kgwilson Posted December 16, 2023 Posted December 16, 2023 I agree. Many pilots are weekend joy flighters or hire an aircraft and go for a trip once in a while. 800 hours is 20 hours a year and I know plenty of pilots who fly less than that. Life gets in the way of the majority of pilots who get their PPL or RPC. It is only a minority of amateur recreational pilots who would have anywhere near 800 hours over their lifetime of flying. 1
facthunter Posted December 16, 2023 Posted December 16, 2023 Plenty of pilots at the end of the war had only a bit over 300 Hours. It's hard to motive oneself to keep a high standard unless you work hard at it .My method was to keep instructing where you're supposed to be on top of everything.. I also got frequently asked to try out other people's planes , and there's heaps of other flying where I've shared it but not logged it. Nev
pmccarthy Posted December 16, 2023 Posted December 16, 2023 It’s probably the hours in the last twelve months and last three months that matters when it hits the fan. 2 1 1
Litespeed Posted December 16, 2023 Posted December 16, 2023 8 hours ago, RFguy said: I have already made my conclusion. And it is harsh ! Pilot became unconscious. Passengers were not sufficiently briefed on activating the CAPS system (shutdown engine, activate CAPS). Should have been with so many souls on board. It is a terrible ending to a what should have been survivable situation. Pilot only accumulated 800 hours in 38 years which for me is a question mark. For whatever reason he failed to provide duty of care to that family through his own errors. Given they were young children, it's a bit much to expect them to save the day. If a pilot can't control it or loses consciousness and spins the chance are very low. But you are correct, in that a design that needs a chute to recover is a death sentence unless the chute is pulled. That still assumes a spinning iced aircraft will recover and float gently down. A chute should be to save you after structural failure or engine loss. Not because it is unrecoverable from a spin. I personally do not like the SR22 but your life your choice. Given the destruction, I doubt we will ever know the actual truth. 1
Methusala Posted December 17, 2023 Posted December 17, 2023 NTSB interim report released last week. Says the aircraft landed fairly flat left wing low. Maybe flat spin. Difficult aircraft to recover from a spin. I've logged almost 900 hrs over 45 odd years. I fly for the joy of it and the marvel of levitation. Don't use lighties for transport, that where Airbus excells. Fly in good weather and (mostly) can glide to survivable terrain. Don 2 1
Bennyboy320 Posted December 17, 2023 Posted December 17, 2023 10 hours ago, Methusala said: Don't use lighties for transport, that where Airbus excells. Fly in good weather and (mostly) can glide to survivable terrain. Don Hey Don, this would have to be one of the best statements I’ve ever read reference private/recreational flying, I agree with you 💯%. 1
Markdun Posted December 17, 2023 Posted December 17, 2023 And Don, if I recall correctly, in your 900 hours you survived a broken/collapsed wing spar in flight & at least 2 ‘outlandings’ into paddocks following engine failures; one into a crop of lupins over a metre high. The last 2, both the aircraft and you could fly again. I also recall you doing a precautionary landing into a paddock near Braidwood to avoid hail. So you must be doing something right. Mark 1 1
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now