I’m not suggesting you do anything. I’m questioning what you think the chap referred to who ended up with a catheter and a leg bag due to delayed op should have done. You’re the one who said that he hadn’t been taking his health seriously.
I had a friend who had no urinary symptoms from his prostate before he had bony secondaries. Dead 11 months after diagnosis. Not uncommon for spread to precede symptoms.
He didn’t ignore his waterworks symptoms.
Tim
Over-screening can be harmful too.
Tim
Jerry Grayson, a highly-decorated air-sea rescue helicopter pilot (who also flew the comms helicopter for Treasure Hunt) describes in his autobiography a long flight when he couldn't wait any longer and had to use the dreaded "tube and funnel". His crew were seated below his seat on the large Royal Navy helicopter. He heard shouts of disgust over the intercom. Apparently it was "someone else's job" to replace the collection bag after if had last been used and cleaned, and this had not been done so the pipe sprayed its contents over his crew ;-)
It is in fact much more complicated than that.
FAR more end up with benign prostate enlargement and just have the nuisance of pissing more frequently and die due to something else. And plenty who have benign prostate enlargment get 'treated' for it and end up with incontinence and or no longer being able to f*ck for no purpose.
And in fact FAR more often causes real harm than prostate cancer killing you.
So the crew ended up getting highly-decorated as well, then.
It usually is!
Well, quite. That's why I recently turned down a colonoscopy in fact. But as I've said before, each person needs to do their own research and make that judgement for themselves, having factored in what their GP advised.
Far more viable to go with the protocol that those who have done some rigorous science have shown is the best approach.
Yes, when my dad was catheterised it was very convenient in that way. Bill
NY snipped-for-privacy@privacy.invalid wrote
Thanks for that, just bought both of his in kindle format.
Got any others as good as that in memoirs/history/biography ?
I should get that looked at then. Brian
Look out for his account (in the first book) of how he managed to land a helicopter which had lost its tail rotor drive, which meant that he had to fight its tendency to spin by keeping enough forward speed for the anti-spin tail fin to hold the tail steady. He recounts it very vividly in this TED talk:
Entering “auto-rotation” to descend without engine power or a working tail rotor is standard helicopter pilot training isn’t it?
Doesn’t mean it isn’t a bit hairy, but it’s something all helicopter pilots should be able to do.
Tim
Auto rotation doesn't work with no tail rotor.
Wrong with no tail rotor.
Autorotation is simply the main rotor turning faster than the engine driving it, usually, but not necessarily, because the engine has stopped. However, losing the tail rotor while the main rotor is still powered sounds difficult.
If the engine fails, so does the tail rotor. However, if the engine has failed, the tail rotor is no longer needed to counteract the torque of the engine and the fuselage alone is usually enough to counteract the effect of a main rotor in autorotation. That is slightly different from having a working main rotor and no tail rotor though.
"zall" snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@pvr2.lan...
Auto-rotation is designed for engine power failure. It uses the descent of the helicopter (the air rushing past the rotor blades) to spin the main rotor (and also the tail rotor) which generates lift that partially counteracts the descent, so allowing a more gradual and controllable descent. AIUI, it is not effective to counteract tail-rotor failure. That's why helicopters often have big tail fins, so the forward motion generates "sideways lift" in a direction that is the same as the tail rotor would normally produce. He describes the helicopter as being controllable as long as he was flying above a certain speed, and starting to spin when he slowed down - and why he had to land like a fixed-wing plane (at significant forward speed) rather than reducing his forward speed to zero as he touched down, as he would do normally. The fact that he had to land on only one skid, which increases the chance of his main rotor blade touching the ground, with the helicopter travelling sideways, makes it all the more remarkable. Given his "I ran out of hands" comment - that he wouldn't be able to use two hands to fly and still be able to cut the rotor power - makes me wonder why the main engine power control / fuel cutoff isn't placed on the cyclic lever so it can be operated without taking a hand off cyclic or collective levers. Good thing he had a passenger to do the job, and that the passenger "was a very quick learner".
I loved the photo of him hovering with one wheel touching a stack of rock as he was rescuing someone.
Have helicopters ever tried using an electric motor (powered from an engine-powered generator) for the tail rotor, to eliminate the single point of failure - the shaft/gearbox between main rotor and tail rotor.
Apparently there was an Aussie pub who installed a urinal trench in front of the bar so patrons didn't have to stop drinking to use the dunny.
I don't think so, but surely that introduces a number of new failure points, both electrical and mechanical.
They do have tail-rotorless helicopters (NOTAR), but they use a fan driven by the engine (fewer joints and gearboxes and no vulnerable, exposed parts) which ducts large volumes of air along the hollow tail boom and vents it out of two slots in the side. That apparently affects the airflow coming down from the main rotor and causes it to produce a sideways lift on the tail boom, instead of requiring a tail rotor.
I know what it is. As usual, Wodney has got it wrong.
“Autorotation is a state of flight in which the main rotor system of a helicopter or other rotary-wing aircraft turns by the action of air moving up through the rotor, as with an autogyro, rather than engine power driving the rotor.[1][2][3] The term autorotation dates to a period of early helicopter development between 1915 and 1920, and refers to the rotors turning without the engine.[4] It is analogous to the gliding flight of a fixed-wing aircraft. Autorotation has also evolved to be used by certain trees as a means of disseminating their seeds further.”And…
“The most common use of autorotation in helicopters is to safely land the aircraft in the event of an engine failure or tail-rotor failure. It is a common emergency procedure taught to helicopter pilots as part of their training.”Tim
I presume the pilot's rudder controls adjust the pitch of the fan blade that produces the air feed to the tail, in the same way as they adjust the pitch of the conventional tail rotor; either way the sideways force is varied to allow a brief controlled spin to change direction.
How does the rudder on a twin-rotor helicopter work? If one rotor is spun more slowly than the other, there may be a nett torque on one direction, but there'll also be less lift so the helicopter will pitch forwards/backwards. I suppose twin-rotor pilots learn to adjust for this...
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.