mscard88
Touchdown! Greaser!
Just saw on ABC News. Said dad and son were doing landings. Completely engulfed in flames. Probably a plastic airplane but couldn't tell from video. Son got out, dad passed. That's all I know. RIP.
It was during the second set of landings that the plane bounced, became airborne, rolled to the left, came back down, passed through a fence, skidded into the road and caught fire, according to Todd Gunther, of the NTSB.
Touch and goes are stupid and dangerous. IMO.
They are certainly higher risk than full stopNo they're not. I've done plenty as a pilot, and as a CFI w/ students. Never had an incident due to T&Gs, nor any of my students.
Now nothing wrong with FS landings and taxi back either. But T&Gs are not dangerous.
They are certainly higher risk than full stop
No they're not. I've done plenty as a pilot, and as a CFI w/ students. Never had an incident due to T&Gs, nor any of my students.
Now nothing wrong with FS landings and taxi back either. But T&Gs are not dangerous.
Maybe this is the place or not to ponder something.
It seems there are a number of incidents where someone passes and someone survives.
I don't feel like I ever hear of or read an interview from the survivor.
Remember the Student / CFI that went down last year and speculation was the student was suicidal and tried to kill them.
That was the first that popped in my head but I dig through all the databases reading up on accidents.
I'm kind of always hoping to find a write up from the survivor of what went on and how things unfolded.
Seems there is not that level of follow up. I really like the AOPA True Pilot Stories and I feel like there is a lot more opportunity to learn about how things took place from reading survivor accounts.
S
Is it just me, or does it seem like there have been more crashes that usual lately.
Turning the engine on is a risk. What's your point?If you're going to say that, then a FS landing would be a risk too right?
Turning the engine on is a risk. What's your point?
Well it is. But it is often the case that risk and fun are directly related.Well using your logic, everything is a risk. Fly safe!
Is more than enough.3100 ft runway, touch and go in a Cirrus 22.
Is more than enough.
Well using your logic, everything is then a risk. But you fly anyway. Fly safe!
Until it isn't.
Was this an over-run ?
3100 ft runway, touch and go in a Cirrus 22.
From the witness account, it sounds like maybe a departure stall after a bounced landing go around attempt. Also from the witness account this was the second attempt after a first attempt was a bounced landing and go around.Was this an over-run ?
Touch and goes are stupid and dangerous. IMO.
I don't do T&Gs in a retract. Not so much because I am afraid of death, just the possibility of a $60,000 oopsie. I also dont see that much benefit in doing T&Gs at this point in my flying 'career'. It's not like I dont learn anything during a takeoff from a full stop.
From the witness account the NTSB provided, it seems plausible that he may not have even been trying to do touch and goes, he could have just been trying to land and having issues.Stupid and dangerous, in your opinion, but... methinks that would be the case if you're a stupid and dangerous pilot. Would that description fit you?
I've touch n goes in most stuff up to a DC-9 and a Lockheed Lodestar, never had an issue with it.
Or are you just trolling?
Maybe this is the place or not to ponder something.
It seems there are a number of incidents where someone passes and someone survives.
I don't feel like I ever hear of or read an interview from the survivor.
Remember the Student / CFI that went down last year and speculation was the student was suicidal and tried to kill them.
That was the first that popped in my head but I dig through all the databases reading up on accidents.
I'm kind of always hoping to find a write up from the survivor of what went on and how things unfolded.
Seems there is not that level of follow up. I really like the AOPA True Pilot Stories and I feel like there is a lot more opportunity to learn about how things took place from reading survivor accounts.
61 whole posts. Who's the troll?Stupid and dangerous, in your opinion, but... methinks that would be the case if you're a stupid and dangerous pilot. Would that description fit you?
I've touch n goes in most stuff up to a DC-9 and a Lockheed Lodestar, never had an issue with it.
Or are you just trolling?
Depends on elevation and temperature not just runway length.
There were around 40 thousand people killed on our highways last year and around 4.5 million injured.Sometimes I think I shouldn't fly anymore.
Assuming you don't use 2800 ft to land
The SR22 needs 1900 feet of runway to takeoff and clear a 50 foot obstacle.
That's why I do touch and goes. You're not a student, true, but knowing how to quickly reconfigure the plane for TO is a good skill to have, don't want to be fumbling around last minute when someone enters the runway uncleared, you hit a gust and lose stability, etc. It's also good to be able to fly patterns as second nature so you can worry about traffic, ATC, etc.Until you need to abort a landing, for whatever reason.
Agreed. But flying is always an easy target because the perception is that little planes are dangerous. So often I have people ask me "do you were a parachute when you fly those tiny Cessnas?" I'm like, do you wear a helmet when you ride in a car?There were around 40 thousand people killed on our highways last year and around 4.5 million injured.