CAP Pilot Wings

[NYArcherFG]

My father laughed when he saw this. You should talk to him one day, he has logged over 19,000 hours. We own a 1982 Piper Archer and a 1999 Seneca V. Views pretty good from FL200 

YOU should talk to him one day.  And listen.

You will find he is saying the same things we have been trying to get through to you.

I have, I would never debate on assumptions or preconceived notions. What exactly are you trying to get through to me, an aircraft with a 310HP engine can go faster than one with a 180HP engine?

[NYArcherFG]

Good for you and "Daddy."

BTW, stabilators on fighters?  Ever seen an A-10?

There's several of us here who have been flying in GA probably since before your daddy could walk.  You sound like a spoiled rich kid. 

(The rest is deleted due to being an officer and a gentleman)

Stabilators were developed for control in trans and supersonic regimes. I doubt an Archer can go that fast.

Please cite your sources.

[NYArcherFG]

Good for you and "Daddy."

BTW, stabilators on fighters?  Ever seen an A-10?

There's several of us here who have been flying in GA probably since before your daddy could walk.  You sound like a spoiled rich kid. 

(The rest is deleted due to being an officer and a gentleman)

Yes I have seen an A-10. The aircraft you speak of is a ground support aircraft, not a fighter. Hence, A-10, not F-10, which is very slow and obtrusive. I really dont care how old you are, and I didn't call anyone an "idiot", until I had to defend myself.

An A-10 is a very maneuverable aircraft. It will turn circles around an F-15 at slow speeds. An A-10 will still do double what your Archer will for speed.

Please show me where I said an A-10 is slower than a Piper Archer. Its not like I think a Single Engine prop goes faster than a multi turbofan.

[DG]

What exactly are you trying to get through to me?

What exactly are we trying to get through to you?

That these are different airplanes for different missions.

Foolish to say one is "better" than the other or that one is a "downgrade" from the other.

Aviation is replete with different makes and models.

I have flown an estimated 25 make / models.

Which is my favorite?

It depends on the mission.  They are all great, each for its own mission.

That's what we have been trying to communicate.

With 19,000 hours, your father surely would make that point with us.

Good luck, and advise you tone down what comes across as a know-it-all attitude while making statements that are foolish.

[NYArcherFG]

Did you, or did you not, call me an idiot?                           Talk about attitude

[davidsinn]

Good for you and "Daddy."

BTW, stabilators on fighters?  Ever seen an A-10?

There's several of us here who have been flying in GA probably since before your daddy could walk.  You sound like a spoiled rich kid. 

(The rest is deleted due to being an officer and a gentleman)

Stabilators were developed for control in trans and supersonic regimes. I doubt an Archer can go that fast.

Please cite your sources.

Wiki for starters and the book "Feet Wet" by Adm. Paul Gilcrist has a good explanation as well. "X-Planes and Prototypes" by Jim Winchester in the Bell X-1 section discusses how it allows trimming as the shock-wave moves aft. Also from Wiki:

The system of a fixed tail surface and moveable elevators is standard in subsonic aircraft. Craft capable of supersonic flight often have a stabilator, an all-moving tail surface. Pitch is changed in this case by moving the entire horizontal surface of the tail. This seemingly simple innovation was one of the key technologies that made supersonic flight possible. In early attempts, as pilots exceeded the critical Mach number, a strange phenomenon made their control surfaces useless, and their aircraft uncontrollable. It was determined that as an aircraft approaches the speed of sound, the air approaching the aircraft is compressed and shock waves begin to form at all the leading edges and around the hinge lines of the elevator. These shock waves caused movements of the elevator to cause no pressure change on the stabilizer upstream of the elevator. The problem was solved by changing the stabilizer and hinged elevator to an all-moving stabilizer - the entire horizontal surface of the tail became a one-piece control surface. Also, in supersonic flight the change in camber has less effect on lift and a stabilator produces less drag

Do I need to go on?

[NYArcherFG]

Yes, if you would like to. Lt.Sinn, tell me, are you a pilot?

[davidsinn]

Yes, if you would like to. Lt.Sinn, tell me, are you a pilot?

Does it matter? Aerodynamics is aerodynamics.

[Gunner C]

Good for you and "Daddy."

BTW, stabilators on fighters?  Ever seen an A-10?

There's several of us here who have been flying in GA probably since before your daddy could walk.  You sound like a spoiled rich kid. 

(The rest is deleted due to being an officer and a gentleman)

Stabilators were developed for control in trans and supersonic regimes. I doubt an Archer can go that fast.

Please cite your sources.

Wiki for starters and the book "Feet Wet" by Adm. Paul Gilcrist has a good explanation as well. "X-Planes and Prototypes" by Jim Winchester in the Bell X-1 section discusses how it allows trimming as the shock-wave moves aft. Also from Wiki:

The system of a fixed tail surface and moveable elevators is standard in subsonic aircraft. Craft capable of supersonic flight often have a stabilator, an all-moving tail surface. Pitch is changed in this case by moving the entire horizontal surface of the tail. This seemingly simple innovation was one of the key technologies that made supersonic flight possible. In early attempts, as pilots exceeded the critical Mach number, a strange phenomenon made their control surfaces useless, and their aircraft uncontrollable. It was determined that as an aircraft approaches the speed of sound, the air approaching the aircraft is compressed and shock waves begin to form at all the leading edges and around the hinge lines of the elevator. These shock waves caused movements of the elevator to cause no pressure change on the stabilizer upstream of the elevator. The problem was solved by changing the stabilizer and hinged elevator to an all-moving stabilizer - the entire horizontal surface of the tail became a one-piece control surface. Also, in supersonic flight the change in camber has less effect on lift and a stabilator produces less drag

Do I need to go on?

Heck, I learned that when I was a cadet:  Wright Brothers Achievement (Aircraft in Flight).  But heck, that was 42 years ago.  What do I know?

[NYArcherFG]

.

[davidsinn]

Of course you did, especially when that Award was created on 1April 2003. Well, that just tells me a lot about your Integrity

Yes it was created in 2003 however the Wright Brothers ACHIEVEMENT is much older and was replaced by the milestone award. Before insulting someone you best get your facts straight.

[Gunner C]

Wow!  You can't swing a dead cat without insulting someone!

[Spike]

Wow!  You can't swing a dead cat without insulting someone!

ummm.....shall I call animal protection or do you want to turn yourself in?   

[Gunner C]

 

[NYArcherFG]

Well other than a small part CAP being a congregation of men with too much time on their hands, they seem to teach Cadets "Moral Leadership", while they cannot stop argueing themselves. It still seems nobody can reply to comment #44.

[MIKE]

The one is well past done.