Almost saw someone crash

Have to admit, I'm not sure I would be comfortable going up in a 140 that
someone bought for 15K.

John

"Blanche" wrote in message
...
Jay Honeck wrote:
And people wonder why no one can afford to fly...

Let's not perpetuate that myth here, of all places.

Anyone who can afford to buy a new Lexus can afford to fly.

A Lexus? I can't afford one of those! (And wouldn't drive one if
I could). I keep telling my friends that an airplane costs the same
as a car. Pick any car, you can find an airplane for that price.

Got $15K? Get a Cessna 152 or Cherokee 140.

Got $1.0 Million? Got car and airplane in that range too!

I expect the incident did teach the pilot a lesson (if he's normal) and
I bet his downwind checks are a lot better now.

I surely hope so.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

David CL Francis wrote:

Good point. I believe there are some 600 known crash sites in the North
of England where aircraft are believed to have flown into high ground
during WW2. Around 1 in 5 Spitfire and Hurricane losses were due to
accidents and not enemy action if my memory is correct.

I read somewhere about bomber squadrons forming up in low vis before a raid.
Often the crews wouldn't see the conflicting plane, but they'd feel the
wake turbulence and then realized that they'd survived another near miss.


All the best,


David

On Mon, 24 May 2004 19:46:05 GMT, David Megginson
wrote:

I read somewhere about bomber squadrons forming up in low vis before a raid.
Often the crews wouldn't see the conflicting plane, but they'd feel the
wake turbulence and then realized that they'd survived another near miss.

I don't think they formed up in the clouds Dave. The British would
take off and basically head for the target in one huge stream. Bomber
Command accepted that some midair collisions would occur but the main
point was to pull the bombers together in a swarm to overwhelm the
fighter defenses by pushing too many targets for them to track
efficiently. There weren't that many German night fighters so if the
entire bomber swarm passed through the sector together, the night
fighter would not get an opportunity to attack multiple targets. They
basically took off, headed for an assembly point and turned for the
target when they reached it.

The Americans formed up during the day, often climbing out through
dense cloud (bomber pilots often said "when heading back to base, head
for the biggest cloud in the sky, England will be below it) and
breaking out on top to circle for an hour before forming up in wings
and groups all the time gaining height before heading towards their
target of the day. Sometimes bad things happened in the clouds,
sometimes bad things happened in the clear. I have a book at home
that has a photo of a group of B-24's headed straight for the nose of
the B-17 from where the photo was taken. Someone was out of place in
the crowded sky and two entire squadrons of heavy bombers passed right
through each other head on. No collisions that time, but there must
have been a few tightly puckered pilots.

Corky Scott

wrote:
There weren't that many German night fighters so if the
entire bomber swarm passed through the sector together,
the night fighter would not get an opportunity to attack
multiple targets. They basically took off, headed for an
assembly point and turned for the
target when they reached it.

You sure about that? I thought the Brit bombers attacked in a "bomber
stream" rather than any kind of group formation.
--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

"Viperdoc" wrote in message news:O%....

She did not seem at all concerned with how
close she had come to a serious event,

......did not care how close she came to getting killed
yesterday......how cavalier an attitude she
had toward flying, and how close she had come to crashing.

she had nearly killed herself,

Just how close, exactly, did she come, Doc? What did you see? Or was she
flying with substantially less safety factor than standard?

We all know people who scud-run, and the fact is that some of them show a
skill level inversely proportional to their apparent judgement. But if
we're to discuss such things rationally, we have to avoid the emotional
arguments and melodramatic statements.

Dan Luke wrote:

There weren't that many German night fighters so if the
entire bomber swarm passed through the sector together,
the night fighter would not get an opportunity to attack
multiple targets. They basically took off, headed for an
assembly point and turned for the
target when they reached it.

You sure about that? I thought the Brit bombers attacked in a "bomber
stream" rather than any kind of group formation.

I'm not sure about the British, but the American bombers flying out of the
UK used a box formation -- I think it was three levels high -- and that
requires a fair bit of choreography to set up. In any case, there are many
gradations of visibility between inside a cloud and severe clear.

In THE FOG OF WAR, Robert McNamara talks about how he worked as a
statistician for General Curtis LeMay when LeMay was in charge of the Flying
Fortresses out of the U.K. in 1943. After having too many planes abort
missions because of faulty oxygen systems, engine problems, etc. LeMay
(according to McNamara) declared that the next crew who turned back for any
reason would be court-martialed. That's a strong disincentive for turning
back just because the visibility is low.


All the best,


David

John Gaquin wrote:

......did not care how close she came to getting killed
yesterday......how cavalier an attitude she
had toward flying, and how close she had come to crashing.

she had nearly killed herself,

Just how close, exactly, did she come, Doc? What did you see? Or was she
flying with substantially less safety factor than standard?

We all know people who scud-run, and the fact is that some of them show a
skill level inversely proportional to their apparent judgement. But if
we're to discuss such things rationally, we have to avoid the emotional
arguments and melodramatic statements.

If this is still the original thread, then the original poster mentioned
that she had tree-branch damage to her wing and wingtip. If that's
accurate, it's a fairly objective measurement of how close she came. She
also stated that she had been considering a precautionary landing in a field
in low visibility before she spotted the airport.


All the best,


David

John Fitzpatrick wrote:

Have to admit, I'm not sure I would be comfortable going up in a 140 that
someone bought for 15K.

I'm sure that I would *not* be real comfortable in a 152 that someone got that cheap.

George Patterson
I childproofed my house, but they *still* get in.

I saw her emerge from the clouds when the weather was below localizer mins.
She personally stated that she was completely lost, unable to control the
plane, and was contemplating landing in a field when she stumbled across the
airport.

I would also say that flying through a thunderstorm VFR when the ceilings
were below localizer mins and scud running low enough to damage a wing tip
by hitting a tree would count in my book as coming pretty close to getting
killed.

You can draw your own conclusions as to whether her actions were rational
and demonstrated good judgment.