Kenny Phillips
Final Approach
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2018
- Messages
- 5,651
- Display Name
Display name:
Kenny Phillips
This guy has adventures.
This is in the Turbulence race plane.
This is in the Turbulence race plane.
I agree but I would not compare him to Musk - this guy is creating Frankenstein-like contraptions for his own use while Musk runs companies selling hundreds of thousands of advanced cars, continuously delivering ****load of cargo into space with reusable rockets at half the cost, providing fast and reliable Internet access to most remote locations on this planet and now even running a glorified internet message board so yeah … both of these guys play completely different ball.I know he's got the hordes of sycophants and Musk-like idolation/blind following as some sort of innovator savior of GA, but I find his "look at all the expensive sh%t that gets blown up like it's nothing" shtick just low-key $ humblebrag tbh. 2/10 would not recommend. Flame away.
Well huh… I thought it was just me. He does impressive work, yet I just can’t stand to watch his videos.I know he's got the hordes of sycophants and Musk-like idolation/blind following as some sort of innovator savior of GA, but I find his "look at all the expensive sh%t that gets blown up like it's nothing" shtick just low-key $ humblebrag tbh. 2/10 would not recommend. Flame away.
With 400+ knots cruise up there it can race just about anything … I think he meant it as a metaphorI see its described as a "race plane". Where does it race? What class or organization?
"In the quest for even more speed, Mike continued to modify his Legacy. In the unlimited category, he finished the 2013 Sport Air Racing League season as the only undefeated racer, setting multiple track records. At the Mojave Experimental Fly-In in 2014, he broke speed records in the 1,000- and 2,000-kilometer courses with a top speed of 319 mph. The following year, he took second place in the AirVenture Cup Race and didn’t like it. He came back in 2016 with Turbulence, a heavily modified Lancair Legacy and set a world record for the fastest single-engine turboprop with a speed of 438.02 mph. Turbulence has an 850-hp Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42 engine, custom five-blade MT propeller, and custom cowling, wings, and tail section. The entire fuselage is reinforced, and the airframe is 7 inches wider and 4 feet longer than a Legacy with a 32 percent larger rudder and tail."I see its described as a "race plane". Where does it race? What class or organization?
...Turbulence has an 850-hp Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42 engine, custom five-blade MT propeller, and custom cowling, wings, and tail section...
Actually, Mike and Mark have several businesses, and they talk about only one, Best Tugs, in videos.I agree but I would not compare him to Musk - this guy is creating Frankenstein-like contraptions for his own use while Musk runs companies selling hundreds of thousands of advanced cars, continuously delivering ****load of cargo into space with reusable rockets at half the cost, providing fast and reliable Internet access to most remote locations on this planet and now even running a glorified internet message board so yeah … both of these guys play completely different ball.
Doesn't that make it more valuable? There were those looking to see Turbulence at OSH. He explained why he wouldn't be there. He's as outgoing as I am introverted—that is to say, very much. Heart-on-sleeve.Not sure id have the nerves or the juevos to suffer an engine out and immediately start shooting a video on the event.
Kiss the ground. Call family. Figure out how to finish the trip. But not turn up the influencer. Not everything needs to be shared. At least not immediately. Especially not from a guy with his means where the influencer thing is not top 5 on the income list.
I can get annoyed at click-bait very quickly, and while I don't at all consider myself a Mike Patey sychophant, I honestly don't get the haters viewpoint on this guy. While there's an absolute glut of YT channels out there whose owners have no productive life in the real world, this guy has a ton of real world accomplishments that started long before his YT channel heated up.Actually, Mike and Mark have several businesses, and they talk about only one, Best Tugs, in videos.
Otherwise he would have been mobbed all the time he was at OSH with questions as to what happened and why it's not there (probably still will be). Now he can just say, "check out my YT video where I tell the whole story".Doesn't that make it more valuable? There were those looking to see Turbulence at OSH. He explained why he wouldn't be there.
It would be valuable if it was a primary source of income. I suspect his youtube bucks are a pittance to his other sources. Like you, I'm very introverted and so I don't understand peoples incessant need to put out "look at me" thingsDoesn't that make it more valuable? There were those looking to see Turbulence at OSH. He explained why he wouldn't be there. He's as outgoing as I am introverted—that is to say, very much. Heart-on-sleeve.
What if, now hear me out...While there's an absolute glut of YT channels out there whose owners have no productive life in the real world, this guy has a ton of real world accomplishments that started long before his YT channel heated up.
We have really set the bar pretty low, haven’t we?At least he didn't jump out of a perfectly good airplane with a fire bottle attached to his leg.
Hopefully not a massage parlor.Actually, Mike and Mark have several businesses, and they talk about only one, Best Tugs, in videos.
I appreciate you taking one for the team and watching it so we don't have to.Gryder's video is 41 minutes of nonsense.
We aren't worthy.[...] wouldn't know proper risk assessment and mitigation if it was a salmon filet that slapped him in the face.
Beginning with the nonsense of including Mike's event in a compilation titled "10 more senseless GA losses"...Gryder's video is 41 minutes of nonsense
I object to this comment. That is a waste of a good salmon filet.Gryder wouldn't know proper risk assessment and mitigation if it was a salmon filet that slapped him in the face.
Even keeping in mind that we're talking about a guy that threatened to run over a police car with a DC3, demanded that the police allow him to refuel and fly away, was suspended from delta, publishes videos in which he refuses to turn over pieces of crash debris to the NTSB for their investigation, got suspended from YT for spreading covid misinformation, is charged with tax evasion, nearly blew over a cub at airventure (is he banned from the event for that?) - this is "he should have landed in the grass" thing is still the dumbest thing he's yet said.Gryder: Ignoring Patey's smooth deadstick touchdown and rollout on RWY 31, DTSB expert says he should have landed the aircraft wheels up in the grass at KRST. He claims it would have been safer, because Mike touched down at 140 kts, and the gear and brakes could have been compromised by the engine explosion. There was also the danger of fire, because if the gear had failed, the airplane would have been showering sparks on the concrete runway. A nice sliding stop on the manicured grass would have been the correct choice.
Me: What the hell are you talking about? RWY 31/13 is 9,034' of 150' wide smooth concrete. Brakes were not needed. Sparks? The aircraft is constructed with composite materials. Even if the gear had folded up, the airplane almost certainly would have quickly skidded to a stop without the danger of a fire. Landing in the grass? The airport site is over 400 acres, and the crossing RWY 20/2 is 7,301'.
That much acreage and paved area requires a massive drainage system with concrete inlets, culverts, and sloped grading parallel to the runways and taxiways. In addition to those obstacles, there are also other structures adjacent to RWY 31/13 visible in satellite photos. Land in that nice green grass at 140 kts, and an element of the drainage system will at least rip off the wings. It might cause a fire or destroy the entire aircraft.
Which is a safer choice, the runway, or the grass? Duh.
Not to me. But then again, I know his history and experience, and somewhat demented sense of humor.Gryder comes across as a sim player who’s never been in a real airplane. Juat another Youtube commenter, like the gamers who try to “correct” real fighter pilots for not wearing gloves.
Landing gear up should be on a hard surface, like a runway. Uneven surfaces, like the grass between the runways will toss the airplane up and down and cause lots of damage. A smooth surface and a gentle(-ish) landing will likely only tear up the points of contact.
Seen it many times...
His hot take on this particular incident has me concluding that if he stays online spewing this kind of nonsense long enough, one of his followers has a good chance of being featured in one of his videos.Even keeping in mind that we're talking about a guy that threatened to run over a police car with a DC3, demanded that the police allow him to refuel and fly away, was suspended from delta, publishes videos in which he refuses to turn over pieces of crash debris to the NTSB for their investigation, got suspended from YT for spreading covid misinformation, is charged with tax evasion, nearly blew over a cub at airventure (is he banned from the event for that?) - this is "he should have landed in the grass" thing is still the dumbest thing he's yet said.
Everything quoted above is true, and to add to it: There is also the very real risk of some piece of the bottom of that plane digging into the turf and taking the plane from 140kt to 0kt in about 18 inches. And that's true in the case of a simple engine failure. In the case of an explosion, when the pilot doesn't know what the bottom of the cowl looks like, it would be even more of a fools errand.
But this is a guy who thinks he saved the day flipping a plane in a cornfield. So there is no reasoning with him. I was there that day, BTW. And *way* before he wrecked the plane, when he was approaching the STOL strip in a plane not equipped to use it, the three of us watching collectively had comments along the lines of "what is this jackass doing" (not knowing at the time that it was DG. He's also been uninvited from hosting that event ever again, BTW).
One can think of ways to explain any one of those incidents away, but the pattern with this guy has been established for years at this point. I think he's a menace to the industry and will be glad when he just goes away and attends full time to his fake animal charity (which isn't a registered charity, so who knows what happens to the money he collects as there are no filing requirements).
I met Mike at my local airport during an air race. I liked him, seemed like a very genuine guy. He obviously has a lot of money to throw at his toys and they're fun to watch.I can get annoyed at click-bait very quickly, and while I don't at all consider myself a Mike Patey sychophant, I honestly don't get the haters viewpoint on this guy. While there's an absolute glut of YT channels out there whose owners have no productive life in the real world, this guy has a ton of real world accomplishments that started long before his YT channel heated up.
Otherwise he would have been mobbed all the time he was at OSH with questions as to what happened and why it's not there (probably still will be). Now he can just say, "check out my YT video where I tell the whole story".
You could just call out the entire history of Gryder as disrespectful BS and save a lot of typing. As an expert in the accident investigation field I can't watch two seconds of any of his videos without throwing something at the screen.While the threads about the OSH T-6 crash and helicopter/gyroplane collision have commentary about Dan Gryder's blather regarding the incidents, no one has mentioned his dissection of Patey's engine failure and dead stick landing on RWY 31 at Rochester International Airport (KRST) from FL27. I'll be that guy. It might not be precise and all encompassing, but I'm just SGOTI.
It would be too boring to discuss all of his nonsense, so I'll stick to Gryder's incorrect first impressions of the incident and just two of his explanations (there were many others) of how Mike violated good ADM standards and made questionable decisions after the engine failure and during his emergency descent.
After viewing the video Patey released shortly after he landed at KRST, Gryder was initially critical of his apparent failure to declare an emergency. It wasn't until he interviewed Mike that he discovered the radio communications inserted into Patey's video did not include all of the transmissions between controllers and N707MM, and that he had declared an emergency just seconds after the engine exploded.
The criticism of flying at 27,000' above a cloud layer in an experimental aircraft powered by a untested engine:
Gryder: There was "just five hours" of flight time on the PT-6. That was unacceptable risk, and when the engine failed, he had to descend through IMC for an extended time. Patey should have been aware of the possibility of failure, and should have been at lower altitude and flying VFR.
Me: Five hours in that aircraft, and a few thousand on the wing of a commuter. It had been on scheduled maintenance and inspections were current. The catastrophic failure of a PT-6 at altitude is almost unheard of. The aircraft's altitude gave Patey time and distance to choose an airport with long runways and a ARFF Index B rating. Gryder wouldn't know proper risk assessment and mitigation if it was a salmon filet that slapped him in the face.
Besides all that, Patey built the airplane to go fast in the flight levels, not to chug along using flight following and burning lots of Jet A. That wouldn't make for an impressive flight and arrival at AirVenture, which was the reason for flying on oxygen and traveling at 493 MPH. (I'll note the irony of that statement. He did indeed make an impression. )
Next, his comments on the landing:
Gryder: Ignoring Patey's smooth deadstick touchdown and rollout on RWY 31, DTSB expert says he should have landed the aircraft wheels up in the grass at KRST. He claims it would have been safer, because Mike touched down at 140 kts, and the gear and brakes could have been compromised by the engine explosion. There was also the danger of fire, because if the gear had failed, the airplane would have been showering sparks on the concrete runway. A nice sliding stop on the manicured grass would have been the correct choice.
Me: What the hell are you talking about? RWY 31/13 is 9,034' of 150' wide smooth concrete. Brakes were not needed. Sparks? The aircraft is constructed with composite materials. Even if the gear had folded up, the airplane almost certainly would have quickly skidded to a stop without the danger of a fire. Landing in the grass? The airport site is over 400 acres, and the crossing RWY 20/2 is 7,301'.
That much acreage and paved area requires a massive drainage system with concrete inlets, culverts, and sloped grading parallel to the runways and taxiways. In addition to those obstacles, there are also other structures adjacent to RWY 31/13 visible in satellite photos. Land in that nice green grass at 140 kts, and an element of the drainage system will at least rip off the wings. It might cause a fire or destroy the entire aircraft.
Which is a safer choice, the runway, or the grass? Duh.
Gryder's video is 41 minutes of nonsense.