Cockpits with wheel camera feeds?
#21
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: lapsed medical
Posts: 65
Absolutely nothing says that. Are you suggesting we put our thinking caps back in the closet because some of our brainstorming ideas cannot be 100% guaranteed before R&D begins?
#23
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: lapsed medical
Posts: 65
Even then, the steering of a single-engined Cessna is good for what, ten degrees either way? Would be quite a feat to use a tail-mounted camera, on a small (say Garmin 530 sized) screen, to actively dodge trees.
I'm very sorry for your friend and your loss...it's a reminder to us all to always use your shoulder harness!
I'm very sorry for your friend and your loss...it's a reminder to us all to always use your shoulder harness!
Yes, always use your shoulder harness, if your company has installed them in your plane. If it's your plane, and you don't have them, you should install them. But, no shoulder harness will protect you from a tree branch smashing through the windshield and penetrating your face.
Now that you've addressed the obvious potential shortcomings, do you have any constructive ideas?
#24
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: lapsed medical
Posts: 65
People don't like change. People are afraid of change. Pilots are people. I don't like change. I prefer steam gauges to glass panels. But if I continue to fly, eventually I'll have to change my attitude.
Pilots may have to change their attitudes about Lithium ion batteries, Mode S transponders, 406Mhz ELTs, PDAs, and even cameras.
#25
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,021
When did I say I can't actually keep the airplane from hitting something without seeing my wingtips? I didn't. You are just so quick to assume that you know everything and everyone else is a moron that you think you can put words in my mouth.
Once in 250 hours is hardly routine.
I thought most air tankers were multi-engine with none up front.
The majority of the tanker fleet are Type III and IV tankers: single engine air tankers (SEATs). I was in one of them, and given that it had one engine, and given that the reason for the power loss was complete loss of engine oil, and given that I was directly behind the engine...you figure it out.
Lucky for you that there were no trees.
I said "Lucky", not necessarily "skillful", nor knowledgeable.
What would you know about that, at 250 hours?
#26
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2012
Position: lapsed medical
Posts: 65
But alas, after his last post, I better just not feed the trolls.
#28
Eats shoots and leaves...
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Position: Didactic Synthetic Aviation Experience Provider
Posts: 849
John appears to have some good experience and knowledge to convey, he just hasn't learned to do so in a way which doesn't come across as - oh shall we say "in your face."
I'd put that down as a "growth area" for him as the HR people would say.
And to put something in on topic: I've never flown any of the SVS equipped aircraft, but IF the aircraft incorporated a camera view as part of a PFD I can see where it _might_ be useful in a vision-obscured type emergency. If the display was anywhere other than the PFD or HUD I'd think it would be worse than useless.
I'd put that down as a "growth area" for him as the HR people would say.
And to put something in on topic: I've never flown any of the SVS equipped aircraft, but IF the aircraft incorporated a camera view as part of a PFD I can see where it _might_ be useful in a vision-obscured type emergency. If the display was anywhere other than the PFD or HUD I'd think it would be worse than useless.
#29
Suppose your Cessna is a C208 Caravan, and your PT-6 just blew apart, and your window is suddenly covered with oil? Please don't lecture me about how that only happens once every 6 Million hours. A tail mounted camera might have saved my friend's life. He landed just fine, but on rollout he could not see the trees whose branches ultimately smashed his windshield and penetrated his face.
#30
Disinterested Third Party
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,021
Sounds likr someone put too much oil in their pt6.... You really should not fill it past the minimum line since it will just burn it. The min line is only like 2 or 3 quarts(correct me if im wrong its been a few years). But also a catastrphic engine failure in a van?? Thats just not rare, that windscreen is so large i dont think i could vomit and cover it. Also at 35mph thats gotta be one big branch to not only go through that big windscreen but to breakbone... After going thrpugh that big fan and pt6.
It doesn't take a lot of oil to obscure vision; a fine mist or spray will make it difficult to see out the windscreen. Turbine oil from a PT6 isn't like piston oil, however, and doesn't come out black; it's fairly clear (slightly bluish/purplish in tint).
The poster to whom you're responding has described a catastrophic engine failure. Material striking the windshield (and subsequently entering the cockpit) doesn't ever need to "make it through the PT6" and the "big fan" already quit working...that's part of the reason it's an engine failure, you see.
Never had a bird strike on the cockpit, that's made it past the propeller? I certainly have...hundreds of times. That's hundreds. As for striking objects during the roll-out...of course it happens with some regularity during a forced landing. This is surprising?
I'd put that down as a "growth area" for him as the HR people would say.
John appears to have some good experience and knowledge to convey, he just hasn't learned to do so in a way which doesn't come across as - oh shall we say "in your face."
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post