterson, N3162Q.
David Hyde
> The prototype crashed when the engine came apart.
Once crashed when the vertical stab failed in flight, anopther when a flap
pin sheared resulting in split flaps. Engines stayed together in both
cases.
>Nobody ever tried to take it supersonic. The FAA refused to certify it for
>supersonic flight.
The FAA doesn't certify airplanes for supersonic flight. Test results
that I've seen published, as well as pilot reports and rumors within 'the
professional community' indicate that it was probably clear that the
airplane wasn't capable of sustained supersonic flight. Mods to the
airplane while it was still under Bede's control seem to back that up.
> No. It was being tested by a company which bought the rights from Bede.
> If I remember correctly, the company president was killed in the crash.
Twice.
Dave 'deja vu' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
highflyer
And our boy Juan believes that the jet version was hand crafted
by Jim Bede. Of course the BD-5J never did make it even to the
relatively low airspeed where the BD-10 had its structural failure.
HF
Charles Black
library and a search of "readers Guide to Periodical's " should turn it up. As I
recall, it was a case of an FAA official deciding maliciously that Hoover was
too old to be doing stunt flying.
Charlie
Richard Lamb
would you mind lightning up a bit.
the sarcasm gets real old after a while
and I'm starting to wonder about you.
Pat Barry
inspector talked with him at an air show.
The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made him
tentative - as you know, Bob has rather a large proboscis which has been seen to
glow, maybe due to age, maybe due to ethyl alcohol - who knows besides him.
Hoover took his suspension and appealed it. In the meantime, he applied for a
commercial license in Australia, and since the Aussies couldn't see any reason
not to issue one to him, he earned his commercial license there. With that he
could appear at air shows in Australia.
He then appealed further in the United States (even though his suspension was
upheld) and finally Congress got involved.
The whole suspension thing with Bob Hoover seemed to be case of bureaucracy gone
wild, although I am sure that the folk who made the decision were well
intentioned.
He has his certificate back these days, and I guess he is back flying at air
shows.
Pat
Mahan
BD-5's and BD-10's over to rec.aviation.homebuilt?
Fred in Florida
Richard Lamb wrote in message <36DB1E98...@flash.net>...
Mike Rapoport
with "real jet" problems like flutter, wave drag, transonic flow ect. I
stand by my earlier statement. Your statement on dead pilots irrelevent and
irreverant. Very few undamaged planes have come apart at one half their
design airspeed in smooth air as a result of flutter. To send a pilot up in
an airplane designed by someone ignorant of the aerodynamic forces involved,
without a full scale wind tunnel test program was totally irresponsible. To
do so without an ejection seat was even worse! The fact that supersonic
aircraft are only designed and built by a handful of nations with
multibillion dollar budgets should have been a clue that the task wasn't
trivial.
Mike
MU-2
Greg Smith
Pat Barry wrote:
> Long story - to make it short, the FAA decided he seemed 'tentative' when an
> inspector talked with him at an air show.
> The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made him
> tentative -
I had never heard about the alcohol rumor. What I heard was that someone from the
FAA witnessed an airshow that they thought was below standards, and pulled Hoover's
ticket. He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative neurologic disease,
tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not. He continued to do airshows in
Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and finally the FAA
gave him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys from...EAA?
AOPA?
Juan Jimenez
>
> Only one broke up in flight with a fatality. The other fatality was
> the result of a split (i.e. asymmetric) flap condition after an
> actuator bolt or pin or similar sheared in flight.
If you're talking about the Reno Air races accident, that was the same
vertical spar issue, not asymmetric flap deployment.
Juan Jimenez
>
> > No. It was being tested by a company which bought the rights from Bede.
> > If I remember correctly, the company president was killed in the crash.
>
> Twice.
So he resurrected, came back to fly the airplane again, against all
odds, and then crashed again? That's what I call tenacity...
Juan Jimenez
>
> And our boy Juan believes that the jet version was hand crafted
> by Jim Bede. Of course the BD-5J never did make it even to the
> relatively low airspeed where the BD-10 had its structural failure.
What, another graduate of the Garfield Willis School of Debate? Who gave
you permission to refer to me as a boy?
The BD-5J was never designed to reach the airspeeds that the BD-10 was
designed to fly at, that's why the BD-10 was thought up in the first
place. If the BD-5J could have reached those speeds, why do the BD-10 at
all? <chuckle>
Juan
Juan Jimenez
>
> The BD-5J is an cute PR toy, but is so slow that it doesn't have to deal
> with "real jet" problems like flutter, wave drag, transonic flow ect.
A cute PR toy. Hmm. Go ask Bobby Bishop, Jack Ekl, etc. about that. I'm
sure they'll be happy to share their views of the BD-5J with you.
> I stand by my earlier statement. Your statement on dead pilots irrelevent and
> irreverant. Very few undamaged planes have come apart at one half their
> design airspeed in smooth air as a result of flutter.
Which Bede jet came apart because of flutter?
> To send a pilot up in
> an airplane designed by someone ignorant of the aerodynamic forces involved,
> without a full scale wind tunnel test program was totally irresponsible.
First of all, Peregrine sent its own pilot up, not Bede, he wasn't even
there. Second, what qualifications do you have to state that Bede is
"ignorant of the aerodynamic forces involved"? Are you an aircraft
designer? Were you one of Bede professors, or are you privy to Bede's
educational background?
Juan
leo_p...@my-dejanews.com
A bureaucrat in the FAA figured that a man Hoover's age couldn't possibly
be safe to fly displays so the FAA took his display licence off him.
Bob then came down to Australia to fly at an air show and a
ex- Australian Navy Fleet Air Arm pilot employed by our FAA equivalent,
the CAA, checked him out.
The CAA check pilot said that Hoover was the best he had ever flown
with and he just sat back and learned from Hoover. Our Australian CAA
gave him a display licence immediately. The Australian licence added
more fuel to the flames generated by US supporters to get Hoover
reinstated but it still took a long time to get the FAA to reinstate him.
Bob Hoover wears an Australian flag on his jacket in gratitude for CAA's
(now CASA) support. Bob Hoover is the greatest pilot (of any age) I
know of and is a fine man.
Regards,
Leo
In article <36DA7F01...@home.com>,
Juan Jimenez <fly...@home.com> wrote:
> You know, I know that Bob was grounded for almost a year, and there was
> a big fight with the FAA. Bob won and is flying again. But I don't know
> the details of why Bob was grounded in the first place. Perhaps someone
> else can fill you in.
>
> Juan
>
> Joe Hovel wrote:
> >
> > Juan ,
> > what qa great picture! What did Bob Hoover get grounded for? I saw him last
> > weekend here in Avalon (near Melbourne, Australia) performing at our great
> > international airshow. He was doing terriffic aerobatics in a twin Shrike
> > Commander! Not bad for an old bloke! :) I wish I can do that at his age!
> > Joe
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
David Hyde
No, the _second_ fatality was due to a split flap. See:
NTSB Identification: LAX95LA278. The docket is stored in the (offline)
NTSB
Imaging System.
Accident occurred AUG-04-95 at MINDEN, NV
Aircraft: FOX PEREGRINE PJ-2, registration: N62PJ
Injuries: 1 Fatal.
...THE PILOT REPORTED A SPLIT FLAP SITUATION DURING THE GO-AROUND...
...Probable Cause...a failure of the wing flap control system
Dave 'records' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
Juan Jimenez
vertical stab failure.
David Hyde
> I stand corrected. I thought that the first crash was also because of a
> vertical stab failure.
*sigh*
The FIRST 'crash' (i.e. fatality) was the vertical stab failure.
The SECOND crash was the split flap.
Dave 'may I take your order' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
Mark Norris
George R. Patterson III wrote in message
<36DABC7B...@earthlink.net>...
Ronald James Wanttaja
>Juan Jimenez (fly...@home.com) wrote:
>> David Hyde wrote:
>> >
>> > Only one broke up in flight with a fatality. The other fatality was
>> > the result of a split (i.e. asymmetric) flap condition after an
>> > actuator bolt or pin or similar sheared in flight.
>
>> If you're talking about the Reno Air races accident, that was the same
>> vertical spar issue, not asymmetric flap deployment.
>
>No, the _second_ fatality was due to a split flap.
A possible clarification: Prior to Peregrine's involvement, the BD-10
prototype suffered a vertical stabilizer failure at the Reno Air Races.
However, it did not result in an accident. This incident led to Bede's
stabilizer strengthening mod, which the Peregrine prototype had.
Ron Wanttaja
want...@halcyon.com
http://www.halcyon.com/wanttaja/
Wes Grady
political overtones and often hard to get to the bottom, but.....
An FAA agent (I think he was also a safety counsellor, but don't quote
me on that one) witnessed his program and thought it was below Hoover's
normal program. He spoke with him and was concerned about his mental
alertness. He ASKED Hoover to surrender his medical and Hoover
complied. Once the medical was surrendered, he was subject to normal
processes of showing that he was medically qualified. The thing then
got crazy because AOPA, EAA and all the other pilot groups started a
campaign to get the medical back and the resulting restoration was made
more to quiet things down than to follow the letter of the rule....
I have seen Hoover both before and after the incident and while he still
looks the same to me, I have never been terribly impressed with the
engine out thing he does, I am not a qualified observer.
Wes
highflyer
Not hardly. Like usual Jimenez posts nonsense. However, there were
two successive Presidents of Peregrine killed in the two successive
crashes of their prototypes. The second crash succeeded in arranging
the companies demise as well.
HF
highflyer
>
> HF,
> would you mind lightning up a bit.
> the sarcasm gets real old after a while
> and I'm starting to wonder about you.
>
>
I suppose I should. HOwever, this character has really pissed
me off. He has implied more than once that I don't know anything
while HE does and that my dislike of Bede is due entirely to
unprofessional professional jealousy.
I am proud to say that I have NEVER been JEALOUS of Jim Bede.
I fear that I do not have a very high opinion of his admirers.
HF
highflyer
Any ignoramus who attacks people for trying to illuminate his
many mistakes is generously called "boy." Perhaps the appropriate
designation for Juan Jimenez is less appropriate in a public venue.
HF
George R. Patterson III
>
> He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative neurologic disease,
> tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not.
The unfavorable tests were regarded as experimental by the company which
produced them and have since been withdrawn as unreliable. They were
administered in a fashion completely at odds with the conditions which
were recommended by the designer (fasting, under stress conditions, and
given in an all-day sequence rather than independently).
> He continued to do airshows in
> Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and finally the FAA
> gave him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys from...EAA?
> AOPA?
AOPA stayed out of it. The majority of the battle was performed by a
group formed for that purpose called "Friends of Hoover". The head of
the FAA ordered the suspension revoked when he received a personal note
from the head of the Australian medical certification board stating
that any Australian doctor who recommended certificate action based on
those tests would lose his license to practice medicine. Said letter
was hand-delivered by members of the "Friends of Hoover" group.
I contributed to the "Friends of Hoover" organization a few times, and
still have documentation of the above which they sent me.
George Patterson, N3162Q.
George R. Patterson III
>
> The whole suspension thing with Bob Hoover seemed to be case of bureaucracy gone
> wild, although I am sure that the folk who made the decision were well
> intentioned.
The two FAA people who complained about Hoover were overheard conspiring
to fake their stories and make them sound different. Another inspector
testified to that fact under oath. None of the three are still employed
by the FAA.
George Patterson, N3162Q.
Bill Berle
far as to say that many many people have heard this rumor as well.
Should the rumor have been true at the time, then it would answer many
questions about how and why the FAA seemingly "went after" this great
American icon. If that in turn is true, then someone at the FAA sat
there and took a WHOLE lot of heat from a whole lot of people, just so
that they could stop him from flying while Hoover's reputation was not
publicly damaged. If that turned out to be true, then the legal stink
that was made on Hoover's behalf went too far because the feds were
actually trying to protect him in a way.
Think about it, IF this scenario were accurate, and IF the FAA sugar
coated the grounding of a drinking pilot, then at any time they could
have held a press conference and said "OK, folks, here's the reason we
took his ticket..." and the pilot population would have happily backed
the FAA for a change. And if Hoover was indeed caught with his hand in
the Martini jar, why on earth he chose Rudolph the red-nosed Bailey as
his lawyer would have been the biggest irony of all.
All that being said, I have no personal knowledge of Hoover's habits or
lack thereof, and I have NO idea if the whole booze story is true
underneath this all. Furthermore, I must begrudgingly admit that Hoover
on a fifth of scotch could fly better than I can sober, and I'd fly with
him no matter.
By the way, I once sent an E-mail addressing this very subject
(Hoover/scotch) to a very vocal aviation magazine editor, who was very
vocally defending Hoover against the evil Orwellian FAA conspiracy. I
mentioned that there might be another side to this story that nobody had
the guts to investigate, a side that might be a big surprise for how
most people view the FAA enforcement branch. I mentioned that only the
ballsiest of journalists would have the huevos to look a little further
into this matter, and it would be the sign of true journalistic
integrity. You know what the response I got from this well-known editor
was? Something to the effect of "Your transmission was garbled...What
E-mail? Sorry, I can't hear you".
To you, Mr. Editor, I raise my whiskey glass.
Bill Berle
> > Pat Barry wrote:
> >
> > > Long story - to make it short, the FAA decided he seemed 'tentative' when an
> > > inspector talked with him at an air show.
> > > The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made him
> > > tentative
snip
Kevin O'Brien
> Juan Jimenez (fly...@home.com) wrote:
>
> > I stand corrected. I thought that the first crash was also because of a
> > vertical stab failure.
>
> *sigh*
>
> The FIRST 'crash' (i.e. fatality) was the vertical stab failure.
> The SECOND crash was the split flap.
>
> Dave 'may I take your order' Hyde
> na...@glue.umd.edu
> RAH15/?
You're both kind of right. The vertical stab spar failed in two incidents,
one at Reno in 1994 with the Bede proto (but the plane got back down okay)
and then again to a second BD-10:
"NTSB Identification: LAX95LA067. The docket is stored in the (offline)
NTSB Imaging System.
Accident occurred DEC-30-94 at GARDNERVILLE, NV
Aircraft: HARRIS BD-10, registration: N9WZ
Injuries: 1 Fatal.
THE FLIGHT'S TEST CARD CONCERNED EXPANSION OF THE SPEED ENVELOPE FROM 370 TO 380
KIAS. ON AN EARLIER TEST FLIGHT AT 350 KIAS, THE SIDE LOAD FORCES ON THE
VERTICAL STABILIZERS REACHED A COMPANY IMPOSED LIMIT OF 40 PERCENT OF THE
ULTIMATE FAILURE LOAD DETERMINED BY THE DESIGNER. DURING THE RUN BETWEEN
375 AND 380 KNOTS, THE AIRCRAFT PITCHED VIOLENTLY NOSE UP FOLLOWED BY A
GENERAL BREAKUP. THE COMPANY SAID THE ORIGINAL BEDE BUILT BD-10 PROTOTYPE
SUSTAINED A VERTICAL STABILIZER FAILURE DURING FLIGHTS AT THE 1994 RENO
AIR RACES. BEDE SUBSEQUENTLY DESIGNED A FIX WHICH STRENGTHENED THE
VERTICAL TAILS....
<snip>
Probable Cause
the in-flight overload failure of the left vertical stabilizer spars, at
force levels substantially below the predicted ultimate
failure loads, due to inadequate substantiation by the designer."
The short report I've excerpted here is at
http://www.ntsb.gov/Aviation/LAX/95A067.htm
and the long version is at:
http://www.ntsb.gov/Aviation/LAX/lnarr_95A067.htm
This aircraft was owned by 'Peregrine Flight International' and the pilot
was an employee of same. Dunno if he was the president. He had extensive
fighter experience and 63 BD-10 hours, presumably mostly in other
prototypes as N9WZ had only 29 hours on it. The 20 g+ pitch-up would have
rendered him unconscious instantly at the moment of aircraft breakup, so
an ejection seat wouldn't have saved him, IMHO.
The split-flap accident in August, 1995 is listed as a Peregrine PJ-2.
-=K=-
sdd...@yahoo.com
"George R. Patterson III" <grpp...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
> >
> > He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative neurologic disease,
> > tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not.
>
> The unfavorable tests were regarded as experimental by the company which
> produced them and have since been withdrawn as unreliable. They were
> administered in a fashion completely at odds with the conditions which
> were recommended by the designer (fasting, under stress conditions, and
> given in an all-day sequence rather than independently).
>
> > He continued to do airshows in
> > Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and finally
the FAA
> > gave him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys
from...EAA?
> > AOPA?
>
> AOPA stayed out of it. The majority of the battle was performed by a
I am not sure if AOPA took an offiial postiton, but AOPA's counsel John
Jodice (spelling) and F. Lee Bailey represented Bob during the appeals of the
FAA's action, There was at least one long article in AOPA's Pilot about the
situation while it was still on going so to say that AOPA "stayed out of it"
might be technically accurate I think it is misleading at best.
> group formed for that purpose called "Friends of Hoover". The head of
> the FAA ordered the suspension revoked when he received a personal note
> from the head of the Australian medical certification board stating
> that any Australian doctor who recommended certificate action based on
> those tests would lose his license to practice medicine. Said letter
> was hand-delivered by members of the "Friends of Hoover" group.
>
> I contributed to the "Friends of Hoover" organization a few times, and
> still have documentation of the above which they sent me.
>
> George Patterson, N3162Q.
>
>
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
Juan Jimenez
>
> It appears to me that Juan decided that the heat was getting too hot in
> R.A.homebuilt, and decided to move to a new newsgroup to expouse his
> beliefs. Juan also appears to have not considered that several of the
> participants from the R.A.H discussion also read other rec.aviation
> newsgroups.
<chuckle> I visit and reply both newsgroups, Edward. You forgot to look
at the newsgroups before posting this. Had you done that you would see
that I posted the original message with this subject line in several
newsgroups. And I've replied to the ones were I got replies.
Sorry to burst your bubble. <shrug>
Juan
Juan Jimenez
>
> Any ignoramus who attacks people for trying to illuminate his
> many mistakes is generously called "boy." Perhaps the appropriate
> designation for Juan Jimenez is less appropriate in a public venue.
<yawn> At least I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong, which is more
than can be said about you.
Dave Stadt
reaction would be? Get real....the FAA had every opportunity to prove
their case and could not provide one measley piece of evidence. The
only evidence provided resulted in the termination of three FAA
employees.
Dave S.
C120 N2904N
highflyer
I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
from you to indicate that I was incorrect. I have heard a lot of
lies and fabrications on your part, as well a a blithe disregard
of reality. It is no longer necessary for you to admit your mistakes.
They are now obvious to all, and everyone is merely waiting for you
to shut up and go away.
HF
Jim Campbell
> Pat Barry wrote:
>
> > Long story - to make it short, the FAA decided he seemed 'tentative' when an
> > inspector talked with him at an air show.
> > The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made him
> > tentative -
>
> I had never heard about the alcohol rumor. What I heard was that someone from the FAA
> witnessed an airshow that they thought was below standards, and pulled Hoover's
> ticket. He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative neurologic disease,
> tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not. He continued to do airshows in
> Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and finally the FAA gave
> him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys from...EAA? AOPA?
Rumor Control:
I'm in the very final stages of a book about the FAA v. Hoover (Bob is now reviewing the
manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds and other involved parties next month)
matter and am currently whittling 500 pages of narrative down to something over 300 for
publication this summer... but its been a laborious process requiring inspection of over
7000 pages of documentation and many hours of interviews.
On August 26, 1992, (more than two months after Hoover's Aerospace America shows) the
FAA received reports written by two FAA Inspectors who monitored the 1992 Aerospace
America Airshow on behalf of the OKC FSDO. Inspectors Clint Boehler and James Kelln
seemed to think that something was wrong with Bob’s performances as well as with Bob
himself. According to a number of sources, Boehler and Kelln, “closeted themselves in a
room in the Oklahoma City FAA Flight Standards District Office and planned a way to have
Hoover grounded.”
During their conversation, which was overheard by FAA inspector, Norbert Nester; Boehler
and Kelln conspired to file two separate reports, in which they collaborated and
intended to make it appear as if they had not collaborated. These reports alleged that
Hoover's flying had deteriorated and that he appeared medically unfit. They further
alleged that Hoover was shunned by his colleagues. These statements were filed, and the
next day, August 27, 1992, the FAA, acting on the inspectors' “strikingly similar and
unsubstantiated allegations of substandard performance at an air show more than two
months earlier, demanded that Hoover undergo psychiatric evaluations by doctors of the
FAA's choosing.”
I have interviewed virtually every major airshow pilot who flew at Aerospace America...
not a single one reports anything out of the ordinary on the part of Hoover's
performances.
During the period preceding the grounding; Hoover went through THREE groups of
Doctors... the first two of which were DIRECTLY chosen by the FAA and the Third
comprised of a well known Air-Racer who also happened to be a Neurosurgeon and another
pilot/psych professional, Dr. David Johnsen. The Doctor who led the third group of
tests, Dr. Brent Hisey, also was a Flight Surgeon for the ANG (465th FS) and owned Miss
America, an unlimited Air Racer.
All three groups recommended, in various terms, that Hoover be returned to flight
status... but the FAA over-ruled its own experts and set up one of the bigger fights in
aero-legal history.
As to the rumors of drinking... as noted in a lot of the FAA documents and remarks we've
looked over, Hoover was singled for suspicion of alcohol abuse for two reasons... the
first was because of the distinct reddening of his nose, which also is a bit of
prominent feature on his face. Hoover's Father had the same trait and was not a drinker.
The reddening and other stigmata was actually diagnosed as Rosacea, a somewhat nasty
form of acne and common folklore often associates it with alcohol abuse (probably due to
the same trait as typified by the legendary mug of WC Fields). Antibiotics often clear
this malady up rather nicely and since Bob started such treatment, his long-term
condition has diminished visibly. Of course; Bob does drink socially. He comes out of a
generation of pilots that did do a fair amount of drinking while serving in the armed
forces (there wasn't a whole lot to do in those days besides go to the O Club...), but
I've personally never seen him imbibe to excess and I've partied with him dozens of
times. Testimony form many other persons corroborates that.
All in all, the whole matter makes for a fascinating story of a government gone awry and
the research has been engrossing.
There's more... SO much more... but the more I get into it, the more convinced that I
become that Mr. Hoover was a victim of a bureaucracy that refused to back down from a
big mistake and piled on countless other mistakes to validate its own excesses.
--
Jim Campbell, Publisher, US Aviator
Copyright 1999, All Rights Reserved
Author: SportPlane Resource Guide--Second Edition
http://www.av8r.net
http://www.kindredspirit.com
http://www.sportplane.com
"To sin by silence when they should protest,
makes cowards of men." -Abraham Lincoln
St Stephen Ames
I heard MTV is starting a new show called Aviator Deathmatch, maybe we
could take this there...
--
Till the next time,
St Stephen Ames
54.0 Total hrs(34.8hrs dual, 19.2hrs solo, 231 landings!)
"When my abilities = my desire & commitment,
I will be one hell of a pilot!"
My flying site: http://www.stephenames.com/flying/flying.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"St Stephen with a rose, in and out of the garden he goes,
country garden and the wind and the rain,
wherever he goes the people all complain!"
mark smith
>
> Rumor Control:
>
> I'm in the very final stages of a book about the FAA v. Hoover (Bob is now reviewing the
> manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds
> Jim Campbell
I read this email with great admiration and was surprised to see that
Jim had written it and that it had so much info and not just a tease
piece for the book.
Thanks, Jim, I also feel the government is running out of control on
many issues,,,
Mark Smith mailto:tri...@trikite.com
Tri-State Kite Sales
1121 N Locust St
Mt Vernon, IN 47620 http://www.trikite.com
Wes Grady
Jim Campbell wrote:
> I'm in the very final stages of a book about the FAA v. Hoover (Bob is now reviewing the
> manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds and other involved parties next month)
> Inspectors Clint Boehler and James Kelln
> seemed to think
> According to a number of sources, Boehler and Kelln, “closeted themselves in a
> room in the Oklahoma City FAA Flight Standards District Office and planned a way to have Hoover grounded.”
>which was overheard by
>conspired to file
>intended to make it appear
> acting on the inspectors' “strikingly similar and
> unsubstantiated allegations
oh, well, enough already. You have written a narative of what you think
happened, from Bob Hoover's point of view. You have added your own
personal slant on things that make your book your book.
Just don't try to come off as an "Independent" observer with no adjenda.
brand...@my-dejanews.com
usa...@gate.net wrote:
> Greg Smith wrote:
>
> > Pat Barry wrote:
> >
> > > Long story - to make it short, the FAA decided he seemed 'tentative' when
an
> > > inspector talked with him at an air show.
> > > The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made
him
> > > tentative -
> >
> > I had never heard about the alcohol rumor. What I heard was that someone
from the FAA
> > witnessed an airshow that they thought was below standards, and pulled
Hoover's
> > ticket. He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative neurologic
disease,
> > tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not. He continued to do
airshows in
> > Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and finally
the FAA gave
> > him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys
from...EAA? AOPA?
>
> Rumor Control:
>
reviewing the
> manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds and other involved parties
next month)
over 300 for
> publication this summer... but its been a laborious process requiring
inspection of over
> 7000 pages of documentation and many hours of interviews.
I hear Bob's contract for his autobiography won't let him cooperate with any
other book about him, and your book is from the FAA record.
If you've never seen him drunk, you've never partied with him. Everybody on
the airshow circuit knew he was a fish (he's dry now, from what I hear.)
The FAA pressed because they found a deputy sheriff in FL that arrested him
for DUI. The sheriff was a pilot and knew it would end Hoover's carreer, so
they didn't charge him and "lost" the report. Without paperwork they
couldn't confirm it, so they went the medical route. When the MRI turned up
the dead area they had a good excuse to keep him on the ground for a couple
of years while he dried out.
Hoover is a better pilot drunk than any of us will ever be sober but if he
has a stroke and puts one into the audience it will be the last airshow ever.
FAA's job is keeping the public safe. If they had any doubt I'm glad they
grounded him. I'm also glad he's back.
highflyer
>
> highflyer wrote:
> >
> > Juan Jimenez wrote:
> > >
> > > highflyer wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Any ignoramus who attacks people for trying to illuminate his
> > > > many mistakes is generously called "boy." Perhaps the appropriate
> > > > designation for Juan Jimenez is less appropriate in a public venue.
> > >
> > > <yawn> At least I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong, which is more
> > > than can be said about you.
> >
> > I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
> > from you to indicate that I was incorrect. I have heard a lot of
> > lies and fabrications on your part, as well a a blithe disregard
> > of reality. It is no longer necessary for you to admit your mistakes.
> >
> > They are now obvious to all, and everyone is merely waiting for you
> > to shut up and go away.
> >
> > HF
>
> I heard MTV is starting a new show called Aviator Deathmatch, maybe we
> could take this there...
> --
>
It isn't necessary. When he ever gets around to flying his dream
plane I sure hope he is current and sharp, or he will join the crew
who had a unsuccessful first flight in his favorite airplane.
HF
highflyer
>
> Jim Campbell wrote:
> >
> > Rumor Control:
> >
> > I'm in the very final stages of a book about the FAA v. Hoover (Bob is now reviewing the
> > manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds
> > Jim Campbell
>
> I read this email with great admiration and was surprised to see that
> Jim had written it and that it had so much info and not just a tease
> piece for the book.
>
> Thanks, Jim, I also feel the government is running out of control on
> many issues,,,
>
documentation of the references so that they can be independently
checked and verified. This is standard practice for any scholarly
research effort, because research is meaningless if it cannot be
repeated or verified.
HF
Ron Natalie
> > AOPA stayed out of it. The majority of the battle was performed by a
>
> I am not sure if AOPA took an offiial postiton, but AOPA's counsel John
> Jodice
While Yodice writes for AOPA Pilot and may represent them on
some issues, he is in his own practice.
MarkHiatt
>
>and everyone is merely waiting for you
>to shut up and go away.
>
>HF
>
>
...uh, not "everyone" HF.
byron...@xtalwind.net
it might be worth it if you two are going to be arrive at the same place at
the same time.
BJC
Remember: Never show up for a knife fight without you gun.
highflyer wrote in message <36DD55...@alt.net>...
>Juan Jimenez wrote:
>>
>> highflyer wrote:
>> >
>> > Any ignoramus who attacks people for trying to illuminate his
>> > many mistakes is generously called "boy." Perhaps the appropriate
>> > designation for Juan Jimenez is less appropriate in a public venue.
>>
>> <yawn> At least I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong, which is more
>> than can be said about you.
>
>
>I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
>from you to indicate that I was incorrect. I have heard a lot of
>lies and fabrications on your part, as well a a blithe disregard
>of reality. It is no longer necessary for you to admit your mistakes.
>
>They are now obvious to all, and everyone is merely waiting for you
St Stephen Ames
>
> St Stephen Ames wrote:
> >
> > I heard MTV is starting a new show called Aviator Deathmatch, maybe we
> > could take this there...
>
Only to the winner!
Juan Jimenez
>
> I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
> from you to indicate that I was incorrect.
How do you tell anything to anyone who wears blinders and ear plugs?
And you really think that I will just "shut up and go away"? You, who
navigate these waters under an assumed name, and fully embrace the
so-called debating technique of adding feminine endings to people's
given names instead of doing something as simple admitting that you are
wrong, and moving on with the debate? You think that just because you
choose to throw a couple of BB's at someone who's been around the
Internet since before you knew what a modem was, that person is just
going to go away? You pompous prepubescent putz! From what -planet- do
you hail???
<chuckle>
Juan Jimenez
Juan Jimenez
>
> From: highflyer <high...@alt.net>
> >
> >and everyone is merely waiting for you
> >to shut up and go away.
> >
> >HF
> >
> >
>
Hey, Mark! What brings you to the deathmatch? :) Kinda reminds you of
the JerryP RT, eh? <grin>
Juan Jimenez
experimental area at....say... 8pm or so on Saturday. :) But, alas, I
don't think HF would last more than a few minutes. People would be
asking for their money back, throwing propwash and flightline at each
other (or better yet, some of those leatherburgers), it would be a
mess... :)
JuanBAv8r
There is but one way to hush the Bard of Illinois (don't be too hard on him,
he's been exposed to way too much academia)
It's time for your PIREP on a BD5J. No, I don't mean collecting pictures of
one. I don't mean collecting names of some people that have built and tried to
fly them. I don't even mean compiling NSTB reports on various incidents.
It's pretty obvious that the rhetorical skills you can bring to this pissing
match are unequal to the task. It's time to put up or shut up.
I will absolutely guarantee that if you pilot a BD 5 of any configuration into
P'ville in May you will instantly change many minds. Perhaps not HF, let's not
pray for miracles after all, but enough pressure will bear on John to ensure
his forbearance. In addition I'm relatively certain you can pass the hat for
a least 20 bucks a head (probably more) from all in attendance to defray your
expenses. And I'm not even mentioning the terrific downstream endorsement
opportunities. I would suggest a midday Saturday arrival . . . this is gonna
take a lot of witnesses to be believed.
Disclosure: There is a downside. Statistically speaking there is a very good
chance you might not survive the effort. At any rate, it will conclude one of
the more tenacious pissing matches recently seen in these here parts.
I fear that until you pull off such a stunt (or die trying) it may well be
impossible to overcome the image you've created as a person of limited
comprehension and less persuasive ability.
Or, of course, you could just stop playing, devote your time to your site
(which is nicely done and I'm sure thrills adolescents everywhere).
Take care, 'lil bro.
Juan I (I WAS here first <g> even if in the shadows)
Ron Parsons
>Greg Smith wrote:
>
>> Pat Barry wrote:
>>
>> > Long story - to make it short, the FAA decided he seemed 'tentative'
when an
>> > inspector talked with him at an air show.
>> > The rumor was that the FAA suspected he had an alcohol habit which made him
>> > tentative -
>>
>> I had never heard about the alcohol rumor. What I heard was that
someone from the FAA
>> witnessed an airshow that they thought was below standards, and pulled
Hoover's
>> ticket. He underwent tests to show that he had no degenerative
neurologic disease,
>> tests were sometimes favorable and sometimes not. He continued to do
airshows in
>> Australia the whole time that he was fighting the suspension, and
finally the FAA gave
>> him back his medical (after legal wrangling that included attorneys
from...EAA? AOPA?
>
>Rumor Control:
>
>I'm in the very final stages of a book about the FAA v. Hoover (Bob is
now reviewing the
>manuscript and copies will be going to the Feds and other involved
parties next month)
>matter and am currently whittling 500 pages of narrative down to
something over 300 for
>publication this summer... but its been a laborious process requiring
inspection of over
>7000 pages of documentation and many hours of interviews.
>
>On August 26, 1992, (more than two months after Hoover's Aerospace
America shows) the
>FAA received reports written by two FAA Inspectors who monitored the 1992
Aerospace
>America Airshow on behalf of the OKC FSDO. Inspectors Clint Boehler and
James Kelln
>seemed to think that something was wrong with Bob’s performances as well
as with Bob
>himself. According to a number of sources, Boehler and Kelln, “closeted
themselves in a
>room in the Oklahoma City FAA Flight Standards District Office and
planned a way to have
>Hoover grounded.”
>During their conversation, which was overheard by FAA inspector, Norbert
Nester; Boehler
>and Kelln conspired to file two separate reports, in which they
collaborated and
>intended to make it appear as if they had not collaborated. These reports
alleged that
>Hoover's flying had deteriorated and that he appeared medically unfit.
They further
>alleged that Hoover was shunned by his colleagues. These statements were
filed, and the
>next day, August 27, 1992, the FAA, acting on the inspectors' “strikingly
similar and
>unsubstantiated allegations of substandard performance at an air show
more than two
>months earlier, demanded that Hoover undergo psychiatric evaluations by
doctors of the
>FAA's choosing.”
>I have interviewed virtually every major airshow pilot who flew at
Aerospace America...
>not a single one reports anything out of the ordinary on the part of Hoover's
>performances.
>During the period preceding the grounding; Hoover went through THREE groups of
>Doctors... the first two of which were DIRECTLY chosen by the FAA and the Third
>comprised of a well known Air-Racer who also happened to be a
Neurosurgeon and another
>pilot/psych professional, Dr. David Johnsen. The Doctor who led the third
group of
>tests, Dr. Brent Hisey, also was a Flight Surgeon for the ANG (465th FS)
and owned Miss
>America, an unlimited Air Racer.
>All three groups recommended, in various terms, that Hoover be returned
to flight
>status... but the FAA over-ruled its own experts and set up one of the
bigger fights in
>aero-legal history.
>As to the rumors of drinking... as noted in a lot of the FAA documents
and remarks we've
>looked over, Hoover was singled for suspicion of alcohol abuse for two
reasons... the
>first was because of the distinct reddening of his nose, which also is a bit of
>prominent feature on his face. Hoover's Father had the same trait and was
not a drinker.
>The reddening and other stigmata was actually diagnosed as Rosacea, a
somewhat nasty
>form of acne and common folklore often associates it with alcohol abuse
(probably due to
>the same trait as typified by the legendary mug of WC Fields).
Antibiotics often clear
>this malady up rather nicely and since Bob started such treatment, his
long-term
>condition has diminished visibly. Of course; Bob does drink socially. He
comes out of a
>generation of pilots that did do a fair amount of drinking while serving
in the armed
>forces (there wasn't a whole lot to do in those days besides go to the O
Club...), but
>I've personally never seen him imbibe to excess and I've partied with him
dozens of
>times. Testimony form many other persons corroborates that.
>All in all, the whole matter makes for a fascinating story of a
government gone awry and
>the research has been engrossing.
>There's more... SO much more... but the more I get into it, the more
convinced that I
>become that Mr. Hoover was a victim of a bureaucracy that refused to back
down from a
>big mistake and piled on countless other mistakes to validate its own excesses.
Of course if you want unsubstantiated rumor or conjecture, here's my take
after 40 years in Aviation.
I think there is a group of "headhunters" within the FAA who get their
jollies by capturing trophies. In their case the trophy is the medical or
ticket of a noteworthy person. I doubt if they are an organized group, but
rather it is just a mentality that some of them have.
I recall about 15 years ago (could have been 20), there was a note in the
paper that one of the lady pioneers of aviation who lived in the DFW area
had had a mild heart attack. The trophy hunters were running all over each
other to get to her front door and DEMAND that she immediately hand over
her ticket.
I'm trying not to be a conspiracy nut here, but I wonder if your document
research showed exactly the final physical location of Bob's medical once
he surrendered that scrap of paper.
End of rumor mongering and speculation.
We should also remember and credit Flying magazine for the light and heat
they kept on the issue as well.
Ron
Jerry Springer
>
>
> We should also remember and credit Flying magazine for the light and heat
> they kept on the issue as well.
>
> Ron
WHAT??? and take some of the credit away from zoomy.
--
Jerry Springer|RV-6 First Flight 1989|Hillsboro, OR
jsf...@teleport.com
Ron Natalie
> I think there is a group of "headhunters" within the FAA who get their
> jollies by capturing trophies. In their case the trophy is the medical or
> ticket of a noteworthy person. I doubt if they are an organized group, but
> rather it is just a mentality that some of them have.
>
And this wouldn't be possible if there were any sense of
fairness inside the FAA. However, once an enforcment
action starts, it goes unchecked. The FAA does not view
any outcome successful until somebody (and not any FAA
employee) loses a certificate or pays a fine or the like,
no matter how much they find out in the course of the
investigation that the original complaint was groundless
or wrong. Hoover is one such example, so is Breckinridge.
Once the enforcement ball starts rolling, the FAA refuses
to be confused by facts.
Alhansen
brand...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> Hoover is a better pilot drunk than any of us will ever be sober but if he
> has a stroke and puts one into the audience it will be the last airshow ever.
> FAA's job is keeping the public safe. If they had any doubt I'm glad they
> grounded him. I'm also glad he's back.
This is what we need: More assholes out there encouraging the gestapo
(FAA) and their strong arm tactics. Where the hell have you been? How
many times does it have to be proven that it wasn't about keeping the
public safe? It was a damn ego trip on the part of a couple of shithead
bureaucrats not qualified to hand Hoover his toilet tissue, much less
judge his flying abilities. Move to Europe. You'll fit right in!
Al Hansen
Chris Massey
highflyer
>
> Now -there's- an interesting thought. We could tape off a ring in the
> experimental area at....say... 8pm or so on Saturday. :) But, alas, I
> don't think HF would last more than a few minutes. People would be
> asking for their money back, throwing propwash and flightline at each
> other (or better yet, some of those leatherburgers), it would be a
> mess... :)
>
asshole.
I am out of here. This idiot is not worth my time. I suspect he
will kill himself promptly if he ever tries to actually fly one of
the airplanes he touts so highly.
I suspect he has put himself in a position where any truth about
the lack of design ability or honesty in his hero, Bede, is seen
as a direct attempt to put him out of business.
I feel sorry for him, but I am afraid that he made his bed and
will have to lie in it.
All I can say is please don't accept anything he says at face value.
HF
highflyer
>
> highflyer wrote:
> >
> > I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
> > from you to indicate that I was incorrect.
>
> How do you tell anything to anyone who wears blinders and ear plugs?
>
> And you really think that I will just "shut up and go away"? You, who
> navigate these waters under an assumed name, and fully embrace the
> so-called debating technique of adding feminine endings to people's
> given names instead of doing something as simple admitting that you are
> wrong, and moving on with the debate? You think that just because you
> choose to throw a couple of BB's at someone who's been around the
> Internet since before you knew what a modem was, that person is just
> going to go away? You pompous prepubescent putz! From what -planet- do
> you hail???
>
> <chuckle>
Once again, yo display your ignorance and you inability to learn.
You have my pity if not my support.
HF
mikepatt...@spammindspring.com
Mike
JStricker
You touched on something I've been wondering about. Fines.
I've never, EVER, heard of a pilot being fined. It's always been either an
administrative action of some kind, or an enforcement action where they had
to give up their certificate for a specified length of time (maybe forever).
Have you or anyone else any firsthand (or at least reliable) knowledge of
any fines being used to punish an individual pilot's actions? (I'm not
talking about fining an airline or FBO or some business entity, just
individual pilots)
John Stricker
--
Remove the "nosp..........." Oh hell, you folks know what to do and
why I had to put it in. If one of you real humans wants to contact me:
"I didn't spend all these years getting to the top of the food chain
just to become a vegetarian"
Ron Natalie wrote in message <36DE987D...@sensor.com>...
Ron Natalie
>
> Ron,
>
> You touched on something I've been wondering about. Fines.
>
> I've never, EVER, heard of a pilot being fined. It's always been either an
> administrative action of some kind, or an enforcement action where they had
> to give up their certificate for a specified length of time (maybe forever).
>
> Have you or anyone else any firsthand (or at least reliable) knowledge of
> any fines being used to punish an individual pilot's actions? (I'm not
> talking about fining an airline or FBO or some business entity, just
>
used to regularly seek out certificate actions (suspensions) on
working pilots and fines for recreational pilots in order to
do the maximum harm. It's one of the few "kindler, gentler"
actions that every happened when they reformed this.
Ron Natalie
>
> > Have you or anyone else any firsthand (or at least reliable) knowledge of
> > any fines being used to punish an individual pilot's actions?
I believe Howard Fried ended up paying a fine for his
alledgedly illegal 135 op.
Dave Mould
Alhansen wrote in message <36DEA86C...@psln.com>...
> Where the hell have you been? How
>many times does it have to be proven that it wasn't about keeping the
>public safe? It was a damn ego trip on the part of a couple of shithead
>bureaucrats not qualified to hand Hoover his toilet tissue, much less
>judge his flying abilities. Move to Europe. You'll fit right in!
I'm not sure what ethnocentric rubbish you are trying to say with your last
two sentences. Keep the blinkers on and enjoy your "land of the free".
Comfort yourself that no matter how bad it gets, the rest of the world
*must* be far worse off. You are welcome here to see for yourself any
time - but if you want to form an unbiased opinion leave the chip at home,
OK? It wouldn't fit into one of our cars!
Dave Mould
JStricker
Thanks. I don't remember that happening 10 years ago because that was when
I wasn't actively flying so it doesn't surpise me that I wasn't aware of it.
I hope that my comment about "first hand knowledge" didn't come off as
doubting or snotty. I have just heard to many stories about "my sister's
friend's uncle Ed" to put much stock in them. :-)
John Stricker
--
Remove the "nosp..........." Oh hell, you folks know what to do and
why I had to put it in. If one of you real humans wants to contact me:
"I didn't spend all these years getting to the top of the food chain
just to become a vegetarian"
Ron Natalie wrote in message <36DF134E...@sensor.com>...
Alhansen
insult was to be directed at European bureaucracy. You can't deny that,
especially in the general aviation world, your bureaucracy has run amok.
Ours is only a few steps behind. The older a government is it seems, the
more wasteful, inefficient and overbearing it becomes. I certainly had
no desire to insult the people of Europe. My wife and I travel almost
yearly to Britain and the continent. Can't get enough! Love the
countries, love the people. Even the people of Paris after our trip last
May. I'll try to remember next time to energize my brain before I engage
my typing finger.
Al Hansen
Ronald James Wanttaja
JuanBAv8r <juan...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>I'm sure that Bobby Bishop, Ed Porter, Dave Hammer (is that name real?)...
Actually, "Hammer" is Dave Harris' nickname...I think he goes by Dave
"Hammer" Harris, professionally. Unless you're thinking of another
Seattleite, Bob Hammer, who built the "Zipper" homebuilt jet in the late
'70s.
Harris keeps his BD-5s at Renton airport, just down the road from where
I work and around the hangar corner from a buddy of mine. He's given a
number of presentations about the -5 at local EAA chapters. He *is*
quite enthusiastic about the flying qualities of the airplane, but is
also quite definite about he modifications that he thinks are required to
make the -5 safe.
He has both a jet and a VW-powered BD-5. He often flies the jet at local
airshows, and the Arlington people get a local TV station to install a
camera in the airplane for publicity.
He used to fly his VW-powered BD-5 to local chapter meetings and
fly-outs (Those with the Second Edition of _Kitplane Construction_ will
find a picture on page 6). A couple of years back, he was climbing out
when he noticed his airspeed indicator had an odd, flickering light.
Turns out the glass was reflecting flames jetting out from the side of
his engine compartment. He secured the engine, activated his Halon fire
bottle (a far-thinking man, Mr. Harris), and brought the airplane around
for a downwind landing.
Ron Wanttaja
want...@halcyon.com
http://www.halcyon.com/wanttaja/
Juan Jimenez
>
> It's time for your PIREP on a BD5J.
Sure, you provide the plane, I'll give you a PIREP. I've never flown any
of the 6 or 7 BD-5J's out there and don't expect to do so.
Juan
Juan Jimenez
ask Bobby Bishop to give you one. He's got two of them. That address is
my BD-5 mailing list. The only other person I've met that has flown one
is Ed Porter out of Arizona, but he's not on the mailing list. Oh, and
there's Dave Hammer but I've met him and he's somewhat elusive in email.
Juan
JuanBAv8r
>ask Bobby Bishop to give you one. He's got two of them. That address is
>my BD-5 mailing list. The only other person I've met that has flown one
>is Ed Porter out of Arizona, but he's not on the mailing list. Oh, and
>there's Dave Hammer but I've met him and he's somewhat elusive in email.
>
>Juan
>
Hey Bro,
I fear you miss my point, dude. But I gotta admit, you do hang in there.
I'm sure that Bobby Bishop, Ed Porter, Dave Hammer (is that name real?) or
other peole with actual experience in that plane could discuss it's strenghts,
weaknessness and dangers and probably probably not draw half the crap and abuse
you've had tossed as you.
The strange thing is, ya keep asking for more of the same. Strange, truly
strange.
We've got an expression down here in Texas. All hat and no cattle. You may
have heard it.
Me, I don't claim to know shit. That's why I only get to pick on the few, the
proud . . . (no, I aint agonna do it <g>)
Juan
" I am not a crook" --
Richard Milhouse Nixon, 1974
" We will have the most ethical administration in history" --
William Jefferson Clinton, 1993
john brunson
1. Get rid of the lawyers.
2. Hire a pilot to run the damn thing.
JStricker wrote:
--
PMCC昏.
Juan Jimenez
here where I said I had flown a BD-5J, or that I was defending the
BD-5J's attributes, or whatever, let me know, and we'll talk about
whatever it is that's bothering ya. In the meanwhile, have you ever
built or flown a BD-5?
I don't have the foggiest idea what your point is, but methinks you're
beating on the wrong dead horse.
Juan (resident of mid-cities area, Texas, pardner, and I refuse to wear
a hat...)
Juan Jimenez
3. Hogtie Congress and lock them up until the day after the FAA funding
renewal deadline. Presto.
Believe it or not, that day is coming up real soon!
JuanBAv8r
>Well, tell ya what, if you ever come up with a message anywhere around
>here where I said I had flown a BD-5J, or that I was defending the
>BD-5J's attributes, or whatever, let me know, and we'll talk about
>whatever it is that's bothering ya
I doubt that even the totally brain dead believe that you've ever touched a
BD5. let alone flown one. I'd ask some directly, but at this point that would
only add to the flame <g>. Oh well the hell, Brian, do you think Juan has
claimed to flown a BD? As to "defending" "methinks" that's probably the most
generous characterization one could put on your recent posts.
> In the meanwhile, have you ever
>built or flown a BD-5?
Absolutely not! I'm a fool, not stupid <g>. I reiterate a previous post: I
don't know shit.
>
>I don't have the foggiest idea what your point is, but methinks you're
>beating on the wrong dead horse.
>
>Juan (resident of mid-cities area, Texas, pardner, and I refuse to wear
>a hat...)
>
As to my point. I'm trying to relate to you, Bro, not put you down. Honest.
You've been severely insulted, some would say deservedly, some not. Regardless
of the merit of the abuse, you don't seem to understand where it's coming from.
That's my point and where I'm trying to help.
Imagine you were the most avid baseball fan in the world. You've died and
gone to heaven. The first thing St. Pete does is invite you to dinner and
shows you to your place at the table. Sitting around you are Babe Ruth, Hank
Aaron, Shoeless Joe Jackson, Ted Williams, Joe DiMaggio and some kid that had
collected sixteen gazillion baseball cards. Who are you interested in hearing
from? (incidently, me, I'm just the schmuck schlepping ice tea, not even a
real waiter, just the busboy)
You've got a nice collection of aviation cards (oops, web site). Everybody
knows about it now. It's yours, you can say anything you want there, without
suffering all these insults. Pop in here once a month or so, announce your
latest upgrade or mod, post the URL and fade. Your blood pressure will thank
you. You'll collect more fans and generally live a happier life.
Peace, Bro. Having now said my piece as clearly and unambiguously as I know
how, this troll is fading back under my own bridge.
Juan I, the clear wannabe
Ron Parsons
<64549A2BFAB1E2AA.49687CBA...@library-proxy.airnews.net>,
"JStricker" <jstr...@odsys.NOSPAM.net> wrote:
>You touched on something I've been wondering about. Fines.
>
>I've never, EVER, heard of a pilot being fined. It's always been either an
>administrative action of some kind, or an enforcement action where they had
>to give up their certificate for a specified length of time (maybe forever).
>
>Have you or anyone else any firsthand (or at least reliable) knowledge of
>any fines being used to punish an individual pilot's actions? (I'm not
>talking about fining an airline or FBO or some business entity, just
>individual pilots)
The last I knew the fine was limited to $1000 per incident. My
understanding was that private pilots did get fined, for not being able to
use their "toy" for a couple of weeks was not much of a hardship. On the
other hand, two weeks (or six months) of not working for a commercial
pilot adds up to a lot bigger penalty. I've often wondered why they've
never been challenged in court for using a suspension to levy a "fine"
larger than that allowed by law.
Ron
Ron Parsons
>The answer to the FAA problem is simple -
>1. Get rid of the lawyers.
>2. Hire a pilot to run the damn thing.
Actually, the now aging core of inspectors were mostly RIF'd majors from
the service. And RIF seldom comes off the top.
Ron
Charles Black
Charlie
drop the "ob" to reply
David Hyde
> It's time for your PIREP on a BD5J.
There's no small irony in the idea that it takes time in type to support a
design but no time in type to criticize it.
Dave 'flip flop' Hyde
na...@glue.umd.edu
RAH15/?
Steven M. Cantrell
You are hereby notified that you are not, repeat not, speaking for me when you refer to "everyone". If you two want to have a knife fight or pistol duel, then do so. Between yourselves, if you please.
Also, if you are such a great authority and believe in yourself so completely, would you mind explaining why you refuse to identify yourself by name?
Steve Cantrell
N9211B
highflyer wrote:
Juan Jimenez wrote:
>
> highflyer wrote:
> >
> > Any ignoramus who attacks people for trying to illuminate his
> > many mistakes is generously called "boy." Perhaps the appropriate
> > designation for Juan Jimenez is less appropriate in a public venue.
>
> <yawn> At least I'm man enough to admit it when I'm wrong, which is more
> than can be said about you.
I am waiting for you to admit it, Juan. I haven't heard a thing
from you to indicate that I was incorrect. I have heard a lot of
lies and fabrications on your part, as well a a blithe disregard
of reality. It is no longer necessary for you to admit your mistakes.They are now obvious to all, and everyone is merely waiting for you
to shut up and go away.HF
brand...@my-dejanews.com
Alhansen <alha...@psln.com> wrote:
>
> This is what we need: More assholes out there encouraging the gestapo
> many times does it have to be proven that it wasn't about keeping the
> public safe? It was a damn ego trip on the part of a couple of shithead
> bureaucrats not qualified to hand Hoover his toilet tissue, much less
> judge his flying abilities. Move to Europe. You'll fit right in!
>
If you don't want more gestapo FAA tactics, don't give them an excuse to grab
power.
Remember the Frecce Tricolore crash at Ramstein? No more airshows in
Germany. The F86/Farrel's Ice Cream Parlor in Sacramento, '72? Dave Sutton
will tell you how close we came to losing civilian jet warbirds. The Duxford
Tatoo? That was when we stopped doing airshow manuvers toward the audience.
Every time there's a disaster the Fed's knee jerk is to stop whatever it is
that caused it. Swiss Air's MD-11 has a fire and goes in? They draft an
order that every plane in the fleet has to replace every inch of captom wire
and every bit of flamable soundproofing immediately. Don't even wait for a D
check, just ground the fleet.
When Packul did the MRI on Bob, they found an area in his brain the size of a
ping pong ball that was dead. They had no way of telling if it was recent or
old, or if it was stable or progressing. They had well founded doubts about
his ability so they pulled his ticket. If they hadn't, and he'd put one in
the crowd, I hat to think what the reaction would have been. It might be
worse now, since we've all told the public that Bob's the greatest pilot
alive. If he stuffs one now the press will say how can we trust any of you
pilots again?
Someday Bob will be too old to fly. Maybe next year, maybe when he's 120. I
just hope he's like General Doolittle and hangs it up before he has to.
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
john brunson
Theirs is the attitude that needs to be dealt with! Roll a few heads at that level and
the little chickenshit military rejects will shut up and behave.
--
PMCCŤ¨.
highflyer
>
> highflyer,
>
> You are hereby notified that you are not, repeat not, speaking for me
> when you refer to "everyone". If you two want to have a knife fight
> or pistol duel, then do so. Between yourselves, if you please.
>
> Also, if you are such a great authority and believe in yourself so
> completely, would you mind explaining why you refuse to identify
> yourself by name?
>
> Steve Cantrell
> N9211B
>
I certainly do not wish to speak for an ignorant asshole like YOU.
I do not. It is not necessary for me to identify myself by name.
Everyone who counts KNOWS me and knows who I am.
Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. IMPORTANT
HF
v
Richard Lamb
Jim Campbell
> When Packul did the MRI on Bob, they found an area in his brain the size of a
> ping pong ball that was dead. They had no way of telling if it was recent or
> old, or if it was stable or progressing. They had well founded doubts about
> his ability so they pulled his ticket. If they hadn't, and he'd put one in
> the crowd, I hat to think what the reaction would have been. It might be
> worse now, since we've all told the public that Bob's the greatest pilot
> alive. If he stuffs one now the press will say how can we trust any of you
> pilots again?
>
BULLSHIT!!!!
I don't who you are but you are way off base. I have all the medical reports
right here stacked behind me in 11 binders and five boxes... over 7000 pages.
I've been through them more times than I can count. I have the summary of the
MRI, itself, and you are wholly inaccurate. I have talked to a number of medical
professionals who examined the tests you cite and not a single one of them states
what you state... including Dr. Liddell, the former head of Australian Aviation
Medicine, who sat down with me at an Int'l Aerospace Medical Conference in
Chicago nearly two years ago and spoke to me for several hours (on tape and on
the record).
As to your previous assertion of a DUI on the part of Mr. Hoover... that is utter
bull. Hoover says so (do you want to tell me that he's lying?). The FAA says it
has no evidence of such. There is no record of such in any place we can track in
FL (and the plethora of crimes that would be committed if ANY officer did as you
said would be more than ANY deputy could possibly hope to cover for... surely, in
this day and age, you have to realize that the concept of such secrets and
cover-ups are a joke... unless you've been to Burger King with Elvis lately). No
one in the FAA will confirm your story (despite the fact that there are still
some folks there who are smarting over the Hoover matter and are not big fans)
and no one has offered any evidence of knowledge of same--in either the medical
offices, legal offices, or administrative offices.
I do not believe you. I don't know anyone else who does.
Please cite your sources, your evidence and identify yourself or apologize for
attempting to tarnish the good name of a man who defended your country and your
freedoms, so that you could come forth and act like a jerk.
--
Jim Campbell, Publisher, US Aviator
Copyright 1999, All Rights Reserved
Author: SportPlane Resource Guide--Second Edition
http://www.av8r.net
http://www.kindredspirit.com
http://www.sportplane.com
"To sin by silence when they should protest,
makes cowards of men." -Abraham Lincoln
MarkHiatt
>
>Please cite your sources, your evidence and identify yourself
Sweet Jesus! Is that James R Campbell, asking someone for *SOURCES*, for
*EVIDENCE* and for *IDENTIFICATION* from someone who expressed a point of view
he disagreed with?
Well, I'll be damned.
Maybe that's how it's supposed to work, huh? Folks stir up a little controversy
and then haul out some kind of data to support their assertions? Maybe that's
how it's supposed to actually go down? You can't just make something up and
prin--er, I mean "post"--it unless you can back it up?
What a wonderful world it would be, huh?
To send me e-mail, first take out the trash.
Steven M. Cantrell
Richard Lamb wrote:
> Welp, I guess that answered that!
Not really. He merely managed a little transference. By placing me in
to this issue based on one message must leave one to doubt.....well most
everything associated with this person. It is amazing how fast the
degradation progressed. Even Juan is now resorting to name calling and
mud slinging.
I know not either of these combatants. Their conflict does appear to be
consistent with the normal flow and content here in RAH, uninspired and
seldom meaningful.
Highflyer, you do have one supporter who spoke rather highly of your
abilities, association with a higher learning institution (really, with
that language and attitude?) and that I would benefit by your wealth of
knowledge in the aviation field (no slam here and no sarcasm). Also
that you normally help people. A couple of comments were: "He'll also
give you a ride in his Stinson Reliant, should you make it to
Pinkneyville during decent weather." and "So in HF's defense I'd say
look beyond his obvious ego posts and rants and look at the genuine
information he posts. If you have a specific question about
homebuilding, HF is a font of information and is readily willing to
spend hours on the keyboard helping you out."
You sound like another person I know, you either like him or you hate
him. ain't no in between. go figure.
Highflyer, I had no intention of "taking you on". However, you really
don't want to come after me, I don't fight fair and I win, my way.
Check six.
steve
St Stephen Ames
like a "Saint" ;-)
--
Till the next time,
St Stephen Ames
54.0 Total hrs(34.8hrs dual, 19.2hrs solo, 231 landings!)
"When my abilities = my desire & commitment,
I will be one hell of a pilot!"
My flying site: http://www.stephenames.com/flying/flying.html
----------------------------------------------------------------
"St Stephen with a rose, in and out of the garden he goes,
country garden and the wind and the rain,
wherever he goes the people all complain!"
Dylan Smith
Alhansen wrote in message <36DF3546...@psln.com>...
>My sincerest apologies to Chris Massey and Dave Mould. My intentional
>insult was to be directed at European bureaucracy
BTW: Don't call English people European, it's like calling a Texan a yankee!
brand...@my-dejanews.com
Go into the medical record. Look up the PET scan (Positron Emission
Tomography).
Does it show an area of damage where no detectable neurological activity was
taking place?
Was F. Lee's response to the results that the damage was the result of a head
injury when Bob was shot down during WWII, and knocked unconscious?
Is the response of Dr. Pakul that since there was no earlier record of the
damaged area, there was no way to know how old the damage was? And that it
might be something recent and progressing? And they would have to run another
test some time later, and compare the two, to see if the condition was stable?
Or do you say there's no damage in his brain at all, that all the
professionals who looked at the test agree, that he's in perfect neurological
shape, despite what F. Lee said?
http://www.cami.jccbi.gov/AAM-400A/editorls.htm#Bob Hoover
http://awgnet.com/safety/denied.htm
> As to your previous assertion of a DUI on the part of Mr. Hoover... that is
utter
> bull. Hoover says so (do you want to tell me that he's lying?). The FAA says
it
> has no evidence of such. There is no record of such in any place we can track
in
> FL (and the plethora of crimes that would be committed if ANY officer did as
you
> said would be more than ANY deputy could possibly hope to cover for... surely,
in
> this day and age, you have to realize that the concept of such secrets and
> cover-ups are a joke... unless you've been to Burger King with Elvis lately).
No
> one in the FAA will confirm your story (despite the fact that there are still
> some folks there who are smarting over the Hoover matter and are not big fans)
> and no one has offered any evidence of knowledge of same--in either the
medical
> offices, legal offices, or administrative offices.
You're a reporter, call Robert Poole in Washington. Ask if they had any
indication (not proof, not paperwork, just a report they couldn't confirm)
that Bob was picked up for DUI in Florida.
They'll say there was one, but they couldn't confirm it, so they didn't do
anything about it. But if the answer is yes, you think that pushed FAA to
look at him that much harder?
> I do not believe you. I don't know anyone else who does.
You don't believe that Bob drank like a fish? Ask any airshow pilot or crew
member that ever went to a reception with him. Ask an airshow promoter. Ask
him! He used to tell the story of doing a zero G pushover and getting
knocked out by a quart of Gin. The punchline was "I always knew the Gin
would kill me, I just didn't think it would be that way!"
> Please cite your sources, your evidence and identify yourself or apologize for
> attempting to tarnish the good name of a man who defended your country and
your
> freedoms, so that you could come forth and act like a jerk.
I fought in the same war as Bob. I was shot down too, flying a C-47 and
didn't have anything to shoot back. I spent 3 years in a Jap camp and I lost
a hell of a lot more than Bob did in Germany. 5% of the prisoners in Germany
died. 55% of the men in my camp didn't go home. By the time our boys got to
us I weighed 90 pounds and I was one of the healthy ones. Don't tell me I
haven't put my ass on the line defending stupid, selfish arrogant self
important little draft dodging pukes like you.
I drank as hard as Bob too but I quit 30 years ago. I know what it's like, I
know what it does to you. I haven't said anything about Bob that isn't true,
just things you don't want to hear.
If Bob crashes during an airshow, even if no one on the ground is hurt, we'll
loose half the shows in America. If he puts it in the crowd, that will be
the last airshow we'll ever see. Even before they pulled his ticket he came
back with grass stains on the belly of his plane and he's not a better pilot
now than he was 10 years ago.
One of three things can happen now. The FAA might pull his ticket again.
But we know that won't happen again, not after they fired the guys that did it
the last time. Or Bob will hang it up or he'll crash. I hope he hangs it up.
Chuck Yeager did.
Richard Lamb
The guy has been abusive and intolerant.
I - personally - don't need him.
Ergo - ignore him.
He won't go away,
but he won't piss me off, either.
Rob Fiscella
>
>
> This is what we need: More assholes out there encouraging the gestapo
> (FAA) and their strong arm tactics. Where the hell have you been? How
> many times does it have to be proven that it wasn't about keeping the
> public safe? It was a damn ego trip on the part of a couple of shithead
> bureaucrats not qualified to hand Hoover his toilet tissue, much less
> judge his flying abilities. Move to Europe. You'll fit right in!
>
> Al Hansen
assholes...shithead....toilet tissue......it's pretty obvious where your head
is. I guess you've never been to Europe. Lucky for them, too bad for you.
R. Fiscella
J T Cooper
highflyer <high...@alt.net> wrote:
>I certainly do not wish to speak for an ignorant asshole like YOU.
>
>I do not. It is not necessary for me to identify myself by name.
>Everyone who counts KNOWS me and knows who I am.
>
>Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Mr. IMPORTANT
>
>HF
My God! It would be easy to imagine an immature juvenile responding
in such a manner, especially if provoked by an equally juvenile taunt.
But, alas, this was neither penned by a juvenile nor provoked by a
juvenile taunt. That this child-like retort originated from a retired
college professor speaks volumes about his character, or, more
correctly, his lack of character. He has lost any respect I may have
once had for him. I suspect I am not alone in this. Seek therapy HF.
J T Cooper