Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

[OM] Re: [OT]... chicken and aircraft, but were afraid to ask..

Subject: [OM] Re: [OT]... chicken and aircraft, but were afraid to ask..
From: hiwayman@xxxxxxx (Walt Wayman)
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2006 15:20:43 +0000
I saw that Mythbuster's episode, and to the best of my recollection at this 
time (I've been a witness once or twice and know the weasel words), they were 
shooting the chickens at something like an old single-engine Cessna, or some 
such, certainly nothing in the class of aircraft you reference.

As an aside, during the early days of my time as a TV news 
reporter/photographer, I covered the official opening of the Arnold Engineering 
& Development Center near Tullahoma, Tennessee (which is not too far from the 
Jack Daniel's Distillery, but that's a story for another day).  We got to see 
their chicken cannon in action.  Most impressive.  And loud.  Their chickens 
were barely dead Rhode Island Reds, probably still warm, eyes open with a look 
of surprise, and complete with feathers, feet and guts.  And before then, I 
thought a giant bug on the windshield made a yucky mess.

Walt  

--
"Anything more than 500 yards from 
the car just isn't photogenic." -- 
Edward Weston

 -------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Bill Pearce" <bs.pearce@xxxxxxx>
> 
> Sorry to take so long to reply, but it's been a busy weekend...
> 
> > Mythbusters did the chicken and aircraft thing recently. Found out it
> > makes essentially no difference whether the chickens are frozen or
> > thawed... They all penetrate the average private aircraft windscreen.
> > Moral: avoid bird strikes.
> 
> A good moral, but I would like to know more. When I worked for the airplane 
> factory, one of my jobs was to shoot high speed film of bird strike tests, 
> so I've seen quite a few. (to anticipate your questions, I don't remember 
> the camera, but we went through a 400' pancake in about ten seconds)
> 
> If they were testing against a piston single, that's probably true, as those 
> are generally not, at least in the seventies and eighties, certified for 
> that, due to their speed. We tested corporate jets. The chickens were 
> thawed, and the FAA expected them to not penetrate the windshield, which 
> they didn't. (To anticipate another question, they were whole chickens, not 
> like you get at the grocery. We had a farmer who raised them, and killed and 
> froze them whole, feathers and all.)
> 
> The subject of thawed versus frozen came up when we leased the chicken gun 
> to another manufacturer. The somewhat inexperienced engineers didn't thaw 
> the chickens, and they did go right through the windshields, like a 
> cannonball. As this was not even close to their calculations, they called us 
> in panic. Someone asked, half in jest, "You do thaw them, don't you..."
> 
> And despite what certain other manufacturers said, we did not test the 
> trailing edges!
> 
> Oh, and for certain of our more rugged readers, I can't get you a chicken 
> gun to complete your collection. There's not an SUV big enough for one, 
> anyway!!!
> 
> Bill Pearce 
> 
==============================================
List usage info:     http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies:        olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz