landing airplane on helipad

Red Bull they’ll try anything ,no matter the danger level.
 
If they go off the edge on landing the way they go off the edge on takeoff, they’d crash and die. :rolleyes:
 
I was wondering why they didn’t wait till favorable winds; even a 10kts HW would have helped tons and not given unacceptable structure turbulence.
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I was wondering why they didn’t wait till favorable winds; even a 10kts HW would have helped tons and not given unacceptable structure turbulence.
Click to expand...
Maybe they thought it would be cheating.
 
Until the landing gear gets caught in that fence and the plane flips inverted.
 
Landing short looks dangerous, long maybe they can regain lift after running off the end. Video was kinda meh for me
 
Piperonca said:
Until the landing gear gets caught in that fence and the plane flips inverted.
Click to expand...
Hence the steep approach; falling over the edge ain't no big deal, as that was the takeoff technique.
 
texasclouds said:
Landing short looks dangerous, long maybe they can regain lift after running off the end. Video was kinda meh for me
Click to expand...
I saw a video showing them doing that on takeoff. There's plenty of height to accommodate diving to gain airspeed.
 
Piperonca said:
Until the landing gear gets caught in that fence and the plane flips inverted.
Click to expand...

It looks like they removed and/or covered the fall fencing. As long as he didn't short it he would just run off the other side and have plenty of altitude to recover. Other than the cool/wow factor, I really don't suspect this was that difficult from a performance capability standpoint of the aircraft and pilot. I've watched cub guys here take off and land on the runway aiming point markings for fun.
 
Piperonca said:
Until the landing gear gets caught in that fence and the plane flips inverted.
Click to expand...
There is sort of a low framework around the circumference - I'm not sure it would qualify as a fence. It looks like they put some paneling over it for this event. (The paneling is not present in other photos.) It looks pretty dangerous though. A little lower looks like it could have been catastrophic. :yikes:

230315121754-czepiela-plane-landing-burj-al-arab-helipad-top.jpg
 
I enjoyed watching the facial expressions on girl riding in back.!!
 
Let'sgoflying! said:
I was wondering why they didn’t wait till favorable winds; even a 10kts HW would have helped tons and not given unacceptable structure turbulence.
Click to expand...

Mike talks about that in the "how we did it video". The short answer is that the risk of swirly winds was greater than the risk of overrunning.

There was an amazing about of engineering that went into this. Way more than just a cowboy strapping on a carbon cub and yelling "ye-haw"

 
Capture.PNG

I'm a little bit surprised it's an N registered airplane. Weren't a few rules getting bent?
 
Sac Arrow said:
View attachment 115823

I'm a little bit surprised it's an N registered airplane. Weren't a few rules getting bent?
Click to expand...

What rules are being bent? N-registered aircraft fly to Dubai every day (airliners). Red Bull isn't subject to FAA jurisdiction in UAE, so I'm sure they got whatever waiver they needed from the Emirati gov't. Dubai loves that kind of publicity. I think they've even had a tennis match between Agassi and Federer on that same helipad at the top of the Burj al Arab.
 
FastEddieB said:
Maybe an admin can combine the threads?

(Weird that mine was posted yesterday and had multiple views but no comments until now, while the other exploded)
Click to expand...

I liked and subscribed!
 
After he bounced it the first couple approaches, the last successful one was very flat making it a bit easier to stick.
 
rwellner98 said:
Mike talks about that in the "how we did it video". The short answer is that the risk of swirly winds was greater than the risk of overrunning.

There was an amazing about of engineering that went into this. Way more than just a cowboy strapping on a carbon cub and yelling "ye-haw"

Click to expand...
But he did say yee-haw...right?
 
SoonerAviator said:
What rules are being bent? N-registered aircraft fly to Dubai every day (airliners). Red Bull isn't subject to FAA jurisdiction in UAE, so I'm sure they got whatever waiver they needed from the Emirati gov't. Dubai loves that kind of publicity. I think they've even had a tennis match between Agassi and Federer on that same helipad at the top of the Burj al Arab.
Click to expand...

Maybe that is my confusion. I thought US pilots flying N registered aircraft in foreign places were still subject to FAA regulation.

Aren't parachutes were required for aerobatic flight when carrying a passenger?
 
Sac Arrow said:
Maybe that is my confusion. I thought US pilots flying N registered aircraft in foreign places were still subject to FAA regulation.

Aren't parachutes were required for aerobatic flight when carrying a passenger?
Click to expand...

In the US, parachutes are required for aerobatic flight, which is defined as pitch greater than 30 degrees and bank more than 60 degrees. It doesn't matter if there is a passenger.

There is an exception for spin training for CFI candidates.
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
In the US, parachutes are required for aerobatic flight, which is defined as pitch greater than 30 degrees and bank more than 60 degrees. It doesn't matter if there is a passenger.
Click to expand...
Those pitch and bank angles don’t define aerobatic flight, but they are the limits in the parachute regulation…and yes, it does matter whether there is a passenger on board or not. See 91.305.

91.303 defines aerobatic flight as
an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, an abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for normal flight.
Click to expand...

the two are often intermingled, but are technically different.

There is an exception for spin training for CFI candidates.
Click to expand...
…among other things. ;)
 
Gilbert Buettner said:
In the US, parachutes are required for aerobatic flight, which is defined as pitch greater than 30 degrees and bank more than 60 degrees. It doesn't matter if there is a passenger.
Click to expand...

No, a parachute is not required for aerobatics if flying solo:

§ 91.307(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds -
(1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or
(2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.
 
Part 91 operational rules probably don't mater much outside of US airspace.
 
MajorTurbulence said:
After he bounced it the first couple approaches, the last successful one was very flat making it a bit easier to stick.
Click to expand...
The claim is he was doing touch and goes for practice. And then the wind was just right so he decided to land instead of Another Touch and Go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top