C-152 Breaks Up In Air

Thomas Borchert wrote:
Larry,

Tragic indeed.


Hmm. If indeed it was VFR into IMC and the pilot had obtained his
certificate only two months prior, that's not the only word that comes
to mind. And I would have some questions for the CFI.

Speaking as a CFI who once had a student that she dumped for doing
idiotic stuff, it's not always the CFI's fault.

Emily,


Speaking as a CFI who once had a student that she dumped for doing
idiotic stuff, it's not always the CFI's fault.


I'm aware of that. I didn't say anything about assigning blame. It
could be at least interesting to learn from the CFI about the general
mindset of the pilot with rgard to flying.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...
Larry,

Tragic indeed.


Hmm. If indeed it was VFR into IMC and the pilot had obtained his
certificate only two months prior, that's not the only word that comes
to mind. And I would have some questions for the CFI.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

And what questions would that be? The Pilot applicant also had to
demonstrate some proficiency of the 180 degree turn while under the hood to
the Examiner. I'm sure all records will be reviewed.

It reminds me of the new teenage driver, all is well in front of family and
the motor vehicle test. But then they feel invincible after a few weeks on
their own.

BT

Btiz,

And what questions would that be?


"What was your impression about the pilot's general attitude towards
risk assessment in flying?" would be one.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:

Two folks flew into instrument conditions and tried to fly back out without
success. Aircraft parts are scattered over a one mile radius.

How hard do you have to work to break up a 150 in flight?

I don't believe I've ever heard of its happening before. Anyone know of
another case?

--
Dan
C-172RG at BFM

Dan Luke wrote:
"Mortimer Schnerd, RN" wrote:
Two folks flew into instrument conditions and tried to fly back out without
success. Aircraft parts are scattered over a one mile radius.

How hard do you have to work to break up a 150 in flight?

I was recently reading the "AOPA Pilot" article about C150 Aerobat
aerobatic training.

Can any Cessna fans point out the differences between the basic 150/152
& Aerobat versions? Do they have different G restrictions? Or are the
Aerobat upgrades mainly pilot escape related, etc...

Thanks!

B A R R Y wrote:
Dan Luke wrote:
I was recently reading the "AOPA Pilot" article about C150 Aerobat
aerobatic training.

Can any Cessna fans point out the differences between the basic 150/152
& Aerobat versions? Do they have different G restrictions? Or are the
Aerobat upgrades mainly pilot escape related, etc...

As I recall, there is a bit of horizontal stabilizer reinforcement and
not much else.

Acrobatic or not, it's hard to imagine it being overly difficult to pull
the wings off in a spiral. And not too difficult to get in one in those
conditions.

The Aerobat has much larger struts and wing attach points.

Karl


"Maule Driver" wrote in message
...


B A R R Y wrote:
Dan Luke wrote:
I was recently reading the "AOPA Pilot" article about C150 Aerobat
aerobatic training.

Can any Cessna fans point out the differences between the basic 150/152 &
Aerobat versions? Do they have different G restrictions? Or are the
Aerobat upgrades mainly pilot escape related, etc...

As I recall, there is a bit of horizontal stabilizer reinforcement and not
much else.

Acrobatic or not, it's hard to imagine it being overly difficult to pull
the wings off in a spiral. And not too difficult to get in one in those
conditions.

The 150/152 were certified in the normal/utility category which, as I
recall, carries a G rating of 3.8/4.4 positive and 1.52/1.76 negative.

The 150 Aerobat was certified in the aerobatic category which carries a
+6 -3 G rating.


Jim



"Maule Driver" wrote in message
...



As I recall, there is a bit of horizontal stabilizer reinforcement and not
much else.

"Maule Driver" wrote in message
...


As I recall, there is a bit of horizontal stabilizer reinforcement and not
much else.

On Wed, 6 Sep 2006 11:37:07 -0700, "RST Engineering"
wrote in :

The 150/152 were certified in the normal/utility category which, as I
recall, carries a G rating of 3.8/4.4 positive and 1.52/1.76 negative.

The 150 Aerobat was certified in the aerobatic category which carries a
+6 -3 G rating.

But, was Vne increased?