Or that an auto pilot needs to be engaged and disengaged by an actual in the seat pilot. If that’s not in the POH, it should be.
Play stupid games. Win stupid prizes.
Doug, I seriously disagree with you. Yes, the crashed aircraft didn’t hit anyone or anything. Other than the ground. However, it did have the potential of doing so. A pilot less aircraft with full fuel isn’t something I would want to encounter. Especially If it was headed towards my house.
1 reply
Of course you should do that in all flights conducted by yourselfs.
“However, it did have the potential of doing so.”
Any aircraft has the potential of doing so.
“A pilot less aircraft with full fuel isn’t something I would want to encounter.”
Wait until you hear about these new fangled things they call “drones” and “UAVs”. It’s gonna knock your socks off.
Huh?
Rejected! Airplane falling on the head of farmer out walking his fields is harmful to others.
Yah, the world is full of Darwin Candidates, remember the Evil person who jumped motorcycles over busses, and recently many cases of people falling over cliffs trying to take a photo of themselves.
1 reply
But that is their hobby. Obviously, you must be from the other side.
I’d prefer people like our little Dougie to wear straightjackets. A helmet provides the wearer protection, where as a straightjacket protects everyone around the wearer.
And the NTSB report was way too long. It should have said the cause of the accident was, “STUPIDITY”!
I presume since the accident involved “substantial damage” to the aircraft, they were required to investigate the crash. And it wouldn’t surprise me that if they took any shortcuts on it, some politician down the line with an axe to grind would twist it against them (and it wouldn’t be without precedent).
Not investigating this disapproved stunt and proceeding anyway because of Red Bull promoting it, one of the two pilots knew the stunt was disapproved, the public fully engaged would have presented the FAA as looking the other way with repercussions from the aviation community. This goes along with the previous stunt of bailing out from an airplane with parachute to garner YouTube fame. All three pilots deserved their flying privileges revoked.
Isn’t the cornerstone of conservatism that you face consequences for breaking the rules? That’s the standard that conservatives apply to nearly everything else! Yet here we have two pilots knowingly and purposely broke the rules and are facing ordinary consequences.
I guess your point is that if you personally disagree with a rule it’s ok to break it.
1 reply
Agreed. That’s what Discovery Channel did.
It’s on thing to argue that FAA should have granted a permit to do the stunt. I think they should have!
But that’s different than saying it’s OK to do the stunt anyway even after the FAA said no.
I also disagree, but only because your a utterly wrong with the “no danger to anyone” line.
“ Rejected! Airplane falling on the head of farmer out walking his fields is harmful to others.”
Tell me about it!
2 replies
Who but an outrageously high dollar corporation would already have a live stream HULU show scheduled without even getting the permission first. “Cart before the horse”. It may have taken some time but I believe they could have done it correctly and through the proper channels. But “Red Bull” has “ball$” and money so up your FAA.
1 reply
Tickets yanked. Good for FAA. Intolerable stupidity. They should also go after Red Bull too.
Wrecking a nice C182. smh.
That’s the meme of neo-Marxists not Conservatives.
Riiight!
What’s the difference to the farmer on the ground, if this was a “regular” flight or a “stunt”?
Answer 'Robert O’s feeble attempt at rebuttal o me:
Cause of the Cessna jet crash was pilot not proficient with the airplane and/or flew with high risk medical conditions. IOW poor judgement by pilot but we assume he was on a worthwhile trip.
OTOH, mebbe the Cessna piston fool could claim he was doing research - which failed.
1 reply
Seems some right-wing commenters are just lashing out like the misguide Canadian trucker’s convoy which hurt freedom by initiating force against innocents, giving cover to terrorist wannabes, and giving a shallow pandering politician an excuse to copy his daddy and restrict freedom without necessity.
(In the convoy blocking border crossing in southern AB were armed persons intending to kill police.
PM ‘jefe’ Trudeau Jr. invoked an Emergencies act then lied that police wanted it, just like his father invoked an earlier act against a small bunch of tinpot terrorists. Marxists all.)
Yup that’s their game.
There’s enough problem with fool pilots on useful missions.
USMC MV-22 crashed in Norway because pilot went too low with excessive bank angles, in maneuvers not in the training plan.
A retail body-worn video camera was found in the wreckage.
How would it have glided any significant distance? A speed brake was installed (and tested) so that the plane would dive pretty much straight down…and that’s approximately what happened.
“ – Cessna didn’t hit anyone.
– Cessna flight was doing something useful.”
Which “Cessna” are you referring to?
Hard to tell because neither cessna hit anyone. Usefulness here, is subjective; the end result was the same for both aircraft, both left smoking holes.
Which of these aircraft were of a greater concern for the farmer on the ground?
I would submit, that one flight was more proactive and had at least a modicum of a plan in place for the safety of those on the ground.
Which flight should we be more concerned with? The one with so-called “potential” loss of life or, the one that actually caused the loss of a life? I say “so-called” potential here because every flight has the potential for harm. The unique measurement here, is that we know which flight caused the most harm.
Throughout History …. Conservatives have ALWAYS been on the wrong side of History.
Perhaps you’ve not heard of the recent increase in popularity of outback exploring and 4-wheeling, not to mention the spate of wildfires during a western drought.
If it appropriately addressed the public safety then FAA would have had a difficult time denying the permission. Doh.
Red Bull was not suggesting they were doing a regulated “test crash” with appropriate fire/rescue personnel and safety measures in-place. They also were not performing this stunt in an approved restricted area. Stupid is as stupid does.