Go Back  RCU Forums > RC Airplanes > AMA Discussions
Reload this Page >

FAA telling Law Enforcement they CAN act...

AMA Discussions Discuss AMA policies, decisions & any other AMA related topics here.

FAA telling Law Enforcement they CAN act...

Reply

Old 01-05-2019, 08:05 AM
  #1  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default FAA telling Law Enforcement they CAN act...

FYI, the FAA is reaching out to law enforcement to inform them that they can act against drones to protect public ....

https://www.facebook.com/FAA/videos/...2832-122554489
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:29 AM
  #2  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default



"SHOULD"


"MUST"
Should and Must.........Differnt meanings to most people.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:42 AM
  #3  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Could be worse. At least they didn't openly authorize the use of deadly force. However, depending on the situation that is still an option.

And people who insist on arguing semantics will be the ones that get the whole hobby locked down even tighter.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:49 AM
  #4  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Wow! Really? Deadly force for flying a UAS? I need a Kevlar vest now when I attend a sanctioned Pattern contest at a chartered field?
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 09:22 AM
  #5  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Wow! Really? Deadly force for flying a UAS? I need a Kevlar vest now when I attend a sanctioned Pattern contest at a chartered field?
Your hyperbole aside, if you are flying outside field limits over people, roads, buildings, etc., this does make it easy for endangered third parties to complain and law enforcement to take action.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 09:37 AM
  #6  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Do you think you could actually reply to me without an opening statement that efforts minimizing my point of Veiw? I will never claim that you don't " politician " well.

That aside, I agree with the factual part of that post. That is why I ONLY fly at AMA chartered club fields. Most are isolated enough where flying over objects and people really aren't possible. Most times when I talk to a anyone not associated with the hobby they are surprised to the fact that the flying site is even there and we are talking about a club field that has been active for 20+ years.

Now compare that to a guy " you " that just wants to drive down the street to a park for a couple quick flights. If there are houses surrounding the park or school yard, you ARE going to get noticed. Even if you are doing everything correctly it is not going to stop an uniformed resident from picking up the phone. To add to that, many parks in my city/state prohibit UAS of all types. If you would care to let me know the location of where you fly I would be happy to check for you.

Bottom line is that the park flier gains more attention from the general public then us guys at club sites. Not to mention if you have a signal failure with a cheap radio when flying at a park your model could easily do some property damage. Flying from club fields has an exceptional safety record. Dare I say much better then Naval Aviation.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 10:35 AM
  #7  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,256
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Do you think you could actually reply to me without an opening statement that efforts minimizing my point of Veiw? I will never claim that you don't " politician " well.

That aside, I agree with the factual part of that post. That is why I ONLY fly at AMA chartered club fields. Most are isolated enough where flying over objects and people really aren't possible. Most times when I talk to a anyone not associated with the hobby they are surprised to the fact that the flying site is even there and we are talking about a club field that has been active for 20+ years.

Now compare that to a guy " you " that just wants to drive down the street to a park for a couple quick flights. If there are houses surrounding the park or school yard, you ARE going to get noticed. Even if you are doing everything correctly it is not going to stop an uniformed resident from picking up the phone. To add to that, many parks in my city/state prohibit UAS of all types. If you would care to let me know the location of where you fly I would be happy to check for you.

Bottom line is that the park flier gains more attention from the general public then us guys at club sites. Not to mention if you have a signal failure with a cheap radio when flying at a park your model could easily do some property damage. Flying from club fields has an exceptional safety record. Dare I say much better then Naval Aviation.
I have always believed that responsible park flying is a great way to let the public see how much fun model flying can be . When I say responsible I mean things like not flying aircraft that are too big , too heavy , too fast , and too loud to be considered true park flyers and of course no flying over (or even too near) the uninvolved general public who may be in the area .

PS , the Naval Aviation comment was , in my opinion , in poor form . Gloating over the graves of people who died in the service of the protection of our country is uncalled for , no matter the point your attempting to make .
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 10:42 AM
  #8  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,256
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
Could be worse. At least they didn't openly authorize the use of deadly force. However, depending on the situation that is still an option.

And people who insist on arguing semantics will be the ones that get the whole hobby locked down even tighter.
The way things are today I could see where that could happen . We already have one wannabe terrorist in jail who thought he could load a model plane with explosives and fly it into the Pentagon . What if the next one , or the one after that , actually manages to get a deadly payload off the ground and needed to be taken out before completing his nefarious plan ? I wonder if present day law enforcement trains for that scenario ...
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 11:12 AM
  #9  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by init4fun View Post
I have always believed that responsible park flying is a great way to let the public see how much fun model flying can be . When I say responsible I mean things like not flying aircraft that are too big , too heavy , too fast , and too loud to be considered true park flyers and of course no flying over (or even too near) the uninvolved general public who may be in the area .

PS , the Naval Aviation comment was , in my opinion , in poor form . Gloating over the graves of people who died in the service of the protection of our country is uncalled for , no matter the point your attempting to make .

While I would agree that 10 years ago park flying an electric model would have been considered a good public outreach approach. I also beleive that the attitude of the general public towards any UAS is different now. We can blame the media in part for that and of course some irresponsible pilots. That again is another reason why the popularity of the hobby is on the decline, the media spin on the hobby as a whole.

My comment about Naval Aviation was not to disrespect anyone. If you recall me saying several times I am the son of a retired Air Force loadmaster. Growing up my family knew other families that lost husbands and fathers. I can recall several times my mother helping a widow pack for the move off base. The comment was focused on Franklin telling a Canadian poster on RCG to worry about his own back yard and not ours when that poster had an opposing Veiw. I would think Naval Aviation to be in Franklin's back yard. Kinda illustrates where some may feel he is entitled to make certain types of comments where others are not.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 11:36 AM
  #10  
init4fun
 
init4fun's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 3,256
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post



While I would agree that 10 years ago park flying an electric model would have been considered a good public outreach approach. I also beleive that the attitude of the general public towards any UAS is different now. We can blame the media in part for that and of course some irresponsible pilots. That again is another reason why the popularity of the hobby is on the decline, the media spin on the hobby as a whole.

My comment about Naval Aviation was not to disrespect anyone. If you recall me saying several times I am the son of a retired Air Force loadmaster. Growing up my family knew other families that lost husbands and fathers. I can recall several times my mother helping a widow pack for the move off base. The comment was focused on Franklin telling a Canadian poster on RCG to worry about his own back yard and not ours when that poster had an opposing Veiw. I would think Naval Aviation to be in Franklin's back yard. Kinda illustrates where some may feel he is entitled to make certain types of comments where others are not.
Thank You for the response , and put me on record as saying that no one should be making those certain types of comments you mention , on either or any side of the discussion . Please remember , there are some among us (Me for one) who truly don't read RCG (unless it gets cross quoted here) so I have no knowledge of what was said there . Now as to law enforcement and drones and the enforcement of FAA regulations , I can tell you for certain that during Boston , Massachusetts' "First Night" New Years eve celebration there was specific notice in all media (TV , Radio , Internet , Newspapers) that civilian drone use over the city was prohibited , because law enforcement themselves were planning on using drones to keep watch over the area . It was kinda weird watching Boston's new police commissioner , William Gross , on the TV news telling people no civilian drones and no Pot were allowed at the big celebration , recreational Pot now being legal here in Mass. There was no mention of the penalty for breaking the temporary drone ban but I'd imagine had anyone tested it the firing squad likely wouldn't have been employed , nor would a "slap of the wrist" been the least of it , likely somewhere between the two .
init4fun is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 12:06 PM
  #11  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Sure and I agree that in certain circumstances action is warranted. However I do not feel that action is warranted nor is going to happen if I am practicing my pattern sequence at an AMA sanctioned club field and break 400' 8 times for a few seconds each time during each run through the sequence. I agree that not everyone has the desire or skill to be a competitive pilot but there are many of us who do. It could be argued that the advanced products we have today are a direct result from competition. I am confident although not certain that the AMA and FAA will come to an agreement that allows us to fly at chartered club sites as we have been for decades. If you think about it, that really would be the best solution for all of us. The way I see it the guys who don't want the club atmosphere are flying smaller aircraft and is not handicapped by the 400' limit. Those of us who have the need to fly over 400' will have to do so at club fields. Kinda seems like a win-win for us all. Unless that is if someone does not have any hidden motives. The way I see it is it becomes a " you leave me alone and I will leave you alone" situation. I do have to say that someone who thinks that AMA membership for 75.00 has no value but advocates that buying additional equipment to provide telemetry for many people is a good value.
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 01:48 PM
  #12  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Do you think you could actually reply to me without an opening statement that efforts minimizing my point of Veiw? I will never claim that you don't " politician " well.
Oh, are you saying the Kevlar vest comment wasn't hyperbole? Yeah right.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
That aside, I agree with the factual part of that post. That is why I ONLY fly at AMA chartered club fields. Most are isolated enough where flying over objects and people really aren't possible. Most times when I talk to a anyone not associated with the hobby they are surprised to the fact that the flying site is even there and we are talking about a club field that has been active for 20+ years.
Good for you. The problem is that's not the case at all AMA fields. Fairview lost their field here in PA. It was in the middle of farmland. The problem was, they didn't respect the neighbors farms. And despite AMA saying not to overfly non-particpant property etc., the club did it ... for years. People got fed up with that, got fed up with their livestock being endangered, their farm workers, and the tresspasses to collect wreckage, The courts shut them down. Then there's the Markham flyers. Where there's video of of a jet going well outside the field boundaries, over picnic areas, over busy interstates, and not one of the AMA members seen either before or after the flight step in to stop. So much for AMA's "self regulation" eh? There's others. Like the field in Delaware where an AMA EC member was in attendance, but did nothing when the AMA recommended standoffs were "waived" and the crowd dangerously close to the runway. There's video of people diving for safety as a 100lb four engine model is careening toward them. So while your club appears to be the one that never has issues, is never breaking the rules, and heck probably has unicorns grazing nearby, the reality is many AMA clubs are not so lilly white.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Now compare that to a guy " you " that just wants to drive down the street to a park for a couple quick flights. If there are houses surrounding the park or school yard, you ARE going to get noticed. Even if you are doing everything correctly it is not going to stop an uniformed resident from picking up the phone. To add to that, many parks in my city/state prohibit UAS of all types.
"Many parks in my city/state prohibit...." Ah, but don't you live in the People's Democratic Republic of Kalifornia? Nanny state land of one party rule ... where plastic straws are banned? I guess it's no surprise then the sUAS flying in parks is banned. In contrast, here in the "Shall Issue" and "Castle Doctrine" Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, not only can I buy plastic straws in stores and get them with my fast food, I can also fly a sUAS in the park WALKING distance from my home (you said "drive," I wanted to be accurate).

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
If you would care to let me know the location of where you fly I would be happy to check for you.
I already have checked. Thanks though.

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Bottom line is that the park flier gains more attention from the general public then us guys at club sites. Not to mention if you have a signal failure with a cheap radio when flying at a park your model could easily do some property damage.
It does get attenion, from the local kids who want to watch and, depending on what I'm flying, actually get to try. Same with their parents, all of whom know me and know that I follow the law (because one or more times they've asked and I've stopped and taken the time to educate).

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Flying from club fields has an exceptional safety record. Dare I say much better then Naval Aviation.
The operational environment of Naval Aviation is considerably different.

Last edited by franklin_m; 01-05-2019 at 03:15 PM.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 01:51 PM
  #13  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Sure and I agree that in certain circumstances action is warranted. However I do not feel that action is warranted nor is going to happen if I am practicing my pattern sequence at an AMA sanctioned club field and break 400' 8 times for a few seconds each time during each run through the sequence. I agree that not everyone has the desire or skill to be a competitive pilot but there are many of us who do. It could be argued that the advanced products we have today are a direct result from competition. I am confident although not certain that the AMA and FAA will come to an agreement that allows us to fly at chartered club sites as we have been for decades. If you think about it, that really would be the best solution for all of us. The way I see it the guys who don't want the club atmosphere are flying smaller aircraft and is not handicapped by the 400' limit. Those of us who have the need to fly over 400' will have to do so at club fields. Kinda seems like a win-win for us all. Unless that is if someone does not have any hidden motives. The way I see it is it becomes a " you leave me alone and I will leave you alone" situation. I do have to say that someone who thinks that AMA membership for 75.00 has no value but advocates that buying additional equipment to provide telemetry for many people is a good value.
I got news for you. AMA probably cannot survive on the number of people who "need" club fields to fly... And even then, the charter club revenue, just like membership revenue, is in near constant decade long decline.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:08 PM
  #14  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
...........................................
My comment about Naval Aviation was not to disrespect anyone. ................
And yet, somehow you do! Like it's second nature for you.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:13 PM
  #15  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
.................................................. .....However I do not feel that action is warranted nor is going to happen if I am practicing my pattern sequence at an AMA sanctioned club field and break 400' 8 times for a few seconds each time during each run through the sequence. ..................................................
But it's not always about YOU! There are some one million FAA registered recreational flyers. Just because you do something one way does not mean they all do it the same way. Some aren't like you, known to the police as being as pure and innocent as the driven snow. The need for deadly force might very well be closer than you think.

And growing up in a military family does not make you a veteran.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-05-2019, 08:41 PM
  #16  
speedracerntrixie
My Feedback: (29)
 
speedracerntrixie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 6,524
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
But it's not always about YOU! There are some one million FAA registered recreational flyers. Just because you do something one way does not mean they all do it the same way. Some aren't like you, known to the police as being as pure and innocent as the driven snow. The need for deadly force might very well be closer than you think.

And growing up in a military family does not make you a veteran.
Dude, you really need to pull your head out!! How could you possibly be delusional enough to come close to thinking I implied being a Veteran?

However you are right, not everyone is like me and that is why a 400' limit would be unacceptable to me. You really have me wondering what kind of life you had that made you such a bitter person. Do you spew this much hate towards everyone that does not agree with you?
speedracerntrixie is online now  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 02:28 AM
  #17  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,477
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Speed, even though it may not matter to you, I'm also a veteran and was involved with Naval Aviation. Let me throw a couple of facts at you:
1) The flight deck is the most dangerous place in the world to work, between jet engine intakes, exhausts, spinning props and rotors
2) It takes less than a second to die or to be missing body parts on the flight deck and less than five seconds to find yourself in the water and fighting to just stay afloat when you're probably hurt from a 70+ foot fall
3) It takes less than a minute for someone to type a snide comment about those who risked their lives working in that environment just so that person has the freedom to type said snide comment
4) It takes less than a minute for someone like me, that risked his life working in that environment and also had the misfortune of watching someone die in that environment, to lose all respect for the person that typed that snide comment. Now, with that said, I'll let Jack Nicholson say the rest, just forward the video to 1:04
Hydro Junkie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 04:24 AM
  #18  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post


Dude, you really need to pull your head out!! How could you possibly be delusional enough to come close to thinking I implied being a Veteran?


Then why is it every time someone mentions military service, especially in regard to Franklin, you immediately throw out your growing up on AF Bases? If not trying to say, "Look at me! Look at me!". "I've been there too!"

Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
However you are right, not everyone is like me and that is why a 400' limit would be unacceptable to me. You really have me wondering what kind of life you had that made you such a bitter person. Do you spew this much hate towards everyone that does not agree with you?
Originally Posted by speedracerntrixie View Post
Bitter person? You know nothing about me. I think I've had one hell of a life and career. But maybe you're right. Maybe I hate the AMA so much that I continue to try to bring attention to issues within the AMA that if left unchecked, will eventually destroy it. I guess maybe I want them to see it coming?

Am I hateful when I support Franklins arguments?
Am I hateful when your primary counter argument to me is to claim I'm bitter and hateful? Because you have nothing else!
Or was I hateful when you made a point of telling me you could help me with my Stabilator questions but.........you won't?
Has it been hateful when I talked to my Senators and Congressman MULTIPLE TIMES about RC Models, the FAA, AMA and new rules?
Or maybe I was hateful when you run to the mods to report something I said you don't like?
Am I hateful when I post in other forums and shortly after is a post from you?
Am I being hateful when I suggest to someone they join the local club and AMA?
Am I being hateful when I respond to name calling and senseless ridicule with sarcasm?

But, I'll tell you what I do hate. Stupidity!

I see you as someone trying to build credibility based on a relatively quiet and uneventful life. Nothing wrong with that but..............You're over impressed with yourself and somehow think we should be too. IMHO you've lost your objectivity. You need to step back and address the FACTS. Your constant claims of others being hateful is nothing more than you having run out of arguments. When you can't discredit the facts! Kill messenger. Now, is that being hateful?

Last edited by Appowner; 01-06-2019 at 04:27 AM.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 04:33 AM
  #19  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
Speed, even though it may not matter to you, I'm also a veteran and was involved with Naval Aviation. Let me throw a couple of facts at you:
1) The flight deck is the most dangerous place in the world to work, between jet engine intakes, exhausts, spinning props and rotors
2) It takes less than a second to die or to be missing body parts on the flight deck and less than five seconds to find yourself in the water and fighting to just stay afloat when you're probably hurt from a 70+ foot fall
Looked like a lot more to me when I looked over the side of the JFK. But then, I'm use to my runways being at ground level and stationary!

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
3) It takes less than a minute for someone to type a snide comment about those who risked their lives working in that environment just so that person has the freedom to type said snide comment
4) It takes less than a minute for someone like me, that risked his life working in that environment and also had the misfortune of watching someone die in that environment, to lose all respect for the person that typed that snide comment. Now, with that said, I'll let Jack Nicholson say the rest, just forward the video to 1:04
Loved that movie.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 05:35 AM
  #20  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,477
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
Looked like a lot more to me when I looked over the side of the JFK. But then, I'm use to my runways being at ground level and stationary!
Loved that movie.
You have to think about it this way, from the hanger deck to the overhead(otherwise known as the ceiling) on a modern carrier is approximately 25 ft. Depending on the class of carrier, the hanger deck is between 20 and 40 ft above the water. The O-3 level(the deck between the hanger overhead and flight deck) is roughly 9 ft high and topped by an armored flight deck several inches thick. If you add that all together, you're looking at somewhere between 55 and 75 ft. No matter how you look at it, it's still a long way down when you're falling and out of control
Hydro Junkie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 05:50 AM
  #21  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Hydro Junkie View Post
You have to think about it this way, from the hanger deck to the overhead(otherwise known as the ceiling) on a modern carrier is approximately 25 ft. Depending on the class of carrier, the hanger deck is between 20 and 40 ft above the water. The O-3 level(the deck between the hanger overhead and flight deck) is roughly 9 ft high and topped by an armored flight deck several inches thick. If you add that all together, you're looking at somewhere between 55 and 75 ft. No matter how you look at it, it's still a long way down when you're falling and out of control
From a cat shot perspective, we always used 60 feet and about 2 seconds to impact (after cold cat). I still remember from typical preflight brief (depending on temp, internal fuel, and stores): "145 kias off the end, 125 jettison stores, 114 jettison the airplane."
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 05:55 AM
  #22  
franklin_m
Thread Starter
 
franklin_m's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: State College, PA
Posts: 2,964
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
Looked like a lot more to me when I looked over the side of the JFK.
I did a full set of workups and a deployment aboard Kennedy. Was with the Shadowhawks of VAQ-141. We went through the Suez in the middle of summer. Holy Crap it was hot on the flight deck. Pretty cool seeing all the burned out tanks just left on the banks of the canal.

Also got my alongside conning qualification on that ship. Between that and flying off her at least once a day for better part of six months, I've got some good memories of that ship.
franklin_m is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 06:01 AM
  #23  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,477
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by Appowner View Post
Then why is it every time someone mentions military service, especially in regard to Franklin, you immediately throw out your growing up on AF Bases? If not trying to say, "Look at me! Look at me!". "I've been there too!"
Figured I'd reply to this one as well.
He can't say that because he wasn't there too, his father was. Then again, someone that never had to deploy on an aircraft carrier or, for that matter, work around 20 mm gatling guns, rockets, missiles, bombs, torpedoes and the possibility of nuclear weapons wasn't really there either. Must have been nice to have his father home most nights after working his shift. When I went out, it was for at least a week during training cruises and 6 to 7 months during a full deployment. Maybe Speed would like to do what I did, take showers in water that smelled like JP-5(otherwise known as jet fuel), share a bedroom with 30+ other guys in bunks stacked three high while working 12 hours on 12 hours off for weeks on end without a break. After 45 days straight at sea, the Navy would throw us a "Steel Beach Picnic" which amounted to a three hour BBQ with two cans of beer per man(San Miguel Beer, made on the island of Luzon outside of Manila) that reeked of formaldehyde and tended to put the person that drank it in the head(on the toilet) for a couple of days afterwords. Doesn't that sound like fun?
Hydro Junkie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 06:04 AM
  #24  
Appowner
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 841
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

I was in Morocco supporting an annual exercise when I got a Moral ride on the COD out to the Kennedy. Spent a few hours out there. Got the 3 hour tour! And took the COD back to the base in Morocco.

I think that was the year a B-52 went on a run against the Kennedy at wave top level. Even the F-16s refused to fly as low as the BUFF which was leaving rooster tails from the 4 engine pods. Would have loved to have seen that.
Appowner is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2019, 06:05 AM
  #25  
Hydro Junkie
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Marysville, WA
Posts: 7,477
Gallery
My Gallery
Models
My Models
Ratings
My Feedback
Default

Originally Posted by franklin_m View Post
From a cat shot perspective, we always used 60 feet and about 2 seconds to impact (after cold cat). I still remember from typical preflight brief (depending on temp, internal fuel, and stores): "145 kias off the end, 125 jettison stores, 114 jettison the airplane."
On my two cruises, we got lucky. No cold cats, but we did have one Sea King lost due to a snapped tail rotor shaft(several went down due to that in 1985, when we lost ours) and one man dead, sucked through the engine of an S-3A Viking
Hydro Junkie is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service