 |
Page: 1 2 3 Next > Jump to:  Bottom  Last Post
 TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
 16 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 7:26:29 PM
Ok fair enough, we're in agreement :) I also agree with always having two choices left... this guy also had two choices, he just waited too long and then picked the wrong one, lol.Ya my apologies on the incorrect spelling, I didn't realize I was doing it until I posted the comments. Thanks for the compliments on the blog, cheers! |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:09:16 PM
ALSO... awesome blog, keep on truckin' |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:07:35 PM
ALSO... If you're ever left with only one choice in aviation, you screwed up. Oh, ALSO... have the decency to spell properly... "Leer..." WTF. ;) |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 6:05:01 PM
Of course no power setting is recommended. It's a variable with atmospheric conditions. We're really both in agreement as to the cause. That's no issue. My comment on the wind was more about the approach winds, not those on the field. Sometimes the approach winds will not favor a certain runway, but there is a shift at low altitudes. We get that out of Van Nuys fairly often. I don't doubt the hours you claim. I think that the type of flying you do sounds like tons of fun. I've always wanted to hit a turf strip in a J-3. In the few times I've flown to Canada, I really enjoy it. It is a beautiful place. So, anyway, happy flying! Oh, BTW I have 3 hours for every hour of flight you have. Dual PIC Ratings on Learjet and Westwind Jets. Maybe we'll have an rvsm pass somedeay... |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 5:25:21 AM
ALSO... the reason no POH recomends power off approaches is because it never recomends any power setting, only airspeed. Power setting is used to control approach angle, so if you need a steep approach use little to no power, a shallow approach - more power. If this pilot wanted to clear the hill at the approach end and touch down as soon as possible his only choice would have been NO POWER. That's pretty much landings 101... I think perhaps its you leerjet guy that may have received the poor instruction.At any rate this debate has been quite entertaining, but I think I've said enough for now. |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 5:14:43 AM
leerjetguy I more or less agree with thegrinninfi's last post. If by backside approach you're talking about approaching at an airspeed on the backside of the power curve, well, that's kind of a skewed way of looking at things. That is really just flying slower. Usually most published aproach speeds tend to be already a tad to the back side of the power curve anyways, so its a strange way of saying "just approach slower", lol. Thirdly I think its stating the obvious that its pilot error. Obviously there was no mechanical failure or sudden changes in weather which caused the accident, so pilot error is the only available option, I don't believe anyone is debating that.Lastly if you saw the windsock why did you say that "based on the available data blah blah blah he may have been landing downwind" when the windsock clearly indicated he wasn't? |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Thursday, June 04, 2009 4:57:24 AM
lol, professional aviator at 250 hrs? Your ink is still drying! BTW I do indeed have the time I claimed. I'm not going to go mentioning my employer to random people on the internet, but I'm a bush pilot in Northern Ontario. You can check out my blog at (ironically enough) http://intheovershoot.blogspot.com - that should be proof enough, I invite you to check it out. You could likely figure out my company based on that anyways if you're resourceful enough. |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:12:48 PM
Enough, rookies.Backside approach - review performance curves for airspeed vs. power required. Short field approach - power at idle for touchdown, not approach. No POH published technique reccommends idle power for final approach. Runway upslope helps compensate not for mistakes, but for unfavorable terrain at one end of the runway. You guys are pathetic, thinking you know squat. You don't. But you're not interested in learning from a professional aviator. You're just looking to appear as though you know what you're talking about. Again, you don't. Also, you very well may be receiving crappy instruction... there's a lot of it out there. |
|
thegrinninfi
Male, 18-29, Western US
7 Posts
|
Wednesday, June 03, 2009 9:47:30 AM
Learjetguy: 1)'power off approaches are the result of bad planning' Wrong. Sorry. Remember shortfield technique? They said something about engines idle.
2)'Pilot Error was the cause' oh yeah!
3)'Backside approach' WHAT? I can only hope you mean either a forwardslip or a sideslip. And your idea about using the upslope of the runway as compensation for a mistake should only be as a last option, not something you plan on, especially on a runway like this. Tibet? Sure, but definitely not here.goalie jerry: 'landing gear wasn't down' No. Wrong. Watch it again. Sorry for the rant. |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 8:28:45 PM
LOL @ madest |
|
 madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
1104 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:34:49 PM
must be a colgan air trainee |
|
 Nburkie420
Male, 18-29, Canada
464 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 5:25:08 PM
its to fake to even like |
|
 GRadde
Male, 18-29, Europe
1245 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:49:44 PM
Hee hee.For some reason I love Viemo's loading sequence... Those three little triangles are quite entertaining. |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 12:51:37 PM
>>dm2754: "They do seem to be impressed with cuss word words and insults."My sentiments exactly. Everyone wants to point out how the other person is a jagweed because they disagree. It's pointless to attempt an intelligent discussion around here. |
|
 dm2754
Male, 30-39, Western US
483 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 11:12:19 AM
>>cman7721: "nobody here is impressed with your knowledge"<<I would have to agree I have been on IMB for many years and i discovered most people here aren't impressed by any type of knowledge whatsoever. They do seem to be impressed with cuss word words and insults. I'm decided to give up on intelligent arguments as they require an intelligent audience. |
|
Learjetguy
Male, 18-29, Western US
26 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:58:21 AM
Ah, 700hr. commercial. That's awesome. Who do you fly for? Calling me an idiot only goes to show you're deficient maturity to be a commercial pilot. I could say I was the same at 250hrs with a commercial ticket. Also, anyone who has to bring it up is insecure. I saw the hill, and I did see the windsock. So, if you claim that he was doing everything as he should (well, almost everything), what would've been the correct actions for a successful approach and landing? Excessive speed meant bad descent planning, throw in improper ADM and that's when crashes happen. Even landing with the wind, the increased ground speed can be compensated for by utilizing a backside approach, along with the upslope of the runway to decelerate. |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 9:58:19 AM
Ya its definitely a piper. I the nose, windshield, and short landing gear look like a Comanche, but the square wingtips look more Seneca ish. I have my bets on a Twin Comanche, just wondered if anyone knew for sure |
|
 alacastor
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
2 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 8:44:05 AM
TheChad40 is ftw i love when people get pwned via logic. |
|
 Binary101
Male, 13-17, Asia
847 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 8:03:00 AM
It is a twin engined piper, It was going very slowly but it touched down WAAAY too late. Now it has to be repaired, inspected and certified which takes about 6 months |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:07:23 AM
Anyone know what kind of plane that is? I think its a Piper Twin Comanche... but I'm not sure |
|
TheChad40
Male, 18-29, Canada
16 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 7:04:57 AM
K first of all, leerjetguy is an idiot. you can see in the left side of the screen the windsock, he's definitely landing into the wind. Also power off approaches do not mean poor planning. In this case you can see the hill at the approach end he had to clear first, which means power off is his only choice. Leerjet guy stop trying to look smart, you just end up looking like an idiot. that said he did come in too fast and should have gone around. 2100 ft is a short runway for an airplane like that but can be done. I've taken a twin similiar to that into a 2200 ft turf strip before... its short! FYI, I'm a 700 hr commercial pilot |
|
 Link_Hiei
Male, 18-29, Eastern US
2210 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 6:06:44 AM
Well that kinda......blows. LOL |
|
cman7721
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
329 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:13:22 AM
oh and leerjetguy, nobody here is impressed with your knowledge. save it for aviation class. i want to major in aviation and even IM annoyed with you. |
|
cman7721
Male, 18-29, Midwest US
329 Posts
|
Tuesday, June 02, 2009 1:11:21 AM
best commentary for a vid ever.
wow. that kind of...blows.
classic. |
|
 CJ-Boy-2010
Male, 13-17, Eastern US
365 Posts
|
Monday, June 01, 2009 9:04:38 PM
Next time, get a hydroplane. |
|
Page: 1 2 3 Next >
|
|
Back to Listing
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
){kind=avatar}
