If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
"Mike" wrote in news:kkQlk.208$EL2.6@trnddc01:
"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message ... Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in m: Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in m: Mike wrote: Taking off with your wife and daughter would have to be pretty high on the list: http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20080731X01135 The plane was a '59 145hp 172. DA would have been around 3,500. You can draw your own conclusions. From the report... "The personal flight was being conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91..." No it wasn't. Hell they could really stick it to him and say it was under part 121. He didn't have a certificate for that either. Why would they say it was under part 121? And where does it say he was not operating under the provisions of 91? If any regs were broken, and that is no tclear, it would have been 61 in any case. Bertie Jeez Bertie it was a joke. The guy didn't have a license yet he went X-C to pick up his wife and child. He might get charged with child endangerment. He would if I was the DA there. Ah, OK. Well, you dtill don't know he didn't have a licence yet. Often there's a bigger picture behind NTSB reports like that, which was the subtle point i was making. In any case, it's also not at all clear he did anything stupid as far as his flying was concerned. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I just don't like seeing people lynched.. The word on the street even before the prelim NTSB was the "pilot" involved had bought his plane to get his ticket, but never did and even his student ticket had expired. So that made the airplane fall out of the sky? Bertie |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
buttman wrote in
: On Aug 4, 10:17*pm, "Mike" wrote: "Peter Dohm" wrote in message ... "Mike" wrote in message newsgIlk.165$ZV1.149@trnddc07... 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. Not much there to draw any conclusion from, beyond the assertion about the certificate issue. *There was plenty of *runway for the conditions; so if the fuel was good, the prop was not repitched for some special purpose, and the engine continued to run correctly we would all have none the wiser. And yes, am familiar with the model and vintage, although not the same tail number. Actually there's quite a bit. *The plane appears to have been transferr ed in 2004, so it's reasonable to assume the new owner (who at one time was iss ued a student certificate) had attempted to gain a PP-SEL and never completed . If you want to go down the road of conjecture, someone who has such a blatant disregard for the FAR possibly didn't have a current annual on th e plane either and possibly wasn't worried too much about weight and balanc e, density altitude, or any other pesky little detail. he also probably raped his daughter and also most likely murdered a few people as well. Because when you show willingness to break one rule, there is no limit of what you're capable of, right? PKB Bertie |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Mxsmanic wrote in
: buttman writes: he also probably raped his daughter and also most likely murdered a few people as well. Because when you show willingness to break one rule, there is no limit of what you're capable of, right? A willingness to break one law does indeed correlate with a willingness to break other laws. However, you also need motivation to break a law, Pretty juch makes you the most law abiding person to ever have lived. Bertie |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Jim Logajan wrote:
"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. The report lists the N-number and states that the non-certificated pilot is also the owner. The aircraft number can be located in the FAA aircraft database, which provides the owner name. The FAA license database can be searched for the owner's name to see what, if any, certificates the owner holds or held. Bottom line appears to suggest: The listed owner bought the aircraft in 2004 about a month prior to getting a student pilot certificate. Doesn't appear to have gone past that stage. I don't know if or how the database handles renewals so the owner might still have a student license, though were that the case I assume the NTSB report would have stated "student pilot" not "non-certificated" pilot. http://www.tylerpaper.com/article/20...WS08/808030343 "The investigation into the crash of a Cessna 172 last weekend in the Athens area raised the questions when the newspaper learned the pilot, Paul Kaemmerling, of Liberty, does not hold any type of pilot certification, though he owns an airplane. “He had a student pilot certificate, but that expired May 31, 2006, so he did not have any pilot certificate at the time of the crash,” National Transportation and Safety Board Safety Investigator Jennifer Kaiser said earlier in the week. " |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
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? |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Mike wrote:
"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message ... Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in m: Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in m: 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. From the report... "The personal flight was being conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91..." No it wasn't. Hell they could really stick it to him and say it was under part 121. He didn't have a certificate for that either. Why would they say it was under part 121? And where does it say he was not operating under the provisions of 91? If any regs were broken, and that is no tclear, it would have been 61 in any case. Bertie Jeez Bertie it was a joke. 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. Ah, OK. Well, you dtill don't know he didn't have a licence yet. Often there's a bigger picture behind NTSB reports like that, which was the subtle point i was making. In any case, it's also not at all clear he did anything stupid as far as his flying was concerned. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. I just don't like seeing people lynched.. The word on the street even before the prelim NTSB was the "pilot" involved had bought his plane to get his ticket, but never did and even his student ticket had expired. Actually I did know he didn't have a license when I wrote that. |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
So that made the airplane fall out of the sky? Bertie Well in this case, it might have had something to do with the guy not being able to keep the plane in the air. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m: 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? I wouldn't say you're a nazi, but to say that a piece of paper makes someone a good pilot is not what I'd call reason. I read the preliminary reoprt and there is no indication that it was pilot error. It might have been, but you've leapt well beyond what the evidence suggests. You might well be right about it, and chances are good, but a piece of paperis, of itself, meaningless. And, as is often said, a private pilot's licence is a licence to learn. It might also be aptly applied to any licence. I've seen ATRs, examiners and people you would most definitely not expect to do so make even bigger errors in judgement than that which you are accucing this guy. A fully fueled 172 with three SOB taking off out of a 4,000 foot strip with a 3,500 foot density altitude is not what could even remotely be called a tight situation. Bertie |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
On Aug 5, 10:10*am, Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote innews:n4Kdnes90ILuwAXVnZ2dnUVZ_v3inZ2d@supernews. com: Peter Dohm wrote: "Gig 601Xl Builder" wrote in message news:__6dndSb5erX5QrVnZ2dnUVZ_uydnZ2d@supernews. com... 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? I wouldn't say you're a nazi, but to say that a piece of paper makes someone a good pilot is not what I'd call reason. I read the preliminary reoprt and there is no indication that it was pilot error. It might have been, but you've leapt well beyond what the evidence suggests. You might well be right about it, and chances are good, but a piece of paperis, of itself, meaningless. And, as is often said, a private pilot's licence is a licence to learn. It might also be aptly applied to any licence. I've seen ATRs, examiners and people you would most definitely not expect to do so make even bigger errors in judgement than that which you are accucing this guy. A fully fueled 172 with three SOB taking off out of a 4,000 foot strip with a 3,500 foot density altitude is not what could even remotely be called a tight situation. Bertie The credentials document the subject had demonstrated some level of competency to an examiner. This pilot did not do that. It does not mean he was not Sire Dud in drag, but the way to bet is that he was a doofus. That is was likely unlawful is a further assessment of his lack of judgment. Of course all would be forgiven if he stayed at a Holiday Inn last night (playing MSFS of course). |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Things not to do while working on your private ticket...
Gig 601Xl Builder wrote in
m: Bertie the Bunyip wrote: So that made the airplane fall out of the sky? Bertie Well in this case, it might have had something to do with the guy not being able to keep the plane in the air. Might being the operative word. In my experience, it's very unwise to point a finger at another pilot's apparent error until you have all the facts. Here's a case in point. When the prelim accounts of the Kegworth 737 accident came out nearly every pro pilot on earth either said straight out, or privately thought, that these guys had made so fundamental a fjukup as to defy belief. When all the results were in, all but the idiots realised that anyone might have, and indeed, probably would have, made exactly the same error... To a lesser extent, the Air Florida accident is another one. There is more BS talked about that accident than you'd find in a chicago cattle yard.. Most of that BS originates from the monday morning quarterbacking that took place in the hours immediatly following the accident. Bertie |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Private Aero L-39C Albatros everyone in cockpit working hard | Tom Callahan | Aviation Photos | 0 | November 26th 07 05:15 PM |
Things to do as a private pilot ? | [email protected] | Piloting | 49 | June 25th 06 06:16 PM |
WTB: 135 Ticket | AML | Piloting | 28 | May 26th 06 04:10 PM |
WTB:135 Ticket | AML | Owning | 1 | May 24th 06 08:41 PM |
WTB: 135 Ticket | AML | Aviation Marketplace | 1 | May 24th 06 03:32 PM |