light planes collide over Seattle?

"Sylvain" wrote

do you really think journalists will bother to check that out,
or even if they did, to report it? which is going to sell
more paper? 'little plane crashes into derelict/unoccupied
building' or 'little plane crashes into *school*' ?

I see you haven't changed.

*Plonk*
--
Jim in NC

Seth Masia wrote:

And let's hear a round of applause for the Beaver pilot, who put it down
safely on the grass in spite of having his floats apparently distorted about
30 degrees off center.

Yeah! (clap, clap, clap)

I looked at those floats and thought it was a miracle he didn't dig the tip of
one in. I guess he hung it on the prop and "three-pointed" it.

George Patterson
Give a person a fish and you feed him for a day; teach a person to
use the Internet and he won't bother you for weeks.

Recently, Peter Duniho posted:

That said, reports as to what exactly happened are still conflicting.
The evening news was reporting that the 150 was flying perpendicular
to the flight path of the floatplane, while the web site's article
appears to be saying that the flight paths were nearly parallel, in
the same direction.

This aspect of the report confuses me, as well. If the aircraft were on
"nearly parallel" flight paths, how could the sun be much of a factor? One
of them should have seen the other with a normal scan to their sides. I
don't get it.

Neil

wrote:
Oh, Boy and this is rainy Seattle. Makes the M..gs closure look sounder
every day.
Uncle Bobby RIP.

For the curious, Uncle Bobby Collins was a local radio host who was
similiarly clipped, and
some wreckage hit a HOSPITAL in Lake County IL.

JG


And that was SPLAT into a SCHOOL BUILDING.

Polarized sunglasses anyone?

JG

Hey George! Sorry, Hi George.

Maybe the floats were damaged, but remained in corrrect
position/alignment until the weight was applied on touchdown and it
gave way?

Bryan "The Monk" Chaisone

"Neil Gould" wrote in message
. ..
This aspect of the report confuses me, as well. If the aircraft were on
"nearly parallel" flight paths, how could the sun be much of a factor?

No one has said that the sun *was* a factor. There simply have been people
who have suggested that it *might* have been a factor.

As is often the case, many statements have been made about the accident, not
all of which can be true at the same time. Which ones are true and which
ones are not will be known in due time, and likely not in the near future.

I would agree that the "sun in the pilot's eyes" and the "parallel flight
courses" possibilities are mutually exclusive, assuming that the parallel
flights were in the same direction. If they were on a head-on course (and I
haven't heard any suggestion that they were), the sun and visibility
generally could have been a factor.

Pete

"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
oups.com...
Maybe the floats were damaged, but remained in corrrect
position/alignment until the weight was applied on touchdown and it
gave way?

The report I saw said that the floatplane pilot noted the floats at an angle
before touchdown.

As far as the "hung it on a prop and 'three-pointed' it" goes...witness
accounts say that the floatplane bounced several times before coming to a
rest. It sounds to me like a classic example of the pilot continuing to fly
the airplane until it came to a stop, no matter what happened. This is, of
course, the text-book example of what one SHOULD do when landing, in an
emergency or otherwise.

I think it likely that the successful landing had less to do with a
particular choice of technique, and more to do with a pilot who kept his
wits about him and maintained control of the airplane as best he could, even
in an extremely difficult situation.

Pete

Agreed. A full stall landing isn't a good idea on floats, because it means
you come down on the tail of the floats -- and this could mean pitching
sharply forward and possibly going up and over. Instead, you want to settle
at minimum sink rate on the step, regardless of whether it's water, grass,
snow, plowed field or pavement, and come to as gradual a stop as possible
using the keels as your brakes. Which is exactly what happened in this
case. Bravo.

Seth


"Peter Duniho" wrote in message
...
"Flyingmonk" wrote in message
oups.com...
Maybe the floats were damaged, but remained in corrrect
position/alignment until the weight was applied on touchdown and it
gave way?

The report I saw said that the floatplane pilot noted the floats at an
angle before touchdown.

As far as the "hung it on a prop and 'three-pointed' it" goes...witness
accounts say that the floatplane bounced several times before coming to a
rest. It sounds to me like a classic example of the pilot continuing to
fly the airplane until it came to a stop, no matter what happened. This
is, of course, the text-book example of what one SHOULD do when landing,
in an emergency or otherwise.

I think it likely that the successful landing had less to do with a
particular choice of technique, and more to do with a pilot who kept his
wits about him and maintained control of the airplane as best he could,
even in an extremely difficult situation.

Pete

Instead, you want to settle
at minimum sink rate on the step, regardless of whether it's water, grass...

What does "on the step" mean outside of a water landing?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

It means the first point of contact with the earth's surface should be the
strongest part of the keel: that is, the step. Touch down anywhere else
and you risk a flip-over. Deceleration is going to rock you forward onto
the forward keel, and you want that pitch-over to happen as slowly and
gently as possible. So if I were doing it I'd probably apply gentle
up-elevator as soon as the step made contact.

In fact this process should be a lot like a soft-field landing in a plane
with wheels.

Any float CFIs out there feel differently?

Seth


"Jose" wrote in message
...
Instead, you want to settle at minimum sink rate on the step, regardless
of whether it's water, grass...

What does "on the step" mean outside of a water landing?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no
universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.