Sorry to report the two links above (in reference to the Pop. Mech. story) got mangled and are broken but if they're fixed, I'm still interested.

(Written on 08/02/2017)(Permalink)

That's a great video; what a great shot! Although, one still needs to give consideration to the potential harm to people underneath the flight path of the now wrecked and falling drone. I was cringing as I wondered if a fan in a forward row might've stood up bloodied after getting struck by the falling drone. But, it seems it wasn't directly above anyone. *Whew* If someone was hurt, the TP-roll thrower might share liability with the pilot in a civil action.

(Written on 07/31/2017)(Permalink)

I think this article used crude, imprecise language to paint the situation in the most dramatic light possible, perhaps thereby skewing the true nature of what the AF was requesting (god, I hope so--but such is our media today). "Shoot down" with "weapons" gives me a mental image (as if directed by Michael Bay) that seems quite unlike what the AF would actually be doing. In my opinion, clearly the AF should not be granted permission to use military weapons (e.g. kinetic/explosive systems) to "shoot down" civilian drones inside civilian airspace, or even military airspace above a base. Directed fire is not sufficiently accurate or reliable to ensure containment to the immediate area of the target. Someone totally innocent on the ground or in the air would eventually get hurt and uninvolved property damaged or destroyed. In this case, it appears what the AF wants to do is use ECM against the problem drones. Civilian drones use well defined and known radio systems to permit contro

(Written on 07/31/2017)(Permalink)

CORRECTIONS (2) to my earlier comment, and added assessment: Ok, thank you, I didn't see or look for the Wiki article on the incident before. That article shows a few minor discrepancies compared to Mahaffey (spellings of names, D'Mario/D'Amario, Hunziker/Hunziger) and I think the Wiki is probably more accurate pertaining to the post-crash details (at least it's more detailed). My reading of Mahaffey misled me to the understanding there was no Pu in the bombs, which is incorrect[1]. They are the same type as at Palomares, and Pu is in the primary. The book's depiction also led me to understand there was no explosion of the bomb HE, which appears also incorrect[2], so Pu from bomb primaries would indeed have the opportunity to become finely deposited over the area. So I think the book gives a slightly misleading picture of the effect from the crash and aftermath, though seems good regarding the accident itself, crew rescue and general engagement of parties involved. According to

(Written on 06/29/2016)(Permalink)

I went back to the book Atomic Accidents James A. Mahaffey and the description of events at Thule starts on page 314 of my edition: HOBO 28, a B-52G loaded with 4 MK-28FI bombs (a/k/a B28FI, adjustable yield ~70kt - 1.45Mt), was flying mission "Junky 14" as part of Operation Hard Head (a dumb idea, Hard Head). Fire on the flight deck, started presumably by some poorly stowed seat cushions next to a hot-air vent, eventually forced evacuation of aircraft, which impacted at a shallow angle on the flat ice shelf of Wholstenholme Fjord, breaking up and scattering debris over 2.5 mi N-S line. Only one crewmember of seven died in the bailout. No HE detonation in any bomb, but the bombs broke up and became part of the debris field. Air Force initially wanted to push the debris into the fjord, where it would be inaccessible to most of humanity, but Denmark insisted on total decontamination and debris removal to the USA, and they wanted to help ensure this by providing some of their own ass

(Written on 06/28/2016)(Permalink)

Do you have a reference for that one at Thule? I just finished James Mahaffey's book, "Atomic Accidents" and don't remember reading about exploded ordnance there.

(Written on 06/25/2016)(Permalink)

Slow news day at BI? This seems like a big non-story. It's a hot airplane, with lots of orders, but sales are drying up?! Day-traders, buy puts! Airlines are keeping their older and less efficient 767s because they can afford the cheap fuel?! Well sure...for the moment. This may only change the rate of fleet replacement, not that the fleet will be replaced. And what are they gonna buy? It's a better and more efficient airplane, so fuel price doesn't matter if you plan on playing Airline Tycoon for the long run. Here I was expecting a story about how someone discovered the wings may snap off...(they do flex alot).

(Written on 05/22/2016)(Permalink)

When I listened to the LiveATC audio, two things really struck me: 1) wow that was fast; 2) "we have an indication that is not correct in the plane". Only 2m33s elapse from the initial request for lower from the aircraft, and the first recorded acknowledgement of it's clearance for FL200. Two previous instructions had been complied with before this point (descend FL250; LT 30-deg for lower), and the present clearance to continue to FL200, though acknowledged, was never complied with (nor a following clearance DT TAY VORTAC). Two-and-a-half minutes of /useful/ consciousness was all we witnessed. Over the next 50 seconds we hear how rapidly the hypoxia was degrading the pilot, as it begins to sound slurred and is slow off the transmit button. My CFI and various info resources have always warned how quickly hypoxia can take you from normal to talking but non-functional to unconscious. This was a harrowing demonstration. Both the controller and the pilots aboard realized too late how

(Written on 09/10/2014)(Permalink)

Ditto the previous comments. Very much enjoyed! It's interesting to me in how many similar sorts of stories (where something goes wrong in IMC), the ostensibly well-trained IFR pilot cannot seem to keep enough basic instrument flying skill together to keep from losing control. You got through it, although you didn't get the precision you would have liked. My overriding thought from the "jumpseat" in your story was: "What if he cannot stabilize and has to go around, is he ready to handle that?" Available training topics are far more numerous than most pilots' time and budget. One risk in standardization may be that the last incident to get attention refocuses training too much onto an aspect that might realistically be further down the priority scale if considered in perspective. Good skills foundation frees you to start doing what you know you can do, while you work out what the priorities are. Working the priorities by applying your skill foundation minimizes the consequences

(Written on 10/18/2013)(Permalink)

Well done to the FO, and well done to the CAPT for his prolific posting of inflight videos! -Subscribed-

(Written on 10/18/2013)(Permalink)