Someone has some explaining to do!

[Avaiojet]

More recent news:The Northwest Regional Airport (52F) Property Owner's Association has tried on several occasions to buy the land associated with the private roadway. The owner doesn't want to sell.The student pilot has said he will not continue to pursue his license. That is too bad.Nothing is posted yet on the FAA and NTSB web sites. This stuff usually takes awhile.

The student pilot has said he will not continue to pursue his license. That is too bad.

Bob,

With all due respect, why is it to bad?

Just about anyone can be a pilot, but not all individuals have the makings of being a "good" pilot.
Anyone involved in GA knows quite clearly that some life styles don't work well with being a private pilot.

Wanting to be "Indiana Jones," or just a mid crisis whim, is no reason to start pursuing a privite pilots license. I've seen this plenty of times, those that want to be a pilot but don't have their head on straight.

My guess is this student pilot made the best decision for himself, based on his needs and his life style, not to mention, but I will, his family.

Piloting an airplane isn't for everyone, he's probably better off not being a pilot, there are risks. Well, at least he has that video to remind him of his efforts.

Does he build model airplanes? That's something to fall back on.

Doesn't take much to make you think twice.

Charles

[GonzoBonzo]

It was on too shallow of an angle and 400 feet BEFORE the beginning of the landing zone area.

Thanks Steven! 

 Everyone else is dismissing this.   My question would be, how far back from the threshold would the pilot, (who has been trained, and knows its against regulations to land his plane before), still have the "rightaway"?   I guess we add a week to drivers ed. to teach drivers about patterns, and approaches.


The first picture shows the displaced threshold, the second picture shows the "stop sign".  Once you bring the picture up, click on it again to zoom in.

Gonzo

[Bob Heywood]

Bob,

With all due respect, why is it to bad?

Just about anyone can be a pilot, but not all individuals have the makings of being a "good" pilot.
Anyone involved in GA knows quite clearly that some life styles don't work well with being a private pilot.

Wanting to be "Indiana Jones," or just a mid crisis whim, is no reason to start pursuing a privite pilots license. I've seen this plenty of times, those that want to be a pilot but don't have their head on straight.

My guess is this student pilot made the best decision for himself, based on his needs and his life style, not to mention, but I will, his family.

Piloting an airplane isn't for everyone, he's probably better off not being a pilot, there are risks. Well, at least he has that video to remind him of his efforts.

Does he build model airplanes? That's something to fall back on.

Doesn't take much to make you think twice.

Charles

I think it's too bad because we have a person with an interest in aviation who was turning a dream into a reality. The only thing I know about him is his name. None of us has the right to judge his motivation. None of us has the right to judge anything about him. His dream was shattered. Aviation is a great adventure. That's why it's so sad.

My take on this ~ I'm with Dan. We have a ground vehicle crossing an active runway approach. A plane was on final. I don't care if it was the crappiest approach ever. I don't care if the pilot was going to land short of the displaced threshold. He was still a landing aircraft. The SUV driver violated the aircraft's right-of-way.

[Bob Heywood]

Thanks Steven!  

 Everyone else is dismissing this.   My question would be, how far back from the threshold would the pilot, (who has been trained, and knows its against regulations to land his plane before), still have the "rightaway"?   I guess we add a week to drivers ed. to teach drivers about patterns, and approaches.


The first picture shows the displaced threshold, the second picture shows the "stop sign".  Once you bring the picture up, click on it again to zoom in.

Gonzo

All is not what it seems. The following was taken from an interview with the airport manager after the incident.

A Google Maps aerial photograph of the runway taken several years ago shows an arrow designating where planes can land moved away from the north end of the runway.

Today, the arrow is at the edge of the landing strip.

The airport's owner said the marker was first moved because of a dangerous fence made of railroad ties located just beyond the end of the runway. When the airport installed a breakaway plastic fence, the landing marker was moved back.

"It wouldn't make any difference," Hyde said. "The pilots would have the option to come in and make short field landings."

[GonzoBonzo]

Thanks Bob,  I digress. 

[steven yampolsky]

The airport's owner said the marker was first moved because of a dangerous fence made of railroad ties located just beyond the end of the runway. When the airport installed a breakaway plastic fence, the landing marker was moved back.

I checked the FAA data for the airport: the threshold is there. google maps is not the official record, FAA is. Any changes require FAA approval.

[GonzoBonzo]

...this will get interesting.

[Wade Bognuda]

The bus arrived at Flying Baron Estates in Leesburg at about 8:00 a.m. on the 19th and parked approximately 90 yards away from the landing strip and approximately 15 yards in front of the house that would later serve as the accident site. On the bus were: Ozzy Osbourne, Sharon Arden, Rudy Sarzo, Tommy Aldrige, Don Airey, Wanda Aycock, Andrew Aycock, Rachel Youngblood, Randy Rhoads and the bands tour manager. Andrew Aycock and his ex-wife, Wanda, went into Jerry Calhoun’s house to make some coffee while some members of Ozzy Osbourne’s band slept in the bus and others got out and "stretched". Being stored inside of the aircraft hanger at Flying Baron Estates, was a red and white 1955 Beechcraft Bonanza F-35 (registration #: N567LT) that belonged to Mike Partin of Kissimmee, Florida. Andrew Aycock, who had driven the groups bus all night from Knoxville and who had a pilots license, apparently took the plane without permission and took keyboardist Don Airey and the bands tour manager up in the plane for a few minutes, at times flying low to the ground. Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, Andrew Aycock’s medical certificate (3rd class) had expired, thus making his pilots license not valid. Approximately 9:00 a.m. on the morning of March 19th, Andrew Aycock took Rachel Youngblood and Randy Rhoads up for a few minutes. During this trip the plane began to fly low to the ground, at times below tree level, and "buzzed" the bands tour bus three times. On the fourth pass (banking to the left in a south-west direction) the planes left wing struck the left side of the bands tour bus (parked facing east) puncturing it in two places approximately half way down on the right side of the bus. The plane, with the exception of the left wing, was thrown over the bus, hit a nearby pine tree, severing it approximately 10 feet up from the bottom, before it crashed into the garage on the west side of the home owned by Jerry Calhoun. The plane was an estimated 10 feet off the ground traveling at approximately 120 - 150 knots during impact. The house was almost immediately engulfed in flames and destroyed by the crash and ensuing fire, as was the garage (pictured) and the two vehicles inside, an Oldsmobile and a Ford Granada. Jesse Herndon, who was inside the house during the impact, escaped with no injuries. The largest piece of the plane that was left was a wing section about 6 to 7 feet long. The very wing that caught the side of the tour bus, was deposited just to the north of the bus. The severed pine tree stood between the bus and the house. Ozzy Osbourne, Tommy Aldrige, Rudy Sarzo and Sharon Arden, who were all asleep on the bus, were awoken by the planes impact and (at first) thought they had been involved in a traffic accident. Wanda Aycock had returned to the bus while keyboardist Don Airey stood outside and witnesses the accident, as did Marylee Morrison, who was riding her horse within sight of the estate. Two men, at the west end of the runway, witnessed the plane "buzzing" the area when the plane suddenly "went out of sight" as it crashed. Once outside of the bus the band members learned of the catastrophic event that had just taken place. The bus was moved approximately 300 feet to the east of the house that was engulfed in flames. The band checked into the Hilco Inn in Leesburg where they mourned the death of Randy and Rachel and would wait for family members to arrive. While Orlando’s "Rock Super Bowl XIV", scheduled for later that day, was not canceled, the Ozzy Osbourne band would not play and the promoters offered refunds to all ticket holder







That's what really happened.

[Wade Bognuda]

Sadly it was an incident such as this that took the great Randy Rhodes...
(Although there were drugs, alcohol and rock and roll involved in that one)

As I said, Bulls**t. These two accident sequences had NOTHING in common.

[Frank Sheridan]

   I took my first flying lesson at McFillen Air Park in Lake Charles (probably gone now) and we had two things to worry about on approach - 100 foot tall pine trees on one side of the runway and a road that crossed the north end of the runway just like the one in the video. My instructor used to tell me not to worry about the trees.
  
   I watched the student's approach in the video and the first thing I noticed was that it looked like he wasn't going to clear that little bitty fence. He was dragging that 172 over the numbers - and any instructor worth his salt will tell you not to do that unless you are dead stick and have no alternative.

   I don't think I could pass  the medical now, and I haven't flown in maybe twenty years, but watching the video made me want to get an instructor and stuff my fat backside into a 172 and go shoot some touch and goes.
  

[Dan McEntee]

Thanks Steven! 

 Everyone else is dismissing this.   My question would be, how far back from the threshold would the pilot, (who has been trained, and knows its against regulations to land his plane before), still have the "rightaway"?   I guess we add a week to drivers ed. to teach drivers about patterns, and approaches.


The first picture shows the displaced threshold, the second picture shows the "stop sign".  Once you bring the picture up, click on it again to zoom in.

Gonzo

     Hey Gonzo;
    I feel that the location of the displaced threshold isn't relevant to who is at fault for the collision. We really don't know for sure that he could not have made it to that point, because there was a black SUV in his path and he hit it and that interrupted his flight and caused it to terminate flight and crash. The cause of the collision can't be based on where the airplane would have ended up if the collision had not occurred. Lots of potential possibilities if he doesn't hit the SUV. The last second settling of the airplane could have been from the pilot pulling back in a last second reaction to finally seeing the SUV. Before that point, I don't think he could see it or he would have avoided it even at his lower skill level. He was making his first solo landing and his focus was straight ahead, I'm guessing, and at his altitude and the SUV below him and to his right was not visible from his position in the left seat, which is pretty low below the top of the dashboard. If he sees it at the last second, his reaction might be to pull back or turn the wheel to the left. Since he was an adult and probably operates a car, turning left might have been a natural knee jerk reaction and I think you can get the picture of what would have happened there at that altitude and airspeed. All we see is the plane settle a bit and the left wing drop a bit. At that point he's hitting ground effect, and if he didn't hit an SUV he probably would have been able to make an acceptable landing or even put power back up and go around. If he landed before the displaced threshold, there wouldn't have been any repercussions other than a warning about it from his CFI, correct? I mean, that is why that area is there as a buffer for approaches that come up a bit short for what ever reason? I think it's a shame that he gave it up, because he probably had to work hard and save the money to do it as far as he got, and even with the crash he should finish it, whether he gets his ticket or not. Think of the confidence builder it would be if he got back on the horse and mastered it. Not just in the cockpit but in life in general.

    But the long and short of it is, in my opinion, the pilot was where he was supposed to be and had the more difficult task to perform, and had the right of way at that point. Whether he was too low doesn't matter because if he doesn't hit the SUV, he still has options. It's not a matter of how good or bad a pilot he was, the collision could have been avoided if the driver of the SUV wasn't as bad a driver as HE was!! If the SUV isn't there, there may or may NOT have been a single plane crash landing. In my opinion

   Sorry for the lack of paragraphs Mr. Reeves! The nuns would be whacking my knuckles with a ruler right now!!!
 
     STOP STEALING MY SIGN OFF PHRASE CHUCK!!  Show some originality!

   Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee
    

[Avaiojet]

 

STOP STEALING MY SIGN OFF PHRASE CHUCK!!    Show some originality!

Dan,

Sorry about that, it is a good sign off.

Think anybody reads those things?

Charles

[Zuriel Armstrong]

I've been reading this post with interest and debated on replying.  Every day "WE" do things as normal and seem to get by with it.  In the video, remove the car or the plane...no story.  One thing changed in the routine for both of them and now it is a problem.  We are taught how to drive, perform VFR patterns, etc, yet "WE" tend to lean toward accepted practices and it becomes the norm.

Just this week on Wednesday I was sitting at a local airport eating lunch and passing the time.  I watched a P210 back-taxiing for takeoff.  The airport is in Central Arkansas and is in the middle of the rapidly growing town on I-40.  To my amazement, I watched as he stopped at the displaced threshold and performed a 180 to begin his takeoff roll.  All was normal until the gear completed retracting, then the engine failed.  He had left 1643 ft of runway behind him at takeoff and had no altitude or options.

The point is, we are typically taught the correct way to do things and usually find out the hard way why it was taught that way in the first place.

[Mike Scholtes]

This story may have been beat to death, but one thing that occurs to me is that if this truly was the pilot's first solo and his first solo landing, the plane would have been about 200 pounds lighter than he was used to, since the instructor was not on board. The glide and descent path would be different and the float once in ground effect more pronounced, so his instructor may have told him to aim shorter than usual. This must be a decently long runway since there is a DC-3 in one of the pictures that presumably operates out of this field.

I would give the student pilot the benefit of the doubt on this. His attention would be focused ahead, not off to the right (blind) side of the aircraft where the car approached from, while the opposite was true of the car driver. My home field in California has not only a road at the approach end, but the road is on a levee that keeps the Bay at bay. More than one set of landing gear has been left behind over the years.

[Brett Buck]

This story may have been beat to death, but one thing that occurs to me is that if this truly was the pilot's first solo and his first solo landing, the plane would have been about 200 pounds lighter than he was used to, since the instructor was not on board. The glide and descent path would be different and the float once in ground effect more pronounced, so his instructor may have told him to aim shorter than usual. This must be a decently long runway since there is a DC-3 in one of the pictures that presumably operates out of this field.

    Something like that happened to me. My 275+ lb flight instructor got out, and off I went in my 150. Took off like I was shot out of a cannon, got to pattern altitude about the end of the runway, then on landing lined up on what I expected to be the numbers, but floated about halfway down what is now 30R at San Jose international.

   BTW, I know it's a lot cause, but Charles - there is nothing at all wrong with landing without the flaps deployed in a 172, in fact it probably gets done that way more than with flaps since they are generally unnecessary.

    Brett

[Dan McEntee]

  Exactly correct Mike. We can nit pick the approach and landing all we want, but we have to stop at the point of impact. The camera angle and depth of field and such photographic distorts our depth perception and makes some assessments of speed and altitude difficult. We don't know what is going on in the cock pit. He VERY well could have made the threshold as it has already been stated by someone here familiar with the airplane that a 172 on a flapless approach can float in ground effect for a long way. But it can't be determined since the flight was terminated at the black SUV, while he was still airborne. So responsibility for the accident should end there and not include what "might have been" beyond that point. Since the whole incident took place on private property, local law enforcement might not have been involved in any investigation, and it will be interesting how far the FAA takes it. It will probably end up in court on who pays damage and that may depend on who has the best lawyers. But in the end, I think the guy in the SUV will get the tab.
   It would hurt the pilots chances if the judge is an aviation enthusiast!
  
    Type at you later,
   Dan McEntee

[Avaiojet]

BTW, I know it's a lot cause, but Charles - there is nothing at all wrong with landing without the flaps deployed in a 172, in fact it probably gets done that way more than with flaps since they are generally unnecessary. Brett

Brett,

You must still be a student pilot or you didn't pursue piloting for any long period of time? I do know you never owned an aircraft.

Because if you did, you would know that landing without flaps creates unnecessary wear on the tires. Also unnecessary stress on the aircraft. Your goal, as a good pilot, is to land the aircraft as slowly and as gentle as possible. Flaps are needed to accomplish this.

With this kind of flying, you also try to assure that passengers are comfortable at all times. Not every passenger is into flying or aviation as a kick or thrill, many are nervous and some may be in an airplane, your airplane, for the first time.

FYI. Airframes do get "loose" just from normal use and foolish abuse over a period of time. You can see this in older aircraft with high hours.

I have many hours in floatpanes and seaplanes. I've owned Lake aircraft. The gear struts are excessively long because the wing is shoulder mounted on the aircraft. Now why would anyone, who has knowledge of the way this aircraft operates, elect to not use flaps on landing?

The same relates to the takeoff. Why keep the aircraft accelerating, on the runway, longer than necessary? Or operate it faster than needed to get the thing into the air without flaps?

Aircraft, 152 or 172, name others, aren't just for training. They are used for transportation from point A to point B. Maintaining them correctly is as important as operating them correctly. Why beat them up?

Thinking small?

 Piloting an aircraft with friends as passengers is not play time. Foolish pilots kill themselves all the time, but when they take the innocent to death with them, that's the crime.

I said not everyone has the right mindset to become a private pilot.

Now do this commercially. The required pilot ability and knowledge is above that of a private pilot.

Now add commercial seaplane. There's not many pilots with that ticket. Possibly only 600 or so in the Country.

Lake flying, island flying, mountain flying, low altitude flying, bush flying, IFR flying, night vs. day, cross country, etc., etc.

I'm not saying it gets complicated because you do have to go through a training process and learn the skills required for all this stuff, but, not everyone takes GA this far? But when you do, you generally know stuff. Or you should?  There's no point in myself taking this any further. Mature thinking is killing me. 

Charles
 
 

[Wade Bognuda]

So, tell us about ag flying.

[Trostle]

Brett,

Thinking small?

I'm not saying it gets complicated because you do have to go through a training process and learn the skills required for all this stuff, but, not everyone takes GA this far? But when you do, you generally know stuff. Or you should?  There's no point in myself taking this any further. Mature thinking is killing me. 

Charles
 

Hey Charles,

Yes, you think you know a lot.  You even bring a number of subjects into this discussion that have no bearing on this thread just to show you know a lot.  That is not too impressive.  Here is another thing you can learn to add to your vast store of knowledge:  Brett Buck knows a lot of "stuff" as you put it.  For you to lecture Brett borders on the ridiculous if not asinine.

Keith








b

[Wade Bognuda]

Hey Charles,

Yes, you think you know a lot.  You even bring a number of subjects into this discussion that have no bearing on this thread just to show you know a lot.  That is not too impressive.  Here is another thing you can learn to add to your vast store of knowledge:  Brett Buck knows a lot of "stuff" as you put it.  For you to lecture Brett borders on the ridiculous if not asinine.

Keith






That was funny !!!!!








b

[Wade Bognuda]

Charles, tell us about flying off a carriers, or how about getting a ground level waiver. Inquiring minds want to know.........

[Dan McEntee]

   He's not even current on a control line model!

[Wade Bognuda]

LOL!!!!

[Avaiojet]

   He's not even current on a control line model!

Dan,

You certanly aren't clairvoyant, or you would know I've been flying this beat up Magician which I purchased at a yard sale some time ago.

I posted this.

You read every word in all my posts, how did you miss that?   

It has a McCoy red head in it. The engine has an offset plug, if that means anything?

Yeah, the model is a mess. 

 It's heavy and the covering is really loose in places, but it runs and barely flies. It's still fun because it's all I have right now.

At the yard sale, they said the model was from Pennsylvania. So someone built and flew the thing, for years by the looks of it.

I could take photos, may bring back memories for someone?

BTW. Everything I offered about GA "is related." Some of it are comments and information related to replies that make absolutely no since at all.

BTW. Did you know that you can become a pilot at any age as long as you can pass the physical?

You're a great bunch of guys, but please stop egging me on, I'm done! 

Charles

[GonzoBonzo]

I wish we still had those Av gas prices. 

[Trostle]

Dan,

I posted this.

BTW. Everything I offered about GA "is related." Some of it are comments and information related to replies that make absolutely no since at all.

You're a great bunch of guys, but please stop egging me on, I'm done! 

Charles

Charles,

Until you better understand the English language, you might learn to make more "sense" than "since".

What a relief it is to know that you are "done".  However, I will miss the comic relief.

Too bad that you will probably not be able to erase all of this thread.

Keith

[RandySmith]

I wish we still had those Av gas prices.  

Yeah  me too !   this thread has taken a sad turn  with it turning into a bashing session of the student pilot. He really was not at fault , all of this maybe could have been avoided...? yes  but  it wasn't, Fact is it happened, and the parties must deal with. I too personally think the SUV will be found at fault, but it really does not matter. sometime stuff just happens

Randy

PS by the way I have flown for many decades and have owned 5 172s  and a host of other planes, I too have landed in cooler months without flaps, or with only the first notch of flaps, which he may have had, I don't think you can tell from this video.
The planes will float down the runways many times in cool weather with less fuel and only 1 person in it.
I have gone down almost 1/2 of the runway before in ground effects before the plane settled to the ground

[Brett Buck]

Brett,

You must still be a student pilot or you didn't pursue piloting for any long period of time? I do know you never owned an aircraft.

Because if you did, you would know that landing without flaps creates unnecessary wear on the tires. Also unnecessary stress on the aircraft. Your goal, as a good pilot, is to land the aircraft as slowly and as gentle as possible. Flaps are needed to accomplish this.

     I owned two aircraft, a 150 and a 172. Our maintenance bills were no different from anyone else's. You can land either aircraft as softly as you want either way, although generally landing with flaps tended to lead to a little bit more "flop down" because you are approaching at a much higher angle. But if you do it right it's a grease job in either case.

    The rest of your lecture is equally at odds with reality.  You know nothing about this topic, which so far appears to be par for the course. You would be well-served to sit back quietly and learn, but as a malignant narcissist, this would not serve your craving for attention.

  BTW, I didn't get a chance to thank you for deleting the other thread, wherein I offered useful assistance that you apparently took to heart. I did it for other people, of course, not for your benefit. But we couldn't have anything that interferes with your "oh look, all these bad internet people are picking on me for no reason" approach.

   So here you go, another innocent thread turned into an "Avaiojet" narcissist's dream. And you are working the system like a master, just skirting the edge of getting tossed, and then getting some cover (in the form of locked or deleted threads) when it goes off the rails for you. Well done.

     Brett

[Avaiojet]

Brett,

Yes, you are correct! The Thread has gone in a different direction.

However, I'm pleased to advised it's really not my fault.

You see, I went back and read each and every one of my posts or replies.

Doing this again, I noticed that not once did I blame that pilot for this incident. I did point out some of the bad decisions he made, as anyone would have done with a background in GA, but didn't point the blame.

Now, what's interesting about these bad decisions, is, it doesn't necessarily make him at fault. I also said that the FAA will determine who is at fault and most likely list his errors and bad decissions.

I also never said the driver was at fault. Soccer Mom on the cell phone?

Now that puts me in a pretty neutrul position.

Not a bad place to be.

So, why are you blaming me for where the Thread went?

It's clear why the Thread went sideways and I had nothing to do with it.

I did make a comment about you "never owning" an airplane.  I guess I was wrong based on what you said? So, sorry about that.

I will defend my comments on the use of flaps.

Flaps can be your friend.

Brett, here's a question. Better glide rate, with or without flaps?

Another. Seaplane or floatplane landing, flaps or no flaps? Glassy water landing, flaps or no flaps?

No Google allowed!

Brett, we can be friends.

Charles

[Dan McEntee]

    The better glide is without flaps. You need to define what you are talking about, a better glide or a controlled decent. There is a difference. The glide ratio decreases significantly with each increase flap angle and drag increases. That's why gliders and sailplanes don't have flaps and use lift spoiler to help control their decent. You don't want anything that can rob you of precious airspeed. That's why powered aircraft have throttles so you can increase power to overcome the excess drag of the flaps, and pitch trim to to over come the nose up tendency that flaps induce. The balance of those three is what you control your decent with. If you need a steeper angle of decent, you control the airspeed of the airplane and the angle of decent with these also. Critical airspeed changes with this balance and all three are determined in real time for each approach and atmospheric conditions. So what are you talking about?

  I won't be typing at you later,
     Dan McEntee

[Brett Buck]

Brett, here's a question. Better glide rate, with or without flaps?

Another. Seaplane or floatplane landing, flaps or no flaps? Glassy water landing, flaps or no flaps?

No Google allowed!

Brett, we can be friends.

    Perhaps. But only after you get the psychiatric help you so desperately need. I am not kidding, I am not trying to insult you, I am trying to provide advice that you can take advantage of. If you are this tiresome and annoying here, how must you be in real life?

    If it's all an act, I doff my cap to you.

    I don't know what you think you are accomplishing here, but it's not making friends.

    Brett

   

[Bob Whitely]

Oh Man, Dan and Brett really  screwed things up!  I getting all set to
learn about perfect carrier traps, sailplane record distance attempts
and any number of esoteric adventures from Chucky. Since I only have
a private, commercial, multi-engine, instrument and glider licenses
I feel so left out when hearing from such an experienced aviator.
C'mon, Really??? RJ

[Chris Wilson]

.......asinine.

Is that a wave form made by a donkey?

[Dan McEntee]

  Sorry RJ

[Marvin Denny]

Is that a wave form made by a donkey?

   I widh you guys had not even MENTIONED thast word "asinine".  That lonely word caused me more marital headache than anything else in my 60 years of wedded bliss.

  OUCH  Bad memories for sure.

  Bigiron

[Dan McEntee]

  Sorry Marvin
    HOW YOU BEEN MAN! Haven't seen you for a while, but then I haven't been gettin' out on the contest circuit like I used to. Hope to fix that next year.
     Dan McEntee

[Mike Scholtes]

What I want to know is how there was room for anyone else in a 150 in addition to a 275-pound instructor!

And, nobody has noted yet that there are plenty of aircraft that don't HAVE landing flaps, like the T-Craft I learned to fly in, the Super Decathlon that came next, or the Pitts S2. All these can be made to touch down with hardly any sense of impact. Particularly after mastering the wheel landing technique.

[Avaiojet]

What I want to know is how there was room for anyone else in a 150 in addition to a 275-pound instructor!

And, nobody has noted yet that there are plenty of aircraft that don't HAVE landing flaps, like the T-Craft I learned to fly in, the Super Decathlon that came next, or the Pitts S2. All these can be made to touch down with hardly any sense of impact. Particularly after mastering the wheel landing technique.

Mike,

We all know you can land an aircraft without flaps and in the training process this is repeated many times. Take off without them also!

I know the T-Craft well actually, nice airplane. Did you know some had flaps!

Guys try to add flaps to them. I have no idea why!   

Charles

[mike londke]

Darwin Wins! The gene pool needs a little thinning out now and then.

[Ted Fancher]

Aviojet,

Thought it might be of value to share the following with you and those who've fallen prey to your self proclaimed aeronautical expertise.  Although I wasn't able to preserve the formatting what follows was lifted directly from C-172 POHs (Pilot Operating Handbooks) readily available via an internet search.  I've highlighted in red the comments I find most pertinent to correcting your oft repeated assertions of (flawed) aeronautical wisdom.

If you're unfamiliar with the word "normal" as used in the excerpts I'd suggest you google the definition of same or I would be happy to do so for you if it is too painful for you to do for yourself.

With regards to your great concern for unacceptable wear and tear on the airframe I direct your attention to the vast increase in approach airspeed you feel makes it not only unwise but literally unforgivable for a pilot to fly an approach and landing in a C-172 with zero vice full flaps.  A full 5MPH increase in POH recommended approach speeds.  I can sure see how that would tear an airplane up in short order.


 
 LANDING
Normal landings are made power off with any flap setting. Slips are prohibited in full flap approaches because of a downward pitch encountered under certain combinations of airspeed and sideslip angle. Approach glides are normally made at 70-80 m.p.h. with flaps up, or 65-75 with flaps down, depending upon the turbulence of the air. The elevator trim tab is normally adjusted in the glide to relieve elevator control forces.

Landings are usually made on the main landing wheels to reduce the landing speed and the subsequent need for braking in the landing roll. The nose wheel is lowered gently to the runway after the speed is diminished to avoid unnecessary nose gear strain. This procedure is especially important in rough field landings.
Heavy braking in the landing roll is not recommended because of the probability of skidding the main wheels with the resulting loss of braking effectiveness and damage to the tires.

Normal Landing (0° Flaps)   1.) 70-80 MPH final approach
Normal Landing (40° Flaps)   1.) 65-75 MPH final approach
Short-Field Landing (40° Flaps)   1.) 70 MPH final approach speed
Soft-Field Landing (40° Flaps)1.) 70 MPH final approach speed
 

Ted Fancher

[Douglas Ames]

<snip> What I want to know is how there was room for anyone else in a 150 in addition to a 275-pound instructor!

I can relate to that. When I got my check ride in 1983 in a 150M, My FAA Examiner was 250+. I was 6'2" and a skinny 175 lbs. I ripped up a good chart when he made me plot a new course - E6B, colored pencil and all that... No room to work!

[steven yampolsky]

70-80 MPH final approach

You can tell an "oldtimer" by the fact that they still use MPH. My 172 POH and the checklist are both in knots.

[Mike Keville]

Ref. Reply #89, above:

Now I suppose "someone" will attempt to contradict a multi-thousand-hour retired UAL Captain who has experience in everything from ragwing taildraggers to 747-400s on International runs.  If so, THAT will be interesting reading.   

[Bob Whitely]

What Douglas said.  I also had a 250# instructor and when I figured out
the weight and balance, also a C150, he just said to use 175# for him and
off we went. Worked out ok as we were able to use the aircraft again!! RJ

[RandySmith]

What Douglas said.  I also had a 250# instructor and when I figured out
the weight and balance, also a C150, he just said to use 175# for him and
off we went. Worked out ok as we were able to use the aircraft again!! RJ

LOL yea  I had the same experience in a 150 ND 152, when I showed him the overweight condition he said re-figure for 170...  I told him I am glad he was the  PIC...
:-)

Randy

[Wade Bognuda]

Commercial ride 300+ lb. examiner, me 245 lbs. W&B @ 170 each W&B provided courtesy of the ratings mill the examiner owned.

[Brett Buck]

What I want to know is how there was room for anyone else in a 150 in addition to a 275-pound instructor!

    It was pretty cozy. The other issue is that the engine was getting very tired, and the 150 is no F-22 at the best of times.

    Brett

[RandySmith]

    It was pretty cozy. The other issue is that the engine was getting very tired, and the 150 is no F-22 at the best of times.

    Brett

WE had a 152 with a Lycoming 320 stuffed in it, boy that one would climb :-)
BUT THE best climbing plane I ever flew was a Cessna TU 206, went up like a rocket....so much better feeling that the high time 150s in the dead of summer.

Randy

[Chuck_Smith]

Bob, that's a fairly common situation at small airports in the midwest and southern states where it's flat. You go as long as you can with the runway, and the road is usually where the property ends.   Of course, the article fails to mention if there was a VASI or displaced threshold. Often there is, so this could be flat-out pilot error.  

'Course, I wasn't there, haven't seen the NTSB report so my conjecture is merely that. I do know that having made thousands of landings at airports like that you do learn to look for cars. Or when you land at St. Maartin Airport you watch out for boats and tall sun-bathers!

I remember when Junior put his P-38 into a U-Haul in Paris, Texas.

[GonzoBonzo]

You can tell an "oldtimer" by the fact that they still use MPH.

Hey Steven,

I think its pretty common now.   The LSA Evektor I fly has an MPH ASI.  Super fun plane.  At 750 lbs, it can get a "little" bumpy in the Texas heat, winds, and thermals though.  I also found out it spins very easily the hard way in pilot training while practicing power on stalls while turning.  I of course went up in the straps, and froze while my brain was processing what just happend.  We got a full rotation before the CFI about put the rudder pedal through the firewall.  Now, I am very happy it happend, and always have that experience in the back of my brain while doing stalls, or any other kind of slow flight.

I do have a whopping, grand total of 1 hr in 172's.  While contemplating working towards my full ticket,  I took advantage of a $100 introductory flight at a school across the runway from ours.  It was a newer model painted like the one in the video.  It too had an MPH ASI.  Fuel injected, so no mixture control.  After flying the Evektor, I found it very stable, and easy to land.  Almost boring.  I thought I was going to have a hernia holding it off the runway landing.  Very stiff controls.  Visibility wasn't the best, face full of instruments.  But the thing I detested the most were the electric flaps.  No "notches".  I had to look at the flap gauge while operating the flaps.  Big distraction while turning base.  This could have played a role in the crash.  The Evektor has the manual, notched parking brake style.   After the flight I decided it wasn't for me.  $40 an hour more renal rate, medical examines, definitely not as fun.  I'm sure the 172 makes for a great cross country plane,  but for me I'll stick to LSA.

Gonzo