Parachutes

[FlyingKiwi_73]

THING i'm new here and i have been slapped with the rule book on a few occasions!

Most of the guys know from where they speak! i normally feel like a chided school boy by the end of the thread!

I think if you asked any fixed wing prop driver about parachutes your bound to get the above responses. Most of us know the likely hood of getting out of your average spam can is unlikely (even for the more motivated of us) especially at the altitudes most of us fly at (sub 4000ft). If the engine stops we are more than likely to join the gliding brotherhood at this point rather than the Caterpillar club!

[Plasmech]

Regarding the theoretical engine fire risk, I saw a movie about WWI biplane pilots a couple years ago (I think it was called "Flyboys" that) covered the cockpit fire topic. What all of those pilots would (very wisely I may add) do is carry a sidearm with them. This sounds barbaric, but they cleverly explained that the parachute had not been invented yet. So, if you caught fire, as would often happen back then, you would burn to death, which was apparently an excruciating way to go. Instead of burning to death, most pilots would draw their pistol and euthanize themselves before the pain got too intense. This happened to one of the pilots in the movie. It was somewhat sad to see, but it worked perfectly. The thing that was stresed is that the pilot's life ended when the fire started, not when he pulled the trigger, so he and his family would not be disgraced from stories of a suicide.

In modern times, carring a gun in the cockpit for this purpose is, in almost all cases, simply not necessary. While you could, in theory, still burn to death, the chances of a cockpit fire are a LOT smaller today, and we now have checklists for it...pulling avionics fuses, using an extinguisher, diving to choke-out the fire, ect. A lot of pilots in the US carry guns for personal protection but in all my life I have never heard of a euthanization prompted by a cockpit fire. I'm sure it happens, but is extremely rare.

[BackPacker]

and we now have checklists for it...pulling avionics fuses, using an extinguisher, diving to choke-out the fire,

Actually they're memory items. And if it's an engine fire a fire extinguisher in the cockpit will not do you much good. Nor will any of the other items you mentioned. Except, maybe, diving to choke-out the fire. But I wouldn't know how effective that is, considering the relatively low Vne of a typical GA aircraft compared to, say, a WWII Spitfire or Mustang. Anybody knows how fast an Avgas/Air mixture flame front spreads?

Here's what you should do without hesitation:
Close throttle
Close mixture
Close fuel cutoff

Oh, and there's a neat invention called a firewall. It's designed to stop an engine fire from spreading into the cockpit. Works fine as long as you remember to seal it properly - some aircraft may have vent holes or other holes through them, which may require separate actions to close. Cabin heat for instance should be selected "off".

[Plasmech]

I guess I was talking about a general cockpit fire as opposed to an engine fire. Possibly caused by a short on the instrument panel.

[Pilot DAR]

Hmmm, thread drift, but here we go...

In perfect theory, fire requires three things in adequate proportion: Fuel, heat, and oxygen. Take any one away, and the fire is supposed to extunguish (or at least become much less intense). Hence, the design requirement that the pilot be able to turn things off.

Firewall cutoff selected, the fuel is no longer supplied to an engine fire. Aside from the gasoline, which you have now turned off, there's not supposed to ba any other exposed fuel up there. Master off, the heat is no longer supplied to an electrical fire.

I know that this is the ideal world of aircraft existance, and nasty fires still do happen, but it's a risk so low on my list of things to worry about, that I take no other precautions than simply being aware of how the aircraft systems are to be used in such an event.

[eharding]

Originally Posted by Plasmech

In modern times, carring a gun in the cockpit for this purpose is, in almost all cases, simply not necessary.

I always have a small bet with myself when Pprune parachute threads emerge as to how long it takes before the Gupster manages to introduce the topic of guns (he didn't disappoint this time round) but I'm still struggling with your assertion of in almost all cases.

Granted, in the UK should you have to bale out over Essex, some form of personal protection weapon would be ideal, but in light of current UK legislation regarding firearms the only feasible option is to fashion a makeshift shell-suit from the canopy fabric and hope to escape the immediate area and evade capture by the locals.

[SNS3Guppy]

In perfect theory, fire requires three things in adequate proportion: Fuel, heat, and oxygen. Take any one away, and the fire is supposed to extunguish (or at least become much less intense).

The "fire triangle" was replaced a number of years ago by the "fire tetrahedron." That is, the triangle is fuel, heat, and oxygen. The tetrahedron is fuel, heat, oxygen, and the chemical reaction of pyrolosis (fire). Interrupt any one of those four and the fire may be terminated. Halon interrupts the chemical reaction.

Firewall cutoff selected, the fuel is no longer supplied to an engine fire. Aside from the gasoline, which you have now turned off, there's not supposed to ba any other exposed fuel up there. Master off, the heat is no longer supplied to an electrical fire.

With fuel shut off, the engine still has oil. An oil fire is very difficult to control, even with an onboard fire system.

Electrical components burn, and are ignition sources. So long as the engine windmills, generally the generator still turns. If a fire has occurred, one may nor may not be able to interrupt the field, and one may or may not be able to ground a magneto through the cockpit controls. One may still have an ongoing source of electricity out there, and therefore, ignition.

For aircraft using hydraulic sources (such as the Twin Commander discussed in a recent thread, this presents another fire hazard at the engine.

Turbochargers present special hazards, and gas path leaks can cut through nearby components, leading to a fire, just as oil supplied to the turbo bearings can cause a fire.

Anybody knows how fast an Avgas/Air mixture flame front spreads?

In flight, that really depends on the fire and it's source and the location, as well as the amount of oxygen being put to the fire. An airborne fire can move very rapidly.

Oh, and there's a neat invention called a firewall. It's designed to stop an engine fire from spreading into the cockpit. Works fine as long as you remember to seal it properly - some aircraft may have vent holes or other holes through them, which may require separate actions to close.

Firewalls are required to be fire resistant, but it's a mistake to think it will stop a fire from reaching the cockpit. Works fine for a small, quickly extinguished fire, perhaps. Beyond that, don't count your chickens before they hatch.

Of course, if the fire is somewhere other than ahead of the firewall, the firewall is irrelevant.

A lot of pilots in the US carry guns for personal protection but in all my life I have never heard of a euthanization prompted by a cockpit fire. I'm sure it happens, but is extremely rare.

Say again?

Very few pilots in the US carry firearms while flying. A select few pilots operating in the airline environment carry firearms as part of the Federal Flight Deck Officer program, but that's very controlled, and there aren't a lot of participants.

Pilots shooting themselves to escape a fire? You've been watching too many movies.

Regarding the theoretical engine fire risk, I saw a movie about WWI biplane pilots a couple years ago (I think it was called "Flyboys" that) covered the cockpit fire topic. What all of those pilots would (very wisely I may add) do is carry a sidearm with them. This sounds barbaric, but they cleverly explained that the parachute had not been invented yet. So, if you caught fire, as would often happen back then, you would burn to death, which was apparently an excruciating way to go. Instead of burning to death, most pilots would draw their pistol and euthanize themselves before the pain got too intense. This happened to one of the pilots in the movie. It was somewhat sad to see, but it worked perfectly. The thing that was stresed is that the pilot's life ended when the fire started, not when he pulled the trigger, so he and his family would not be disgraced from stories of a suicide.

As you noted, that was fiction; a movie. The point of that element of the movie wasn't that parachutes hadn't been invented. They had. It wasn't that they weren't available. They were. The airplanes burned quickly because they were fabric and the dope was very flammable. So was the gasoline. As far as handguns go, there are recorded incidents of pilots shooting at one another with handguns in flight, and there's even a case of a T33 pilot who shot holes in his tip tank to balance a fuel load. The notions in the movie were melodrama and hollywood. Best not to confuse them with the realities of flying an airplane.

While you could, in theory, still burn to death, the chances of a cockpit fire are a LOT smaller today, and we now have checklists for it...pulling avionics fuses, using an extinguisher, diving to choke-out the fire, ect.

There are very few potential opportunities to fight a cockpit fire by diving an airplane.

When it comes to fire procedures, one needs to know one's airplane well and follow the procedures set out for that airplane with a keen eye to systems knowledge and understanding. What works in one airplane may prove fatal in another. Don't plan on blanket fixes, and don't mix procedures from one aircraft to another.

I always have a small bet with myself when PPRuNe parachute threads emerge as to how long it takes before the Gupster manages to introduce the topic of guns (he didn't disappoint this time round) but I'm still struggling with your assertion of in almost all cases.

It's hard to lose when you bet against yourself.

[Pilot DAR]

he "fire triangle" was replaced a number of years ago by the "fire tetrahedron."

Well, no, physics did not suddenly change a few years ago, the "fire tetrahedron" was always there. (we had firefighter refresher training on precisely this subject last month). I did not say only three things were needed to support a fire, I just presented the three which supported my point. I don't think that opening up a discussion of the chemistry of pyrolosis has any benefit in a general aviation thread titled "parachutes".

Though a pilot is required to have a fire extinguisher in the cockpit, and that it's presupposed that pilot will use it there, if the circumstances dictate, in this forum, it is unlikely that pilots have extinguishing systems in the engine compartments. Therefore removing the fuel for an engine fire is the best option, and the first thing a pilot should be considering.

the engine still has oil. An oil fire is very difficult to control,

Indeed, hence my reference to exposed fuel. For the engine types prominate in this forum, I would suggest that engine oil fires are very rare, and as there is very little the pilot could do if there were such a fire. Engine oil vapours are rarely exposed to heat and oxygen in concentrations which support fire.

may not be able to ground a magneto through the cockpit controls.

Yup, I agree with this statement, though I hardly think a live mag is a risk as a source of ignition for a fire. A lot of unrelated failurs would have occurr simultaniously for that to happen!

If a fire has occurred, one may nor may not be able to interrupt the field,

If one is flying an aircraft which meets the design requirements, the pilot has control of the alternator/generator field, so have no fear pilots, you'll be able to turn off the master, and remove that ignition source if you need to.

Yes, there are some very minor risks (combined failures) in aviation, that we just cannot mitigate. Let's discuss and mentor those risks we can mitigate. Getting pilots here worried about engine oil fires and uncontrolled electrical sources foward of the firewall really has little value in pilot mentoring in my opinion.

We who certify aircraft designs pay a lot of attention to the flammability characteristics of an aircraft, on both sides of the firewall. Pilots should be reminding themselves, that although nothing is perfect, they have a lot of opportunity to make a fire situation less serious very quickly. Pilots must understand what control they have, and use it (firewall shutoffs, for example).

It would be unfair of me to suggest that aircraft fires do not occasionally occur, and that a few of those are not serious. But, a pilot who has prepared him/herself, has a lot to work with, to make the very least out of a fire in flight - prepare, and play to your strengths....

[RatherBeFlying]

The standard fire drill

The AFMs commonly specify the sequence of mags off, throttle to idle, mixture off, fuel selector off.

My inclination would be the reverse as fuel selector off halts the supply of fuel. Mags left on should get rid of the fuel in front of the firewall in the most acceptable manner.

Throttle to idle and mixture off before fuel selector off would trap the fuel in the firewall forward fuel system where there is most likely a leak

Discuss.

[SNS3Guppy]

I don't think that opening up a discussion of the chemistry of pyrolosis has any benefit in a general aviation thread titled "parachutes".

I didn't open up the discussion to that topic, you did. When you said "In perfect theory, fire requires three things in adequate proportion: Fuel, heat, and oxygen," in "perfect theory" you were wrong. You were also wrong to state "Aside from the gasoline, which you have now turned off, there's not supposed to ba any other exposed fuel up there. Master off, the heat is no longer supplied to an electrical fire."

Clearly you've never had such a fire. I have. I didn't just do a "firefighter refresher this month" either, but I do have nearly 20 years of professional firefighting experience, and have dealt with such fires in flight (as an aerial firefighter) and on the ground.

Master off means switch off in the cockpit. Think about which side of the firewall the battery master relay is located; the switch only controls the battery master relay, and if that's bridged, then you still have electrical power available. Further, while many light airplanes use lead acid batteries, (their own hazard, if you've ever seen one explode; I have), many airplanes also use NiCad batteries, which can create self-sustaining thermal runaways.

As for oil not becoming combustible, oil burns very well, and oil in contact with hot exhaust and forced ventilation can easily translate into a fire. Oil can come from a failed cylinder, a cracked case, a broken pushrod tube, a failed crankshaft seal, a failed turbo bearing seal, a failed turbo supply line, and other such sources.

I don't think that opening up a discussion of the chemistry of pyrolosis has any benefit in a general aviation thread titled "parachutes".

I didn't open it up. I didn't open up a discussion about shooting one's self to avoid flames, either, but they were put on the table. The hollywood suicide garbage has been gently put to bed, I think but it's you that's perpetuated the discussion on fire and airplanes, so by all means, let's discuss. Burying your head in the sand with comments like "have no fear" is little more than saying "it's alright, kids, it can't happen to you." Yes, it can.

If a fire has occurred forward of the firewall, the ignition source is not necessarily removed from the fire by turning off the master. The ignition source may not be electrical, but if it is, shorts due to the fire may have removed this option from you; you're moving a switch in the cockpit, not actually moving the battery master relay; lose the ability to have that control from the cockpit by one or both wires from the battery master switch, and you've lost control of the battery master relay, and of the electrical system. This can happen as the result of a short. I've experienced it.

The mag can certainly continue to present as an ignition source, which is part of the reason that the mags are turned off as part of the engine shutdown procedure.

Oil can certainly be present in the nacelle or cowl area. Ever had a lifted jug that separates the pushrod tubes and allows oil to pump out? Ever had a cracked case, or failed cylinder? I certainly have. Ever had an oil fire? I certainly have. If you haven't experienced these things, you shouldn't assume they don't happen, aren't possible, or shouldn't be considered. These events are real, they do happen, and if they're outside the realm of your experience, you do no one a favor by dismissing them.

Engine oil vapours are rarely exposed to heat and oxygen in concentrations which support fire.

Rarely, like leaving an oil cap off on one's Cessna turbo 210? I saw that two years ago. In fact, I've seen quite a few folks take oil baths after leaving the filler cap off. You don't think a hot turbo can transform that into a fire? Ever seen just how hot a turbocharger gets? Ever fly a Navajo at night?

Rarely, like seeing all the oil pumped out of the engine onto the exhaust in a Cessna 337? I saw that a couple of years ago, too. Rarely, like a cylinder lifting, or a failed jug, or a jug that leaves the airplane; I've seen that many times over the course of my career. I've had it happen, I've repaired such failures, and I've seen the damage. In many cases an oil fire doesn't occur; I think it's safe to say that the majority of the cases don't see an oil fire. Every single one of them has the distinct potential, however, and that potential is what we consider.

We're unlikely to see a need to shoot ourselves in the cockpit. That's not realistic. The potential for an engine failure, electrical failure, hydraulic failure, cockpit fire, cabin fire, or engine fire is realistic, however, and it's for this reason that we have such procedures in aircraft flight manuals.

Though a pilot is required to have a fire extinguisher in the cockpit, and that it's presupposed that pilot will use it there, if the circumstances dictate, in this forum, it is unlikely that pilots have extinguishing systems in the engine compartments.

You've never had to discharge an extinguisher on the ground for an engine fire? Really?

A member of this forum recently purchased a Twin Commander. His particular model probably doesn't include the fire suppression system, but some do. One I flew last year did. I've seen them installed in other general aviation airplanes, too, as I'm sure you have. People frequent this forum who use all manner of light airplanes; not everyone flies a Cessna 172, so yes, it's entirely possible that a private pilot posting here may use or may purchase an airplane with a fire suppression system installed for the engines and/or engine accessory system. A Cessna 421 that I flew a couple of years ago had one in it, for example.

Additionally, the Twin Commander has fire procedures that go beyond mixture, mags, and fuel. The Twin Commander has hydraulic to consider. Anyone here who flies a Cessna 172RG, 177 RG, 182RG, or 210 should consider the potential for a fire in an electrohydralic pack. I had one several years ago. It continued burning until I got on the ground and put it out with a fire extinguisher. The electrical couldn't be terminated in that case, incidentally, because due to a fire, the master relay had welded itself closed, providing continuous power that I couldn't interrupt. Go figure. (I suspect you're thinking "circuit breaker" presently, but circuit breakers don't always work (had one burn up in a lear several years ago, requiring a return to the airport with smoke in the cockpit), and circuit breakers don't protect components; they're installed to protect wiring.

In a nutshell, despite your attempt to dismiss, these are realities and burying one's head in the sand does no one any good.

Will most posters here ever see these things? Likely not. That is irrelevant.

Most posters here will not see many of the things that happen or can happen in airplanes. Knowing that they can and do happen, knowing that procedures are laid out for them, and knowing those procedures and the systems and what must be done, is critical regardless of whether these things occur. The mere fact that they can occur is enough.

For the engine types prominate in this forum, I would suggest that engine oil fires are very rare, and as there is very little the pilot could do if there were such a fire.

I'm a mechanic and inspector. I disagree.

If one is flying an aircraft which meets the design requirements, the pilot has control of the alternator/generator field, so have no fear pilots, you'll be able to turn off the master, and remove that ignition source if you need to.

Not in a fire. When all is functioning well and properly, you have control. Not necessarily in a fire. When insulation is burned, components melt, shorts occur, you have no idea what you have control over. Not in a fire.

Further, a generator bearing failure, or fire near a generator can quickly become a class D magnesium fire, and that won't be put out. Whether the electrical power is removed by opening the battery master relay, whether the generator field is cut, the generator always produces , and the appliance itself is also an ignition source that can spark in operation. So long as the engine is turning, the generator is also turning, and therein lies another potential source of ignition, and fire.

Getting pilots here worried about engine oil fires and uncontrolled electrical sources foward of the firewall really has little value in pilot mentoring in my opinion.

Burying one's head in the sand has very little value in my opinion. Neither of our opinions are of any consequence here, however. These things can and do happen, and it's for that reason that manufacturers include procedures for them. Manufacturers don't include procedures for shooting one's self in the head; that's fanciful. Having an engine fire or other inflight emergency is not fanciful; it does happen, it is a reality,and one should be prepared for it, know the specific actions necessary for the make, model, and serial number of airplane that one is flying, and be prepared to execute the memory items from that procedure without hesitation.

Again, I didn't introduce this topic. I did address it. Then again, I don't see much discussion on parachutes being tossed around any more, so here we are.

The notion of thread drift as a fault is idiotic. I don't recall ever having been in a conversation with anyone when someone actually piped up and said "I'm sorry, but that wasn't part of the original sentence spoken by the first person to open their mouth in this conversation, and therefore we can't talk about it." That would be stupid. Likewise, all conversations drift somewhat, and as fire was introduced in this thread, it's continued along that vein quite naturally. Nothing wrong with that at all. The only time it is a problem occurs when someone can't contribute to the thread (doubtless the forums most prolific poster will be along shortly to rectify that).

It would be unfair of me to suggest that aircraft fires do not occasionally occur, and that a few of those are not serious.

Yes, it would.

My inclination would be the reverse as fuel selector off halts the supply of fuel. Mags left on should get rid of the fuel in front of the firewall in the most acceptable manner.

Throttle to idle and mixture off before fuel selector off would trap the fuel in the firewall forward fuel system where there is most likely a leak

Discuss.

Don't get too rambunctious guessing about the procedure you *think* would work, vs. what the manufacturer provides. Know your systems, certainly, and remember that not all situations can be accounted for in canned procedures, but don't discount the basic procedures set out, either.

Pilots have been seriously injured in the past when they took off with a fuel selector off or switched the selector just prior to takeoff to a tank with water or bad fuel. The engine can continue to run just long enough, even at takeoff fuel flow settings, to get you into the air and in the worst possible position.

On the ground, shutting off the fuel selector may do little more than give you a long wait while the fire burns. Shutting off the engine may be important for several reasons, and the fire source may not be what you think.

A failed induction tube or induction section isn't uncommon. I've seen quite a few airplanes over the years that had damaged or burned flexible couplings in the induction (many light airplanes use them); these leak, or come off, or get blown off during a backfire, and clamps loosen or fail. Some engines with tightly packed exhaust and induction use heat shields to protect these couplings, but they fail, and they fail often near the exhaust outlet from the cylinder head, or near the cylinder head. These can pump out the perfect fuel air mixture.

The diaphram in the fuel flow divider can fail, pumping fuel overboard, often directly on top of the engine. Fuel lines can fail, injector lines can rupture, as can primer lines. Carburetor floats stick or sink. I've seen some very large fuel leaks occur over the years.

If you truly understand your system and know the immediate problem and can work through it given unique circumstances, then you may require unusual steps to tackle the problem. Generally, however, making up your own procedures isn't a wise idea.

[Plasmech]

Who is the "Gupster"?

At far as guns go, I am 100% for them for self defense purposes. Every man has the right to defend his life and the lives of his family.

As an emergency euthanasia implement in case the pilot catches fire, I would say that today the chances of this happening are low enough that the gun is not worth its own weight.

What are the statistics on cockpit fires anyway?

[SNS3Guppy]

Who is the "Gupster"?

Me, apparently.

At far as guns go, I am 100% for them for self defense purposes. Every man has the right to defend his life and the lives of his family.

Now that is entirely irrelevant not just to the thread, but to the forum, and to this web site.

As an emergency euthanasia implement in case the pilot catches fire, I would say that today the chances of this happening are low enough that the gun is not worth its own weight.

Chances? What's "chance" about inflight suicide?

Not only is this idiocy irrelevant and fanciful, but it has no place in a serious discussion among pilots, private or otherwise. Perhaps you'd be more comfortable publishing this tripe in the jetblast section.

[BackPacker]

Perhaps you'd be more comfortable publishing this tripe in the jetblast section.

Amen.

(Padded to at least 10 characters.)

[FlyingKiwi_73]

<sigh> suicide and guns in the cockpit really?

you know what i'm worried about, meteors! man those things can really ding an aircraft.... phew!

Luckily the tin foil hat i wear protects me from these and the CIA listening to my thoughts.

[SNS3Guppy]

you know what i'm worried about, meteors!

A couple of months ago I watched a meteor shower on a calm, clear night over Pakistan. We turned the cockpit lights low and counted shooting stars. Someone quipped the very same thing, musing about the odds of getting hit by a meteorite.

I suspect that should such a thing happen, we'd never need worry about it again, and almost certainly wouldn't know what hit us.

Getting hit with divorce papers or a law suit of some other kind is a much bigger worry.

[BackPacker]

Getting hit with divorce papers or a law suit of some other kind is a much bigger worry.

Birdstrike.

Mine was a seagull that I hit on short final, doing about 70 knots at the time.

Completely deformed the leading edge between the two outmost ribs (PA28). Couldn't believe the damage it did.

Nose down, add a touch more power because a deformation like that sure isn't going to decrease the stall speed, and landed safely. Repairs to the plane took three weeks.

[SNS3Guppy]

I hit a perigrine falcon near the Grand Canyon in a Cessna 210; it peeled the leading edge back to the spar.

I hit something one halloween night, at 10,000' in a Cessna 182, around one in the morning, in the mountains. A big bang, like someone took a chunk of wood and smacked the windscreen. When I shined a light on the windscreen, blood was everywhere. A few feathers were the dead giveaway. I have no idea what I hit, but it was my first birdstrike at night.

20 years later I hit a bird near Las Vegas at one in the morning, also at ten thousand feet. I heard a loud bang, and thought I'd had a failure associated with pressure, at first. Cabin pressure was fine, but when I looked crosscockpit through the windscreen at the lights of Las Vegas, the view was broken, opaque. Whatever I hit crushed the radome and got the right side windscreen.

When doing ag as a kid, I had a lot of birdstrikes, dozens at a time, when the flocks of birds would nestle down in the crop. My approach apparently surprised them, as I was flying low and I imagine the crop muffled the approach. Flocks rose out of the crop suddently, and they'd strike all over the airplane; they made a sound like popcorn (I called them "popcorn birds" because of the noise). Mostly they only left slight dings in the leading edge, feathers and a little blood here and there. Frequently at least one would get stuffed down the ram air port on the automatic flagman on the right wing; when I opened it up to restock the flags between flights, often the mangled remains of one or two birds were jammed in there. Occasionally they'd come through the cockpit vents, either at the wing roots, or over the top of the cockpit. A fresh air scoop vented over the top, and once in a while the birds made it through the prop, and struck the wire cutter on the windscreen. The birds split in two, half going past one side of the canopy, half going the other way. Sometimes the bird would ride the blade to the top of the canopy, enter the fresh air scoop, and explode down the back of my shirt.

Now that I think about it, exploding birds don't have much to do with the thread topic either, but it's certainly more interesting than re-inventing emergency fire procedures using a handgun. I suspect it happens a lot more, too.

[BackPacker]

certainly more interesting than re-inventing emergency fire procedures using a handgun.

We're on page three of this thread so a little thread diversion is OK. How about using your handgun to shoot the birds before they hit the aircraft.

[SNS3Guppy]

I'm afraid I'd probably shoot myself in the process. I'm afraid this one goes to the birds.

[BackPacker]

Reminds me of an old joke...

"What's the last thing that goes through a fly's mind when he hits the windscreen?"











(His butt)