Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
I was in one of them too. From Amsterdam to London, in 1958, never was in a DC-3 since then. I have been in a comet as well, that was after they fixed the problem with the fuselage. On Tuesday 22 June 2004 23:34, frank theriault wrote: FJW> I was on one of them!! FJW> FJW> On our honeymoon, back in '79, we flew to Cape Cod. Took a Cessna 12 seater FJW> there, and a DC 3 back. FJW> FJW> They fly two DC 3's. One of them has the record for the most hours on an FJW> airframe of all time. That was mid-80's; presumably they still have that FJW> record, if it's still flying. I don't know if I was on the "record" DC 3 or FJW> not. FJW> FJW> Cool flight, though. All 15 minutes of it. The damned planes outlasted the FJW> marriage!! FJW> FJW> cheers, FJW> frank FJW> FJW> "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist FJW> fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer FJW> FJW> FJW> FJW> FJW> >From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FJW> >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] FJW> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FJW> >Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne FJW> >Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:15:29 -0400 FJW> > FJW> >Provincetown-Boston Airways still flies them. FJW> > FJW> > FJW> >Bill FJW> > FJW> >- Original Message - FJW> >From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FJW> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FJW> >Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 10:12 PM FJW> >Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne FJW> > FJW> > FJW> > > - Original Message - FJW> > > From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> FJW> > > > FJW> > > > BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has FJW> >DC-3's FJW> > > in FJW> > > > regular passenger service. FJW> > > FJW> > > They are still popular with charter airlines and some "Island-hopping" FJW> > > operations. I don't think any "major" airlines fly them. FJW> > > FJW> > > Christian FJW> > > FJW> > FJW> FJW> _ FJW> MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* FJW> http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines FJW> FJW> FJW> -- Frits WÃthrich
RE: OT: SpaceShipOne
The DC 3 was the Spotmatic of airplanes! -frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Malcolm Smith" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Well, better than an outside toilet :-) Now come on, every one likes flying - it's crashing that people don't like. What other form of travel could bang on about how safe it is and insist that people depart from something called a 'terminal'? The DC-3 comes from an age where people flew planes, not computers. An age where you spent more time on the plane than you did in departure and customs. Those were the days Chocks away, Biggles _ Add photos to your e-mail with MSN Premium. Get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
I was on one of them!! On our honeymoon, back in '79, we flew to Cape Cod. Took a Cessna 12 seater there, and a DC 3 back. They fly two DC 3's. One of them has the record for the most hours on an airframe of all time. That was mid-80's; presumably they still have that record, if it's still flying. I don't know if I was on the "record" DC 3 or not. Cool flight, though. All 15 minutes of it. The damned planes outlasted the marriage!! cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: "Bill Owens" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne Date: Tue, 22 Jun 2004 13:15:29 -0400 Provincetown-Boston Airways still flies them. Bill - Original Message - From: "Christian Skofteland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 10:12 PM Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne > - Original Message - > From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's > in > > regular passenger service. > > They are still popular with charter airlines and some "Island-hopping" > operations. I don't think any "major" airlines fly them. > > Christian > _ MSN Premium includes powerful parental controls and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
RE: OT: SpaceShipOne
Cotty wrote: > >How about this?: > > > >http://www.douglasdc3.com/ > > > >Nice photos too. > > For God's sake Malcolm, don't give the aviators an inch! > There'll be hairy-knuckled talk of trim levers and leather > flying goggles in no time, those seat-of-your pants flights > and scraping Finagle-knows-what on landing at some dusty > strip south of Vegas back in '63 > > Fly-boys, a bit like racing drivers, just point em in the > right direction and pull the cord ;-) > > > Q: Why do DC-3s have the windscreen wipers on the *inside* of > the windows? > > A: cos the pilot sits there going: Br > rrr (better done in > person with spittle departing rapidly from vibrating lips) Well, better than an outside toilet :-) Now come on, every one likes flying - it's crashing that people don't like. What other form of travel could bang on about how safe it is and insist that people depart from something called a 'terminal'? The DC-3 comes from an age where people flew planes, not computers. An age where you spent more time on the plane than you did in departure and customs. Those were the days Chocks away, Biggles
RE: OT: SpaceShipOne
-Original Message- From: John Francis [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 8:25 PM > > Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR > and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere > near that old. I drive a 1986 Mustang GT ragtop as my daily driver. Paul Stenquist drives a 1955 car (although not as primary transport). Shel drives something pretty ancient, too (or at least he did the last time I saw him driving anything). My daily driver was an '88 Mustang convertible - I need to put the cooling system back together and sell it though. Once that is done the next order of business is getting my '65 Mustangs back on the road... Cesar Panama City, Florida
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
I would call that a (bush) commuter service. However, I admit suprise they are being used even for that. Mostly DC-3's seem to be only used for freight services. I think there are a lot of DC-3 still being used as bush planes. Ever seen one on floats? pretty neat. -- Peter J. Alling wrote: Buffalo Airways seems to fly them. (Old piston engine version, not updated turbo props) http://www.buffaloairways.com/passenger_service.htm As I said it seems to depend on your definition of Airline, though these people seem to fairly substantial. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in regular passenger service. There was one that flew in and out of our airport fairly regularly until just a few years ago. It wasn't a passenger plane, but was used for hauling freight. I don't know who was operating it. William Robb -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
No one in a large organization ever lost their job for failing in a bold initiative, if they didn't try one. The shuttle is a known quantity, necessary for operations and should be replaced, but new technology brings new risks, especially the risk of failure. Buffalo Airways http://www.buffaloairways.com/passenger_service.htm seems to be flying them in regular passenger and freight service, there are others who are flying the BT-67 variant, http://www.baslerturbo.com , a stretched version refitted with turbo-prop engines and modern avionics. Some things reached the apex of design years ago and haven't been improved since. For some purposes the DC-3 is unsurpassed. Finally any flight in a DC-3 would be considered a short hop by current standards. With a top speed of only about 143 knots and a max range of about 1307 nautical miles it's only good for "short" hops. Gary Sibio wrote: At 03:02 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: A car is a bad analogy. The shuttle fleet is more like a fleet of airplanes. The Air force is expecting to fly B52s until they are about 100 years old. There are airlines still flying DC-3's profitably. The age of the airframe isn't the problem. It's the use to which it has been put. NASA's current operating model doesn't require a better/cheaper device, it requires a safe device. A new shuttle design would be risky, (and I don't mean in terms of passenger safety since the current design isn't particularly safe), so there isn't any rush to replace it. The Air Force is experimenting with pilotless drones. DC-3s are used for short hops between islands in the Caribbean and very seldom even for that. There was a charter operation out of Las Vegas that used to fly them as a novelty. Why would a new design be risky? Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/ You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Buffalo Airways seems to fly them. (Old piston engine version, not updated turbo props) http://www.buffaloairways.com/passenger_service.htm As I said it seems to depend on your definition of Airline, though these people seem to fairly substantial. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in regular passenger service. There was one that flew in and out of our airport fairly regularly until just a few years ago. It wasn't a passenger plane, but was used for hauling freight. I don't know who was operating it. William Robb
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Sorry. Meant Burt. >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 06/21/04 08:29PM >>> > > I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) > and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an > achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. Would he be any relation to Burt Rutan?:-)
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
At 03:02 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: A car is a bad analogy. The shuttle fleet is more like a fleet of airplanes. The Air force is expecting to fly B52s until they are about 100 years old. There are airlines still flying DC-3's profitably. The age of the airframe isn't the problem. It's the use to which it has been put. NASA's current operating model doesn't require a better/cheaper device, it requires a safe device. A new shuttle design would be risky, (and I don't mean in terms of passenger safety since the current design isn't particularly safe), so there isn't any rush to replace it. The Air Force is experimenting with pilotless drones. DC-3s are used for short hops between islands in the Caribbean and very seldom even for that. There was a charter operation out of Las Vegas that used to fly them as a novelty. Why would a new design be risky? Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/ You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
At 02:30 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: Neither do any of our cars cost in excess of $20,000,000. Yes, let's DO be realistic... Being realistic means that you acknowledge that there has been a technological advance or two since the shuttle was designed. I realize that there has been some retrofitting but what's so unrealistic about saying the shuttle is old and needs to be redesigned? Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/ You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
- Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne > > BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in > regular passenger service. There was one that flew in and out of our airport fairly regularly until just a few years ago. It wasn't a passenger plane, but was used for hauling freight. I don't know who was operating it. William Robb
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Basler 67s, (up dated DC-3), are apparently being used lots of places. I guess it depends on your definition of what an Airline is... http://www.baslerturbo.com/bt_67_worldwide.html graywolf wrote: Well any mechanical thing can last pretty much forever, if you do not mind the expense of maintaining it. Some of those far better than new classic cars you see where rusting hulks before restoration. Never mind that a car that cost $1800 new took $50,000-100,000 to make like that. A DC-3 cost about $35,000 new, I know of a company that will put one back that way for only 1/2 million or so. How many do you want? BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in regular passenger service. -- frank theriault wrote: Sheesh, They're still flying DC 3's. Some of those must be over 60 and approaching 70 years old. Properly maintained, an airframe should last indefinitely. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Otis Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yes, and 20 years is not too surprising for an airframe. I believe the f-14 first flew in 1970. As I recall, it is still doing quite nicely. Cars maintained to the standards applied to airframes would last a long, long time. _ STOP MORE SPAM with the MSN Premium and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
- Original Message - From: "graywolf" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in > regular passenger service. They are still popular with charter airlines and some "Island-hopping" operations. I don't think any "major" airlines fly them. Christian
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Burt designs the things. Dick and Gina Yeager flew "Voyager" around the world non-stop without refueling Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Peter J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2004 9:52 PM Subject: Re: OT: SpaceShipOne > Brother... > > John Francis wrote: > > >>I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) > >>and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an > >>achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. > >> > >> > > > >Would he be any relation to Burt Rutan?:-) > > > > > > > > > > > >
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Well any mechanical thing can last pretty much forever, if you do not mind the expense of maintaining it. Some of those far better than new classic cars you see where rusting hulks before restoration. Never mind that a car that cost $1800 new took $50,000-100,000 to make like that. A DC-3 cost about $35,000 new, I know of a company that will put one back that way for only 1/2 million or so. How many do you want? BTW, I can not believe that any real airline in the world still has DC-3's in regular passenger service. -- frank theriault wrote: Sheesh, They're still flying DC 3's. Some of those must be over 60 and approaching 70 years old. Properly maintained, an airframe should last indefinitely. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Otis Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yes, and 20 years is not too surprising for an airframe. I believe the f-14 first flew in 1970. As I recall, it is still doing quite nicely. Cars maintained to the standards applied to airframes would last a long, long time. _ STOP MORE SPAM with the MSN Premium and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Brother... John Francis wrote: I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. Would he be any relation to Burt Rutan?:-)
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
> > I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) > and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an > achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. Would he be any relation to Burt Rutan?:-)
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
> > Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR > and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere > near that old. I drive a 1986 Mustang GT ragtop as my daily driver. Paul Stenquist drives a 1955 car (although not as primary transport). Shel drives something pretty ancient, too (or at least he did the last time I saw him driving anything).
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Sheesh, They're still flying DC 3's. Some of those must be over 60 and approaching 70 years old. Properly maintained, an airframe should last indefinitely. cheers, frank "The optimist thinks this is the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears it is true." -J. Robert Oppenheimer From: Otis Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yes, and 20 years is not too surprising for an airframe. I believe the f-14 first flew in 1970. As I recall, it is still doing quite nicely. Cars maintained to the standards applied to airframes would last a long, long time. _ STOP MORE SPAM with the MSN Premium and get 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&DI=1034&SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
On 21/6/04, SDJ, discombobulated, offered: >I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) >and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an >achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. FANTASTIC. Saw it on the telly. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|www.macads.co.uk/snaps _
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Keith Whaley wrote: Gary Sibio wrote: At 01:41 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: That is great news! Now maybe space exploration and exploitation will replace government publicity programs. Nah! They will just regulate it to death. While I believe that some government regulation will be necessary to ensure public safety, I'm all for shutting down NASA and let the private sector handle it. Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere near that old. Neither do any of our cars cost in excess of $20,000,000. Yes, let's DO be realistic... Keith whaley Yes, and 20 years is not too surprising for an airframe. I believe the f-14 first flew in 1970. As I recall, it is still doing quite nicely. Cars maintained to the standards applied to airframes would last a long, long time. Amazing how misinformation gets mixed in to support otherwise quite valid opinions. NASA does seem to be without a mission, but it would be most interesting to see watch the political antics associated with shutting it down. My guess is that the space station is not going to do well either. However, the games played to avoid closing down military bases are nothing compared to what would be involved in shutting down major portions of NASA. I had a prof in college who often said that the major problem with creating major government agencies, programs, etc., is that never get shut down when the've completed thier mission. Seems like we have quite a few candidates for proving that one. Unfortunately, I can't remember which prof it was that said that, which may indicate that I'm coming up on the end of my "mission."Keep smiling Otis Wright The private sector has also benefitted from the space program so let them put their money up front. Gary J Sibio
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
A car is a bad analogy. The shuttle fleet is more like a fleet of airplanes. The Air force is expecting to fly B52s until they are about 100 years old. There are airlines still flying DC-3's profitably. The age of the airframe isn't the problem. It's the use to which it has been put. NASA's current operating model doesn't require a better/cheaper device, it requires a safe device. A new shuttle design would be risky, (and I don't mean in terms of passenger safety since the current design isn't particularly safe), so there isn't any rush to replace it. Gary Sibio wrote: At 01:41 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: That is great news! Now maybe space exploration and exploitation will replace government publicity programs. Nah! They will just regulate it to death. While I believe that some government regulation will be necessary to ensure public safety, I'm all for shutting down NASA and let the private sector handle it. Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere near that old. The private sector has also benefitted from the space program so let them put their money up front. Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/ You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
Gary Sibio wrote: At 01:41 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: That is great news! Now maybe space exploration and exploitation will replace government publicity programs. Nah! They will just regulate it to death. While I believe that some government regulation will be necessary to ensure public safety, I'm all for shutting down NASA and let the private sector handle it. Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere near that old. Neither do any of our cars cost in excess of $20,000,000. Yes, let's DO be realistic... Keith whaley The private sector has also benefitted from the space program so let them put their money up front. Gary J Sibio
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
At 01:41 PM 6/21/2004, you wrote: That is great news! Now maybe space exploration and exploitation will replace government publicity programs. Nah! They will just regulate it to death. While I believe that some government regulation will be necessary to ensure public safety, I'm all for shutting down NASA and let the private sector handle it. Our space program started off as a pissing contest with the USSR and the shuttle is twenty years old. How many of us drive a car anywhere near that old. The private sector has also benefitted from the space program so let them put their money up front. Gary J Sibio [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.earthlink.net/~garysibio/ You know you're having a bad day when Elton John rewrites the lyrics to "Candle in the Wind" for you.
Re: OT: SpaceShipOne
That is great news! Now maybe space exploration and exploitation will replace government publicity programs. Nah! They will just regulate it to death. -- Steve Desjardins wrote: I just heard that SpaceShipOne successfully made it into space (100 km) and back again, making it the first private vehicle to do so. Quite an achievement. Another feather in the cap of Dick Rutan. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com/graywolf.html
