Is a roll that big of a deal?
- Thread starter Holocene
- Start date
- Status
OK, so it's OK to do it if you're Bob Hoover, but if you aren't Bob Hoover, then its not OK. Are you saying it's the of being Bob Hoover is what makes him safe?
I'm not arguing its prudent. I'm arguing that it can be done safely, and that if a pilot attempts one (depending on many factors and circumstances), the act in and of itself doesn't make that person a bad pilot.
Bumblebee
Commodore
yes it does.
He may have mad skilz but the best part of a pilot is his/her judgment, and this is bad judgment by definition. This IS the argument we've been having and this distills your and our position quite well. The only thing for you to do is go get some life experience.
Let's try a cool experiment . . . you save this dialogue for 5 years and then read it (if you survive) I'll still be here at JC (if we all survive) and we can revisit it then OK?
I absolutely find peace with the way you see it.
However, I would never knowingly fly that aircraft. Sorry! Ain't gonna happen. I've lost too many friends from structural failures and dorked-up manuevers to make that risk.
High risk, low reward.
Lots of folks have unprotected sex with prostitutes in Bangkok and don't contract a venereal disease. Personally? I'm not going there.
We've had a mechanical engineer, at least one civil engineer, pilots of various skill levels and experiences all offer their experiences and insight, but if you're still convinced that it's hunky dory, peace be with you.
Don't you think thats a little bit irrational? You seem to be under the impression that barrel roll = structural damage. A barrel roll properly executed (which isn't even that difficult to do correctly) puts less stress on the airframe than a steep turn.
If that outcome (not getting a STD) is achieved via luck, then its not a very good idea to bank on luck by attempting to do... that. But if there is more to it... Maybe an ancient Chinese herbal supplement? Maybe theres a technique to finding the ones who are not infected. Do you know enough about this technique to you trust your ability to make you confident it will work for you? This is what judgment is all about. Simply stating "I'm just not going there" is not much in my book in the way of judgment.
We've also had people who are apparently more experienced than me say it's not such a huge risk and that it can be done without damaging the airframe (check page 1).
Bumblebee
Commodore
yes, but your book is Cliff notes . . .
TXaviator
Well-Known Member
i just want to step in and say:
our EXPERT, "butt" keeps referring to a "barrel roll"... when he is describing an AILERON ROLL.
a barrel roll will put about 3 to 4 G on the plane if performed correctly, which would be the integration of 1 full loop with 1 full roll.
youre talking about an aileron roll (pitch up, slam the ailerons, neutral)
if you cannot even accurately describe the maneuver you are arguing, i cannot give any credence to the rest of your babbling.
I SAY GOOD DAY SIR.
our EXPERT, "butt" keeps referring to a "barrel roll"... when he is describing an AILERON ROLL.
a barrel roll will put about 3 to 4 G on the plane if performed correctly, which would be the integration of 1 full loop with 1 full roll.
youre talking about an aileron roll (pitch up, slam the ailerons, neutral)
if you cannot even accurately describe the maneuver you are arguing, i cannot give any credence to the rest of your babbling.
I SAY GOOD DAY SIR.
I don't claim to be an expert in aerobatics. I called a loop a 'flip' earlier. Anyways, this thread isn't even really about aerobatics anymore. The reason I became involved with this thread in the first place was to "fight" (if you want to call it that) the growing trend of what I now call Aviation Fundamentalism, which is the at of letting the regulation book and other people's opinions do the thinking for you.
And to the people calling me names: I'm not here to gain 'cred', make friends, nor to make a name for myself. My handle is "butt" for gods sake. I'm here to further my understanding of aviation, and nothing else. You won't see me flipping my stance on something based on what a bunch of people say on the internet. If you aren't here to further the discussion or in any way enlighten the debate, then I'm just ignoring your posts. You can't "scare" me into changing my mind because of some kind of threat of being disliked. That kind of crap may work with just about everyone else here, but it won't work for me.
Yeah, after a couple glasses of cheap red wine, I think we need to nuke the village to save the villagers!
The 'yeah but what if's' are driving me to want to stab my eyeballs out. And I know if I've lost patience, holy cow, there are probably a few thousand folks in the ER with stabbed-out eyes too.
What "what ifs"? I want to know exactly it is that makes Bob Hoover capable to do aerobatics in non-approved aircraft. People seem to have no problem with him, or any other "aerobatic legend" doing such feats. Can anyone attempt to quantify what allows them and only them to have the skill to be able to pull this off safely? This question is hypothetical free.
TurdBird
Well-Known Member
Null....Boom?
PS- if you want to get specific I think it's vier and not fier. I know they sound the same.
For a second there I actually thought you were mature enough to rise above the circle jerkers and take this seriously...
I'm sure my users are mortally wounded.
Perhaps I could hire Dr. Phil to give them some group therapy!
Myself? I'm certainly curled in the fetal position after the stunning attack.
- Status