Do you flight plan?

Brian Burger wrote:

If pilot-boy had arranged to have a few hundred litres of 100LL shipped
down beforehand, he'd have had less difficulty. As it is, why should the
Yanks or Kiwis bail him out?

It's probably not that simple. He wasn't planning to end up where he
did, my understanding is it was his 3rd choice. It's probably not
feasible to send fuel to all the places you MIGHT end up. I suspect if
you didn't use it you would also have to pay to ship it out again too
- they probably don't want barrels of avgas sitting around there
indefinitely.

Andrew Rowley writes:

Brian Burger wrote:

If pilot-boy had arranged to have a few hundred litres of 100LL shipped
down beforehand, he'd have had less difficulty. As it is, why should the
Yanks or Kiwis bail him out?

It's probably not that simple. He wasn't planning to end up where he
did, my understanding is it was his 3rd choice. It's probably not
feasible to send fuel to all the places you MIGHT end up.

Nope, but it is feasible to call ahead and say "If I land at your airport
am I going to be able to get fuel from you?" I'd bet that the scientists
would have told him "No, you will not." Then he could have used that
knowledge in his flight planning (on the ground and in the air). If he
really wanted to be able to immediately fly out of that location if he
had to use it, he would make arrangements to get fuel there.

Note that we don't know that the pilot is whining about not being able to
force the scientists to provide fuel to him. That's just Rosspilot. It
could be that our world-traveling pilot is being perfectly reasonable,
saying "Darn it. I was hoping this wouldn't happen, but it sure beats
taking a cold swim" and just trying to make the best of the situation.

--kyler

Kyler Laird wrote:

Nope, but it is feasible to call ahead and say "If I land at your airport
am I going to be able to get fuel from you?" I'd bet that the scientists
would have told him "No, you will not." Then he could have used that
knowledge in his flight planning (on the ground and in the air). If he
really wanted to be able to immediately fly out of that location if he
had to use it, he would make arrangements to get fuel there.

Note that we don't know that the pilot is whining about not being able to
force the scientists to provide fuel to him. That's just Rosspilot. It
could be that our world-traveling pilot is being perfectly reasonable,
saying "Darn it. I was hoping this wouldn't happen, but it sure beats
taking a cold swim" and just trying to make the best of the situation.

The interview I heard he said they made a mistake in continuing too
far before making the decision, and he could not make it back to New
Zealand. Sounded a fair enough assessment to me.

I am sure he knew that fuel could/would be a problem when he made the
decision to land there, but he chose to land there rather than going
elsewhere where the weather was a risk. At least he is:
- alive and unharmed,
- his aircraft is intact
- and no-one had to go looking for him
They are the main points I think. Should he have gone elsewhere if he
knew he wouldn't get fuel there? If so, where?

My impression is that certain groups are trying to paint him in as bad
a light as possible, basically to justify the ultra hard line being
taken - or maybe as part of the deterrent. This includes more than the
fuel issue - according to reports he has not been able to use their
telephones, and during one interview he said they would not even let
him charge his own phone.

There is an article in todays paper about the reception others have
got on expeditions to Antarctica, it sounds like the treatment is a
standard thing:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...125711709.html

("Andrew Rowley" wrote)
snip
There is an article in todays paper about the reception others have
got on expeditions to Antarctica, it sounds like the treatment is a
standard thing:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...125711709.html


After re-reading the piece, I think the *hut and airplane* section is from
1985. If so, is there a Cessna sitting down there "rotting?" How'd they get
a Cessna out of there in 1985?

Can you imagine flying and maintaining an abandoned (then salvaged) Cessna
....in Antarctica?

FAR's - in Antarctica? We don't need no stink'n FAR's.

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/20...125711709.html

(From the article above)
We were told that the Cessna - and the expeditionary hut - would be left to
rot on the ice.

Two or three days went by. You lose track of time in the 24-hour light. At
an angry expedition meeting, it was decided three men would stay behind on
Cape Evans, as caretakers of the hut and the plane.

Meanwhile, according to the plan, money for a transport plane or ship would
somehow be raised in the coming year.

However, the three men who remained behind were declared personae non grata
by the Americans and apparently found little joy at the New Zealand station.
[end of article]

--
Montblack
http://lumma.de/mt/archives/bart.gif

If he
really wanted to be able to immediately fly out of that location if he
had to use it, he would make arrangements to get fuel there.


I suppose that's reasonable, for every set of airports he might need to use.
And if he didn't use them, he should make arrangements to get the fuel back out
of there.

Not

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

On Sat, 14 Dec 2003, Teacherjh wrote:


If he
really wanted to be able to immediately fly out of that location if he
had to use it, he would make arrangements to get fuel there.


I suppose that's reasonable, for every set of airports he might need to use.
And if he didn't use them, he should make arrangements to get the fuel back out
of there.

Not

The pilot in question was flightplanning for *Antarctica*. Or at least,
was supposed to be... There are NO commercial fuel suppliers
down there; none of the government-run research projects are in the
business of supplying private expeditions.

This suggests that a cache of fuel shipped down to McMurdo earlier this
year might not have been a bad way to spend some money. Even if he might
have spent some more money shipping it all home again.

This is just basic logistics, really.

Brian.

This suggests that a cache of fuel shipped down to McMurdo earlier this
year might not have been a bad way to spend some money. Even if he might
have spent some more money shipping it all home again.


And what is that cache of fuel supposed to be shipped IN? What if THAT mission
got buggered for some other reason? There's a point at which things just get
too complicated and the chance of mishap increases.

Jose

--
(for Email, make the obvious changes in my address)

(Teacherjh) writes:

And what is that cache of fuel supposed to be shipped IN? What if THAT mission
got buggered for some other reason? There's a point at which things just get
too complicated and the chance of mishap increases.

Darn it! We really must do something to make minimally-planned
recreational flights near the poles less of a hassle.

How are people going to follow "in the tradition of Lindbergh,
Amelia Earhardt, Ruttan, Yeager and all the other cutting-edge
adventurous courageous spirits who set out to test themselves
and their flying machines" if they have to put a bunch of effort
into logistics?

--kyler

(Teacherjh) writes:


If he
really wanted to be able to immediately fly out of that location if he
had to use it, he would make arrangements to get fuel there.


I suppose that's reasonable, for every set of airports he might need to use.
And if he didn't use them, he should make arrangements to get the fuel back out
of there.

Not

Did you miss the part where I said "If he really wanted to be able to
immediately fly out"? I'm not suggesting that it's reasonable for him
to make arrangements to immediately fly out of any location he might
use. The point was that if he did not make arrangements, he shouldn't
be surprised and abrasive to find that the resources aren't available.

'course we don't know that he was. It's just a couple of loud pilots
here who seem to expect the world to make up for their lack of
planning.

--kyler

It's just a couple of loud pilots
here who seem to expect the world to make up for their lack of
planning.

Hey, Kyler . . .this "loud" pilot is getting tired of your obnoxious
commentary.

The man is a fellow aviator, one with courage and probably more piloting skill
and experience than you have amassed in your entire life.

That he finds himself stranded in the Antarctic without fuel deserves more than
your curt, unforgiving "he should have planned better" criticism.

You better remember that when YOU make some error that leaves YOU in
circumstances where YOU need assistance to bail your butt out.

Oh, I forgot, you are the PERFECT pilot, and you *never* make mistakes, do you?

(loudly)
www.Rosspilot.com