Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: Miloch <Miloch_member@newsguy.com>
Newsgroups: alt.binaries.pictures.aviation
Subject: Re: Welsh airlift ends in crash (1949)
Date: 24 Aug 2017 16:02:01 -0700
Organization: NewsGuy - Unlimited Usenet $23.95
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <onnlt901499@drn.newsguy.com>
References: <C6adnZkiOMRvwgHEnZ2dnUU7-Y_NnZ2d@supernews.com> <oni3ug01ili@drn.newsguy.com> <dcCdnUh05bVozALEnZ2dnUU7-RHNnZ2d@supernews.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pd718eaa895c0414d95ab0530f1d550645905ad6c82eb56d9.newsdawg.com
User-Agent: Direct Read News 5.60
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2115198389
X-Received-Bytes: 1408
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.binaries.pictures.aviation:6406
In article <dcCdnUh05bVozALEnZ2dnUU7-RHNnZ2d@supernews.com>, Byker says...
>
>"Miloch" wrote in message news:oni3ug01ili@drn.newsguy.com...
>>
>> Flying rule of thumb:
>>
>> "Anytime you can walk away from a landing...it was a good landing".
>
>After seeing so many crashes attributable to tail rotor failure, I wonder
>why there aren't more twin-rotor manufacturers, like Kaman and Kamov?
>
>
>
Went thru flight school in the 60s and was assigned to fly TH-55s as my trainer.
The first models had a tail rotor that spun at close to the speed of sound...it
was OK unless it rained. The high speed of the tail rotors hitting the rain
drops could cause them to shatter!
*
|
|