| Author | Message | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2390 Registered: 5-2003 |
He broke a law, and was consequently demoted. He broke another law, and was consequently promoted. He1=He2. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 1623 Registered: 7-2009 |
law 1= a legal law? a law of science? law 2, same questions He=HAM? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2391 Registered: 5-2003 |
law 1= a legal law? Thisish. a law of science? law 2= a legal law? a law of science? This. He=HAM? Yes. | ||
| Abc (Abc)
Moderator Username: Abc Post Number: 216 Registered: 7-2006 |
Is he famous? A scientist? A famous scientist? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2394 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is he famous? A scientist? A famous scientist? No to all. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1364 Registered: 9-2009 |
Did he have to break the first law to break the second one? Did he make a new discovery? Was the first law a company rule? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2398 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he have to break the first law to break the second one? Yes. Did he make a new discovery? SVV of discovery, yes. Was the first law a company rule? SVV of company rule, yes. | ||
| Galfisk (Galfisk)
New member Username: Galfisk Post Number: 1370 Registered: 9-2009 |
Possible spoiler emailed. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2399 Registered: 5-2003 |
Possible spoiler correct. | ||
| Alhucema (Alhucema)
New member Username: Alhucema Post Number: 1832 Registered: 11-2008 |
demoted/promoted by the same entity? A company he was working for? Law 1 - is it related to criminal activity (including petty crimes, torts etc.)? Is it universal, or is it valid only locally (eg in the company he was working for?) Law 2 - physics? Chemistry? Did he break both laws at the same time? As a result of a single activity? Did he break Law 1/Law 2 because he was investigating something? In a moment of distress? His profession relevant? If so, is he a policeman? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2412 Registered: 5-2003 |
demoted/promoted by the same entity? Yes. A company he was working for? Yesish. Law 1 - is it related to criminal activity (including petty crimes, torts etc.)? No. Is it universal This, or is it valid only locally (eg in the company he was working for?) Though best known in his own industry. Law 2 - physics? This. Chemistry? Did he break both laws at the same time? As a result of a single activity? Yes to both. Did he break Law 1/Law 2 because he was investigating something? In a moment of distress? This, but look out for FAs. His profession relevant? Yes. If so, is he a policeman? No. | ||
| Ajcham (Ajcham)
New member Username: Ajcham Post Number: 1 Registered: 3-2010 |
Was the promotion to the same status from which he had been demoted? Or to an alternative status within the same structure? Or were the promotion and demotion related to his position in two separate hierarchies? Did he work in medicine? Finance? Government? Law? Education? | ||
| Ajcham (Ajcham)
New member Username: Ajcham Post Number: 2 Registered: 3-2010 |
Sorry for double posting, but a further question: Did he literally break a physical law (that is perform a supernatural feat or miracle)? Or did he go against the existing understanding of physics, thereby redefining it? Or did he break the laws of physics in a colloquial sense (such as how some may describe powered flight as defying gravity)? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2413 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the promotion to the same status from which he had been demoted? Yes. Or to an alternative status within the same structure? No. Or were the promotion and demotion related to his position in two separate hierarchies? No. Did he work in medicine? Finance? Government? This is closest. Law? Education? Did he literally break a physical law (that is perform a supernatural feat or miracle)? Or did he go against the existing understanding of physics, thereby redefining it? This in a minor sense. Or did he break the laws of physics in a colloquial sense (such as how some may describe powered flight as defying gravity)? But mostly this. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2435 Registered: 5-2003 |
Hint - He was in the military. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2457 Registered: 5-2003 |
Futher hint: He was a pilot. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 1668 Registered: 7-2009 |
Breaking the sound barrier? Something similar? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2458 Registered: 5-2003 |
Breaking the sound barrier? No. Something similar? No. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2468 Registered: 5-2003 |
Still further hint: He got into serious trouble, in more ways than one. | ||
| Viniter (Viniter)
New member Username: Viniter Post Number: 8 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he flying in some restricted area? If yes, was that the reason why he was demoted? Did he literally broke a law of science? Was the law incorrect? Or it's kind of sci-fi story and we're assuming he can break a physical laws? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2495 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he flying in some restricted area? Irr. If yes, was that the reason why he was demoted? No. Did he literally broke a law of science? No. Was the law incorrect? No, but something new was learned. Or it's kind of sci-fi story and we're assuming he can break a physical laws? Definitely not. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2609 Registered: 5-2003 |
Recap (of a true story): A military pilot, during a flight, got into serious trouble. During this incident, he broke a military regulation and appeared to break the laws of physics, in a colloquial sense. (in the process, learning something new.) When he returned, he was demoted from his military rank, then promoted back to it. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 133 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he demoted for breaking the law? Promoted for his svv "discovery"? Is what he learned taught in school? Did this happen in [LTPF list of decades]? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2643 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he demoted for breaking the law? Yes. Promoted for his svv "discovery"? No, with a small ish. Is what he learned taught in school? Aviation school, maybe. Did this happen in [LTPF list of decades]? '80s. | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 1 Registered: 5-2010 |
1st Law: Related to altitude of flight? Velocity of flight? Orientation of flight (e.g. upside down? Flying straight up?) 2nd law: The law of gravity? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2650 Registered: 5-2003 |
1st Law: Related to altitude of flight? Velocity of flight? Orientation of flight (e.g. upside down? Flying straight up?) None of these. 2nd law: The law of gravity? This, with an ish. Welcome to the forum! | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 5 Registered: 5-2010 |
"Welcome to the forum!" Thanks! Was he engaged in combat? Type of plane relevant? 1st Law: Contents of the plane relevant? Passengers? Equipment? Weapons? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2651 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he engaged in combat? No. Type of plane relevant? Yes. 1st Law: Contents of the plane relevant? No. Passengers? No. Equipment? Yes. Weapons? No. | ||
| Viniter (Viniter)
New member Username: Viniter Post Number: 39 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he performed parabolic flight or stalled the aircraft which resulted in weightlessness? Was there some unattached equipment on board which stared floating around? Did it damaged the plane? Was plane anyhow damaged during the incident? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2655 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he performed parabolic flight or stalled the aircraft which resulted in weightlessness? No. Was there some unattached equipment on board which stared floating around? Did it damaged the plane? No to both. Was plane anyhow damaged during the incident? Yes. | ||
| It_so_happened (It_so_happened)
New member Username: It_so_happened Post Number: 35 Registered: 5-2010 |
Fighter jet? Helicopter? Cargo plane? Tilt rotor? Bomber? Did the plane crash? Ejection seat relevant? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2658 Registered: 5-2003 |
Fighter jet? This. Helicopter? Cargo plane? Tilt rotor? Bomber? Did the plane crash? No. Ejection seat relevant? Yes. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2726 Registered: 5-2003 |
Hint: Breaking the first law should have gotten him killed -- breaking the second kept him alive. | ||
| Noel (Noel)
New member Username: Noel Post Number: 1762 Registered: 7-2009 |
Did he release the ejection seat? If not, did it deploy on its own? If it deployed, was he in it? Was the first law gravity? Did he break the law of gravity by going up in the ejection seat? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2730 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he release the ejection seat? No. If not, did it deploy on its own? No. If it deployed, was he in it? Was the first law gravity? No, that's the second law. Did he break the law of gravity by going up in the ejection seat? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 669 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he attempt to deploy the ejection seat? Did it deploy at all? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2737 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he attempt to deploy the ejection seat? Did it deploy at all? No to both. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 671 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was this fighter jet even equipped with an ejection seat? Did something go wrong with it? Did he abandon the plane? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2739 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was this fighter jet even equipped with an ejection seat? Yes. Did something go wrong with it? The ejection seat? No. Did he abandon the plane? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 674 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did something go wrong with the plane? Was he forced to break the law (regulation) to fix it? Forced to break the law of gravity? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2740 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did something go wrong with the plane? Yes. Was he forced to break the law (regulation) to fix it? Yope. Forced to break the law of gravity? Yes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 676 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did the plane break the law of gravity? Part of the plane? The man? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2744 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did the plane break the law of gravity? Yes.) Part of the plane? (Yes. The man? No. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2745 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did the plane break the law of gravity? Yes. Part of the plane? Yes. The man? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 679 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did something explode? Was something jettisoned from the plane? Thus thrusting the plane upward? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2747 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did something explode? No. Was something jettisoned from the plane? I wouldn't say jettisoned. Thus thrusting the plane upward? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 680 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was something thrown out of the plane? Ejected? Dropped? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2749 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was something thrown out of the plane? Ejected? Dropped? None of these. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 683 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did some item leave the plane? Through an air lock? Was that item broken? Was it what required fixing? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2751 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did some item leave the plane? I'd not put it that way. Through an air lock? No. Was that item broken? Oh, definitely. Was it what required fixing? I don't recall if the damage was reparable, but I doubt it. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 684 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the broken part removed? And thrown in the back of the plane or something? Did the plane ever enter free fall? A parabolic arc? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 685 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the ejection seat broken? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2753 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the broken part removed? And thrown in the back of the plane or something? Did the plane ever enter free fall? A parabolic arc? Was the ejection seat broken? None of these; you clearly have an FA. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 688 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was any part of the plane broken? If yes, was there an attempt at fixing it? If no, something was still wrong with the plane, right? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2755 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was any part of the plane broken? Yes. If yes, was there an attempt at fixing it? No. If no, something was still wrong with the plane, right? Yes. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2757 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he forced to break the law (regulation) to fix it? Blooper: Perhaps my answer to this should simply be No. I apologize for the confusion. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 689 Registered: 4-2010 |
To remedy the problem, did he break the first law? The second law? Did he even try to remedy the problem? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2759 Registered: 5-2003 |
To remedy the problem, did he break the first law? No. The second law? For SVV of "remedy," yes. Did he even try to remedy the problem? Actually, he wasn't aware that there was a problem. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 704 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he ever realize the problem? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 705 Registered: 4-2010 |
Clarification: Did he not realize the problem till later? Or never realize it at all? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2761 Registered: 5-2003 |
Clarification: Did he not realize the problem till later? This. Or never realize it at all? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 707 Registered: 4-2010 |
Should he have known about the problem? By the gauges? And he did something you're not supposed to do with that problem? Is that how he broke Law 1? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2763 Registered: 5-2003 |
Should he have known about the problem? Yes. By the gauges? I doubt it. And he did something you're not supposed to do with that problem? Oh, yes. Is that how he broke Law 1? Yope. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 710 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the problem with one of the engines? Fuel tank? Wing? Fuselage? Window? This is a fighter jet, so the plane's gun? Did he execute a maneuver he shouldn't have? Did his law-breaking (#1) involve the gun? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2764 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the problem with one of the engines? Fuel tank? Wing? This. Fuselage? Window? This is a fighter jet, so the plane's gun? Most jets rely on missiles, actually... Did he execute a maneuver he shouldn't have? \b(Technically yes.} Did his law-breaking (#1) involve the gun? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 712 Registered: 4-2010 |
"There's something...on the wing!" Sorry, couldn't resist. Is that relevant, by any wild chance (was there a foreign object on the wing)? Was there a problem with a wing flap? Was the wing skewed? Part of it broken off? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2773 Registered: 5-2003 |
"There's something...on the wing!" Heh. Sorry, couldn't resist. Is that relevant, by any wild chance (was there a foreign object on the wing)? Nope. Bill Shatner is not involved. :p Was there a problem with a wing flap? Was the wing skewed? Part of it broken off? This. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 720 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he keep flying with the broken wing? Was that how he broke Law 1? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2780 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he keep flying with the broken wing? Yes. Was that how he broke Law 1? No, it's how he broke Law 2. You could say he broke Law 1 by doing it, but they are fundamentally different laws and he broke them in different ways. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 730 Registered: 4-2010 |
So he broke the law of gravity by flying with a broken wing? (I'd ask, how on earth is that possible, but that's what I'm supposed to figure out, isn't it?) How he broke law 1: Does it involve the broken wing? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2782 Registered: 5-2003 |
So he broke the law of gravity by flying with a broken wing? (I'd ask, how on earth is that possible, but that's what I'm supposed to figure out, isn't it?) No, you're supposed to figure out why he was demoted and then promoted. How he broke law 1: Does it involve the broken wing? Tangentially. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 735 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did continuing to fly with a broken wing save his life? Someone else's? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2787 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did continuing to fly with a broken wing save his life? Yes. Someone else's? Yes, but irrelevant. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 750 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is anyone else in the plane? Relevant? Completely the wrong track? Was the wing obviously broken? (By which I mean, could a casual observer see this?) | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2790 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is anyone else in the plane? Yes. Relevant? No. Completely the wrong track? Pretty much. Was the wing obviously broken? (By which I mean, could a casual observer see this?) Oh, yes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 753 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was part of the wing snapped off? And he somehow broke the law of gravity this way? Should it have been possible for him to keep flying with the damage? Did a shot damage the wing? Another weapon? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2792 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was part of the wing snapped off? Pretty much all of it, actually. And he somehow broke the law of gravity this way? Figuratively speaking, yes. Should it have been possible for him to keep flying with the damage? No (or so they thought at the time). Did a shot damage the wing? No. Another weapon? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 764 Registered: 4-2010 |
So he was essentially flying with one wing? And this is how he broke law 2? Because they thought it was impossible? Was breaking the wing how he broke law 1? Did he break the wing? By grazing something with it? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2793 Registered: 5-2003 |
So he was essentially flying with one wing? And this is how he broke law 2? Because they thought it was impossible? Yes to all. Was breaking the wing how he broke law 1? No. Did he break the wing? By grazing something with it? It was a midair collision, and whose fault it was is irrelevant. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 771 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he break Law 1 before the wing broke? After? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2796 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he break Law 1 before the wing broke? After? This. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 773 Registered: 4-2010 |
For breaking Law 1: Did he do something he shouldn't have done? Not do something he should have? Continue to do something he should have stopped? Did he fail to report the collision? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2798 Registered: 5-2003 |
For breaking Law 1: Did he do something he shouldn't have done? Not do something he should have? This. to the others.} Continue to do something he should have stopped? Did he fail to report the collision? Technically yes, but this isn't what he did wrong. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 778 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he fail to follow proper procedure for a collision in some way? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2801 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he fail to follow proper procedure for a collision in some way? Yesish. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 781 Registered: 4-2010 |
So he didn't do something he was supposed to do after a collision? Was he supposed to eject? But didn't? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2808 Registered: 5-2003 |
So he didn't do something he was supposed to do after a collision? Was he supposed to eject? This. But didn't? Correct. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2809 Registered: 5-2003 |
So he didn't do something he was supposed to do after a collision? Not just after a collision. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 787 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he supposed to eject in any emergency? But chose to keep flying? Thus breaking Law 1? Is this why he was demoted? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2811 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he supposed to eject in any emergency? Irr. But chose to keep flying? Yes. Thus breaking Law 1? Yes. Is this why he was demoted? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 791 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was not ejecting the only thing he wasn't supposed to do? Did he keep flying for a long time with the broken wing? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2816 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was not ejecting the only thing he wasn't supposed to do? Excellent question. No. Did he keep flying for a long time with the broken wing? No, but long enough. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 797 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he fly with the broken wing just long enough to make it to safety? To land? Away from enemy lines? Now trying to think of what he was supposed to do.... | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2818 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he fly with the broken wing just long enough to make it to safety? To land? This. Away from enemy lines? Now trying to think of what he was supposed to do.... Hint: the ejection and breaking the regulation are indirectly related. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 802 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he supposed to land immediately? And if not, eject? Maybe radio for help? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2822 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he supposed to land immediately? And if not, eject? Maybe radio for help? None of these. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 819 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he supposed to let the plane crash in some way? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2823 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he supposed to let the plane crash in some way? No. I think you have a false assumption. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 820 Registered: 4-2010 |
So... He broke Law 1 by flying after the wing broke? But this is not why he was demoted? And by continuing to fly, he broke Law 2 (gravity)? Is this why he was promoted? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2832 Registered: 5-2003 |
So... He broke Law 1 by flying after the wing broke? In a sense. But this is not why he was demoted? Correct. Law 1 was not about flying after the wing broke. And by continuing to fly, he broke Law 2 (gravity)? Is this why he was promoted? Yes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 829 Registered: 4-2010 |
Did he do something else relevant instead of ejecting? Is this "something else" why he was demoted? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2835 Registered: 5-2003 |
Did he do something else relevant instead of ejecting? Well, he kept flying the plane. Is this "something else" why he was demoted? Yes. As a hint, Law 1 applies at all times, not just when not ejecting. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 834 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is Law 1 a legal law? Not just for the military? In the US? England? Another country? Is the law related to the collision? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2839 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is Law 1 a legal law? Yes. Not just for the military? No, but primarily associated with it. In the US? England? Another country? All countries. Is the law related to the collision? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 837 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the law related to death? Injury? Damaged property? Voting (that definitely can't be it)? Loss of property? Something else with property? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2840 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is the law related to death? Injury? Damaged property? Voting (that definitely can't be it)? Loss of property? Something else with property? None of these. | ||
| Emeraldink (Emeraldink)
New member Username: Emeraldink Post Number: 505 Registered: 4-2007 |
Is Law 1 related to the conditions or parameters of flight? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2852 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is Law 1 related to the conditions or parameters of flight? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 839 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the law about persons in the military? About planes? Military planes? | ||
| Emeraldink (Emeraldink)
New member Username: Emeraldink Post Number: 506 Registered: 4-2007 |
Is Law 1 related to the conditions or parameters of flight? | ||
| Emeraldink (Emeraldink)
New member Username: Emeraldink Post Number: 507 Registered: 4-2007 |
Please ignore and remove post #506. Thank you. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2855 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is the law about persons in the military? This. About planes? Military planes? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 902 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the pilot legally in the military? Or did he somehow manage to get in through unlawful means? And they found out when investigating the collision or something? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2859 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the pilot legally in the military? Yes. Or did he somehow manage to get in through unlawful means? And they found out when investigating the collision or something? No to both. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 909 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the pilot licensed to be a pilot? A military pilot? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2860 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the pilot licensed to be a pilot? A military pilot? Yes to both. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 912 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the law related to something military persons have to do in a certain situation? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2865 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is the law related to something military persons have to do in a certain situation? Yes; well, every situation, really. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 916 Registered: 4-2010 |
Ummm...other than blink, breathe, and have a heartbeat, I can't think of anything that has to be done in every situation. Is it by any chance one of those three? Oh, was he wearing his uniform? Was he wearing anything? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2867 Registered: 5-2003 |
Ummm...other than blink, breathe, and have a heartbeat, I can't think of anything that has to be done in every situation. Is it by any chance one of those three? No. Remember, this is every military situation. Oh, was he wearing his uniform? Was he wearing anything? Yes to both. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 918 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he supposed to be carrying something? Doing something? Radio contact relevant? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2869 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he supposed to be carrying something? Doing something? This. Radio contact relevant? Assume yes. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 922 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he supposed to be in contact with someone? Throughout the flight? So someone would know if something went wrong? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2870 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he supposed to be in contact with someone? Throughout the flight? Yes, and he was. So someone would know if something went wrong? And someone did. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 924 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is this second person a superior? Related to the law he broke? Did he not return immediately after the collision? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2873 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is this second person a superior? Yes. Related to the law he broke? Yes. Did he not return immediately after the collision? This is relevant, for SVV of "returning." | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 928 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the pilot flying the plane on a mission? And continued to fly the mission after the collision? Instead of returning to base? Or to a secondary safe landing location? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2875 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the pilot flying the plane on a mission? And continued to fly the mission after the collision? Instead of returning to base? Or to a secondary safe landing location? None of these. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2876 Registered: 5-2003 |
Blooper: Well, I guess you could call what he was on a mission. The answer to the first two questions should be yes, the second pair are still no. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2877 Registered: 5-2003 |
Blooper: Well, I guess you could call what he was doing a "mission." The answer to the first two questions should be yes, the second pair are still no. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 931 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was he on surveillance? Taking recon photos? Was he supposed to stop this after the collision? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2878 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he on surveillance? Taking recon photos? Was he supposed to stop this after the collision? None of these. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2879 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was he on surveillance? Taking recon photos? Neither. Was he supposed to stop this after the collision? He should have, but that's not strictly what he was demoted for. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 936 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was this in a combat situation? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2882 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was this in a combat situation? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 939 Registered: 4-2010 |
So we have the pilot, in constant communication with a superior, gets in a mid-air collision, breaks off a wing, but keeps flying. And the ejection seat is somehow relevant. All this correct? Does communication ever get cut off? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2884 Registered: 5-2003 |
So we have the pilot, in constant communication with a superior, gets in a mid-air collision, breaks off a wing, but keeps flying. And the ejection seat is somehow relevant. All this correct? Yes. Does communication ever get cut off? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 942 Registered: 4-2010 |
Is the superior the one who demotes him? Reports him to the one who demotes him? Was the pilot supposed to crash-land? Abandon the plane (eject) and allow the plane to crash? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2885 Registered: 5-2003 |
So we have the pilot, in constant communication with a superior, gets in a mid-air collision, breaks off a wing, but keeps flying. And the ejection seat is somehow relevant. All this correct? Yes. Does communication ever get cut off? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 946 Registered: 4-2010 |
Um, you answered the wrong set of questions. Anyway, does he end up with the same rank? Lower? Higher? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2888 Registered: 5-2003 |
Note the time -- I tried to stop and rewrite my post at the same time you were asking another set of questions, and posted twice by mistake. Is the superior the one who demotes him? Reports him to the one who demotes him? Assume this. Was the pilot supposed to crash-land? Abandon the plane (eject) and allow the plane to crash? This. Anyway, does he end up with the same rank? This. Lower? Higher? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2889 Registered: 5-2003 |
Is the superior the one who demotes him? Reports him to the one who demotes him? Blooper: Call this irrelevant. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 953 Registered: 4-2010 |
Ah...didn't notice the time. Do we call that an FA on my part? Was the pilot demoted for not allowing the broken plane to crash? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2890 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the pilot demoted for not allowing the broken plane to crash? No. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 960 Registered: 4-2010 |
OK, I think I'm developing a whole bunch of FAs... Could you please recap? | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2893 Registered: 5-2003 |
A jet fighter pilot was in a midair collision which tore one wing off. At the time, he was carrying out a particular type of mission, and was in constant contact with a superior. Rather than ejecting (which would have been smart under the circumstances) he chose to stay with the plane, and landed it safely. He was demoted for violating a universal military rule, and promoted back for saving the aircraft. What military regulation did he break? It has to do with his failure to eject. Oh, and Blooper: Noish to being demoted for not letting the plane crash. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 1043 Registered: 4-2010 |
Was the rule he violated related to flying a plane? Or was it the simple answer: disobeying a superior's order? | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 1044 Registered: 4-2010 |
And if it is the simple answer, I am smacking myself for not getting that earlier. | ||
| Jenburdoo (Jenburdoo)
New member Username: Jenburdoo Post Number: 2922 Registered: 5-2003 |
Was the rule he violated related to flying a plane? Or was it the simple answer: disobeying a superior's order? This. And if it is the simple answer, I am smacking myself for not getting that earlier. LOL! I was waiting for you to get it. *************** Flying Spoiler *************** This occurred in 1983, when an Israeli F-15 Eagle fighter jet on a training mission got in a midair collision, destroying almost its entire wing. The instructor ordered the student pilot to bail out, but the pilot decided he could land the plane (though he had difficulty steering and landed at very high speed). Because the damage was obscured by smoke and aerosol, he was unaware of the extent of damage until he got on the ground. The manufacturers believed their plane couldn't fly without a wing, but it turned out that an F-15's undersurfaces are aerodynamic enough to keep it in the air, at least at high speeds. The pilot was reportedly chewed out and demoted for insubordination, then roundly congratulated and promoted for outstanding flying. The plane was repaired and continued to fly. Many military planes are strongly built and have survived terrible damage, particularly the heavy bombers of World War Two. A B-17 was once rammed by a German fighter over Germany, and did not break into two pieces until after it had landed back in England. | ||
| Balin (Balin)
New member Username: Balin Post Number: 1047 Registered: 4-2010 |
*SMACK* Great story! I've been reading through some of your earlier aviation puzzles in the archives...it's crazy how flying can supply us with such lateral scenarios. |
