|
Hero sounds a lot better these days than "pilot
error".
If it's a manifestation of the media that's just
fine.
Lets not miss the fact that his first plan was to
return to the airport of departure,
(the infamous "dead man's turn") but then almost
immediately realized it was too risky.
He earned all his pay in that minute.
Imagine the panic that would have happened if he'd
hit a tall building in New York.
Mark Ravinski
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Sunday, January 18, 2009 3:02
PM
Subject: [LML] Re: Fw: [LML] GEESE
The guy is a hero. He landed a airliner glider FULL of people
and fuel on water without destroying it or killing anyone.
He is not only
a hero, he is a damn good pilot. If you dont think he is a hero what does it
take to be a hero these days? How many lives do we need to save to be hero?
155 wasnt enough?
Bryan
Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
From: "Greg Ward"
Date: Sun, 18 Jan
2009 10:35:33 -0500
To:
<lml@lancaironline.net>
Subject: [LML] Re: Fw: [LML]
GEESE
C'mon Chuck, everyone's looking for a hero, and with
this guys gliding experience, he pulled it off. It could have been much
worse.
Greg Ward
Lancair 20B N178RG in progress
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, January 17, 2009 7:54
AM
Subject: [LML] Re: Fw: [LML]
GEESE
Not to pop the 'feel good' bubble of public heros or anything, but
why am I a little underwhelmed at the 'miraculous' performance of the USAir
pilot? To his credit, at least he remembered to NOT put his gear
down. After that, I'm having a hard time identifying heroic, let alone
the miraculous components to this 'incident'.
Chuck Jensen
Hello Matt,
As for altitudes geese and other birds fly
high and at night. See article from the USGS.
Migration of Birds
Migratory Flight Altitude
While factors regulating the heights at which birds migrate are not clear,
there are many obvious reasons why flying at higher altitudes may be
advantageous. High-altitude flight may be used to locate familiar
landmarks, fly over fog or clouds, surmount physical barriers, gain
advantage of a following wind, or maintain a better thermoregulatory
balance.
In general, estimates of bird heights based on direct observation are
quite unreliable except under special conditions. A Eurasian Sparrowhawk
could be distinguished at 800 feet but disappeared from site at 2,800
feet. A Rook (a European member of the crow family) could be recognized at
1,000 feet but disappeared from sight at 3,300 feet. An interesting
experiment with an inflated model of a vulture painted black with a wing
span of 7 feet 10 inches illustrated similar limitations. When released
from an airplane at 4,700 feet, it was barely visible and invisible
without binoculars at 5,800 feet. At 7,000 feet it was not picked up even
when 12 power binoculars were used. Radar studies have demonstrated more
accurately than human vision that 95 percent of the migratory movements
occur at less than 10,000 feet, the bulk of the movements occurring under
3,000 feet.
Yet birds do fly at higher altitudes. Bird flight at 20,000 feet, where
less than half the oxygen is present than at sea level, is impressive if
only because the work is achieved by living muscle tissue. A Himalayan
mountain climber at 16,000 feet was rather amazed when a flock of geese
flew northward about two miles over his head honking as they went. At
20,000 feet a man has a hard time talking while running, but those geese
were probably flying at 27,000 feet and even calling while they traveled
at this tremendous height. Numerous other observations have come from the
Himalayas. Observers at 14,000 feet recorded storks and cranes flying so
high that they could be seen only through field glasses. In the same area
large vultures were seen soaring at 25,000 feet and an eagle carcass was
found at 26,000 feet. The expedition to Mt. Everest in 1952 found
skeletons of a Northern Pintail and a Black-tailed Godwit at 16,400 feet
on Khumbu Glacier. Bar-headed Geese have been observed flying over the
highest peaks (29,000+ feet) even though a 10,000-foot pass was nearby.
Probably at least 30 species regularly cross these high passes. Other
accurate records on altitude of migratory flights are scanty, although
altimeter observations from airplanes and radar are becoming more frequent
in the literature. For example, a Mallard was struck by a commercial
airliner at 21,000 feet over the Nevada desert. Radar observations have
revealed that birds on long-distance flights fly at higher altitudes than
short-distance migrants. It has been hypothesized that advantageous tail
winds of greater velocity are found higher up and that the cooler air
minimizes the demand for evaporative water loss to regulate body
temperature under the exertion of flight. Radar studies also have shown
that nocturnal migrants fly at different altitudes at different times
during the night. Birds generally take off shortly after sundown and
rapidly gain maximum altitude. This peak is maintained until around
midnight, then the travelers gradually descend until daylight. Thus, there
is considerable variation, but for most small birds the favored altitude
appears to be between 500 and 1,000 feet. Some nocturnal migrants
(probably shorebirds) fly over the ocean at 15,000 or even 20,000 feet.
Nocturnal migrants also fly slightly higher than diurnal migrants.
Observations made from lighthouses and other vantage points indicate that
certain migrants commonly travel at altitudes of very few feet to a few
hundred feet above sea or land. Sandpipers, Red-necked Phalaropes, and
various sea ducks have been seen flying so low they were visible only as
they topped a wave. Observers stationed at lighthouses and lightships off
the English coast have similarly recorded the passage of landbirds flying
just above the surface of the water and rarely rising above 200 feet over
the waves.
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009 10:57 AM
Subject: Re: [LML] GEESE
Hello Matt,
In my experience, geese fly where and when
they choose. I flew IFR through Pennsylvania amid layers of clouds
at 6,000'. ATC called out traffic. It was an eschelon of geese
above me. I flew VFR over Harford, Ct. at 2,000'. A Canada
goose was flying from left to right a few hundred feet above me.
Just as it passed the fuselage above it folded its wings and dove directly
into my right engine (Cessna 320). It damaged the spinner,
propeller, nose bowl, lower nacelle, engine cross over tube and deposited
lots of itself in the engine nacelle. I was watching it the whole
time. I couldn't maneuver the plane fast enough to avoid it.
How could an airliner? From that experience, I now aim at any goose
or eschelon of geese on an converging path, expecting them to dive out of
the way as I get closer.
Jabe Luttrell
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Friday, January 16, 2009
10:41 AM
Subject: [LML] GEESE
Opinion by Matt
Reeves:
FLOCKS OF GEESE FLY SLOW and
usually in a "V" shape, AND ARE EASY TO SEE ON A BLUE SKY DAY - AND ARE
sometimes DETECTABLE ON RADAR both on airplanes and on the
ground. Pilots WERE heros once plane hit the flock, but
COULD have the collision with geese been avoided and the answer may be
YES.
It is possible that NEITHER pilot was
looking straight out the window because the airplane was on an instrument flight plan = meaning,
controllers on the ground were responsible for aircraft
separation.
ALSO, this aircraft floated for enough
time to save the passengers and did not break apart mainly because of
pilot skill bringing it down to a shallow angle of impact at the slowest
possible airspeed above stall speed AND it is built out of CARBON FIBER
which is significantly LIGHTER and stronger than aluminum and more
flexible AND more seamless preventing instant flooding, thus saving
lives (sorry RV guys).
Baggage and landing gear
compartments sealed with air also helped buoyancy. PILOTS WERE
HEROS in saving lives, but the accident MAY have been avoidable simply
by looking out the
window. Future geese avoidance may include
horns on aircraft, much like deer horns on cars, radar, and simply
looking out the window on the departure and arrival checklists.
This aircraft was on an IFR
flight plan meaning looking out the window was not
required by the pilots since the controllers on the ground were
responsible for separating aircraft. However, at low
altitude, at geese flight levels, looking
out the window should be mandatory. Most geese do not fly in
clouds.
All points I have not seen reported.
What's
next? Billions in research and in the end, no changes except a
Goose Therapist Lady will make off with millions and will simply tell us
the geese are depressed that we are taking over their skies. And
in the end? I will marry
her.
Matt
marv@lancair.net wrote:
Posted
for David Standish <carbonflier@bresnan.net>:
That
being said I still need a couple more pilots to get Pete to come out
to
Montana this summer. Montana is a great place to
fly. Lots of room for
training. Billings is
a great small city. Yellowstone Park is
nearby. And a
local FBO has agreed to discount
fuel. Please contact me if you are
interested.
David
Standish
flypetezacc@aol.com
wrote:
> **
>
> The root problem is getting the
message out to those that think they
> do not need
training. 43% of the accidents are people with less than
> 100 hours in type. But, there is a very large
number of accidents
> from people with 5000-20000
hours. The ease of receiving training has
> never
been easier I implore those that do not need training to get it
> anyway!
>
> Grassroots effort. Go down the hangar
row and let the lancair pilot
> know why its important to get
training from ANY qualified
> instructor. help make 2009 the
safest year for Lancair pilots.
>
> Thank
you,
>
> Peter Zaccagnino
> HP-AT.com, Inc
>
1046 River Ave
> Flemington, NJ 08822
> 908 391
2001
--
For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html
|