Things not to do while working on your private ticket...

On Aug 6, 2:32 pm, Jim Logajan wrote:
Nomen Nescio wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

From: Rocky Stevens

The main exception to this seems to be when the pilot runs out of gas;
in fact, I'm surprised (and disturbed) by how many fatalities are due
to "fuel management" issues!

Don't worry too much, Anthony. You'll never fly.

Fascinating Pavlovian response.

Actually at this rate, unless one defines "flying" as "sitting in a
plane while your instructor does almost everything for you," he's not
too far off

On Aug 7, 5:21*am, Clark wrote:
More_Flaps wrote in news:d146a80e-acc8-4dd2-b395-
:



On Aug 6, 11:07*am, Clark wrote:
More_Flaps wrote in news:7fa28711-ed56-49c3-bcd5-
:

On Aug 6, 8:41*am, wrote:
On Aug 5, 4:13*pm, More_Flaps wrote:

On Aug 6, 6:31*am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote: Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in news:66-

Other than it was the final outcome of a flight that in itself
wou
ld
violation of the child endangerment laws of most states? Not
much.

you dont know that.

Your name Lynch, by any chance?

What don't I know? There is little doubt that the flight ended in
an
accident.

I note you say accident not incident. What you don't know is if he
w
as
a skilled pilot and the extent to which improper operation
contribut
ed
to the incident. He didn't stall but carried out a controlled crash
landing apparently. Not a bad outcome for engine loss over a wooded
area -suggesting some skill doncha think?

Cheers

It's hard to argue with the fact that the crash was a success. The
question is would it have been more likely avoided had the PIC
undergone PPL training.

He must have had PPL training. He did not take a flight test tho' and
I'm not sure a PPL would have stopped an engine failure (even icing
induced?).

Icing on departure? Ummm, itsn't that the least likely case?

Nope seen it myself.

With 100 F OAT? Come on.


Was OAT really 100 when the engine started to loose power (I don't
think you know the OAT)... BUT even at 100 OAT icing is possible.

Cheers

On Aug 7, 6:52*am, Gig 601Xl Builder
wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Oh the guy is screwed as far as liability goes. He damaged at least a
light pole and from the news reports at least one transformer. He will
be getting a bill for that and the labor to replace it. They ain't
cheap.

Jes can't wait to hang him, eh?

So what? You seem to want to blow the guy.

Uh ho. Fightin' talk.

Cheers

Clark writes:

With 100 F OAT? Come on.

The temperature may drop by 70 degrees inside the carburetor, which means that
even at 100 F OAT the temperature may be below freezing inside the carb.

On Aug 6, 4:48*pm, Mxsmanic wrote:
Clark writes:
With 100 F OAT? Come on.

The temperature may drop by 70 degrees inside the carburetor, which means that
even at 100 F OAT the temperature may be below freezing inside the carb.

Under what conditions would you expect such a temperature drop?

"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...
wrote:
On Aug 4, 2:55 pm, "Mike" wrote:
Taking off with your wife and daughter would have to be pretty high on
the
list:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20080731X01135

The plane was a '59 145hp 172. DA would have been around 3,500. You
can
draw your own conclusions.

My question says it all. Experience and ratings are a factor when we
buy hull and liability insurance. This guy may be self insured (OK,
the airplane isn't worth a fortune, but liability could be huge). I
wonder what his exposure is? I have no idea if our umbrella polices
would include coverage for me if I took a seaplane or multi engine
land for an unsupervised flight that ended in a crash, given I am
rated for neither.,


Oh the guy is screwed as far as liability goes. He damaged at least a
light pole and from the news reports at least one transformer. He will be
getting a bill for that and the labor to replace it. They ain't cheap.

I shall make it a point of honor to be at least as non-judgemental as you,
when your name comes up.

Peter

Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in news:xK6dnd-
:

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:

Oh the guy is screwed as far as liability goes. He damaged at least a
light pole and from the news reports at least one transformer. He will
be getting a bill for that and the labor to replace it. They ain't
cheap.


Jes can't wait to hang him, eh?

So what? You seem to want to blow the guy.


Ah.


Gay lames.

Congrats or your ascendency to kookdom.


Bertie

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m:

Flydive wrote:
Mike wrote:
First of all, in this case a "pilot" wasn't involved to begin with.

So if a student pilot crashes in his solo flight no pilots were involved
Assuming he has a student certificate a pilot is involved.

So, the Wrights weren't pilots?


Nope. They were bicycle mechanics with their heads in the clouds and a
really good understanding of aerodynamics. ;-)

On 8/5/2008 9:04 PM Mxsmanic ignored two million years of human
evolution to write:


Because other people here seem to think that having a license makes one a
competent pilot.

What you think is irrelevant. You don't fly. You never will.

Gig 601Xl Builder wrote:
Peter Dohm wrote:
"Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message
m...


much snipped
The guy didn't have a license yet he went X-C to
pick up his wife and child. He might get charged with child
endangerment. He would if I was the DA there.

IMHO, you are a Nazi, and therefore a major irritant!

Peter




I'm a NAZI because I think a person that puts their child and wife in
danger by flying them while legally and obviously actually unqualified
to do so should be charged with child endangerment?



Actually I once witnessed a crash involving a properly licensed pilot
who decided to "show off" to the bosses daughter by taking her up in a
twin Apache that he wasn't current on (he hadn't flown for over two
months). He was practicing "touch and goes" and wound up taking the
aircraft through the fence at the end of the runway, across a busy
highway, and into a ditch. He missed hitting a truck by a whisker. The
"boss" wasn't impressed either. He'd left carb heat "on" for both
engines, should have nailed the brakes instead of attempting to take off
(particularly as he'd landed "long" and had allowed too much speed to
bleed off). Pam told me later (when I went to visit her in the
hospital) how he was busy reading the check-list when he looked up to
see the end of the runway approaching.