• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

More trouble in LC paradise. JohnDoe takes his research and goes home.

B-Man said:
Coolies.
I'd much rather be Billzilla though!

FWIW I really am a 747 Captain, with over 4,000 hours on them. My job takes me all over the world and I've been flying for over 23 years now.
Click to expand...


Welcome! It is great to finally see you hear, having heard so much about you.

You may be able to clear something up for me... would you mind revealing how many flying hours you have in total?

And what would you consider "typical" of an airline pilot with 20 years experience?

Thanks.
-Andrew
 
Weclome aboard, B-man/Billzilla.

I'm pretty sure I saw another Billzilla over here, and I thought you were the same person. Oh well. Anyway, glad to have you here, and yes, this forum is a great deal saner.

Except for over in The Last Person to Post in This Thread Wins! in the humor subforum. Lots of nuts there think that they can beat me.
 
gumboot said:
Welcome! It is great to finally see you hear, having heard so much about you.

You may be able to clear something up for me... would you mind revealing how many flying hours you have in total?

And what would you consider "typical" of an airline pilot with 20 years experience?

Thanks.
-Andrew
Click to expand...


I'm not 'typical', I've had a bit of an odd career as such.
From my latest resume, only a few weeks old ->
Endorsements: All single engine constant speed propeller, retractable undercarriage aircraft.
Multi engined aircraft:
- B-76 Duchess, B-55/58 & 58P Baron
- PA-34 Senneca, PA-31 Navajo/Chieftain and Pressurised Navajo
- Aerostar 600 and 601 P
- Cessna 310, 340, 402, 404, 414, 421
- Swearingen Metro 2
- Cessna Citation 500/550 Command
- Boeing 737 200/300/400 Command
- Boeing 747 Classic Command

Ratings held: Command, Multi-engine Instrument Rating, current & valid until 31-03-2007

Hours, In Command: 4970
Hours, Night: 4230
Hours, Instrument Flight: 1115
Hours, Instructing: 950
Hours, Multi-Crew: 4820
Hours, Multi-Engine: 8020
Hours, Turbine: 7420
Hours, Pure Jet: 5700
Hours, Heavy Jet: 4100
Hours, Command Turbine: 3270
Hours, Command Pure Jet: 1580
Hours, Command Heavy Jet: 675
Hours, Total: 9300

So there ya go, that's all my stuff.
I've flown a few different nav systems - Trimble & Garmin GPS, Delco Mk4 Carusel, Delco PMS, Litton 72 & 92, Honeywell FMS, Marconi FMS.
Turbine engines I've run - Garrett TPE-331-3 & 331-10UA, Pratt & Whitney JT5D-1 & 4A, JT9D-7A & 7Q & 7R4G2, Rolls Royce RB-211-C2 & D4X, and General Electric CF6-50E2's.

I guess a typical airline driver would have more hours than me, though less night hours. I'm semi-retired now, I only work about half a year in total so I can spend more time and home with my dogs and go race cars.
 
B-Man said:
I'm not 'typical', I've had a bit of an odd career as such.
From my latest resume, only a few weeks old ->
Endorsements: All single engine constant speed propeller, retractable undercarriage aircraft.
Multi engined aircraft:
- B-76 Duchess, B-55/58 & 58P Baron
- PA-34 Senneca, PA-31 Navajo/Chieftain and Pressurised Navajo
- Aerostar 600 and 601 P
- Cessna 310, 340, 402, 404, 414, 421
- Swearingen Metro 2
- Cessna Citation 500/550 Command
- Boeing 737 200/300/400 Command
- Boeing 747 Classic Command

Ratings held: Command, Multi-engine Instrument Rating, current & valid until 31-03-2007

Hours, In Command: 4970
Hours, Night: 4230
Hours, Instrument Flight: 1115
Hours, Instructing: 950
Hours, Multi-Crew: 4820
Hours, Multi-Engine: 8020
Hours, Turbine: 7420
Hours, Pure Jet: 5700
Hours, Heavy Jet: 4100
Hours, Command Turbine: 3270
Hours, Command Pure Jet: 1580
Hours, Command Heavy Jet: 675
Hours, Total: 9300

So there ya go, that's all my stuff.
I've flown a few different nav systems - Trimble & Garmin GPS, Delco Mk4 Carusel, Delco PMS, Litton 72 & 92, Honeywell FMS, Marconi FMS.
Turbine engines I've run - Garrett TPE-331-3 & 331-10UA, Pratt & Whitney JT5D-1 & 4A, JT9D-7A & 7Q & 7R4G2, Rolls Royce RB-211-C2 & D4X, and General Electric CF6-50E2's.

I guess a typical airline driver would have more hours than me, though less night hours. I'm semi-retired now, I only work about half a year in total so I can spend more time and home with my dogs and go race cars.
Click to expand...

Impressive resume. I wonder why Johnny boy doesnt list all his ratings and hours. Lord knows, we've all asked him - but his reply is almost always something like "MEI CFII ATP. Look it up." (or the equivalent string of annoying smileys). If I had type ratings on airliners** - I wouldnt be shy about revealing them...

** - well I do have them, but for airframe/avionics/autopilot(737 Classic, 737NG, 767 and 777) as well as 767/777 ETOPS qualification.

I think I could fly them too if I had to though :)
 
Last edited:
B-Man said:
Ratings held: Command, Multi-engine Instrument Rating, current & valid until 31-03-2007
Click to expand...

That's so fake. There is no month 31, what are you trying to pull?

Hey, welcome to the boards. I read one of your little go betweens with John Doe X. Out of curiosity have you ever met anyone that actually works in the air-industry that actually uses as much slang as him?
 
kevin said:
That's so fake. There is no month 31, what are you trying to pull?

Hey, welcome to the boards. I read one of your little go betweens with John Doe X. Out of curiosity have you ever met anyone that actually works in the air-industry that actually uses as much slang as him?
Click to expand...


Nope, he's 'special'.
That's why I had no idea what he was talking about. I could have run a heap of Aussie slang at him to do the same thing, but he wouldn't understand the point.
 
In this thread http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=12383&hl=

JDX is disproving a rival CTist's theory by showing that a 757 couldn't possibly land at a particular airfield. He makes the following stantements:

Runway Information
Runway 3/21
Dimensions: 4000 x 75 ft. / 1219 x 23 m
Surface: asphalt, in good condition
Weight bearing capacity: Single wheel: 12500 lbs


Empty Weight of a 757 (doesnt include fuel or passengers.. etc)
128,730 lb

juuust a tad bit heavy for that runway... lol
Click to expand...
I didnt address the distance issue. The runway is short.. but could accomodate a large airplane.

However, it is only rated for something that is 12,500 lbs... not somethnig that is 10x that weight.

Do you understand the difference between 12,500lbs and 128.000lbs? (and thats before you put fuel in the thing... )

In other words.. (if you still dont follow), if a 757 landed on that runway.. it would crack and destroy the runway.. digging itself into the ground... which would make ALOT of noise, and probably a really big fireball cartwheeling itself down what is left of the runway.
Click to expand...
He's right of course, the plane could never land there but, could somebody with experience tell me if his 10x figure adds up? I'm guessing that the single wheel rating doesn't apply to a 757, because it has more wheels (don't know how many) and so he should be using a 'double wheel', or 'dual tandem' capacity, even if he has to estimate it.

Here's an example http://www.fltplan.com/AirportInformation/IGM.htm Note how the weight capacities increase with the number of wheels on the plane.
 
Oh wait, he seems to have been called on this in the LC thread. It looks like I might be right, although he's making efforts to obfuscate. He says a 757 is a dual tandem so his argument should simply have been 'the runway doesn't support dual tandem'. He should never have compared the single wheel rating to the weight of the 757. Would love to hear a professional's take on that though.
 
Shrinker said:
Oh wait, he seems to have been called on this in the LC thread. It looks like I might be right, although he's making efforts to obfuscate. He says a 757 is a dual tandem so his argument should simply have been 'the runway doesn't support dual tandem'. He should never have compared the single wheel rating to the weight of the 757. Would love to hear a professional's take on that though.
Click to expand...

Yes, you have to look at the weight and tyre pressure of each wheel. The 757 has a double bogie system, so eight main tyres and two nosewheel. The weight on the nosewheel isn't huge, I'd guess maybe 10% or so of the entire aeroplane. So if we look at the empty weight of a 757 (have to convert to real numbers. :) at being 58.4 tonnes, that's 7.3 tonnes per tyre, then make it about 90% of that to be about 6.6 tonnes each. That's about 14,500 lbs, or only a little more than that runway is 'allowed'. So an empty 757 could land there no problems I think.
But of course they're never empty, I would guess a minimum of about four tonnes or so of fuel on top of that.

But this is just an acedemic exercise anyway, of course.
 
Thanks B-Man. I was one of those that thought JDX was probably a real pilot, mainly because I couldn't believe someone could be such a bare-faced liar. Now it turns out I'm more able to chose an appropriate landing runway than he is.

My qualifications: I've had one flying lesson.
 
I notice that johnDOH! is now attacking Russell Pickering because he disagrees with what DOH! thinks.

Maybe this guy doesn't fly anymore because no-one can stand to be in the cockpit with him....
 
Obviousman said:
I notice that johnDOH! is now attacking Russell Pickering because he disagrees with what DOH! thinks.

Maybe this guy doesn't fly anymore because no-one can stand to be in the cockpit with him....
Click to expand...

You got a link for that ERB?
I hate trying to wade through LC to find the good stuff.

BTW I think the thread about the runway weight issue has gone missing...
 
B-Man said:
Yes, you have to look at the weight and tyre pressure of each wheel. The 757 has a double bogie system, so eight main tyres and two nosewheel. The weight on the nosewheel isn't huge, I'd guess maybe 10% or so of the entire aeroplane. So if we look at the empty weight of a 757 (have to convert to real numbers. :) at being 58.4 tonnes, that's 7.3 tonnes per tyre, then make it about 90% of that to be about 6.6 tonnes each. That's about 14,500 lbs, or only a little more than that runway is 'allowed'. So an empty 757 could land there no problems I think.
But of course they're never empty, I would guess a minimum of about four tonnes or so of fuel on top of that.

But this is just an acedemic exercise anyway, of course.
Click to expand...

Yeah-
You could probably land there--you can land pretty much anywhere if you don't want to use the airplane again--but it'd never get off the ground again...
 
Obviousman said:
I notice that johnDOH! is now attacking Russell Pickering because he disagrees with what DOH! thinks.

Maybe this guy doesn't fly anymore because no-one can stand to be in the cockpit with him....
Click to expand...

Very true. But, if he is anything like his internet persona in real-life, he'd never get past the interview stage for an airline job.

I'm not sure how smaller airlines do their hiring for pilots, but SAT scores are required at majors(not sure what the minimum score is); and where I work all technicians, engineers and pilots have to pass job specific test batteries/an IQ test/problem-solving tests/personality tests before ever getting to an interview.

Personally, I dont think the guy has the horsepower upstairs to be a pilot, but ya never know.....its marginally possible he couldv'e slipped through the cracks and got hired by small regional.
 
Last edited:
Looking at the Pilots for Truth forum and considering how dead it is, either their aren't many pilots or not much truth.
 
Last edited:
John Doe banned me from LC too

For suggesting that 77 landed at Gene Snyder Airport in Falmouth KY. I admit, I was rattled by his know it all attitude and I yelled in caps. He called me a fool for my assumptions. (I did sound foolish, I admit.)
However, three years ago, I followed 77s path, found the most likely spot for landing (and yes, taking the passengers to Mars or whatever hehehe) and this place caught my eye because the guy who ran it, Omer Lucas, died shortly thereafter of heart attack.
But there's more reason than that. FEMA bought almost the whole town Falmouth in 1997.
I have heard of planes landing on highways. No runway weight limits there...doesn't matter if it could ever take off again, this plane was to be permenently grounded anyway. (It supposedly blew up in the Pentagon, right?)
And if it's not where they landed, it's where a drone took off from, to continue the radar path.
Oh, and, Falmouth was named in Flight 77's transcripts.
Enough said.

PS I am a girl.
 
Looking at the Pilots for Truth forum and considering how dead it is, either their aren't many pilots or not much truth.
Click to expand...

It reminds me of the pathetic spinoffs of various cults and religions. Their god is only going to reveal the truth to literally a handful of people? The 9/11 spinoffs will either rejoin the larger fold when their groups fail or slowly fade away as no one cares to be a part of forums with less people than fingers on hands.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom