Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Toof on July 27, 2009, 11:24:00 PM
-
Sorry if this has been posted before, but this video is just nuts. I give it a 1 for musical score, and a 12 for footage. Rafales and Mirages, 2 beautiful planes. There are also some videos along the lines of this one, of french helo pilots....it's pretty insane too. If this is a repost, feel free to delete.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ol74hOJtWOA&feature=fvw
-
they are trying to been cool like americans pilots
-
they'll never be as cool as my pixel 190
-
Yee-haw. :O
I always like skimming mountains and banking over at the crest and pulling down the other side...can't imagine the thrill of doing it at 500mph, in real life.
-
they'll never be as cool as my pixel 190
Heck, I bet i am better in my plastic C-47 then they are.
-
Having been guilty of a few low passes myself, (there's video). After watching that, I now realise that I haven't got low enough yet. Must try harder. :uhoh
-
Having been guilty of a few low passes myself, (there's video). After watching that, I now realise that I haven't got low enough yet. Must try harder. :uhoh
I got to low and close to the trees. keep dieing. I like to see them fly throu two fight hangers.
-
What's a "fight hanger"?
-
We got the Air Races tonight in SEA1... Come fly the Tempest against 20+ others. You kinda get this same feeling :rock
-
I used to love flying through fighter hangars in AH, except when I augered :D But in real life I try not to get too low because if the crash doesn't kill me the boss will, :furious besides it always feels lower than it is. Having said that he could replace me and the plane the following week.
There is a guy based on the airstrip I fly out of that flies a Cardinal so low that I swear you can see the top of his wings from certain angles. But he will kill himself one day when a wheel touches the ground. He won't listen though.
-
There is a guy based on the airstrip I fly out of that flies a Cardinal so low that I swear you can see the top of his wings from certain angles. But he will kill himself one day when a wheel touches the ground. He won't listen though.
Slap him in the face or stomach and have a heart to heart. Tell him he's gonna die if he doesn't change the way he thinks about aviation. Hopefully he gets the idea. Flying is not a right, it's a privilege. How many hours does he have anyway?
-
There is a guy based on the airstrip I fly out of that flies a Cardinal so low that I swear you can see the top of his wings from certain angles. But he will kill himself one day when a wheel touches the ground. He won't listen though.
Pilots should start a crash bingo similar to skydiver's "bounce bingo" (bet on who will be the next to die, the person who guessed right wins the pot).
Sometimes, seeing their own name on "the list" works better than sermons to make people realize that they are doing something wrong or are pushing the limits.
-
Here's three more films in the same genre.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=358_1230034112
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=606_1230043447
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=83c_1230060168
-
Those were great.
-
Tell him he's gonna die if he doesn't change the way he thinks about aviation.
He's been told but isn't listening. You can only do so much. His family own the land on which the strip is situated. He has an less than a couple of hundred hours. Maybe one day, he'll do it in front of a vacationing FAA inspector. He has an FAA private certificate and the aircraft is N registered. I'd love to see that ramp check.
-
If he is doing it on his own property, in his own aircraft, and endangering only his own life, then he has every right to do it. Or perhaps we should ban all "extreme sports" while we're at it?
-
I have more than that.
Sad to see someone in a mind state like that. If he's got some money (seems like it), tell him to get some aerobatics instruction. That may quell his craving for 'danger', but will teach him life saving techniques as well.
-
Funny how the original "barnstormers" were considered heroes, while modern day thrill seekers are morons who don't deserve the "privilege" of flying (what a commie thing to say!)
(http://www.century-of-flight.net/Aviation%20history/daredevils/13.jpg)
-
Funny how the original "barnstormers" were considered heroes, while modern day thrill seekers are morons who don't deserve the "privilege" of flying (what a commie thing to say!)
Nobody (but you) said that he doesn't deserve the "privilege" of flying. Cpxxx said that the guy was doing things above his head and tried to put some sense into him.
-
Flying is not a right, it's a privilege.
-
That's correct, it is a privilege to fly. I don't consider trying to fly 2 ft off the ground or under bridges, or whatever a Right. ESPECIALLY with less than 200 hrs. That's how you lose a friend, brother, Dad, etc etc.
Who the hell was knocking Barnstormers here?
(http://images.fanpop.com/images/image_uploads/Jack-Black-goes-Anti-Troll-jack-black-626615_200_200.jpg)
-
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he has the God given right to do whatever he wants, including losing his own life. That's my opinion.
-
If he is doing it on his own property, in his own aircraft, and endangering only his own life, then he has every right to do it. Or perhaps we should ban all "extreme sports" while we're at it?
You are absolutely correct but he buzzed me while sitting there with a load of innocent customers on board. He also buzzes the public area. That's the problem. It's one thing to fly low over Chad or down the runway as I have done but that's different. He does endanger other people and ignores warnings. That's the problem.
-
That's very different, I agree.
-
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he has the God given right to do whatever he wants, including losing his own life. That's my opinion.
The things he does in the air can and will affect those on the ground.
-
If he is doing it on his own property, in his own aircraft, and endangering only his own life, then he has every right to do it.
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he has the God given right to do whatever he wants, including losing his own life. That's my opinion.
-
Those little things on the ground called houses that these other little things called people live in are under airplanes when they're in flight.
I don't care if he owns the airport it doesn't take long to transit the area reaching the end of the boundary where some those little things where other little things live. If I'm transitioning the area of his airport at 3000' and he does some wreckless bellybutton stunt that brings him in some ballistic trajectory toward me it's my tail on the line too.
The love muffin flys over houses, he flys over people and he puts them at risk by doing said love muffinish things.
-
If he's been warned more than once or did that over people and property he needs to have his license pulled either temporarily or permanently. Invite the FAA (or Brit equivalent) over during the time he normally does this crap to witness it.
-
Those little things on the ground called houses that these other little things called people live in are under airplanes when they're in flight.
I don't care if he owns the airport it doesn't take long to transit the area reaching the end of the boundary where some those little things where other little things live. If I'm transitioning the area of his airport at 3000' and he does some wreckless bellybutton stunt that brings him in some ballistic trajectory toward me it's my tail on the line too.
The love muffin flys over houses, he flys over people and he puts them at risk by doing said love muffinish things.
That has no bearing on what I said. I was very specific: "As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property..." If he flies over people's houses he does not fit that criteria now does he. Basic reading comprehension Mr. Golfer. Fact=criteria= :aok Fact≠criteria= :furious
-
My reading comprehension is fine. You're overlooking numerous aspects:
When he sells the aircraft and does not disclose the extra stresses he may place on it causing an accident.
Those same extra stresses causing fatigue which can make things fail before they're supposed to. This endangers the people below him.
The extra wear placed upon the instrumentation alone during what I'll call "unconventional" flight or operations outside their intended design envelopes raises the chances they will fail. He will be over people when this happens.
I can go on and on and on with further examples including situations where exactly those same things have caused compromised components to fail taking innocent lives.
Just because he does something today over his own property doesn't mean he won't endanger someone else tomorrow (or even one minute later)
He doesn't own the world and he certainly doesn't always fly only over his own populated land. He's a love muffin.
-
Drama Queens ... :rolleyes:
-
What do you know? You're French! :P
:lol
-
:lol
Joking appart, are those vids really impressing people? Flying low is the easiest thing a pilot can do. :confused:
-
Low is one thing, carving canyons in a Mirage is a totally different beast :) Just can't even begin to imagine what that would be like. To go tearing through passes 90 feet wide doing 500+mpg...just nuts, in my book.
Check out the Helo stuff....they raze the land about 5-10 feet off the ground.
Seen plenty of good clips of American flying, but nothing like the French were pulling in that video. Feel free to point me to American pilots engaging in the same shenanigans. :aok
-
Military & civilian pilots from all over the world do the same stuff. The French don't have a special ability that nobody else have. :salute
-
Military & civilian pilots from all over the world do the same stuff. The French don't have a special ability that nobody else have. :salute
Don't doubt that in the least. Just haven't seen a more impressive video of it being done until I ran across this one. Would love to see some F-16's, or Harriers down in the dirt like that. :salute
Not knocking any countries Air Guard by any means, but going through those canyons the way they did just made appreciate all pilots that much more.
-
My reading comprehension is fine. You're overlooking numerous aspects:
When he sells the aircraft and does not disclose the extra stresses he may place on it causing an accident.
Those same extra stresses causing fatigue which can make things fail before they're supposed to. This endangers the people below him.
The extra wear placed upon the instrumentation alone during what I'll call "unconventional" flight or operations outside their intended design envelopes raises the chances they will fail. He will be over people when this happens.
I can go on and on and on with further examples including situations where exactly those same things have caused compromised components to fail taking innocent lives.
Just because he does something today over his own property doesn't mean he won't endanger someone else tomorrow (or even one minute later)
He doesn't own the world and he certainly doesn't always fly only over his own populated land. He's a love muffin.
Hahaha, what a stretch! When he sells the aircraft... Wait a minute! Wasn't he supposed to crash and burn before that? Also, you now assume he's also a liar and would not disclose the extra stresses you claim he place on the aircraft. The U.S. used aircraft marketplace holds as sacred the understanding that the buyer must conduct its own inspection of the aircraft to determine that the aircraft is in an airworthy condition, as determined by a mutually agreed upon inspection facility; is otherwise satisfactory to the buyer; and that following correction of any airworthiness discrepancies, the aircraft is sold "as is" without any representations or warranties from the seller concerning the condition of the aircraft. It has been a fundamental principle of U.S. transactions that once title transfers at closing, the new owner accepts all responsibility for the condition of the aircraft and its equipment, including discrepancies that the inspection facility may have failed to identify during the conduct of a pre-purchase inspection.
-
Your delusion that it's possible to do reckless thing in an airplane and only affect yourself is part of the problem. That's simply not possible.
Airplanes don't fly only over the owners private property 100% of the time. You're endangering more than just yourself and your airplane.
Also no such right exists. He has an obligation to operate his airplane in accordance with the regulations set forward by the country in which he operates. The privileges of his pilot certificate are predicated upon this and if he is operating outside of those boundaries (careless and reckless operations do count as violations) he is in effect willingly jeopardizing his privileges. They're not rights.
Your most recent post is correct in principal however lawsuits to assign liability to sellers who knowingly misrepresent an aircrafts condition at the time of sale. Fatigue to structural components in addition to accelerated wear on the instrumentation are some of he very basic things that can arise out of flying an airplane recklessly. It does happen with amateur as well as professional pilots and it's something I have no tolerance for. Get your kicks for aerobatics in an airplane built for it. If you need to operate your airplane contrary to the AFM or what's accepted to be good practice you need a new hobby to risk your life with because when you turn into a smoking hole it affects the rest of us.
The guy remains a love muffin.
-
You're still not getting it; "as long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property..." The person you're describing clearly does not fit the criteria I stated, so what is your problem?
Could you please point to such a lawsuit?
-
Could you please point to such a lawsuit?
I could. With first hand experience no less. To appease you? Not a snowballs chance in hell.
You're still not getting it; "as long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property
You're not getting that I get it. What you're also not getting is these actions are not going to be confined to the length and width of his little grass runway. They are also directly contrary to the regulations set forward by the issuing agency of his pilot certificate, the FAA. This in effect puts his privileges in jeopardy. There are differences between rights and privileges and the authority to fly an aircraft is without a doubt the latter.
-
I could. With first hand experience no less. To appease you? Not a snowballs chance in hell.
In other words: You can't.
What you're also not getting is these actions are not going to be confined to the length and width of his little grass runway.
Who is this "he" you're talking about? If you mean Cpxxx' "friend" then his culpability was agreed upon on page two; before you joined this thread even. So I repeat: What is your problem?
-
In other words: You can't.
No. In the words I used.
So I repeat: What is your problem?
This:
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he has the God given right to do whatever he wants, including losing his own life.
No such right, stated or implied, exists. I have no qualms with someone killing themselves in fact there are many ways to go about doing it. I take issue with people using airplanes to do it even more with them using airplanes recklessly to do so unintentionally. You initially replied to cpxxx that his associate was well within his god given rights to act as he was. You then retract it when you find out that in fact such activities do in fact endanger other innocent people who want no part with his antics. My point is that those actions were not appropriate long before you agreed to it and outside of an airshow demonstration or practice session have no place from the outset. I'm not wrong about that.
-
No such right, stated or implied, exists.
If no law prohibits it, stated or implied, is is legal by default.
I have no qualms with someone killing themselves in fact there are many ways to go about doing it. I take issue with people using airplanes to do it even more with them using airplanes recklessly to do so unintentionally.
The law does not care what you take issues with. Nor do I.
You initially replied to cpxxx that his associate was well within his god given rights to act as he was.
Within the parameters of my stated criteria: "as long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property". Cpxxx clarified that the person in question did not fit the criteria, I agreed and that was it... Until you entered the thread.
-
If no law prohibits it, stated or implied, is is legal by default.
The law does not care what you take issues with. Nor do I.
Within the parameters of my stated criteria: "as long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property". Cpxxx clarified that the person in question did not fit the criteria, I agreed and that was it... Until you entered the thread.
A.) 91.13
B.) You seem to because you keep replying.
C.) My initial post did not challenge your agreeing with cpxxx's assesment. In fact all it said was what he does in the air does affect those on the ground. It also affects the perception of the public upon general aviation which is not a positive one these days. Everything he does in the airplane affects others whether you admit it or not.
-
"Sec. 91.13 - Careless or reckless operation.
(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.
(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another."
Thank you for confirming my point. As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he can do pretty much whatever he wants.
-
I had a snazzy reply and was getting links, cases and references together but it's not worth it even on this lazy afternoon.
Since there seems to be some confusion about "he" if you're referring to some hypothetical guy who doesn't really exist then sure. Assuming he owns his airplane. Assuming he doens't carry passengers. Assuming he's not flying over someone elses property. Assuming a lot of things.
If you're referring to cpxxx's love muffin associate then not only is it no, it's hell no.
-
You guys are really stretching "flying low" into aerobatic maneuver or even aggressive flight. Flying that low does not induce more stress on the aircraft than other routine tasks. So to argue he is endangering potential buyers is a little out there. I also fail to see how "flying low" effects instrumentation more than any other task. If I make a level pass on the field do the instruments care whether I am at 5 feet or 50? If you want to argue the endangerment to people and property while he is flying that is fine. Lets not get so far out there that a simple low pass is overstressing an aircraft. If you do in theory any maneuver other than a simple banking turn or descent/ascent could be called into question. This of course not even counting other aggressive/training flight like spin-recovery and stall-recovery. These of course DO put more stress on the aircraft than any gentle low pass. If the guy is yanking and banking I would agree with you completely. Since it was not specifically stated I am assuming he was just coming in low.....
Strip
-
I had a snazzy reply and was getting links, cases and references together but it's not worth it even on this lazy afternoon.
Since there seems to be some confusion about "he" if you're referring to some hypothetical guy who doesn't really exist then sure. Assuming he owns his airplane. Assuming he doens't carry passengers. Assuming he's not flying over someone elses property. Assuming a lot of things.
If you're referring to cpxxx's love muffin associate then not only is it no, it's hell no.
The legal text is clear and unambiguous. "No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another."
The limit of the law is: "Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation."
The prohibition part of the law is: "No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner"
The law's legal definition of "a careless or reckless manner" is: "To endanger the life or property of another."
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he can do pretty much whatever he wants.
-
outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he can do pretty much whatever he wants.
I'm referring to cpxxx's individual and have all along. You haven't been. The catalyst for your broken record has been my statement of what he does in the air does affect those on the ground. This is 100% true and not up for debate.
I had a little bleed over from a separate discussion that is going on about doing aerobatics in airplanes not approved for such. Including in business jets, with passengers and during revenue flights. I've been pre-primed to address those issues because the behavior of our love muffin who wants to tie the record for lowest flying pilot is just the beginning for ultra melons who do the same. At any rate I lost track of which discussion was going on where.
-
I always love watching videos on jets flying low to the ground. Nothing quite like it!
This is one of my favorites. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e35U7P_bfzI
-
I'm referring to cpxxx's individual and have all along. You haven't been.
Then why did you start off by quoting my clearly conditional statement?
As long as he's outside of controlled airspace and endangers no one but himself and his own property he has the God given right to do whatever he wants, including losing his own life. That's my opinion.
Conditions which I later learned the person in question did not meet, and as Cpxxx and I had already agreed on before you entered the discussion. Why did you quote me if you were not referring to my statement?
-
I always love watching videos on jets flying low to the ground. Nothing quite like it!
This is one of my favorites. ;)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e35U7P_bfzI
Some of that video is taken from this one: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3tf_YPfVU8
Interesting insight to the many uses of the French IR targeting system. ;)
-
Golfer, I don't believe Die Hard will get the point. After all, if he promotes a hard death, why would he support your claim? ;)
-
All I care about is the law and what's right. I'm a fairly libertarian kinda guy.
-
The debate got interesting. However all this has stirred me to think seriously again about crimping his antics. I will have a chat with his brother, who is a Commercial pilot and ask him to have a word. At the very least, he needs to stop buzzing the public area. That won't prevent him doing it when no one is around.
-
they are trying to been cool like americans pilots
And Americas pilots are trying to be cool like the Swiss pilots
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJD4KlmF3Ag&feature=PlayList&p=237EFC2AE626522C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=11
-
You are absolutely correct but he buzzed me while sitting there with a load of innocent customers on board. He also buzzes the public area. That's the problem. It's one thing to fly low over Chad or down the runway as I have done but that's different. He does endanger other people and ignores warnings. That's the problem.
Die Hard. Your wrong.
-
Die Hard. Your wrong.
BMathis, welcome to page two.
That's very different, I agree.
How could you not notice my reply to Cpxxx immediately after his post?
-
:lol
Oh you're so right! How dumb of me. I never even saw your posts. I'm just posting to be heard, and so everyone can read what I say. No reason to look any further than the 1st post, right?
-
Die Hard
Suppose this guy does crash , on his own land , at some point fire brigade and medic's are going to get involved , they are going to have to risk thier own lives trying to help the pilot .
-
Die Hard
Suppose this guy does crash , on his own land , at some point fire brigade and medic's are going to get involved , they are going to have to risk thier own lives trying to help the pilot .
How is that different from having to rescue a mountain climber, sky jumper, sailor or unfortunate practitioner of any other less-than-safe recreational pastime?
(http://www.nps.gov/yose/planyourvisit/images/Pope_Royal_ArchesSH_065.jpg)