• There seems to be an uptick in Political comments in recent months. Those of us who are long time members of the site know that Political and Religious content has been banned for years. Nothing has changed. Please leave all political and religious comments out of the forums.

    If you recently joined the forums you were not presented with this restriction in the terms of service. This was due to a conversion error when we went from vBulletin to Xenforo. We have updated our terms of service to reflect these corrections.

    Please note any post refering to a politician will be considered political even if it is intended to be humor. Our experience is these topics have a way of dividing the forums and causing deep resentment among members. It is a poison to the community. We appreciate compliance with the rules.

    The Staff of SOH

  • Server side Maintenance is done. We still have an update to the forum software to run but that one will have to wait for a better time.

Cool website

aeromed202

aeromed202

SOH-CM-2014
Came across this one that takes a long time to load, and no wonder. It's full of sketches, pictures, videos and text about everything you wanted to know about aircraft escape/survival gadgets and design from the no-way to the currently-in-use. I had to stop for a rest and only got a wee bit down the page.:icon29:


Ok I'm a dope. Forgot to include the URL and now I have to back track to find it :banghead: Stand by..


Ok here we go http://www.combatreform.org/escape.htm
 
Did you actually read any of this guy's "editorial comments"? He may have some good points to make, but he does it in a most offensive way.

A couple examples of his writing style:

"LISTEN to the audio on the first video. Silence our helicopters with NOTAR. If you lose 15% of anti-torque power get bigger engines. That's too *****g bad if it isn't the "old school" tail rotor crap you are used to. The world doesn't revolve around you, Mr. Army RotorHead. It beats getting shot down and dying, doesn't it? If the two helicopters were in the right camouflage and NOTAR in the first video Mr. Allah Akbar in the bushes may not have even been alerted to go out and fire at them. When LTG James M. Gavin created helicopter air-mobile units in the 1950s, he never intended for us to be forever stuck with them as the only means to have vertical take-off and landing capabilities; he assumed we wouldn't be a bunch of lazy retards sitting on the laurels of those who had gone before us and would have functional fixed-wing V/STOL aircraft by now (not overly-complex, crap V-22 tilt-rotors)."

and:

"The Army should buy the MD520 Little Bird NOTAR for its 368 x light scout helicopter program not the bull**** loud and slow Bell 407. The made-in-America, (Arizona to be exact--but ****tard Senator John McCain didn't lift a finger to help) MD900 NOTAR should be bought for the Light Utility helicopter (LUH) mission, but hey! The #1 enemy of the U.S. Army is THE U.S. ARMY. That's why they bought crap racketeer Bell 407 LongJetRangers made in Texas where lots of corrupt politicians are to twist the Army's arm and Eurotrash EC-145 tail-rotor copters for the LUH--which later as the UH-72A "Lakota" proved so defective we cannot even fly them if the sun is out! And its been configured as a homeland security flying "pussy wagon" with no armor or armament etc. so as to not threaten the active duty rotorheads and their mega-expensive-to-fly $4, 000/hour UH-60s racket. We couldn't have the "regular" Army flying agile Little Birds superior to the "Special Feces" flyboys of the 160[SUP]th[/SUP] Special Operations Aviation Regiment....it would make too much economic sense to have more of the same type of helos to save $ for the taxpayers on parts....and this would make the "unwashed", "Conventional" Army helo pilots a "high speed" look and demeanor only reserved for our snobs in the 160[SUP]th[/SUP] SOAR...we cannot bust up our snob racket just for...COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS...and ECONOMIC FRUGALITY....hell no! "


I couldn't get much past this.

edit: The SOH forum software automatically censored some of his more colorful terminology, I hope none of the rest gets me in trouble, I'm just quoting this knucklehead.
 
No, I didn't read much but titles and newspaper stories, the subjects of which I thought were interesting. When I scanned the site I assumed the text was expounding on whatever the picture showed. Silly me.

Some of my stuff got booted too;)
 
I went back and read more of it later, I do think the guy has some good points to make regarding ways to improve surviveability in aircraft mishaps.

It's just that he does it in such an offensive way. He heaps abuse, scorn, and ridicule on Air Force and Army leadership, implying that they intentionally sacrifice aircrew because they just don't think saving them is a priority. Even at that I could accept his editorial opinion if he could state it without all the diatribe and profanity. Don't get me wrong, I'm no prude, but he could make a sailor blush, as the old saying goes, and his scorn for policymakers and military leaders just wrecks his credibility with me. I feel that his outrage that they don't do things his way gets in the way of his message.

I did find a lot of the info that he included to be pretty interesting. I especially liked the parachute equipped jettisonable passenger cabin for airliners.

P.S. Aeromed, I hope you didn't feel I was critisizing you for posting the link, I never for a moment assumed you endorsed this guy's statements. That's why I started my previous post with the question, I kinda assumed you glossed over the hard to read fine print and just went for the scanned stuff.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top