C172 lands in Brooklyn

"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote:
He deserves to sound a little arrogant. He took a bad situation in a part of
the country not known for wide open spaces and safely landed. It wasn't his
lucky stars it was skill. He should be thanking the instructors he had over
the years and his own ability.

It was definitely part luck and part skill; either one without the other
doesn't often end up like it did. And he sure as heck *does* have reason
to be thanking his lucky stars in addition to thanking his instructors
.... he could just as easily have had the problem over a bunch of houses
or trees instead of over a park. As for arrogance, if it's frowned upon
in the cockpit, why is it acceptable on the ground? Even if he landed it
skillfully, he's still damn lucky.

wrote in message
...
"Gig 601XL Builder" wrDOTgiaconaATcox.net wrote:
He deserves to sound a little arrogant. He took a bad situation in a part
of
the country not known for wide open spaces and safely landed. It wasn't
his
lucky stars it was skill. He should be thanking the instructors he had
over
the years and his own ability.

It was definitely part luck and part skill; either one without the other
doesn't often end up like it did. And he sure as heck *does* have reason
to be thanking his lucky stars in addition to thanking his instructors
... he could just as easily have had the problem over a bunch of houses
or trees instead of over a park. As for arrogance, if it's frowned upon
in the cockpit, why is it acceptable on the ground? Even if he landed it
skillfully, he's still damn lucky.

Luck is where Opportunity meets preparation.

Al G, a VERY lucky fellow.

Marc,

(He sounds like an
arrogant jerk who should be thanking his lucky stars - but that's a
non-pilot's opinion.)


Help me out here please. I assume you're not happy when GA aircraft
flying over NY end up crashing into buildings when something goes
wrong. Now you tell us you're not happy when they land without any
incident in a park. So what exactly would be ok from your non-pilot's
point of view?

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

Marc Adler wrote:

1 - Will the pilot get fined (FAA, NTSB, NYPD, parks authority,
anyone)?

FAA - not likely, might get a 709 ride out of it.
NTSB - NO
NY Gov't - Possibly.


2 - How much does it cost to remove the wings from a Cessna and
transport it to the nearest airport?

Not too bad. Will be covered by insurance most likely. It's only
a few man-hours of labor the rental of a truck or trailer.

4 - Will his insurance go up?


Depends what the reason for the failure was.

Ron Natalie wrote in news:455b8968$0$26912
:

1 - Will the pilot get fined (FAA, NTSB, NYPD, parks authority,
anyone)?

FAA - not likely, might get a 709 ride out of it.

You think the FAA would want to checkride him after he glided the plane to
safety with no damage? I can't image that. What will they test him on, his
emergency landing skills? He already proved that he can do it safely...

Judah wrote:

Ron Natalie wrote in news:455b8968$0$26912
:


1 - Will the pilot get fined (FAA, NTSB, NYPD, parks authority,
anyone)?

FAA - not likely, might get a 709 ride out of it.


You think the FAA would want to checkride him after he glided the plane to
safety with no damage? I can't image that. What will they test him on, his
emergency landing skills? He already proved that he can do it safely...

There won't be a 709 ride. Either the engine really did puke and there
would never be a ride for that, or he ran out of gas. If that happened
there's still no ride, just a suspension.

Newps wrote:



There won't be a 709 ride. Either the engine really did puke and there
would never be a ride for that, or he ran out of gas. If that happened
there's still no ride, just a suspension.

There's a member of this group (he can speak up if he wishes) that
ran out of fuel (undetermined reason) who got a 709 ride but no other
action...so your observation is not universally true.

Judah wrote:
Ron Natalie wrote in news:455b8968$0$26912
:

1 - Will the pilot get fined (FAA, NTSB, NYPD, parks authority,
anyone)?
FAA - not likely, might get a 709 ride out of it.

You think the FAA would want to checkride him after he glided the plane to
safety with no damage? I can't image that. What will they test him on, his
emergency landing skills? He already proved that he can do it safely...
You betcha. They 709 ride people who gear up planes due to mechanical
failure who do perfect landings as well.

Ron Natalie wrote in
m:

Judah wrote:
Ron Natalie wrote in news:455b8968$0$26912
:

1 - Will the pilot get fined (FAA, NTSB, NYPD, parks authority,
anyone)?
FAA - not likely, might get a 709 ride out of it.

You think the FAA would want to checkride him after he glided the plane
to safety with no damage? I can't image that. What will they test him
on, his emergency landing skills? He already proved that he can do it
safely...
You betcha. They 709 ride people who gear up planes due to mechanical
failure who do perfect landings as well.

Gear up is an incident. Landing in a park isn't...