21–30 of 30 posts
That is a seriously talented pilot. He makes it look like a natural maneuver but the margin for error was incredibly low.
I'm happy he succeeded, this time, but I can't resist nitpicking the flaw in your argument. Can you tell I'm reading Fooled by Randomness?
Very impressive how slow he got the plane to go. Without using the engines for reverse thrust, I don't know how one would slow down.
As a pilot, it's great to watch a guy make something hair-raising into something that looks like a milk run. I'd be interested to see if the pilot had a float rating. I'd also be curious as to how the wind was in relation to the river. Ideally the plane would be pointing directly upwind as it hit the water. However the details worked out (and we pilots love the details) the crew had only seconds to configure and land…
Do you remember what air line was involved in the South American incident?
That is a seriously talented pilot. He makes it look like a natural maneuver but the margin for error was incredibly low.
Is he? If he had to do that 100 times, how many times would he succeed? What would be the average across all pilots for that type? What would be the variance? I'm happy he succeeded, this time, but I can't resist nitpicking the flaw in your argument. Can you tell I'm reading Fooled by Randomness ?
As a pilot, it's great to watch a guy make something hair-raising into something that looks like a milk run. I'd be interested to see if the pilot had a float rating. I'd also be curious as to how the wind was in relation to the river. Ideally the plane would be pointing directly upwind as it hit the water. However the details worked out (and we pilots love the details) the crew had only seconds to configure and land…
There was also Air Transat flight 236 that landed in the Azores: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_Transat_Flight_236 Do you remember what air line was involved in the South American incident?
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/re...
The pilots requested permission to fly the plane off the levee (!) but were denied.
There's a whole series of interesting power-out landings, including the DC-9 at Sioux City. A recap would be a good idea for a blog post for someone....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was an incredible feat, but I don't think that knowing to keep the gear up when landing on water is particularly remarkable.
noonespecial is not talking about landing gear, he's probably talking about things like this: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/48376/plane_crashes_on_water/
As a pilot, it's great to watch a guy make something hair-raising into something that looks like a milk run. I'd be interested to see if the pilot had a float rating. I'd also be curious as to how the wind was in relation to the river. Ideally the plane would be pointing directly upwind as it hit the water. However the details worked out (and we pilots love the details) the crew had only seconds to configure and land…
The Gimli Glider incident sounds incredible. I can't imagine how spooky it would be to be in a jet at 40,000 feet and have the engines go silent. How much of the noise in a jet is engine noise vs. air resistance?
That is a seriously talented pilot. He makes it look like a natural maneuver but the margin for error was incredibly low.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
noonespecial is not talking about landing gear, he's probably talking about things like this: http://www.metacafe.com/watch/48376/plane_crashes_on_water/
That's a wreck in Ethopia where the hijacker grabbed the controls at the last moment before ditching and crashed the plane.
Very impressive how slow he got the plane to go. Without using the engines for reverse thrust, I don't know how one would slow down.
He used ground-effect to ride the plane on a cushion of air. http://news.google.com/news?q=%22ground%20effect%22