Stick A STEM On It - AVweb

I’m all for STEM and inspiring young women. Still, did you look at the itinerary?

9NM9 has a 5000’ elevation, and is likely to be 90 degrees this time of year. I doubt she got much high and hot experience in Belgium, and I have no idea how her microlight will perform in that density altitude.

Nome? Ulaanbataar?

Yeesh.

Reading Mr. Bertorelli’s statement brought back memories for me. I took off from Springfield, Ohio with my wife, a cohort, his wife and child headed to Hanscom in Boston for a meeting. We were flying a Cherokee 6 as well, certainly similar in vintage and performance to JFK, Jr.'s aircraft. I had likely 500+ hours, SEL, MEL, instrument rating and Commercial. I previously owned and flew a PA-34 with boots for 200 hours without issues. I had a significant proportion of my instrument hours flying at night and in the proverbial soup. That does not mean by any stretch of the imagination that I claim to be anywhere experienced like the gentleman earlier posting and having 23,000 hours. I knew the airplane and I was comfortable flying in instrument weather as long as there was not cumulus issues, icing. We were headed into Hanscom it seems about 7-8pm that evening. I know our IFR flight plan put us headed toward the field at 7,000 feet, we were turned right for a downwind and then landed either on runway 5 or 29. We were in clouds with drizzle for most of the flight. There was no turbulence. I utilized the wing leveler and the flight was really rather benign as far as I was concerned. After we landed, we went into the FBO and while waiting for transportation, sat and watched the television on the wall. They were reporting about the fact that JFK’s flight was overdue. I believe later that evening or the next morning we found out that he had crashed. I do not remember anything about the meeting to which we had travelled. I remember and am reminded so clearly of my thoughts and emotions upon learning about this accident that never needed to happen. So sad. I think Mr. Bertorelli’s comments and numerous others, especially the 23,000 hour circumnavigating pilot offer very clear information that should be listened to by all neophyte pilots but even folks like myself. Thank you gentlemen.

Just imagine how history would look different if the blue ‘level’ button with pitch and roll limits and – now – autoland were installed in that Piper.

I was one of the volunteers who helped put “Voyager” around the world in nine days in 1986 from / to Edwards AFB. That endeavor also prepared for over five years and was flown by an eminently qualified pilot with a qualified backup and a bevy of highly qualified volunteers helping back in Voyager Mission Control in Mojave 24/7.

Not widely known, the fete was likely successful because we were able to reliably communicate with the airplane every six hours from mission control (with the help of an unnamed Government entity … long story). In disguised communications, they reported their position and the flight planners communicated back to them their next ‘fly to’ coordinates … taking into account weather and other factors. An early decision to use the favorable winds of a typhoon over the Pacific by Mission weather planners who were able to communicate that critical information made all the difference to a successful completion many days later. Without it, they would not have made it. But that wasn’t the only ‘good luck’ story.

In total, I think there were about 25 people who worked in Voyager Mission Control. I was manning the communications when a frantic message came from Dick that they had nearly lost the airplane west of Africa and he wanted us to “get him out of it.” Days later, the night before the airplane landed at about midnight, we got the message that we had “a glider on our hands.” Looking for favorable winds at a lower altitude offshore Baja, Dick descended not knowing that the mechanical fuel pump on the rear critical engine had failed. The header tank forward of the right side instrument panel was unable to provide fuel in the nose down attitude. Before they went swimming in the Pacific, the front engine was successfully restarted after ‘sleeping’ for about five days. They came minutes away from ditching. Then, engineers told Jeana how to replumb the airplane to get the rear engine restarted. (All fuel lines ran under her rear facing seat)(check it out in the Voyager exhibit at the EAA Museum). Then a decision on shutting down the front engine had to be made … it was kept running but the fuel remaining was unknown at that point due to the winglets being ground off on takeoff. Next morning on a really cold December morning on the dry lakebed, aviation history was made. I often think about how many things HAD to go right in order for that to happen … not the least of which was all the unsung helpers in Mojave.

Now transpose that with what you’re talking about here. While it isn’t an endurance test, nevertheless, SO many things have to go right or tragedy will occur. I’ll keep my fingers crossed.

By the way, the Voyager had only 18 gallons of fuel left when they landed … the typhoon and weather people did their jobs! Only one paid employee ever worked for Voyager; all others were volunteers.

I was a fan of the flight and Dick and Jeana at the time. At least met them and have a signed copy of Voyager on the shelf. Very cool how involved you were Larry with the event! Not jealous at all…

Generally speaking, a few of us here have struggled to explain that, as you describe and the book Voyager does in detail, no amount of planning and ‘luck’ can guarantee success for such huge undertakings, just how it is. But as I recall, another Yeager of a different stripe at the time with a billion hours and binders full of experience snarled something before their attempt like ‘anybody can ride a gas tank around the world’ or some such drivel, and maybe Jeana got some ‘lack of experience’ flak too, I don’t know.

When is there enough ‘preparation, experience, and skill level’ and who determines that and why are legitimate questions, but pointing out knee-jerk reactions of negative assumptions are legitimate, too. All of the highly experienced kings and queens of the sky with bulging logbooks have a unique responsibility, in my view, to check their judgements and assumptions for the upcoming aviators and adventurers, count to ten, and maybe offer more support (as some have done here), than naysaying. There’s so much g%#damn cynicism and lack of respect in today’s world it would be refreshing to at least find more support than protest from like-minded individuals.
Or not. Que sera, sera.

I totally relate with so much of what is being discussed in this STEM labeled adventure. What’s not being recognized here is how far we’ve come in the past 20 years. Zara Rutherford (19 YO) has so much weather and technical information at her finger tips. How many GA round-the-world flights had an internet connection? Weather modeling has come so far over the last decade. Most of us older folks are not capable of believing the models because of a lifetime of poor WX reporting. Maybe this is a STEM project because Zara is never alone up there, she’s connected real-time to all the advancements that have made this endeavor possible. She has never experienced all the Good-Ol’-Days of aviation. The days when our sectional was spread out, visibility declining, turbulence increasing and you can’t hear nothing on the scratchy radio speaker… Dang-it, my fuel gauges are bouncing on empty…Sure miss the Good-Ol’-Days :wink:

Paul Bertorelli’s comment says it all–I’ll nominate him for the “top commentator” award on this thread!

If age IS an issue, why don’t any of the international sanctioning bodies recognize "youngest, or “oldest” or ethnicity for pilot records? Answer: Age, like ethnicity, has nothing to do with it.

It’s not opinion–as those of us “of a certain age” remember of actor Jack Webb’s Detective Joe Friday–it is a laconic “Just the facts, Ma’am.”

I have to second the actual damage to the cause of STEM - as opposed to support. This is a foolhardy effort at a meaningless thing (around the world) the primary purpose of which is to capture publicity. The pilot has to justify it (possibly even to herself) as meaningful so adds the STEM and Gender Flag Waving. I’d have more respect for the effort if she’d just done it for no reason. There is not positive here for either of the “causes” claimed.

That being said, for an 80 hour pilot to attempt this flight VFR - in that aircraft - is nothing short of plain old stupid. Not because she’s female, not because she’s 19; just because it’s bad Aeronautical Decision Making. I consider myself a pretty risk friendly pilot and I’d never have attempted around the world with 80 hours. Heck I wouldn’t feel good about it it 43 years - and many many hours - later.

Success isn’t even an accomplishment in this case. You could stand in the middle of a busy Interstate Highway for 24 hours. You might survive it. But if you do, it’s not an accomplishment; it’s pure dumb luck. Same thing here.

I hope she makes it. I really do.

“I doubt if they promote aviation in any measurable way if they succeed, but they profoundly tarnish it if they don’t.” – PB.

Precisely. There’s your problem! Every one of us is an ‘ambassador’ for GA – good OR bad --every time we fly. When everything goes right … no one notices, it makes no difference and no one is harmed. When it goes bad, it becomes a feature on the nightly news giving GA still another black eye. And if you’re somehow rich, famous, young, old or otherwise out of the ‘ordinary,’ so much for the worse it is for ALL of us (that’s why PB mentioned JFK) and the bad PR lasts for days, or more. Witness Kobe Bryant’s demise just trying to get around LA traffic. Ultimately, the problem then becomes that The Regulators – you know, the people who are here to help us – then decide it’s their duty to protect society from those pesky bug smashers … thereby harming the larger population of pilots with still more Regulations. We DON’T need no mo’ stinkin’ help! Frankly, I’ve had just about enough of their help. At some point, WE have to take on responsibility.

Let’s draw a parallel example with the fight between FAA and those folks down in Kissimmee flying warbirds. It resulted in harm to ALL of us in the form of the LODA thing. Everything was working just fine until … And now the Administrator has the gall to tell us HE can’t use his executive power to fix what they broke faster than four years. Meanwhile – potentially – safety IS compromised for many of us in the process of them punishing ALL of us for standing up to them.

For me, I think about the risk of just losing my airplane – fuhgetabout me – each and every time I depart the surly bonds of earth. I often reject the inclination – usually for winds – because she’s been my companion for 36 years now. At this point, all of my aviating is recreational thereby discretionary. Having already achieved Master Pilot and Mechanic status, my last aviation goal is to become a flying octenagarian. At that point, I might just decide to fly around the world (sic) in a balloon lawn chair disguised as a black triangular UFO with blinking lights. I guess what I’m really saying is that I want to become an “old” pilot and not smash myself being a “bold” pilot. Age, experience, wisdom and a modicum of good luck does that … don’t ya know. Being careful is job #1 for all of us.

If this young gal pulls it off … great. It won’t do squat for STEM but it will give her bragging rights. If – alternately – she becomes a splat on a mountain somewhere … we’re all screwed. Having liberty also means taking on the attendant responsibility to pay attention to subsequent implications . Let’s cut the crap here … she’s doing this for notoriety, not STEM. In the process, she’s displaying her immaturity. Some adult somewhere is financing her attempt, too.

Ya’ll be careful what you ask for … you might just get it.

Larry, If you where tasked to fly an unmanned aircraft around the world, can you do it? Sure you can, easily. Connect an Iridium data link to a three axes autopilot. Data link the engine parameters to Rotax engineering and contract a meteorologist firm. Several cameras. Now, start calling the airports that you are scheduled to land at and set up arraignments. Fuel, Maintenance, contacts and hotel if there’s a human passenger in your aircraft. The biggest challenge is going to be customs and permissions.

The military has been operating drones from thousands of miles away for over a decade. We have certified autopilots that land complex aircraft at a push of a button. We have access to Data and communication over the entire planet earth, the ISS and soon the moon. So I read on AvWeb.

I’m well aware of what the military has and can do. And I’m well aware of what technology could potentially do. What’s that got to do with a 19 year old 80 hour pilot flying an LSA. For that matter, what’s it got to do with my flying MY Cessna? And what does what she’s doing have to do with STEM ?

Or a “Take me to MVY button.”

Just pointing out that Kara may be more a passenger then a pilot. Someone else could be flying that plane around the world. Today anyone can acquire the components necessary to operate an aircraft remotely. Sounds like Science, Technology, Engineering and Math is a very important part of this mission?

Paul,
I have enjoyed (and disagreed on occasion) your articles. This ‘race to the bottom’ is only productive when it is safe. Aviation can be as safe as one makes it. I was taught to think in terms of “when the engine quits” as opposed to “if the engine quits”. Consequently I fly higher (I did all of the nape of the earth flying in the military, while young & much quicker) than many of my contemporaries & sometimes stay on the ground when I perceive the risk to be greater in the air. Thank you for another thoughtful article.

Dale Snodgrass is also an example for STEM. Flying is one of the most serious things you can do and NO ONE can ignore the basics at any time and expect to live.

Being smart or experienced does not matter when you make mistakes.

Watching Zara navigate up the West Coast, scud running into Boeing Field, and the next leg being VFR to Juneau, I share your concern that her lack of instrument ability will, at best, cause her numerous delays. Certainly wish her success. I believe the key to showcasing “STEM” is having the technology and being able to use it. She and her plane do not see capable of this.

Does she now have enough experience?