Testers Needed: Metar Wx Reports on Your Cell Phone

Morgans wrote:

I would think that additional insurance prices would also be necessary to
cover the occasional payout for blotched aerobatics, ending in destruction
of the plane, and occasional demise of the pilot. :-( Add to that, the
tricky ground handling causing ground loops, bent gear, and bent wings, ect.

Aerobatics is every bit as safe as flying straight and level, even if
one figure or two go wrong (which inevitably happens when you explore
new maneuvres). Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal"
flight.

Ground handling a Pitts is another thing, though.

Stfan

Actually ,
The airfield owns it's planes and provides it's own insurance.It's a
reason the planes other than the Pitts are so reasonably priced for rental.
Your rental insurance covers the plane, so you are flipping that bill. I
would imagine the Pitts price is due to operating costs. Engine overhauls
and such...and how much does it cost to have chutes repacked ..what is it
like every 90 days or so?

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
Morgans wrote:

I would think that additional insurance prices would also be necessary to
cover the occasional payout for blotched aerobatics, ending in
destruction
of the plane, and occasional demise of the pilot. :-( Add to that, the
tricky ground handling causing ground loops, bent gear, and bent wings,
ect.

Aerobatics is every bit as safe as flying straight and level, even if one
figure or two go wrong (which inevitably happens when you explore new
maneuvres). Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal" flight.

Ground handling a Pitts is another thing, though.

Stfan

W P Dixon wrote:

Actually ,
The airfield owns it's planes and provides it's own insurance.It's a
reason the planes other than the Pitts are so reasonably priced for
rental. Your rental insurance covers the plane, so you are flipping that
bill. I would imagine the Pitts price is due to operating costs. Engine
overhauls and such...and how much does it cost to have chutes repacked
..what is it like every 90 days or so?

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech



120 I thought but my experience there was long ago.

--
Saville

Replicas of 15th-19th century nautical navigational instruments:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/backstaffhome.html

Restoration of my 82 year old Herreshoff S-Boat sailboat:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/SBOATrestore.htm

Steambending FAQ with photos:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/Steambend.htm

I think you are right about the 120 days,...anybody know how much it costs
to have one repacked? Do we have any parachute riggers on the group?

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech

"gregg" wrote in message
...
W P Dixon wrote:

Actually ,
The airfield owns it's planes and provides it's own insurance.It's a
reason the planes other than the Pitts are so reasonably priced for
rental. Your rental insurance covers the plane, so you are flipping that
bill. I would imagine the Pitts price is due to operating costs. Engine
overhauls and such...and how much does it cost to have chutes repacked
..what is it like every 90 days or so?

Patrick
student SPL
aircraft structural mech



120 I thought but my experience there was long ago.

--
Saville

Replicas of 15th-19th century nautical navigational instruments:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/backstaffhome.html

Restoration of my 82 year old Herreshoff S-Boat sailboat:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/SBOATrestore.htm

Steambending FAQ with photos:

http://home.comcast.net/~saville/Steambend.htm

"Stefan" wrote

Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal" flight.


All I can say, is figures lie, and liers figure. I'm not calling you a
liar, since I know you are just quoting. g

Seriously, I can't see how that could be true. The same things that a
regular flight can still happen, and added to that, sometimes the wing is
over stressed and folds, or there is spacial disoreintation, and flight
finds ground, or......

If this is true, why is it required to wear a parachute? I could go on.


Ground handling a Pitts is another thing, though.

--
Jim in NC

Morgans wrote:

Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal" flight.

Seriously, I can't see how that could be true. The same things that a
regular flight can still happen, and added to that, sometimes the wing is
over stressed and folds, or there is spacial disoreintation, and flight
finds ground, or......

Obviously you don't fly aerobatics yourself.

Stefan

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
Morgans wrote:

Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal" flight.

Seriously, I can't see how that could be true. The same things that a
regular flight can still happen, and added to that, sometimes the wing
is
over stressed and folds, or there is spacial disoreintation, and flight
finds ground, or......

Obviously you don't fly aerobatics yourself.

True, but what does that have to do with why pilots flying aerobatics are
required to wear parachutes? Are you saying this is not needed, because it
is just as safe as other GA?

Morgans wrote:

True, but what does that have to do with why pilots flying aerobatics are
required to wear parachutes? Are you saying this is not needed, because it
is just as safe as other GA?

In the country where I fly it's not required. I've never understood why
it is in the USA. (Don't get me wrong: I don't say that it's a bad idea
to wear one.)

Stefan

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"Stefan" wrote in message
...
Morgans wrote:

Statistically, aerobatics is even safer than "normal" flight.

Seriously, I can't see how that could be true. The same things that a
regular flight can still happen, and added to that, sometimes the wing
is
over stressed and folds, or there is spacial disoreintation, and
flight
finds ground, or......

Obviously you don't fly aerobatics yourself.

True, but what does that have to do with why pilots flying aerobatics are
required to wear parachutes? Are you saying this is not needed, because
it
is just as safe as other GA?

It is an FAA regulation and like many FAA regulations it makes no sense.