Dead Stick Takeoff & Landing

[Hedley]

More stuff you won't ever see in Canada:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z985xdXW-3w

[Rockie]

Why not? Don't we have hills in Canada?

[Hedley]

http://www.tc.gc.ca/CivilAviation/Regse ... htm#602_01

[Rockie]

Not surprisingly the Americans have the same rule. Why pick on Canada?

http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/te ... .7&idno=14

[Bank Angle]

I for one think that video is awesome and am jealous I don't have access to the equipment or the skill to do it myself.

[Rockie]

Yes it is a neat video. If you want to badly enough you can aquire both the skill and equipment to do that too.

[Hedley]

Sure, if you want to spend the next four years (and
many tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees) at
the Tribunal, Tribunal Appeal, Federal Court and
Federal Court of Appeals, go for it.

[Rockie]

I'm sure the fellow in this video didn't invite the FAA over to watch. As long as Bank Angle doesn't tell TC it's sure to be a lot cheaper than that.

[TG]

I'm sure the fellow in this video didn't invite the FAA over to watch.

Neither his insurance.

[North Shore]

Umm, don't glider pilots do something similar most of the time?

[Hedley]

don't glider pilots do something similar most of the time?

Here's an idea: with a Transport Inspector on the ground watching,
intentionally feather both engines of whatever twin prop aircraft
you're flying these days, and do a perfect dead-stick landing with
both props stopped. With pax onboard.

Then tell the Transport Inspector:

don't glider pilots do something similar most of the time?

Canadian case law on 602.01 states that if you do something that
a "prudent" pilot would not do, you are therefore negligent, and
expect to have your pilot's licence suspended for an arbitrary
and unbounded length of time.

[Hot Fuel]

He might just be one of the dumbest aviators still alive on this planet, surprised he didn't start his monologue with "Hey wanna see something neat".

[SierraPoppa]

He might just be one of the dumbest aviators still alive on this planet, surprised he didn't start his monologue with "Hey wanna see something neat".

Are you referring to Hedley or the guy in the video?

[Hedley]

Neither his insurance

one of the dumbest aviators

ok, there are two votes for "not prudent",
which by Tribunal case law precedent is
enough to hang this guy in Canada for
contravening the ever-so-subjective
CAR 602.01, which would authorize
a licence suspension of unbounded
duration - the Chapter 11 guidelines
do not apply.

Q.E.D.

[yyz monkey]

He might just be one of the dumbest aviators still alive on this planet, surprised he didn't start his monologue with "Hey wanna see something neat".

Yeah.. I was expecting to hear a 'Watch this'..

What's that saying about old & bold pilots?

[FamilyGuy]

I don't get it? What was "imprudent" about that flying? Gliders in Germany do it all the time - just an alternate means of aquiring flying airspeed. The tire tracks on the landing spit makes me think he practiced this once or twice instead of just going for it.

About the only thing imprudent was making a video and posting it. About the only dangerous thing in the whole video was rolling the rock down the hill - that could have taken someone's eye out.

[Tim]

It seems like the sort of thing that you need everything to go perfectly for with not a lot of opportunity to bail out from it...although the engine did start up pretty quickly. I guess he had faith in the equipment to get him out if something went wrong.

[. ._]

That was one dadgum cool video. YEEE HAW!!

I'd never try that in a million years because, well I, value my life and my skills aren't that good.

Funny how it's neat to watch other people take these risks, eh?

It did look like he did a trial run though before. That's kinda prudent.

-istp

[mcrit]

Sure, if you want to spend the next four years (and many tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees) at the Tribunal, Tribunal Appeal, Federal Court and Federal Court of Appeals, go for it.

...or you could just man up and say, "Oops, yeah, my bad", take the slap on the wrist and move on.

[FamilyGuy]

Maybe nobody really cares but consider this a discussion towards my physcology degree or similar....bs...

What exactly is so offensive to us about an airplane rolling down a hill, reaching flying speed, and then gliding off to a landing???? The most complicated bit of kit prone to failure on the airplane - the engine - is out of the equation! Seems to me the only danger is structural failure on T/O - which isn't any different than any other rough feild T/O. The wing is flying or it isn't - powered flight only prolongs the flight barring rapidly dropping elevation.

Granted I think once he got a ways down the hill he was pretty committed to that flight (dont' think he could stop if he wanted to) - but don't we do that on a regular basis anyway? How about night VFR T/O's in a single over a populated area? Once you are wheels up if the engine coughs/stops what are you going to do - land on the lighted roadways? Isn't that imprudent at it's core?

I flew gliders for a bunch of years behind a towplane. It was normal for our T/O path to go over very unfreindly terrain. If the towplane punched us off before a certain altitude we were going to get hurt bad in any off feild landing - was that imprudent? - not having an "out" at all times? Ever seen a winch launch!

This isn't commercial ops with V1 and Vr. Just a simple airplane actually flying at the basic level. I just don't get the reaction at all.

Ps - I'd do that in a heartbeat (in a rental )

[B-rad]

.

[complexintentions]

What a strange thing to submit as some sort of way to imply Canadian inferiority. Proving that someone can master the physics of a Piper Cub? *yawn* For something to qualify as courageous is has to have some sort of a point. I mean I could throw myself off a bridge and survive, but I doubt anyone would applaud. (A few might be disappointed, but that's different! lol)

One thing's for sure, no is going to mistake that accent for a Canadian.

And the whole thing assumes we'd all WANT to see something like this in Canada. Good grief I hope the bar is a little higher than that.

[Rockie]

Hedley is admiring the chutzpa of this guy and lamenting the fact that it would never happen in Canada because of the evil empire's following regulation:

Evil Empire - 602.01 No person shall operate an aircraft in such a reckless or negligent manner as to endanger or be likely to endanger the life or property of any person.

The fact that the republic down south where this courageous act of aviation prowess occurred has their own rule which bears a striking resemblance to the evil empire's regulation doesn't bother him:

Brave Republic - (a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

[Hedley]

Rockie, I only have four years of experience in
four different levels of Canadian courts with the
application and interpretation of CAR 602.01.

If you say you have more experience than that,
who am I to disagree?

[Rockie]

Maybe your four years in the system is making you a little myopic Hedley. You should try looking at it from a slightly different, less combative perspective.