Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Safety
Don't Everybody Thank Me at Once... >

Don't Everybody Thank Me at Once...


Notices
Safety Accidents, suggestions on improving safety, etc

Don't Everybody Thank Me at Once...

Old 05-08-2020, 11:10 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: ATL FO
Posts: 189
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
And he can afford to fly warbirds which were built with wartime expediency (vs. inherent safety) as the priority.
Flying warbirds has nothing to do with poor airmanship and not following ATC instruction?
JonGoodsell764 is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:50 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TommyDevito's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 235
Default

Originally Posted by JonGoodsell764
You mean aside from crashing onto a golf course, almost hitting an airliner at SNA and now this?
So an engine failure in a single engine antique airplane, due to mechanical failure, is grounds for revocation? Sure about that? I looked all through the 2150.3C and couldn't find that. Also couldn't find it in the regulations (14 CFR and 49USC)

Maybe you could help me out here?

The SNA incident was investigated by the FAA and the appropriate measures were taken IAW the 8900.1 and the 2150.3C. Again, nothing called for revocation in that incident either.
TommyDevito is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 01:01 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TheFly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Seat 0B
Posts: 2,300
Default

I have a bad feeling about this...
TheFly is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 03:36 PM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,706
Default

Originally Posted by TheFly
I have a bad feeling about this...
Punch it chewy
John Carr is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 03:51 PM
  #15  
All is fine at .79
 
TiredSoul's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Position: Paahlot
Posts: 4,159
Default

Originally Posted by TommyDevito
So an engine failure in a single engine antique airplane, due to mechanical failure, is grounds for revocation? Sure about that? I looked all through the 2150.3C and couldn't find that. Also couldn't find it in the regulations (14 CFR and 49USC)

Maybe you could help me out here?

The SNA incident was investigated by the FAA and the appropriate measures were taken IAW the 8900.1 and the 2150.3C. Again, nothing called for revocation in that incident either.
Wasnt that maintenance related with a carburetor that wasn’t overhauled for 40+ years
TiredSoul is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 03:56 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TheFly's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: Seat 0B
Posts: 2,300
Default

Originally Posted by John Carr
Punch it chewy
Who you calling scruffy looking?
TheFly is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 04:04 PM
  #17  
Gets Weekends Off
 
TommyDevito's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Oct 2017
Posts: 235
Default

Originally Posted by TiredSoul
Wasnt that maintenance related with a carburetor that wasn’t overhauled for 40+ years
Don't recall.

Was there a requirement to overhaul it?
TommyDevito is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 04:34 PM
  #18  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,755
Default

Originally Posted by TiredSoul
Wasnt that maintenance related with a carburetor that wasn’t overhauled for 40+ years
Main metering jet on the carburetor was loose and unscrewed itself on the takeoff. H€||, even I might not have caught that on the preflight.

So when the engine quit he didn’t stall the aircraft in a panic and found an open spot on a golf course where he could put it down without hurting anyone on the ground or killing himself. I’d give him a fair on that one.

Landing on the taxiway.... not good, but that taxiway is also where he routinely landed his helicopter, so there was a habit pattern issue too. Not good, but he’s not the first. And he didn’t do it at night with a load of pax in back like a certain regional did at Pullman Wa a year or two ago. And that crew of two did not have the excuse that they often landed their helicopter there.

https://youtu.be/vgLYGEj-D7Q

And at least he DID get it down without damage or hurting anyone on a paved surface. Not something a couple pilots at a regional flying into Presque Isle Maine can claim.






As for runway incursions, I guarantee they are underreported:



The OTHER FBO on the field where I used to CFI had a LOT of foreign students whose command of the English language was....well, they HAD no command of the English language. If the tower had actually reported every runway incursion these guys made, the above numbers would be bigger. It was at least a weekly event. I averaged a go-around (or heavy braking on the active) probably every three months my entire time as a CFI.
Excargodog is online now  
Old 05-08-2020, 08:14 PM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jul 2013
Posts: 4,706
Default

Originally Posted by TheFly
Who you calling scruffy looking?
Don't get cocky kid.
John Carr is offline  
Old 05-08-2020, 08:24 PM
  #20  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,755
Default

Originally Posted by TheFly
Who you calling scruffy looking?
All of us, since my idiot governor has locked down all the barber shops...

yet somehow, the ‘official’ barber in the state capital is open by appointment for the politicians...
Excargodog is online now  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices