this just turned up at tobago
Discussion
Ayahuasca said:
We get USAF Globemasters drop into Panama every now and again. And also Homeland Security Orion P3Bs (with the big frisbees on top). Don!t know what the former are up to, but the latter are normally looking out for drug runners from Colombia.
On the hi/lo wing thing, I understand (looks nervously towards Ginetta) that one of the reasons that military transports usually have high wings is to keep the engines out of the way of foreign object debris from imperfect landing strips.
If you think about it a high wing also gives you a low floor which makes loading easier. The layout obviously works as most of the worlds transport aircraft are of a similar layout.On the hi/lo wing thing, I understand (looks nervously towards Ginetta) that one of the reasons that military transports usually have high wings is to keep the engines out of the way of foreign object debris from imperfect landing strips.
a quick "sit-rep" (is that what it's called in these situations !?)
the boeings left their cargo and some personnel and departed. surprisingly fuss free given the commotion they make on landing. then one came back - not sure that "parking up" in front of the terminal was truly in line with all the other security measures but the passengers departing on Virgin that day will have quite an image to take away with them.
another 'plane has appeared but didn't see the arrival so don't know if it flew in or got delivered and reconstituted - would that be possible ? it's a twin prop engined high wing with lots of lumps and bumps on the fuselage. really quite small, even when compared to our own ATR 72-600s.
the helicopters are all still here and conducting what appear to be night exercises. they get cranked up around 16.00 and seem to just sit there with engines running until darkness starts to fall then lots of coming and going. couldn't swear to it but i can't see any lights on them and, given my proximity to the airport, i'd certainly see lights in normal circumstances, even through the trees and bush between me and the runway. they tend to shut operations down at around 20.00 but it certainly disturbs dinner and my afterwork beers when sitting out front !
Operation Fused Response is what's taking place. joint exercises to test our preparedness for disaster and "other emergencies". we all take this to be a thinly veiled reference to the situation in Venezuela as other reports have suggested that there is a second objective - to provide a robust response should the "security and stability" of the region be threatened.
paul
the boeings left their cargo and some personnel and departed. surprisingly fuss free given the commotion they make on landing. then one came back - not sure that "parking up" in front of the terminal was truly in line with all the other security measures but the passengers departing on Virgin that day will have quite an image to take away with them.
another 'plane has appeared but didn't see the arrival so don't know if it flew in or got delivered and reconstituted - would that be possible ? it's a twin prop engined high wing with lots of lumps and bumps on the fuselage. really quite small, even when compared to our own ATR 72-600s.
the helicopters are all still here and conducting what appear to be night exercises. they get cranked up around 16.00 and seem to just sit there with engines running until darkness starts to fall then lots of coming and going. couldn't swear to it but i can't see any lights on them and, given my proximity to the airport, i'd certainly see lights in normal circumstances, even through the trees and bush between me and the runway. they tend to shut operations down at around 20.00 but it certainly disturbs dinner and my afterwork beers when sitting out front !
Operation Fused Response is what's taking place. joint exercises to test our preparedness for disaster and "other emergencies". we all take this to be a thinly veiled reference to the situation in Venezuela as other reports have suggested that there is a second objective - to provide a robust response should the "security and stability" of the region be threatened.
paul
paulmakin said:
a quick "sit-rep" (is that what it's called in these situations !?)
the boeings left their cargo and some personnel and departed. surprisingly fuss free given the commotion they make on landing. then one came back - not sure that "parking up" in front of the terminal was truly in line with all the other security measures but the passengers departing on Virgin that day will have quite an image to take away with them.
another 'plane has appeared but didn't see the arrival so don't know if it flew in or got delivered and reconstituted - would that be possible ? it's a twin prop engined high wing with lots of lumps and bumps on the fuselage. really quite small, even when compared to our own ATR 72-600s.
the helicopters are all still here and conducting what appear to be night exercises. they get cranked up around 16.00 and seem to just sit there with engines running until darkness starts to fall then lots of coming and going. couldn't swear to it but i can't see any lights on them and, given my proximity to the airport, i'd certainly see lights in normal circumstances, even through the trees and bush between me and the runway. they tend to shut operations down at around 20.00 but it certainly disturbs dinner and my afterwork beers when sitting out front !
Operation Fused Response is what's taking place. joint exercises to test our preparedness for disaster and "other emergencies". we all take this to be a thinly veiled reference to the situation in Venezuela as other reports have suggested that there is a second objective - to provide a robust response should the "security and stability" of the region be threatened.
paul
I understand that Venezuela still claims that Trini and parts of Guyana are its territory. Classic diversion tactics if you have internal issues is to have an external enemy to focus on. See Galtieri 1982. Still, if Venezuela was in charge of Trini they might make it less of a sthe boeings left their cargo and some personnel and departed. surprisingly fuss free given the commotion they make on landing. then one came back - not sure that "parking up" in front of the terminal was truly in line with all the other security measures but the passengers departing on Virgin that day will have quite an image to take away with them.
another 'plane has appeared but didn't see the arrival so don't know if it flew in or got delivered and reconstituted - would that be possible ? it's a twin prop engined high wing with lots of lumps and bumps on the fuselage. really quite small, even when compared to our own ATR 72-600s.
the helicopters are all still here and conducting what appear to be night exercises. they get cranked up around 16.00 and seem to just sit there with engines running until darkness starts to fall then lots of coming and going. couldn't swear to it but i can't see any lights on them and, given my proximity to the airport, i'd certainly see lights in normal circumstances, even through the trees and bush between me and the runway. they tend to shut operations down at around 20.00 but it certainly disturbs dinner and my afterwork beers when sitting out front !
Operation Fused Response is what's taking place. joint exercises to test our preparedness for disaster and "other emergencies". we all take this to be a thinly veiled reference to the situation in Venezuela as other reports have suggested that there is a second objective - to provide a robust response should the "security and stability" of the region be threatened.
paul
thole so not all bad. Ayahuasca said:
Classic diversion tactics if you have internal issues is to have an external enemy to focus on. See Galtieri 1982.
And just about every other president/prime minister ever.They all love to have an enemy they can use as a distraction and to whip up a bit of false patriotism.
Nanook said:
Are you just constantly angry?
Possibly if the sexist tts here stopped having a pop and accepted that a woman might possibly know quite a bit about her profession, you might get a different response.I put up with the sexist B/S going through flying training and early Sqn service, I'm not putting up with it now.
If you don't like the fact that I am robust in my opinions, then that says more about you than it does me.
Oh, and since you've never met me, you know nothing about my personality, awful or otherwise. Indeed the fact that you feel the need to keep commenting, and attempting insult, rather makes you somewhat of a hypocrite.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Monday 23 April 20:14
Ayahuasca said:
On the hi/lo wing thing, I understand (looks nervously towards Ginetta) that one of the reasons that military transports usually have high wings is to keep the engines out of the way of foreign object debris from imperfect landing strips.
That.s partly the reason, but I would posit that the major reason is that you want an a/c with a large volume freight bay that is easy to load - whether with wheeled cargo (requiring a shallow ramp angle) or with a system of roller conveyer RO/RO pallets (which requires a horizontal ramp at low height).All this predisposes a high wing a/c with fuselage mounted u/c a la Herc, C5, C141, C17, etc.
If you think about the Andover, which had a low wing, then, for the type with the rear ramp, it had to 'kneel' (collapse the u/c) in order for it to be loaded. Having such a u/c was (IMO) an un-neccessary complication.
ayahuasca - the issues between the UK/TnT and Venezuela were eventually sorted by treaty. initially in the 1940s but then revised in the mid 2000s. this was secondary to disagreements over the maritime boundaries rather than land. i believe that the boundaries, as originally drawn, were later accepted by the international community as being inaccurate. i forget the ruling but it's something about the "Continental Shelf"
the guyanas were sorted out over the centuries with the french selling "theirs" and the dutch and british reaching agreement over "their" territories and the return to local governments. the area formerly known as Spanish Guyana was incorporated into Venezuela and those states now make up most of the SE of the country.
whilst agreeing completely that Trinidad most probably is the unwiped ass-end of the world, i'm not sure that Caracas is in any position to try fixing it !!
anyway; an update on todays activity:
nothing has happened. i am now going out to (mostly) drink a few beers before sundown but i shall probably also talk nonsense with people that i am vaguely acquainted with
paul
the guyanas were sorted out over the centuries with the french selling "theirs" and the dutch and british reaching agreement over "their" territories and the return to local governments. the area formerly known as Spanish Guyana was incorporated into Venezuela and those states now make up most of the SE of the country.
whilst agreeing completely that Trinidad most probably is the unwiped ass-end of the world, i'm not sure that Caracas is in any position to try fixing it !!
anyway; an update on todays activity:
nothing has happened. i am now going out to (mostly) drink a few beers before sundown but i shall probably also talk nonsense with people that i am vaguely acquainted with
paul
Nanook said:
I've certainly not seen any of that.
Of course you haven't because you haven't looked, or even tried looking.So, if I post in a thread about the C-130 that I have 2000+ hrs flying the C-130, not as a boast, but as an indication that I probably know what I am talking about, and I receive comments like:
"Worst "I have wifi in the kitchen" post, ever."
And I take that in the way it was intended, ie a sexist post alluding to the fact that I, as a woman, know f
k all about flying the C-130, but should remain in the kitchen, and react accordingly robustly. such that I get:"To be honest, usually you. Remember this is a car forum, sometimes your posts are informative others you just seem to be turning threads into a pissing contest stating all your credentials and rattling off every abbreviation under the sun before you flounce off.
Maybe take a chill pill yeah?"
Or:
"Perhaps if you had less of a chip on your shoulder, we're a lot less defensively aggressive and realised that this is a forum for enjoyment and not somewhere for you to spout off about how absolutely amazing you are because you fly military transports it might be a better place? Lighten up ffs."
I'm supposed to what? Be all meek and quiet?
And then you come along, as usual, having a dig.
So, my professional ability is derided and I am supposed to keep quiet.
How would you like it if your ability was constantly derided?
As I said, I put up with that sort of BS in flying training and early Sqn service, I will not put up with it again.
Ginetta girl,
I am sorry if I offended you!
I read your post and thought to myself what an accomplished woman you are and also noticed your user name and factored in that you also drive a cool car and wrongly assumed that you would take a silly comment like mine as it was meant to be taken.
I agree it was stupidly sexist, but that was the joke..
You do seem to have a chip on your shoulder though, I would have thought that with everything you have achieved in life you would have been above being wound up by a comment as silly as mine was!
But, as I misjudged the situation and we don't know each other, I apologise.
I am sorry if I offended you!
I read your post and thought to myself what an accomplished woman you are and also noticed your user name and factored in that you also drive a cool car and wrongly assumed that you would take a silly comment like mine as it was meant to be taken.
I agree it was stupidly sexist, but that was the joke..
You do seem to have a chip on your shoulder though, I would have thought that with everything you have achieved in life you would have been above being wound up by a comment as silly as mine was!
But, as I misjudged the situation and we don't know each other, I apologise.
AndrewEH1 said:
Yet when someone posts saying they have 16 years of repairing and maintaining C-130s you say they're wrong.
Because someone builds boats for a living rather than being a pilot you're allowed to be completely rude to them?
But we're all sexist pigs yeah?
Only I didn't did I?Because someone builds boats for a living rather than being a pilot you're allowed to be completely rude to them?
But we're all sexist pigs yeah?
What I said was:
"Knocking the urinal drains off is more to do with the fact that the stretched Hercs tend to 'arrive' rather than land (especially when doing strip work) as opposed to over-rotation on T/O."
Followed by:
" I have over 2000 hrs C-130K and have never known of a tail strike on rotate on a C3. I know of a number on C1 on Tac departures.
Indeed the C3 was very sluggish on rotate and particularly poor upon flare for landing despite what people might think about the longer fuselage/ greater elevator giving better authority . In actual fact the elevator control on the C3 was poor compared to the C1. Indeed IIRC Vmcg1 on C3 was some 7 kts higher than C1 which shows the tail limitation.
As a result the C3 rotated slowly and was never flared well.
Any C-130 Pilot should be able to 'grease' a landing on a short body; it's in the hands of the gods on a long body, its up to chance.
I'm intrigued as to how you know: " I know of one that was definitely an over rotation on take off."?
I'll reiterate, most incidents with Albert tail strikes were on landing and not on T/O."
Followed by:
"I wasn't arguing with you, just trying to get my head around the fact that your experience jibes very much with mine.
I would suggest that to get a C3 to tail strike on rotate it must have been relatively light and with a rearwards CoG. Possibly a lightweight T/O using full T/O power (19,600 in.lbs torque) as opposed to the more normal 18,000 in.lbs?
From my experience the C3 was sluggish on rotate compared to the C1. Looking at my LogBook I flew the C1 on the first 5 OCU sorties (7hrs 50 mins) before flying the C3 on Ex 6. Bearing in mind these were all around 1:30 duration sorties so were lightweight T/Os, the first trip in a C3 was a bit of an eye opener in its sluggish tail authority."
Please explain to me where I was rude or told Eccles he was wrong?
Yet you jump in and start with the insults and aspersions as to my professional ability.
Shuvi, thank you.
I also apologise for going off half cocked, I obviously mis-interpreted what was supposed to be humour.
I have had a lifetime of being told I am not as good as the guys, despite evidence to the contrary. As a result I get a bit snappy when I perceive people being sexist towards me.
I also apologise for going off half cocked, I obviously mis-interpreted what was supposed to be humour.
I have had a lifetime of being told I am not as good as the guys, despite evidence to the contrary. As a result I get a bit snappy when I perceive people being sexist towards me.
But it's fine for you to have a chip on your shoulder?
What you don't understand, or won't understand is that nobody here has an issue with what you do for a living, what sex you are, or what you undoubtedly know about flying planes. Ok?
What we do have a problem with is the bolshie attitude that comes across in your posts. There's no need. You can make your point without trying to put everyone in their place. You could also accept that other opinions from yours are equally valid.
For example if someone who fixes the planes that you and your colleagues break, makes an observation, don't try and belittle them. Just accept it's their point of view. You don't need to bang on about 2000+ hours of flying Hercules or whatever. We already know what you do for a living.
What you don't understand, or won't understand is that nobody here has an issue with what you do for a living, what sex you are, or what you undoubtedly know about flying planes. Ok?
What we do have a problem with is the bolshie attitude that comes across in your posts. There's no need. You can make your point without trying to put everyone in their place. You could also accept that other opinions from yours are equally valid.
For example if someone who fixes the planes that you and your colleagues break, makes an observation, don't try and belittle them. Just accept it's their point of view. You don't need to bang on about 2000+ hours of flying Hercules or whatever. We already know what you do for a living.
Oh here we go again:
Eccles said: "Something stretched C130's are prone to do, especially when the pilots are used to flying shorter aircraft!"
He is not an operator, I am, so I disagreed with him based upon my experience flying the C-130. Surely if anyone knows about, or happens to achieve a tail strike, it would be those as fly them?
Please tell me where I belittled Eccles? I merely disagreed and pointed out that, IME, tail strikes were the result of Tac Landings.
As opposed to you attempting to belittle with me.
" You don't need to bang on about 2000+ hours of flying Hercules or whatever."
I wasn't, I was offering my professional credentials. Why can't you see/accept that?
Tell me, what do you do for a living? Do you use your professional credentials. Of course you do. So why shouldn't I?
"We already know what you do for a living."
No you don't. You know some and have assumed a lot.
Eccles said: "Something stretched C130's are prone to do, especially when the pilots are used to flying shorter aircraft!"
He is not an operator, I am, so I disagreed with him based upon my experience flying the C-130. Surely if anyone knows about, or happens to achieve a tail strike, it would be those as fly them?
Please tell me where I belittled Eccles? I merely disagreed and pointed out that, IME, tail strikes were the result of Tac Landings.
As opposed to you attempting to belittle with me.
" You don't need to bang on about 2000+ hours of flying Hercules or whatever."
I wasn't, I was offering my professional credentials. Why can't you see/accept that?
Tell me, what do you do for a living? Do you use your professional credentials. Of course you do. So why shouldn't I?
"We already know what you do for a living."
No you don't. You know some and have assumed a lot.
Edited by Ginetta G15 Girl on Monday 23 April 22:28
eharding said:
What's this "we" stuff?
There are a small number of usual suspects - yourself included - who seem to have a problem with G3G, and it invariably seems to be an inadequacy problem on your part.
Get over it.
Why do you think he or I have an inadequacy problem?There are a small number of usual suspects - yourself included - who seem to have a problem with G3G, and it invariably seems to be an inadequacy problem on your part.
Get over it.
The problem is rude and abrasive posting with no justification.
Come on Andrew,
Lets AGAIN review my posts:
I said:
"Knocking the urinal drains off is more to do with the fact that the stretched Hercs tend to 'arrive' rather than land (especially when doing strip work) as opposed to over-rotation on T/O."
Eccles said:
"i have been involved in repairing in several tail strikes on RAF C130's over the years. I know of one that was definitely an over rotation on take off. Some were just as simple as a new skid block and urinal drain tubes, to one of them arriving for repair with the gear locked down and ramp down as it was so damaged. It ended up needing pretty much new everything from the para door back, and the floor down.
When the Dutch got their shiny new stretched C130's the pilots were trained by the Belgians in their short aircraft, within a couple of months we'd repaired two fairly hefty tail strikes and one light one due to the crews forgetting about the extra length in the heat of the moment. "
I said:
"Where these J models or K models?"
Eccles said:
"The RAF ones were K's, Dutch ones were shiny new H's."
To which I said::
"I have over 2000 hrs C-130K and have never known of a tail strike on rotate on a C3. I know of a number on C1 on Tac departures.
Indeed the C3 was very sluggish on rotate and particularly poor upon flare for landing despite what people might think about the longer fuselage/ greater elevator giving better authority . In actual fact the elevator control on the C3 was poor compared to the C1. Indeed IIRC Vmcg1 on C3 was some 7 kts higher than C1 which shows the tail limitation.
As a result the C3 rotated slowly and was never flared well.
Any C-130 Pilot should be able to 'grease' a landing on a short body; it's in the hands of the gods on a long body, its up to chance.
I'm intrigued as to how you know: " I know of one that was definitely an over rotation on take off."?
I'll reiterate, most incidents with Albert tail strikes were on landing and not on T/O."
Now. Please explain to me how that was rude and abrasive posting with no justification.
Now justify to me why you have been so rude to me.
Oh you can't.
HYPOCRITE.
Lets AGAIN review my posts:
I said:
"Knocking the urinal drains off is more to do with the fact that the stretched Hercs tend to 'arrive' rather than land (especially when doing strip work) as opposed to over-rotation on T/O."
Eccles said:
"i have been involved in repairing in several tail strikes on RAF C130's over the years. I know of one that was definitely an over rotation on take off. Some were just as simple as a new skid block and urinal drain tubes, to one of them arriving for repair with the gear locked down and ramp down as it was so damaged. It ended up needing pretty much new everything from the para door back, and the floor down.
When the Dutch got their shiny new stretched C130's the pilots were trained by the Belgians in their short aircraft, within a couple of months we'd repaired two fairly hefty tail strikes and one light one due to the crews forgetting about the extra length in the heat of the moment. "
I said:
"Where these J models or K models?"
Eccles said:
"The RAF ones were K's, Dutch ones were shiny new H's."
To which I said::
"I have over 2000 hrs C-130K and have never known of a tail strike on rotate on a C3. I know of a number on C1 on Tac departures.
Indeed the C3 was very sluggish on rotate and particularly poor upon flare for landing despite what people might think about the longer fuselage/ greater elevator giving better authority . In actual fact the elevator control on the C3 was poor compared to the C1. Indeed IIRC Vmcg1 on C3 was some 7 kts higher than C1 which shows the tail limitation.
As a result the C3 rotated slowly and was never flared well.
Any C-130 Pilot should be able to 'grease' a landing on a short body; it's in the hands of the gods on a long body, its up to chance.
I'm intrigued as to how you know: " I know of one that was definitely an over rotation on take off."?
I'll reiterate, most incidents with Albert tail strikes were on landing and not on T/O."
Now. Please explain to me how that was rude and abrasive posting with no justification.
Now justify to me why you have been so rude to me.
Oh you can't.
HYPOCRITE.
I believe far more PHers enjoy GG15's posts than not; especially when she puts wee laddies in their place. Although it must be frustrating for her to fight the same battles over and over.
Anyway, back on topic, Venezuelan friends of mine insist that Trinidad and half of Guyana is theirs. The Venezuelan military is full of Russian kit, their military is firmly on the side of Maduro, and although they have not been involved in any foreign wars as far as I can remember, it would not take much to repossess Trinidad. Not surprised there are 'contingencies' in place.
Anyway, back on topic, Venezuelan friends of mine insist that Trinidad and half of Guyana is theirs. The Venezuelan military is full of Russian kit, their military is firmly on the side of Maduro, and although they have not been involved in any foreign wars as far as I can remember, it would not take much to repossess Trinidad. Not surprised there are 'contingencies' in place.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff