Single Eng. Piston over water

[USMCmech]

I can therefor assume, that back country flight is out of your comfort level. Along with rock climbing, river running, base jumping, bungee jumping, and most likely aerobatics.

Actually he has said that he has done areobatics, and skydives.

I think he sadi that he has a D liscense for skydiving (I may be mistaken)

 

[EMB170Pilot]

Stanley Stupid: I'm, well, to tell you the truth, I'm my own Grandpa.

Talk Show Hostess: You're your own Grandpa? Well, for some of us who don't understand this, can you explain?

Stanley Stupid: Well, yes. It's quite simple, really.

[sings]
Stanley Stupid: Many many years ago when I was twenty three
I was married to a widow who was purdy as can be
This widow had a grown-up daughter who had hair of red
My father fell in love with her and soon they too were wed

This made my dad my son in law and changed my very life
For my daughter was my mother 'cause she was my father's wife
To complicate the matters even though it brought me joy
I soon became the father of a bouncing baby boy

This little baby then became a brother-in-law to dad
And so became my uncle though it made me very sad
For if he was my uncle than it also makes him brother
To the widow's grown-up daughter who of course is my stepmother

My father's wife then had a son who kept him on the run
And he became my grandchild 'cause he was my daughter's son
My wife is now my mother's mother and it makes me blue
For although she is my wife she is my grandmother too
If my wife is my grandmother than I am her grandchild
And every time I think of this it nearly drives me wild

Talk Show Hostess: has got to be the craziest thing I ever saw

Stanley Stupid: As husband to my grandmother I am my own grandpa

I kept using the Irish song beat from Who's Line Is It Anyway? Fits pretty well!

 

[mtrv]

Actually he has said that he has done areobatics, and skydives.

I think he sadi that he has a D liscense for skydiving (I may be mistaken)

I seem to remember the skydiving part, and intentionally left that out. Now, we'll just attach chutes to all single engine aircraft for over water and night mountain operations, such as Cirrus does; and the risk factor will be eliminated!

And BTW, skydiving and aerobatics do not bother me either. Base jumping would!

 

[USMCmech]

And BTW, skydiving and aerobatics do not bother me either. Base jumping would!

So in other words,

You would be willing to accept the risk of flying upside down and high positive and negative G loads placing great stress on the airplane. Provided the airplane was designed and built to withstand such manuvers, you had plenty of altitude, were wearing a parachute, and had taken all other recomended precautions.

You would also be willing to accept the risk of jumping out of an airplane depending only on a colection of nylon fabric and 1/8 lines to stop you from making a crater. Provided that it was a TSO'd parachute with a reserve and you had been properly trained in it's use.


However jumping from 800 ft with only one chute would NOT be an acceptable risk.

I knew a guy who did BASE jump ocasionaly, and while I would never contemplate such a thing, he was widely regarded as one of the best skydivers at the DZ and was a remarkeably levelheaded guy.

 

[avbug]

I do skydive, albeit infrequently these days. I do not base jump, and cannot comment toward that end. Likewise, while I have done minimal climbing, I am not a climber and have no experience in that area. Therefore I will reserve comment regarding safety in those areas. Risk elimination for a climber or a jumper, however, should be every bit the goal as for pilots.

I can therefor assume, that back country flight is out of your comfort level. Along with rock climbing, river running, base jumping, bungee jumping, and most likely aerobatics.

You an assume all you like, which is nothing more than the basis for posting in ignorance of fact, much like those who might put words in my mouth. Your assumption, regardless of content, however, is irrelevant, as my comfort level is not germain to the discussion.

But let's don't go down the path of trying to convince us mortals, that everyone who is involved in these activities must be an idiot. Perhaps they're just a bit more adventurous and willing to accept that higher level of calculated risk.

Again in the spirit of guesswork, speculation being the hallmark of the uninformed mind, you assume that the activities you have specified are dangerous. You suggest you would not try them, and therefore have no knowledge of the danger, hazard, or risk, thereof, yet make the assumption (what's that about assuming??) that these activities are dangerous.

If indeed these activities are dangerous, does calculating the danger make them inherently safer? Is being "adverturous" a badge of honor to which a pilot should aspire when making safety of flight judgements? Is that a desirable trait in a pilot? I think not. I know not. You know not, as well, do you not? You do.

And BTW, you won't see me spending the night strapped to a shear rock cliff, a thousand feet up. It's out of my comfort level. However, I have no meaningful right to call those who do, idiots. Maybe I just don't have the guts for it; or perhaps no real desire. Looks like you don't have the guts or desire for single engine ferrying flights over water either. Stop making excuses.

Ah, the "you don't have the guts" arguement. The proverbial locker room genetalia-measurement exercise. Also a hallmark of intelligent discussion for which you appear so aptly prepared.

Is one an idiot because one climbs a mountain? Likely, no. Were one to ascend a cliff using inappropriate equipment, in high winds on wet rock without appropriate gear, training, experience, using undersize worn out rope...perhaps that might make one an idiot. Much like flying single engine piston airplanes out of gliding distance from shore. But you already knew that.

Excuses? Name one.

Lack the guts? Interesting jibe. You're new here, aren't you? "Lack the guts" might be better phrased as "Intelligent enough not to try." One might say I lack the guts to load one round in the chamber of my .357 ruger, spin the cylinder, put the muzzle to my head, and depress the trigger. I might respond, correctly and rightfully so, that I'm not that stupid. Nothing to do with guts. But then you knew that, too, didn't you?

 

[Fearless Tower]

Risk elimination? I think that's the perfect world that you must live in that USMCmech was referring to. You can't eliminate all risk...period. You can do a lot of things to mitigate the risks that are inherent in activities like aviation, but you simply cannot eliminate all risk. You can strive to eliminate as much risk as possible, but you will never be able to eliminate it all and therefore you must either accept what you can't eliminate or stay on the ground. If you really think you can and have, then you are living in a dream world and probably pose a much greater danger to yourself and anyone who flies with you than any person in a 172 flying over water.

So, Avbug, a person who accepts risk and flies the single engine plane over water is an idiot.....then what would you call the PIC of a 747 that crashes into the ocean? 4 jet engines didn't eliminate all risk from TWA 800. 2 turboprops and an amphibious hull didn't save the poor souls from crashing into the ocean in a Chalks Mallard when the wing decided to separate from the fuselage...were the pilots and passengers of those planes all idiots because they didn't eliminate all risks? Or how about Alaska 261? Were those pilots stupid for agreeing to fly an airplane that unbeknownst to them had a messed up jackscrew? Was it in a fit of idiocy that Al Haynes stepped into the left seat of United 232? You do realize that a pilot making an engine out landing on water in a 172 or a PA28 has a better shot at surviving the outcome than anyone on that DC-10?

If you think you can eliminate all risk in aviation, you might want to go back and read some. I'd suggest starting with Ernie Gann's Fate is the Hunter. You might also want to read some NTSB reports. You'll soon see that flying is dangerous.

I'll agree that flying a single engine plane over the ocean has a higher level of risk than doing it in a multi and that's why I don't venture out beyond places like Block Island or Nantucket even though I have been through dunkers, had to right capsized liferafts and wear cold water survival suits. At this point, I simply do not have any need or reason to. But I'm not about to call anyone who does an idiot. Anyone of us, even the best pilots, can make a mistake at the wrong time or draw the horse that can't be rode as many of our long gone brothers have before. You're basically casting stones from a 4 engine glass house.

 

[mtrv]

Lack the guts? Interesting jibe. You're new here, aren't you? "Lack the guts" might be better phrased as "Intelligent enough not to try." One might say I lack the guts to load one round in the chamber of my .357 ruger, spin the cylinder, put the muzzle to my head, and depress the trigger. I might respond, correctly and rightfully so, that I'm not that stupid. Nothing to do with guts. But then you knew that, too, didn't you?

Then it's simple.

Do you put Russian roulette, in the same classification , as single engine flight over water? I do not. I consider the act of Russian roulette as stupidity and idiotic, as there is an automatic, for sure, one in six chance of instant death.

The odds of failure in a single engine aircraft over a body of water one hundred miles wide, don't come close to one in six, let alone having an automatic for sure, 16.66% chance of doom.

You're correct, Russian roulette has nothing to do with guts. Anything with a built in chance of total failure and bad odds, is just stupidity.

But making excuses such as stunts, stupidity, and being idiots for aviation legends such as Charles Lindbergh, perhaps Steve Fossett, and all the rest who take a risk of long haul water flights, is going a bit over the edge. Way over, IMO.

 

[PimpJuice]

AVWEB stated "Any pilot that develops a tolerance or comfort for risk is an idiot."


Dude, are you for real? Does that mean every time I take off I'm an idiot? There is always some level of risk. Flying over water is a risk that can be managed.

How much time do you have, not including Microsoft Flt Simulator?

 

[FN FAL]

I kept using the Irish song beat from Who's Line Is It Anyway? Fits pretty well!

It was about the only part of that movie that was funny. Most of it was pretty bad. But at least it had Needermier in it from Animal House.

 

[USMCmech]

How much time do you have, not including Microsoft Flt Simulator?

Avbug has plenty of flight time in more types of aircraft than I can really fathom. Including a lot of time flying airtankers. He know far too much information to be a poser.

He definately is the real deal.


Which is what perplexes me to no end. He is obviously aware of the risks, and yet implies that he has "eliminated" all risk in his flying.


Honest question for Avbug, not intended as a flame.

Do you belive that you could ever be the cause of an airplane crash?

I know I could. I make mistakes all the time, both turning wrenches, and as PIC. I tell my students about my screwups all the time, so they can learn from my mistakes.