Simviation Forum - More ignorant 'reporters'

Reply #15 - Mar 26^th, 2010 at 8:57pm

DaveSims Offline
Colonel
Clear Lake, Iowa

Gender:
Posts: 2453

Hagar wrote on Mar 26^th, 2010 at 3:09pm:

DaveSims wrote on Mar 26^th, 2010 at 3:02pm:

I'll tell you why this is news. Some reporter, in an effort to find a greater meaning to the crash last week, and create a better "behind the scenes" article, googled or searched for "Lancair". This report is what came up.

Exactly the point I was trying to make. The average person has no concept of an aerodynamic stall. Why should they if they have no knowledge of aviation? The word "stall" is naturally associated with stalling the engine in their cars. Anyone who has ever driven a motor vehicle has stalled the engine at some time.

The reporter has no knowledge of aviation. Neither does their editor...or 90% of their readers. Only 1 in 400 people in the US have a pilot's license, we are a very small percentage, and easily targeted by the uninformed.

Dave

www.flymcw.com

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #16 - Mar 27^th, 2010 at 1:20am

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

It's pathetic... especially the FAA's "warning"... doesn't matter what Vs or Vso is for any airplane; if you know what it is, you won't get into trouble.
but of course, all of that is irrelvant in this case... Roll Eyes

The key factor, in this accident, was not stall speed- it was the fact that the Lancair basically glides like a brick without power. The wing is optimized for cruise, not slow flight. Under normal conditions it's not a problem, but without power, your options are very limited.

The pilot didn't have a lot of time, his view of the touchdown point was restricted due to the oil, and he sure as hell couldn't slip it to look out the side window, or the descent rate would have increased to the point where he and his pax would be in grave danger, even if the airplane didn't actually stall.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #17 - Mar 27^th, 2010 at 10:37pm

olderndirt Offline
Colonel
Flying is PFM
Rochester, WA

Gender:
Posts: 3574

With this plethora of 'technical' jargon about the d*mn airplane, it's often easy to forget the poor guy who died. It's true what they say - "Dangerous, h*ll you can get killed just jogging on the beach."

THIS IS NOT A PANAM CLIPPER

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #18 - Mar 28^th, 2010 at 3:25am

beaky Offline
Global Moderator
Uhhhh.... yup!
Newark, NJ USA

Gender:
Posts: 14187

olderndirt wrote on Mar 27^th, 2010 at 10:37pm:

With this plethora of 'technical' jargon about the d*mn airplane, it's often easy to forget the poor guy who died. It's true what they say - "Dangerous, h*ll you can get killed just jogging on the beach."

Good point- you have to wonder if the deceased was one of those people who'd "never go up in one of those little planes" because it's too risky... Roll Eyes

Seriously, though- it is terrble. My worst nightmare as a pilot is not getting hurt- it's hurting someone else, especially someone on the ground, who unlike a passenger, has assumed no risk involved with my flight. There's something very unfair about that. The Lancair pilot must feel terrible about it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #19 - Mar 28^th, 2010 at 4:38am

Hagar Offline
Colonel
My Spitfire Girl
Costa Geriatrica

Posts: 33159

beaky wrote on Mar 28^th, 2010 at 3:25am:

olderndirt wrote on Mar 27^th, 2010 at 10:37pm:

With this plethora of 'technical' jargon about the d*mn airplane, it's often easy to forget the poor guy who died. It's true what they say - "Dangerous, h*ll you can get killed just jogging on the beach."

Good point- you have to wonder if the deceased was one of those people who'd "never go up in one of those little planes" because it's too risky... Roll Eyes

Seriously, though- it is terrble. My worst nightmare as a pilot is not getting hurt- it's hurting someone else, especially someone on the ground, who unlike a passenger, has assumed no risk involved with my flight. There's something very unfair about that. The Lancair pilot must feel terrible about it.

The point is that it was a tragic accident. Accidents happen all the time. These people are trying to turn it into something else.

My sympathy has always been with the unfortunate jogger & the pilot. On a different tack, I've seen it mentioned that the jogger might have been listening to an iPod through earphones. This is a common practice which has always worried me as these people are totally unaware of their surroundings. Not that the jogger in this case would have heard the aircraft but he could have missed shouted warnings.

Founder & Sole Member - Grumpy's Over the Hill Club for Veteran Virtual Aviators
Member of the Fox Four Group

Need help? Try Grumpy's Lair

My photo gallery

Back to top

IP Logged

Reply #20 - Mar 28^th, 2010 at 12:06pm

machineman9 Offline
Colonel
Nantwich, England

Gender:
Posts: 5255

Hagar wrote on Mar 28^th, 2010 at 4:38am:

beaky wrote on Mar 28^th, 2010 at 3:25am:

olderndirt wrote on Mar 27^th, 2010 at 10:37pm:

With this plethora of 'technical' jargon about the d*mn airplane, it's often easy to forget the poor guy who died. It's true what they say - "Dangerous, h*ll you can get killed just jogging on the beach."

Good point- you have to wonder if the deceased was one of those people who'd "never go up in one of those little planes" because it's too risky... Roll Eyes

Seriously, though- it is terrble. My worst nightmare as a pilot is not getting hurt- it's hurting someone else, especially someone on the ground, who unlike a passenger, has assumed no risk involved with my flight. There's something very unfair about that. The Lancair pilot must feel terrible about it.

The point is that it was a tragic accident. Accidents happen all the time. These people are trying to turn it into something else.

My sympathy has always been with the unfortunate jogger & the pilot. On a different tack, I've seen it mentioned that the jogger might have been listening to an iPod through earphones. This is a common practice which has always worried me as these people are totally unaware of their surroundings. Not that the jogger in this case would have heard the aircraft but he could have missed shouted warnings.

Earphones versus speaker dock... I'd much prefer the earphones option where people listen to their own music rather than inflicting it on the rest of us. From time to time though, earphones do have their downside where you can't hear your surroundings.

But rightly so, it is a tragic accident which, as per usual, has been turned into something different by the media.

Back to top

IP Logged

	Search the archive: