Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Emergency landing turns Stupid

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Squawk 7500...

I went to a certain nameless FBO in Monroe...ok it's initials are Monroe Air Center...I was supposed to meet a guy at the FBO closest to the airline terminal so I ask the bimbo at the counter, "Is this the closest FBO to the airline terminal?" and she replies "I don't know what FBO is."

I guess it was her first day, but jesus tapdancing christ, you'd think they'd give them a little dual before turning them loose on customers. Sheesh.
 
erj-145mech said:
In part 91 flying, its suggested that the engine be torn down for inspection, but not required. The PIC also determines the airworthiness in a pre-flight inspection, so the PIC is taking the responsibility in continuing the flight. If the prop isn't missing material and the shape hasn't changed, its basically up to the PIC on the next course of action. The FAA may have something to say about this to the PIC when all is said and done if the PIC makes the wrong decision, but its not up to the bimbette behind the desk to insist a plan of action.
I once asked the idiot behind the counter to deice my engine nacelles and then went into the restroom and flight planning area to file and get a weather briefing. When I came out, I found out they had used enough de-ice solution to cover the ramp under my airplane with an inch of orange-aide. The bill? 500.00 bucks.

I passed this on to the family that needed to go to the organ transplant, as I flew them there as an employee favor. However, I never patronized that FBO again.

Had I known there was a U-fuel on the field, I would have used my credit card in the machine and fueled my own dam plane.

I noticed in the flight planning area, that there was a note that said that if you didn't by fuel or pay a ramp fee at the fbo, "you could use the pay phone" to get your stuff done. Which is kind of funny since the state provides the computer and the data service.

I'm glad that this FBO went out of business.
 
Last edited:
xdrvr said:
... of course they do say the best pilots are the worst drivers.. so maybe the worst pilots are the best drivers:]

Can't be true ... how do you explain all of the dumba$$ drivers in and around Sanford?
 
Does anyone know how to save that video?

When I click on the link, it automatically open in Windows Media Player, but there is no option to "Save As."

TIA.

CE
 
Fixed that problem, but 2 weeks later, it did it again, only this time with my father was at the controls and further from the AP (10-15 mi), so he flies it until he throws a rod, but makes it to a highway.

They made it the distance, but threw a hole in the side of the engine 3" in diameter.

The new engine ran like a champion........

Your father ran out of oil due to a blown pushrod seal...and the engine siezed, causing a thrown rod.

With the siezed engine or piston and a thrown rod (invariably goes through the case...not always, but a lot of the time), the kids who took the airplane were able to start the engine and take off...but "threw a hole in the side of the engine?"

You mean there was no hole there to begin with, having already thrown a rod once? Was throwing another hole that big a deal, seeing as your father had already done it once? They managed to get the engine started, running, and takeoff, despite being siezed with a thrown rod?

Interesting story.

I am not an A&P, but I know that a prop strike requires teardown and inspection.

For someone who doesn't hold proper certification, you know a lot. You just know it wrong.

You can find this information in several places by simply reading.

Where, exactly?

You ain't gotta have an A&P to know stuff like that or to know how to turn a wrench.

Apparently not. Do you know how to turn a wrench? Then you'd be half right, because you don't know didly squat about aircraft maintenance.
 
avbug said:
For someone who doesn't hold proper certification, you know a lot. You just know it wrong.



Where, exactly?



Apparently not. Do you know how to turn a wrench? Then you'd be half right, because you don't know didly squat about aircraft maintenance.
Thanks for the laughs Avbug, I knew there had to be more to the prop strike story...I guess If I was allowed to make a WASG, maybe there's a way to measure run out?

:laugh:
 
So, Bug, are you going to admit that an inspection (at the very least) is prudent after a prop strike?

OK, I'll give you the obvious. Proclaiming the need for a prop overhaul and engine teardown might be a bit too forward. But come on...are you really going to take the position that nothing should have been done to that engine?

Something tells me that you'd be on the other side of this argument if someone else had brought up the example! :pimp:
 

Latest resources

Back
Top