|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
Jesus loving christ.loving idiot posted:I was to work two 12 hour shifts only separated by 4 hours and 200 miles This is where things went wrong.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:28
|
|
|
Also his writing style is pretty goddamned  / sperglord. I almost expected a 'm'lady' in there somewhere.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
simble posted:Jesus loving christ. Flying after one 12-hour shift is... questionable. Putting yourself in a situation where you must fly within a specified time window is also a bad idea. Combining the two is a very, very bad idea indeed. I also take it that the parking brake on the aircraft was not applied, which strikes me as a rather considerable oversight, chocked or not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
I don't know if we want to get into this. The NTSB report says the airplane was not airworthy. This seems to be rather dubious to me.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:44
|
|
|
I was going to say hand propping in this situation was a bad idea but realized it was just the last bad decision in a whole sequence of them. Yikes
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:50
|
|
|
Retarded kid brother. Full stop.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 17:59
|
|
|
Captain Apollo posted:Retarded pilot. Full stop. Fixed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:02
|
|
|
Jealous Cow posted:Also his writing style is pretty goddamned He's 54 so he must be a late adopter to the trilby lifestyle. But really I think you're barking up the wrong tree. You should assume that anyone who posts on the AOPA forums is 1) at least 50 2) white 3) male 4) right wing 5) affluent
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:07
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:He's 54 so he must be a late adopter to the trilby lifestyle. But really I think you're barking up the wrong tree. This is the most accurate thing ever posted in this thread.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:He's 54 so he must be a late adopter to the trilby lifestyle. But really I think you're barking up the wrong tree.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2016 20:37
|
|
|
Well, I'm more or less officially a CPL student now. First flight will probably be on Tuesday!
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
Sorry if this is a dumb question but in a situation like this where the NTSB finds the pilot at fault is the pilots license revoked or do they get "points" against it like a drivers licenses?
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
DaRealAce posted:Sorry if this is a dumb question but in a situation like this where the NTSB finds the pilot at fault is the pilots license revoked or do they get "points" against it like a drivers licenses? That's not a dumb question... to be honest, I don't know the answer. Generally, the best practices are "follow the law, or bad things will happen (both to your plane and your license)" so the only testable information I've encountered on the subject relates to the circumstances under which you must report an incident, and how to report an incident. I am 99% sure there is no points system, though -- I'm just not sure what the penalties for a violation resulting in an incident/accident actually are. The flip side of that is that, compared with driving, there are way fewer rules that are created with a huge margin for error. It's possible to be a reasonably safe driver while still speeding moderately, or doing a rolling stop every now and again, even if you really ought not be doing that. If you are breaking laws while flying, you are a danger to yourself and others, full stop, and there needs to be more consequence than getting a few points against your license.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 01:52
|
|
|
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/operations/agc300/reports/certificate_actions/ There's some decent information available about FAA certificate actions. It seems like suspensions are used to punish commercial operators, and revokations are used to keep private pilots out of the sky after particularly dangerous behavior. I'd also suggest reading through NASA ASRS Call Back (https://asrs.arc.nasa.gov) publication. Gives you a feel for the type of incidents that probably would lead to some involvement by the FAA.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 02:06
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Well, I'm more or less officially a CPL student now. First flight will probably be on Tuesday! Canadian right? Do the written yesterday. Its ridiculous the number of students that get burned by that stupid exam. It's not particularly hard, its just a massive time sink that people vastly underestimate. I've personally gotten to the point where I don't even bother doing any real flying towards the license until after that test is done - the CPL maneuvers are easy and don't take a lot of time to master at all, but you can't flight test until after the written is done. I drew a line in the sand after I got the same guy to flight test standard 3 times who kept putting off the stupid CPAER. For that I recommend the pilottraining.ca videos. Spend some quality time with Aaron Doherty (I argue the most hated guy in Canadian Aviation for torturing everyone with his lame dadjokes and tangents) and you won't have any issues.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Desi posted:Canadian right? Do the written yesterday. Its ridiculous the number of students that get burned by that stupid exam. It's not particularly hard, its just a massive time sink that people vastly underestimate. I've personally gotten to the point where I don't even bother doing any real flying towards the license until after that test is done - the CPL maneuvers are easy and don't take a lot of time to master at all, but you can't flight test until after the written is done. I drew a line in the sand after I got the same guy to flight test standard 3 times who kept putting off the stupid CPAER. That's the plan. Calgary Flying Club runs their own ground school very rarely so they recommended pilottraining.ca right off the bat, and I'll certainly be doing it before I'm ready for my flight test -- as I'm not in any rush to actually finish and get a job, I'm expecting my training to take a while, to say the least. Still, traditional "book learning" is something that I'm quite good at -- far more than flying, truth be told, which I only improve at through practice and dedication, not natural skill -- so I'm expecting the ground school and written test to be the least of my worries. I'm so loving excited for Tuesday. I haven't felt this good in 9 years -- financial considerations aside, I think I made a big mistake in not going back and getting my CPL immediately after university like I'd planned before I went to university. I don't know if I've left it too late to make a true career of it, though (I'm 27 now, I think I'd be fighting an uphill battle).
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
DaRealAce posted:Sorry if this is a dumb question but in a situation like this where the NTSB finds the pilot at fault is the pilots license revoked or do they get "points" against it like a drivers licenses? The NTSB findings usually do more to affect safety culture, policy changes, and influence liability legal battles. For pilot certificate action, that falls on the FAA's Flight Standards District Offices (FSDO). The FAA can suspend or revoke airman licenses to their heart's content. A common action taken by FSDO is the assignment of what's called a "709 ride." They require the airman to complete some remedial knowledge testing and fly with a designated examiner to prove they've corrected whatever deficiencies are present. This sort of thing is separate from any NTSB investigation though. You can get tangled up with FSDO without the NTSB having investigated anything and vice versa. For example, maybe someone reported you being a supreme dumbshit in an airplane, but there was never an accident. The NTSB would not get involved. FSDO would deal with you. The Ferret King fucked around with this message at 04:03 on Oct 6, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
DaRealAce posted:Sorry if this is a dumb question but in a situation like this where the NTSB finds the pilot at fault is the pilots license revoked or do they get "points" against it like a drivers licenses? To expand on what Ferret King said, the NTSB actually has zero regulatory or enforcement powers, and NTSB reports have a disclaimer explaining that the agency "does not assign fault or blame for an accident or incident". To make sure the NTSB remains a neutral party, NTSB findings are prohibited from being used in legal cases, which is why you only ever see former NTSB investigators working as consultants or expert witnesses. Since the NTSB is considered to be impartial, they're also responsible for the Administrative Law Judges that act as the "court of appeals" for pilots or mechanics the FAA (or Coast Guard) takes administrative action against.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 07:18
|
|
|
azflyboy posted:NTSB findings are prohibited from being used in legal cases, which is why you only ever see former NTSB investigators working as consultants or expert witnesses. Oh, I didn't know that. I figured they'd (the reports) be fair game for civil suits.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 11:24
|
|
|
The rationale behind this is the purpose of the NTSB is to find the cause of incidents in order to prevent more and their findings being inadmissible as a means to assign blame results in a much higher level of cooperation in their investigations.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2016 13:15
|
|
|
Just busted through 1,400 hours and am about 3 weeks to a month away from the ATPL. I have the written exam done, a still valid flight test, and all of the little sub-requirements done. My life consists of eat/sleep/fly these days. This spectacularly '80s video sums up life right now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jK-NcRmVcw
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
The Ferret King posted:Oh, I didn't know that. I figured they'd (the reports) be fair game for civil suits. There was a case in Scotland where they tried to use the UK AAIB report to prosecute (helicopter - pub - Glasgow) - and got told to get stuffed - even by the Procurator Fiscal (think DA). Investigation testimony is given freely (not under oath) and to work out what happened, not to apportion blame. It is enshrined in an international treaty somewhere - and even the politicians gave up trying to change it here.. for now
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2016 01:05
|
|
|
Backstory: I've known this guy for ~4 years. He used to tow banners, among other sleazball flying jobs. Got out after a pair of maintenance-related crashes almost killed him. He's told a story one or thrice about landing on a taxiway, and I always assumed he meant lengthwise... Got this video sent to me by said friend. His story is "~25kt winds at 90° to the runway. Attempts one and two were go-arounds, attempt three almost ended in a ground loop with fabric damage to the left wingtip. I only had a gallon or three left, so I said gently caress it, and called a straight in approach to the ramp on Unicom." Potato video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nn9Ph8h3Jjc
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:13
|
|
|
Well done by your friend. I always ask my students that question, you’re at minimum fuel and you can’t divert, winds are way beyond the xwind component on all runways, what do you do? No one ever says land on the most advantageous taxiway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:18
|
|
|
e.pilot posted:Well done by your friend. I always ask my students that question, you’re at minimum fuel and you can’t divert, winds are way beyond the xwind component on all runways, what do you do? No one ever says land on the most advantageous taxiway. Obviously not Delta material then. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
My instructor also recommends in a total emergency the grass between runways if need be.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Buddy might have written off his T18 today. Had an engine failure out of glding range to the airport and put it in a field. Ending up flipping over on its back but he got out without injury.  406 ELT did it's job so an ambulance were on scene pretty quick. Just got home from picking him up. I'm surprised he was so eager to get back into a plane after that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
Could be shock
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:12
|
|
|
It happened quite a while ago. Hospital took a bunch of x rays and did some blood tests said he was fine. The canopy hoop was slightly crushed so it adsorbed most of the impact.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
That's one way to keep your tires in good shape! Glad he's ok.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
As soon as the engine quits the airplane belongs to the insurance company. Getting out without a scratch pretty damned decent outcome.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 03:40
|
|
|
bunnyofdoom posted:My instructor also recommends in a total emergency the grass between runways if need be. Hit the softest, cheapest thing on the airfield as slowly and gently as possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
Well I had my very first pilot lesson yesterday. That was incredibly exciting. I was surprised at how I didn't feel anything special when we left the ground. It was a beautiful morning for flying, and everything was very smooth. It's so easy to steer! I expected to get a bit freaked out when we tried stalling/recovering, but I guess I was so focused on making sure I was running the plane correctly that I didn't have time to worry. The rudder pedals work the opposite way that I naturally want them to, but that was easy to get used to. We landed in a pretty strong crosswind, which was interesting to experience in such a small plane. Later that day a friend of mine who is also working on his license took the plane out for a night flight and the alternator belt snapped mid flight. I'm just glad that didn't happen on my try.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
Nuggan posted:Well I had my very first pilot lesson yesterday. That was incredibly exciting. Welcome to the addiction. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 18:03
|
|
|
Finally, finally got back up! Clouds were being lovely so we stayed in the circuit instead of doing upper air work. I'm not extremely poo poo at landing and taking off, even after 9 years off. So that was awesome. Definitely a bit of rust but honestly better than I was expecting. M-model 172s blow rear end though. gently caress the MPH airspeed indicator and gently caress the flaps system, especially on soft field touch and gos.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2016 23:04
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Finally, finally got back up! Clouds were being lovely so we stayed in the circuit instead of doing upper air work. I'm not extremely poo poo at landing and taking off, even after 9 years off. So that was awesome. Definitely a bit of rust but honestly better than I was expecting. Hahahahaha yes. Yes indeed on the c172-m
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 02:20
|
|
|
Goddamn, someone please reassure me that real CRJ's fly easier than the sim 
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 02:37
|
|
|
vessbot posted:Goddamn, someone please reassure me that real CRJ's fly easier than the sim They absolutely do. The sim is squirrelly as gently caress, as all sims are so makes sure not to over-control the airplane like you have to do on the sim. It flies very well, just make sure you don't let it get ahead of you, it can be slippery. Do not be afraid or ashamed of using the speedbrake, that thing will be your friend the first year and forever after. The -200 is steady on landing, and lands flat. The -700/900 require more careful flare. In other news, I finished my first 100 hours on the Boeing 767-200/300. It's an awesome airplane. I've been around the world three times in it already, but got a herniated disc (c6/c7) in Germany, so will be out for a while. Hopefully the medical will not be a bitch, I have recovered hugely in just 7 days after surgery. I have to renew it next month so I'm just gonna wait for that to report the surgery and hopefully a neurosurgeon's note saying I am fit for duty. -sorry for my neverending edits- Animal fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Oct 12, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 02:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 15:20 |
|
|
Nuggan posted:The rudder pedals work the opposite way that I naturally want them to, but that was easy to get used to. You have what is colloquially referred to (in Australia at least) as "billy cart feet".
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2016 12:02
|
|
