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

Low flying ATA 737

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
FN FAL said:
What's the matter Bart? Is it Hard for you to believe a "Jigga Boo" could be an aviation expert? Is that what YOU WERE REALLY TRYING TO SAY?

I hope this post was made under the influence of mind altering substances, because you are way off. Jim Tilmon was an American Airlines Captain, hired in the mid 1960's, who had a fairly uneventful career. In the early 1990's he was in a passenger in a taxi that got into an accident. He claimed, in the lawsuit against the cab company and driver, that he had career ending whiplash (during the big whiplash award days) that would prevent him from performing his job as an airline pilot - of course while continuing to fly his morning turns and doing the evening TV weather.

Tilmon won hid multi-million dollar case and, unfortunately for him, attracted attention from American Airlines and the FAA. He basically retired before he was fired or lost his medical.

So... the TV viewing public of Chicago has been sentenced to Jim Tilmon's rambling, nearly incoherent daily weather reports and occasional "expert" opinion on aviation matters for the past twenty five years. I am a vigorous supporter of equal opportunity employment, but Jim Tilmon sets the whole process back decades. I can't seem to get the video from the CBS feed of the ATA incident to run, probably since we live in (unfortunately) a Windows-driven world, but I can just picture the solemn tone and grave speech Mr. Tilmon used to relate the 'poor judgement of the ATA Captian' over the Sox game last night - based on nothing but the shaky video shot from the Comiskey (I'll never call the place US Cellular Field) press box.

FNFAL, pick another subject if you want to illustrate how conservative society has done the brothers a disservice. Jim Tilmon is not your poster child.
 
I was not fermiliar with the Cab accident story, but I also know TIlman took some heat for is expert opinoin on TWA 800, while on NBC. American was not too happy about is reporting and everybody knowing he was an American Pilot. Sometimes as a pilot my self, I can't believe the stuff that comes out of his mouth. NBC even was a little but off by it. Now if NBC would just can that guy on NBC national news. I can't even think of his name right now, I just turn the channel when he speaks is aviation BS. Daily probably loves both of these guys. I can see them all drinking some coffee in public place chantting the sky is falling, the sky is falling, oh my god the sky is falling!!!!
 
"FNFAL, pick another subject if you want to illustrate how conservative society has done the brothers a disservice. Jim Tilmon is not your poster child."

Conservative society what?
 
FN FAL, you continue to judge people and attempt to label them. Once again, you are wrong. It is not germaine to this discussion, but I'll share my voting record with you. I always view each election as a fresh start. I don't follow party lines. Actually I dislike many facets of each party. However in the last ten years (for as long as I have been able to vote) I have pulled the lever for all republicans. I hate Kerry, and take it as an insult that you compare me to him.
...I'll agree with you on that...the kerry lover thing was a cheap shot. All of the left scares the hell out of me and half of the right as well.
 
As DCitrus9 so wisely observed, an aviation expert who was truly interested in the promotion and defense of aviation...
Since when does being an expert mean that someone also has to be an advocate?

The media man was presenting a news story for a commercial televison news program...duh... when was it 'news' that the media screws up everything up they touch? Ratings and selling commercials is what these places are all about and since when does anything the paid media present on commercial television become a FSI or FAA training seminar?

I saw the video...in my own opinion it looked as if they couldn't zoom in close enough to make the airliner look lower. Personally I think this story is a non-issue.

You would think that Sheriff Ken Jenne was a firearms "expert" and therefore should be a firearms "advocate"...according to the "aviation expert/aviation advocate" theory that has been presented in this thread...but yet in front of a national television audience, a sworn public official perpretrated lies and violated the public trust of his office when he brought CNN to the shooting range and used a machine gun to illustrate what gang members were going to have access to if the 94 Clinton Assault Weapons Ban was allowed to sunset in 1994.

In correlation, you have an EXPERT presenting a story accross the NEWS media. Here there is no advocacy...there is no accuracy...and there is no truth in this story. In fact, the abuse of this public official's power and the wrecklessness of CNN are almost bordering on criminal...but yet what do we do? We turn on the boob tube and watch.

CNN, which bills itself as "the most trusted name in news," was caught
lying during its "reporting" on so-called "assault weapons." On May 15,
CNN aired two pieces which deliberately misled its viewers into believing
that the semi-automatic firearms banned under the 1994 Clinton gun ban are
more powerful than other guns that weren`t banned.

CNN`s John Zarella arranged a live-fire demonstration with Sheriff Ken
Jenne of the Broward County (Fla.) Sheriff`s Department. The exercise
began with a deputy firing a Chinese AK-47 Zarella claimed was targeted by
the Clinton gun ban. Down range, viewers saw the rounds punching holes in
cinder blocks and penetrating body armor. Next, the sheriff fired what was
referenced as a different civilian AK-47 model that was not covered by the
`94 ban. Incredibly, viewers saw no bullet holes, dust, or smoke on the
cinder blocks during this demon-stration, as no rounds hit the cinder
blocks! In fact, CNN later acknowledged, the deputy was actually firing
into the ground. Obviously, the biased point the report was promoting was
that the firearms banned by the Clinton gun ban were somehow more powerful
than those that were not banned-a notion, of course, that is without any
factual merit.

In a later segment that same day, a deputy was aided by CNN in
promulgating the most blatant distortion of the truth. This time the gun
used was a fully-automatic firearm, and it obliterated the cinder blocks.
Of course, not one of the guns banned in `94 is fully-automatic. All of
the firearms covered by Clinton`s ban are semi-automatics. Fully-automatic
firearms have been strictly regulated since 1934.

This demonstration attempted to bolster the justification for Sheriff
Jenne and the Sheriff`s Department supporting the gun ban. This should
come as no surprise, though, since Jenne, who was a former Democratic
state lawmaker in Florida, supported a state bill banning semi-automatic
firearms which was defeated.
 
Last edited:
IN the news video it said 700 feet. Is this agl or msl?

If it were agl then no problem thats still above ciricling mins from the chart I have for MDW as it would be about 1300 to 1400 msl (as seen in the cockpit alt, 31C circling mins (mda) being 1120 (500-1).

Now if 700 was msl or what they had on the alt then they would have been about 100 ft agl due to the terrain being just over 600 ft in that area.

In the end I think it just news people making a big deal of something they know little about. Just my opinion but I think they decended to circling mins or there about and had to go alittle wide due to preceeding traffic. Nothing more to it other than public being misinformed.
 
It has to be 700 AGL because you would be hitting buildings in downtown Chicago if you were 100 AGL (everything is over 100ft high there).
 
If it were agl then no problem thats still above ciricling mins from the chart I have for MDW as it would be about 1300 to 1400 msl (as seen in the cockpit alt, 31C circling mins (mda) being 1120 (500-1).

It's mentioned above that they were doing a visual.. If they were circling, albeit at the correct altitude, they were a little far from the airport for a Cat D circle.. I believe 6 miles was mentioned in the report.

I'm surprised people don't freak out and call the police when Boston is sending the props down 15R with the vis transition to 4L. Doesn't get much closer to the buildings than that!
 
I'm surprised people don't freak out and call the police when Boston is sending the props down 15R with the vis transition to 4L. Doesn't get much closer to the buildings than that!

so much fun, haven't done it in awhile though. I also like racing the helos up the river coming out of DCA.
 
Technically, if you are flying a traffic pattern in a Jet, you should be doing so at 1500' AGL until in a normal position to land.

I've flown into MDW many times, I'm sure they just had to widen out for some traffic and didn't expect to get that far out. Don't know that I would have let myself get that far out while being that low, but I wasn't there.
 
So?????

What regs were broken??? Anyone??? Beuhler????

Obviously on downwind, descended thinking they were turning base, and something happened. It's a visual approach, circling minima doesn't apply. End of story, except for a slow news day and the gargantuan ignorance of the media and their "expert".
 
Applicable Regs

Amazing what a high-speed internet connection and about 30 minutes can produce.... form your own opinion.

Personally, I think TRACON likes to bend situations to make life easy on themselves. I think they are reluctant to use the straight-in approach when landing 22L because it gives them less room for ORD or because it requires RNAV/GPS.

Sec. 121.657 Flight altitude rules.
(a) General. Notwithstanding Sec. 91.119 or any rule applicable
outside the United States, no person may operate an aircraft below the
minimums set forth in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, except
when necessary for takeoff or landing, or except when, after considering
the character of the terrain, the quality and quantity of meteorological
services, the navigational facilities available, and other flight
conditions, the Administrator prescribes other minimums for any route or
part of a route where he finds that the safe conduct of the flight
requires other altitudes....
(b) Day VFR operations. No certificate holder conducting domestic
operations may operate a passenger-carrying aircraft and no certificate
holder conducting flag or supplemental operations may operate any
aircraft under VFR during the day at an altitude less than 1,000 feet
above the surface or less than 1,000 feet from any mountain, hill, or
other obstruction to flight.
(c) Night VFR, IFR, and over-the-top operations. No person may
operate an aircraft under IFR including over-the- top or at night under
VFR at an altitude less than 1,000 feet above the
highest obstacle within a horizontal distance of five miles from the
center of the intended course, or, in designated mountainous areas, less
than 2,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal distance
of five miles from the center of the intended course.

Sec. 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an
aircraft below the following altitudes:
(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency
landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or
settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000
feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of
the aircraft.
(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the
surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases,
the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel,
vehicle, or structure.
(d) Helicopters. Helicopters may be operated at less than the minimums
prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section if the operation is
conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface. In addition,
each person operating a helicopter shall comply with any routes or altitudes
specifically prescribed for helicopters by the Administrator.

Sec. 91.130 Operations in Class C airspace.
(a) General. Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, each aircraft operation in
Class C airspace must be conducted in compliance with this section and Sec.
91.129.
Sec. 91.129 Operations in Class D airspace.
(e) Minimum Altitudes. When operating to an airport in Class D airspace,
each pilot of--
(1) A large or turbine-powered airplane shall, unless otherwise required
by the applicable distance from cloud criteria, enter the traffic pattern at
an altitude of at least 1,500 feet above the elevation of the airport and
maintain at least 1,500 feet until further descent is required for a safe
landing;
(2) A large or turbine-powered airplane approaching to land on a runway
served by an instrument landing system (ILS), if the airplane is ILS
equipped, shall fly that airplane at an altitude at or above the glide slope
between the outer marker (or point of interception of glide slope, if
compliance with the applicable distance from clouds criteria requires
interception closer in) and the middle marker; and
(3) An airplane approaching to land on a runway served by a visual
approach slope indicator shall maintain an altitude at or above the glide
slope until a lower altitude is necessary for safe landing.

Sec. 91.123 Compliance with ATC clearances and instructions.
(a) When an ATC clearance has been obtained, no pilot in command may
deviate from that clearance unless an amended clearance is obtained, an
emergency exists, or the deviation is in response to a traffic alert and
collision avoidance system resolution advisory. However, except in Class A
airspace, a pilot may cancel an IFR flight plan if the operation is being
conducted in VFR weather conditions. When a pilot is uncertain of an ATC
clearance, that pilot shall immediately request clarification from ATC.
(b) Except in an emergency, no person may operate an aircraft contrary to
an ATC instruction in an area in which air traffic control is exercised.
(c) Each pilot in command who, in an emergency...

!FDC 2/0199 FDC PART 1 OF 2 ..SPECIAL NOTICE..
FDC NOTAMS 2/9583 AND 1/3353 ARE CANCELLED.
FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS
EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE.
PURSUANT TO 14 CFR SECTION 99.7, SPECIAL SECURITY INSTRUCTIONS, AND
14 CFR SECTION 91.139, EMERGENCY AIR TRAFFIC RULES. EFFECTIVE ONE
HOUR BEFORE THE SCHEDULED TIME OF THE EVENT, UNTIL ONE HOUR AFTER
THE END OF THE EVENT, ALL AIRCRAFT AND PARACHUTE OPERATIONS ARE
PROHIBITED WITHIN A THREE NAUTICAL MILE RADIUS/3,000 FEET AGL
AND BELOW OVER ANY STADIUM HAVING A SEATING CAPACITY OF 30,000 OR
MORE IN WHICH A MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL, NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE,
NCAA DIVISION ONE FOOTBALL, OR MAJOR MOTOR SPEEDWAY EVENT IS
OCCURING, UNLESS UNDER ATC CONTROL FOR ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE PROCEDURES
AT AN AIRPORT ADJACENT TO THE STADIUM. THIS RESTRICTION DOES NOT
APPLY TO DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE, LAW ENFORCEMENT, OR AEROMEDICAL
FLIGHT OPERATIONS THAT ARE IN CONTACT WITH ATC.
END PART 1 OF 2
 
Incidentally, Comiskey (Cellular) is outside of Midway's Class C and underneath O'Hare's Class B. Technically they were in Class G (below 1200ft AGL).

P.S. I have no personal issues to vent with anyone here. You all are just text and photos on my computer screen to me!!!

If I need to vent personal issues, I get drunk and beat my wife in the privacy of my own home!!! :D
 
Re: Applicable Regs

SoBeFlyer said:
Amazing what a high-speed internet connection and about 30 minutes can produce.... form your own opinion.

... ALL AIRCRAFT AND PARACHUTE OPERATIONS ARE PROHIBITED WITHIN A THREE NAUTICAL MILE RADIUS/3,000 FEET AGL AND BELOW OVER ANY STADIUM ... UNLESS UNDER ATC CONTROL FOR ARRIVAL/DEPARTURE PROCEDURES AT AN AIRPORT ADJACENT TO THE STADIUM.
Edited to highlight the cogent parts. I believe the aircraft in question was under ATC control.

Next?
 
Re: Applicable Regs

SoBeFlyer said:
Sec. 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an
aircraft below the following altitudes...
 
<<<<<<-----

And to further entrench the dumbness of this artical...I have changed my avatar......
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom