Great video!
...But...I can't see the point of it. The pilot is obviously an excellent stick-and-rudder guy, but why risk instant death to do a maneuver like that?
I spend many years flying very low, and there is a limit when you have no 'outs,' and it comes down to trading death for an attempt to complete a maneuver. It doesn't mean you aren't a good pilot, it just means that there is no point in dying for a quick thrill.
Sorry.
Morons in The Sky
Moderators: lilfssister, North Shore, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, I WAS Birddog
I have never ratted out another pilot out to enforcement, and I never will.Hedley wrote:decide not to phone enforcement
If you have a real problem with another pilot's flying, track him down. Talk to him. It may be necessary, in extreme circumstances, to strike him with considerable force, to cause him to reconsider his behaviour
quote]
You could always have em knee capped, that should deter em for a little while, and theres always a sleazy HA chapter near by that would be more than happy to do it for ya
.You will never live long enough to know it all, so quit being anal about it..
-
. ._
- Top Poster
- Posts: 7374
- Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2004 5:50 pm
- Location: Cowering in my little room because the Water Cooler is locked.
- Contact:
Because it's probably fun as @#$!! (Though I'll never be good enough to even THINK about trying something like that.xsbank wrote:Great video!
...But...I can't see the point of it. The pilot is obviously an excellent stick-and-rudder guy, but why risk instant death to do a maneuver like that?
)-istp
The question is asked, "Why surface level acro?", and it's a good question.
A long time ago, Sir Edmund Hillary was asked why he climbed Mount Everest - a VERY risky endeavour, indeed. His reply? "Because it's there".
Same same.
I might mention that if one is going to participate in such wild-ass activities, it is the responsible thing to do, to minimize the risk of collateral damage to non-participants, who didn't sign up for Mr Toad's Wild Ride.
The implicit philosphy is that if you want to off yourself, or risk doing so, that's ok as long as you don't take others along with you, modulo the health costs you may incur to others (similar to smoking).
Which brings us back to the first post in this thread. If the guy had done acro over a non-populated area, only he and the groundhogs were assuming the risks, and that's ok, unless you're some kind of freak that thinks that groundhogs are an endangered species or something
P.S. Through some curious twist of events that sometimes occur in life, I know the local HA guys. I've taken them flying - they really enjoyed it. Sleazy is not a term I would use to describe them. They don't pay much tax - which I undestand really frosts the gov't's wheaties - but I somehow doubt they do as much aggregate damage to the public health as the enormous tax-paying tobacco and liquor companies. Your opinion may differ (shrug).
A long time ago, Sir Edmund Hillary was asked why he climbed Mount Everest - a VERY risky endeavour, indeed. His reply? "Because it's there".
Same same.
I might mention that if one is going to participate in such wild-ass activities, it is the responsible thing to do, to minimize the risk of collateral damage to non-participants, who didn't sign up for Mr Toad's Wild Ride.
The implicit philosphy is that if you want to off yourself, or risk doing so, that's ok as long as you don't take others along with you, modulo the health costs you may incur to others (similar to smoking).
Which brings us back to the first post in this thread. If the guy had done acro over a non-populated area, only he and the groundhogs were assuming the risks, and that's ok, unless you're some kind of freak that thinks that groundhogs are an endangered species or something
P.S. Through some curious twist of events that sometimes occur in life, I know the local HA guys. I've taken them flying - they really enjoyed it. Sleazy is not a term I would use to describe them. They don't pay much tax - which I undestand really frosts the gov't's wheaties - but I somehow doubt they do as much aggregate damage to the public health as the enormous tax-paying tobacco and liquor companies. Your opinion may differ (shrug).
I'm not condoning stupidity here just questioning the ability of your comments under scrutiny to stand up.
Since the fellow was only at 3-500 ft agl you should have had no problem in discerning the registration. He made more than one pass after all. Could you see them? Did you use binoculars?
There's more than one or two of those Yaks / Nanchangs around those parts (Victoria, Boundary Bay, Langley, Pitt Meadows, Delta Air Park Abbotsford) and several of them include blue in their paint scheme, and you wondered if it was a T-28 for a bit (there's more than one engine in those too) and they do sound different. Are you sure you have the type identified correctly? Yak, T-28, T-6 / Harvard / SNJ, Sea Fury... there's one of those around there too and they all have a distinct sound.
Turning to the internet for pictures of an airplane and identifying discernable markings on the paint scheme and then noting the registration when there may be more than one with similarities may lead to mistaken identity.
TC question to you the complainer... Are you prepared to testify?
Hedley is spot on with his altitude comments too.
You did the right thing dealing with the individual involved IMO.
Cheers
Since the fellow was only at 3-500 ft agl you should have had no problem in discerning the registration. He made more than one pass after all. Could you see them? Did you use binoculars?
There's more than one or two of those Yaks / Nanchangs around those parts (Victoria, Boundary Bay, Langley, Pitt Meadows, Delta Air Park Abbotsford) and several of them include blue in their paint scheme, and you wondered if it was a T-28 for a bit (there's more than one engine in those too) and they do sound different. Are you sure you have the type identified correctly? Yak, T-28, T-6 / Harvard / SNJ, Sea Fury... there's one of those around there too and they all have a distinct sound.
Turning to the internet for pictures of an airplane and identifying discernable markings on the paint scheme and then noting the registration when there may be more than one with similarities may lead to mistaken identity.
TC question to you the complainer... Are you prepared to testify?
Hedley is spot on with his altitude comments too.
You did the right thing dealing with the individual involved IMO.
Cheers
-
polythene_pam
- Rank 1
- Posts: 44
- Joined: Tue Apr 04, 2006 8:27 pm
306
Just to play devil's advocate (it's what I do):
The north shore is on a fairly steep slope... An aircraft can easily be 1000' above the ground that is directly below him, but appear to be only 300' agl when observed from one of the more expensive homes up on the hill. I for one won't participate in this slander session with nothing more than one guy's doubious anectote.
Another thing: even if he was doing these maneuvres at 3-400', 60degree banks, etc.... He could still glide to the water and ditch the plane there as opposed to killing the people on the ground. He probably had plenty of airspeed, and should be able to turn toward water and make it there easily at pretty much any altitude.
I've noticed many safety-nazi pilots on here with their holier-than-thou attitudes. It's rather annoying. I view risky flight like I view any of the so-called "extreme" sports. There are many people out there who are willing to risk their lives for a good rush. So be it. I don't care, as long as they're not risking other lives. Snowboarders, free-climbers, base jumpers, they all risk their lives for fun. Fine by me.
This situation, depending on the validity of the op's comments, may or may not have been in the 'risking other lives' category. I'm betting most of his flight was spent over water, but it just looked scary from shore. In fact, I really don't see how it's physically possible for an a/c at 300'asl to be over north van for very long before being under north van. To say "300' agl" is kind of vague, since the ground is not exactly level out there.
The north shore is on a fairly steep slope... An aircraft can easily be 1000' above the ground that is directly below him, but appear to be only 300' agl when observed from one of the more expensive homes up on the hill. I for one won't participate in this slander session with nothing more than one guy's doubious anectote.
Another thing: even if he was doing these maneuvres at 3-400', 60degree banks, etc.... He could still glide to the water and ditch the plane there as opposed to killing the people on the ground. He probably had plenty of airspeed, and should be able to turn toward water and make it there easily at pretty much any altitude.
I've noticed many safety-nazi pilots on here with their holier-than-thou attitudes. It's rather annoying. I view risky flight like I view any of the so-called "extreme" sports. There are many people out there who are willing to risk their lives for a good rush. So be it. I don't care, as long as they're not risking other lives. Snowboarders, free-climbers, base jumpers, they all risk their lives for fun. Fine by me.
This situation, depending on the validity of the op's comments, may or may not have been in the 'risking other lives' category. I'm betting most of his flight was spent over water, but it just looked scary from shore. In fact, I really don't see how it's physically possible for an a/c at 300'asl to be over north van for very long before being under north van. To say "300' agl" is kind of vague, since the ground is not exactly level out there.
-
Positive_Rate
- Rank 1
- Posts: 41
- Joined: Tue Nov 29, 2005 2:16 pm
- Location: Canada Eh
You should've called the guy direct. Posting that on here has considered you a RAT in my books (and I'm sure many others) ! ...Not cool ! ...I had a discrete call once, and it changed my habits in the air. Simply let the guy know there are eyes out there, instead of generalizing and crying wolf
..and in regards to previous HA talk. I can guarantee they would not have liked this thread, except the video that hedley posted.
XSBANK...is that more than 30 degrees ? ?
XSBANK....were you the kid that got beat up at school ? !! (low blow, but seriously?)
OK...back to the long weekend !! " Bottoms up ! "
..and in regards to previous HA talk. I can guarantee they would not have liked this thread, except the video that hedley posted.
XSBANK...is that more than 30 degrees ? ?
XSBANK....were you the kid that got beat up at school ? !! (low blow, but seriously?)
OK...back to the long weekend !! " Bottoms up ! "
Remember...8 hours guys !!
