User Profile Header
MDPiii
,
NJ
Comments
Displaying 1-4 of 4
10 Things I Hate about AirVenture
from MDPiii
wrote 1 year 43 weeks ago
Robert:
So, were the folks in the photo attending one of your talks?
Top 100 Airplanes
from MDPiii
wrote 43 weeks 1 day ago
The Spitfire is a Mk IXb, the 'b' indicating it had the wing design with one cannon and two .303. machine guns on each side -- ultimately the most preferred armament configuration. The initial spec for the Spitfire was eight machine guns -- which is what all the early marks had. At first, during the Battle of Britain, the cannon armament was controversial, and it set pilots Bob Stanford Tuck and Douglas Bader up in arms against each other. Bader, famous as the Battle of Britain hero who flew with two artificial legs, preferred eight guns; Tuck wanted cannons. (Later, Bader and Tuck became close friends. I once asked Tuck about Bader's stubborness over this, and his response was, "If he wasn't so bloody stubborn, he bloody well wouldn't have been there, would he?")
Start Digging! Spitfires Cleared for Excavation
from MDPiii
wrote 30 weeks 1 day ago
Hi Stephan: At least you allowed that my classic qualifier ("up to") "saves" me. I used one of the other ones, too ("thought to be..."). And you have a fair point; and a good one. Laws of supply and demand would do serious damage to the $2.3 million market value of a Mk XIV should there really be 60 more introduced all at once like this. As to the likelihood of this being for real, my information was that they had never been un-crated, and yes, I can imagine, say, some enterprising Milo Mindbender-type (perhaps) caching dozens of fighters with future profit in mind. So I choose to accept the possibility, while remaining open to the 'hogwash' theory, as well. Still, I'd be more excited if they were "thought to be" Mk Vs or Mk IXs. (BTW: I still have my copy of your Flying style guide, and it still works).
Cirrus SR20 Crashes in Connecticut
from MDPiii
wrote 16 weeks 15 hours ago
News reporters face a new challenge with writing about whole-airplane parachute deployments. On this one, the news report I read said the impact 'may' have been diminished by the parachute (no kidding? Would they say that about every skydiver's routine "death plunge?"). In this case, the airplane was clearly destroyed, so it's clearly a "crash." But what if the parachute brings the airplane down basically intact? Do we still call it a "crash?" If not, what can we call it?
The AP style manual needs a rewrite.
Newsletter Signup
Marketplace
Find great Products & Services!
Partner Pages
