Night flying in the mountians in a cessna 150,

Nw,

than on the road with pill
popping crazy people behind the wheel of a 2,000 weapon.


Actually, in that case, the statistics might not bear out the perceived
(by you, apparently) danger, either.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Maybe you are a coward, either because you post this stuff hiding behind a
name that doesn't come up here or because you are afraid of flying over
mountains when you can't even see them.

Mike
MU-2


"jd-10" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Matt Whiting wrote:

People talk about safety like it is an absolute and it simply isn't. It
depends on the circumstances

I've read this entire thread and while everyone else is too PC to say
it, I will:

You are a *****ing* fool. As big a fool as the OP. Flying single-engine
in the mountains at night is like playing Russian roulette with 4 of six
loaded.

You are a corpse waiting to happen. If you fly with your wife, she is as
well. It's death-wish assholes like you that give all the reasonable and
prudent GA pilots a bad name.

You're no different than a guy I used to see in Montana, at the annual
Schafer fly-in. I saw him drink two beers and then jump in his 185 and
go fly.

At the time, I told a friend "that guy is a corpse waiting to happen.
He's one of those guys who thinks **** won't happen to him, and one of
these days he's going to paint himself into a corner he can't get out
of."

Less than a year later, the guy was dead, killed in a collision with a
cumulo-granite not far from Schafer, scud running. He took two others
with him, the son of a bitch.

You remind me of that guy. No regard for your own safety, much less the
safety of others. I hope you wise up before you kill your wife.
--
JD-10

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 07:10:01 +0100 (CET), Nomen Nescio wrote:


It is a useful calculation for making the decision as to "Should I fly over
the mountains at night?"
Using Ron Garret's example of 1 in 100 chance of having an engine failure,
and assuming that an engine failure at night over the mountains has a
100% chance of being fatal (I know it's not 100%, but I'd bet it's awfully
close).

Just to change the line of thinking here, - seems to me that since
the assumption is you would inevitably impact with fatal results, if
an engine failure occurs, over mountains, at night, in IMC, that
jumping out with a parachute (proper training, etc.) would greatly
increase your chances of survival. Might not be too comfortable flying
with one on, I'm not a parachutist - but that kind of flying most
agree is more likely to have fatal results from loss of power. Just
like a liferaft on an offshore yacht, it seems it could be an
insurance policy that could be effective if you have to fly in those
conditions.

I experienced an engine failure in a single over the Sierras at night
(the sunset was beautiful). It was in a Commanche, and the engined died
about 3 seconds after turning off the electric boost pump (10,500'
after leaving Tahoe.) Happily, the engine recovered as soon as the
boost pump was turned back on. Also, happily, the owner of the
Commanchee was in the right seat and is a pretty calm guy. He turned
the pump off again (to see what the fuel pressure would do.) Sure
enough, the pressure dropped, the engine faltered and the nose dropped.
He flipped the pump back on, and I suggested leaving well enough alone
(I'm not that calm.)

I had the suspicion that, even if the electric pump failed the
mechanical one would get started somehow, as we had just flown an hour
to Tahoe with no trouble, but I didn't want to test that theory. The
next day, the engine ran fine on the mechanical pump, and it has ever
since.

Well, enough hanger flying - I gotta go.

In rec.aviation.owning bk wrote:
: I experienced an engine failure in a single over the Sierras at night
: (the sunset was beautiful). It was in a Commanche, and the engined died
: about 3 seconds after turning off the electric boost pump (10,500'
: after leaving Tahoe.) Happily, the engine recovered as soon as the
: boost pump was turned back on. Also, happily, the owner of the
: Commanchee was in the right seat and is a pretty calm guy. He turned
: the pump off again (to see what the fuel pressure would do.) Sure
: enough, the pressure dropped, the engine faltered and the nose dropped.
: He flipped the pump back on, and I suggested leaving well enough alone
: (I'm not that calm.)

That's allegedly a common problem with PA-24's. The mechanical and
electrical(s) are in parallel. When the electric is on for awhile, no fuel goes
through the mechanical pump and it gets no cooling. When the electric is turned off,
the mechanical pump is vapor locked and can't pump. It can ruin your day if you do it
just after takeoff and don't think fast.

That's just what I've heard.

-Cory

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

Morgans wrote:

Have you ever considered home brewing a fire protectin system for your
house? A pipe on the roof with holes drilled in it to keep the shingles
wet. Directional irrigation sprinklers keeping the walls wet.

Real sprinkler heads will do a much better job and are not all that expensive.
For this type of system, you could use open heads. IIRC, each head typically
covers 150'sq.

A high
volume irrigation pump, I'm thinking gas, so power outages will not be a
problem. Pump out of the swimming pool. If you don't have a pool, now you
have an excuse to get one!

Two basic types of pumps are usually used for this sort of thing. A diaphram
pump (such as a "mud puppy") will maintain constant pressure. A piston pump
maintains constant volume. A properly sized piston pump would be best in an open
system.

I no longer remember the flow figures, but a swimming pool wouldn't last long
enough to handle a situation such as the brush fires California suffers.

I spent a year designing systems for Grinnell Fire Protection once.

George Patterson
I prefer Heaven for climate but Hell for company.

"MJC" wrote in message
...
A few years ago, good friend of mine, riding his Harley, was stopped
and
waiting at a red light on a Friday evening on his way home from work. I
imagine that while he was waiting for the light to change, he was probably
wondering what his wife might have cooked for dinner.
Seconds later, he was dead, hit by a drunk who never saw him or the red
light.
I've always ridden bikes (yup, a Harley), and I know the risks. And
it's
because I know the risks of both motorcycles and airplanes that I would
also
prefer the "risk" of flying over a mountain at night rather than sitting
still on a Harley at a red light on a weekend evening.

Your statement makes no sense, if you ride bikes and fly you risk both.

Ric


MJC

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...

"houstondan" wrote in message
oups.com...
very thought provoking thread for me. valuable stuff to consider
personal minimums. as someone who has been riding motorcycles for 40
years, i find it kinda tough to be critical of the decisions other
people make when the biggest killer of stupid old men is really big
motorcycles.


I ride bike's also, Every time I stop at a light I wait for the idiot
that
doesn't see me and is going to plow in to me, hearing someone's tires
skidding behind you is not a good sound or a good feeling. Being boxed in
on
the highway or while at a stop light on a bike by people that think its
funny is not a good feeling also. What about being tail gated while on a
bike. I will take flying a single over the mountains at night rather then
getting creamed by some loser that's not paying attention or wanting to
play
with people on motorcycles.

"Ric" wrote in message
u...
[...]
I've always ridden bikes (yup, a Harley), and I know the risks. And
it's
because I know the risks of both motorcycles and airplanes that I would
also
prefer the "risk" of flying over a mountain at night rather than sitting
still on a Harley at a red light on a weekend evening.

Your statement makes no sense, if you ride bikes and fly you risk both.

Presumably not at the same time though.

I'm a pilot, as well as a homeowner. That means I fly an airplane, and I
have to mow the lawn. I "risk" both, but I prefer flying.

So, why doesn't his statement make sense? Can't he prefer engaging in one
risky activity over another?

Pete

Actually, this is a well known phenomenon for 250 hp Comanches with
carburetors, and is one reason that the International Comanche Society
strongly suggests that anyone new to flying Comanches get a check out
from a CFI who really knows Comanches.

The pertinent parts of a proper checkout start with the engine start
procedu (1) Before start, electric fuel pump ON and listen to the
sound of the two electric fuel pumps. They should sound like a Latin
rhythm as the two pumps go into and out of phase. If the sound is a
regular beat, one of the pumps is not working. Naturally, you can only
hear the pumps when the engine is not running. (2) Then electric fuel
pump OFF for start, taxi, and runup. This tests the engine driven fuel
pump. (3) Electric fuel pump on just before power up for takeoff. (4)
Electric fuel pump OFF when a safe altitude is reached. Watch the
fuel pressure. If it falls below minimum, electric fuel pump back ON
for ten seconds, then OFF again. Repeat ON and OFF until fuel pressure
does not fall below minimum.

What the procedure does is push a little fuel into the engine driven
fuel pump with each on cycle, eventually breaking the vapor lock. I
have never needed more than three on's. There is no reason to scare the
passengers with a dead engine. The carb bowl has enough fuel in it to
give plenty of time to get the electric pump back on if you watch the
fuel pressure.

Keeping the electric fuel pump off until the last minute before
departure generally alleviates the problem entirely.

Hank
Henry A. Spellman
Comanche N5903P

wrote:
In rec.aviation.owning bk wrote:
: I experienced an engine failure in a single over the Sierras at night
: (the sunset was beautiful). It was in a Commanche, and the engined died
: about 3 seconds after turning off the electric boost pump (10,500'
: after leaving Tahoe.) Happily, the engine recovered as soon as the
: boost pump was turned back on. Also, happily, the owner of the
: Commanchee was in the right seat and is a pretty calm guy. He turned
: the pump off again (to see what the fuel pressure would do.) Sure
: enough, the pressure dropped, the engine faltered and the nose dropped.
: He flipped the pump back on, and I suggested leaving well enough alone
: (I'm not that calm.)

That's allegedly a common problem with PA-24's. The mechanical and
electrical(s) are in parallel. When the electric is on for awhile, no fuel goes
through the mechanical pump and it gets no cooling. When the electric is turned off,
the mechanical pump is vapor locked and can't pump. It can ruin your day if you do it
just after takeoff and don't think fast.

That's just what I've heard.

-Cory

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

How did "he and his two passengers" fit in a Cessna 150?

vk6ad
Perth Australia