Is it just me that thinks this was stupid

john smith wrote:

According to thr FAA, the pilot was talking on a cellphone to a
friend in a boat below and asked the friend to shine a flashlight in
the air to signal the boat's location.

If he is dead, he may qualify for a Darwin Award.

Definitely. I saw this on the news and thought, oh no, here's another tragic GA accident situation that's
going to further polarize the public about the inherent dangers of general aviation. This is all we need,
with user fees, TFRs, you name it. Not to mention convincing my own relatives that it's not a dangerous
avocation. Then I hear these details and I admit the final story is not in yet, but it sure sounds like some
bozo just being totally stupid. We don't need that.

Nevertheless, condolences to the families. I think I read it was a Diamond with two on board, both
presumed drowned in deep water.

Mike

If I remember right, nobody reporting on the incident reflected on what they
might have done, only on what they actually did. They very well might have
optimized range at altitude.

Maybe they couldn't get to altitude.

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Jose" wrote in message
t...
If I remember right, nobody reporting on the incident reflected on what
they might have done, only on what they actually did. They very well
might have optimized range at altitude.

Maybe they couldn't get to altitude.

I sure wish I could remember the specifics but it's all a big fuzzball. I
remember seeing the story but don't remember much about the specifics, and
that's where the answer will be I'm sure. Through the fog I seem to remember
something about not wanting to do the climb because of the fuel remaining
and that being a factor in their decision.
Knowing the gang on this forum, I'll bet someone finds the answer before
this thread is finished :-))
Dudley Henriques

In article , DR
wrote:

Dudley Henriques wrote:
"Blanche" wrote in message
...
On 5/14/2007 2:03:24 AM, "Bravo Two Zero" wrote:

A small plane crashed into Lake Pleasant, just outside of Phoenix, at
approx 8pm Friday, while the pilot was reportedly talking on his
cellphone
and flying 10 feet above the water.
Can you have "ground effect" over water?

There's a great story about the crew of a Pan Am Stratocruiser I think it
was, who were low on fuel and a long way out over the ocean. They let down
to within a wingspan's distance over the water, leaned it back a ton,
played
with the RPM, and made it home.
Can't remember the source of the story, but I do remember reading it a long
time ago.
Dudley Henriques


Maybe a true story but I think the the odds are they would have been
much better off at high altitude. As I understand it, induced drag is
only reduced by 10% at 50% of wing span above surface. At 20% of wing
span altitude the drag is still ~70% (Surface skimming birds actually go
lower, nearly touching the water with their wing tips). Of course if the
Stratocourser dropped to say 10' it could have worked better... -kersplash!

Cheers MarkC

I recall the story -- happened about 50 years ago. The Stratocruiser
lost 2 engines, IIRC, and descended (power glided) to about 1/2 wingspan
of the water and was able to fly to land in surface effect. They
obviously did not descend immediately, rather they did a max L/D powered
descent until they stopped losing altitude. It was written up in an old
"Reader's Digest," among others.

In article ,
Orval Fairbairn wrote:

I recall the story -- happened about 50 years ago. The Stratocruiser
lost 2 engines, IIRC, and descended (power glided) to about 1/2 wingspan
of the water and was able to fly to land in surface effect. They
obviously did not descend immediately, rather they did a max L/D powered
descent until they stopped losing altitude. It was written up in an old
"Reader's Digest," among others.

This sounds like the Ernest Gann novel 'The High and the Mighty'
which was also made into a movie of the same name, starring John
Wayne and Robert Stack.

Halfway between Hawaii and San Francisco, they lose an engine which
sheds parts and punctures the fuel tanks on that wing. The movie
was unavailable for years due to a dispute with Wayne's estate,
but has recently become available. I watched it last year, and it
is very well done, and the inspiration for all the other aviation
disaster flicks.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message A lot would depend on what you had to
expend in resources to get up there
from where you were when the decision had to be made . Not sure at all
what
the circumstances were in this incident.

Speaking strictly of recips, would max range differ with altitude? The late
great Max Karant had the answer in his Twin Comanche.

D.

"John Clear" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Orval Fairbairn wrote:

I recall the story -- happened about 50 years ago. The Stratocruiser
lost 2 engines, IIRC, and descended (power glided) to about 1/2 wingspan
of the water and was able to fly to land in surface effect. They
obviously did not descend immediately, rather they did a max L/D powered
descent until they stopped losing altitude. It was written up in an old
"Reader's Digest," among others.

This sounds like the Ernest Gann novel 'The High and the Mighty'
which was also made into a movie of the same name, starring John
Wayne and Robert Stack.

Halfway between Hawaii and San Francisco, they lose an engine which
sheds parts and punctures the fuel tanks on that wing. The movie
was unavailable for years due to a dispute with Wayne's estate,
but has recently become available. I watched it last year, and it
is very well done, and the inspiration for all the other aviation
disaster flicks.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/


If I remember right, in that movie the bird was a DC6 and I think they
stayed at altitude until approach with a normal enroute altitude profile.
The big rub was the ongoing interaction between the right and left seats on
whether to ditch in the sea under power with the remaining fuel or try for
the approach and take a chance the engines would quit.

Poor Lennie the navigator screwed up his winds and made the problem a bit
more interesting, but I don't recall them leaving their assigned altitude
enroute to take a shot at ground effect.
Great movie though. Wonderful sub-plots with Alexis Smith and David Brian
and the other regulars.
You have to love the Duke! Poor Robert Stack. With an engine hanging off the
wing, raw fuel pouring out all over the place, the passengers yelling and
screaming in the back that they're all going to die, solid IFR, on vectors
to the FAF with nothing but the city below him and the fuel gauges on empty,
the Duke, who KNOWS that unusable fuel just MIGHT be usable, slaps him in
the puss and hollers, "Shut up and fly!"
Ah...the movies!!! Great Stuff!! :-))
Dudley Henriques

Dave Esser did a great article on this at ER.
http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache...k&c d=1&gl=us

Wasn't Karant's Twin Commanche lost in a fire somewhere?
DH





"Capt.Doug" wrote in message
...
"Dudley Henriques" wrote in message A lot would depend on what you had
to
expend in resources to get up there
from where you were when the decision had to be made . Not sure at all
what
the circumstances were in this incident.

Speaking strictly of recips, would max range differ with altitude? The
late
great Max Karant had the answer in his Twin Comanche.

D.

In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:

If I remember right, in that movie the bird was a DC6 and I think they
stayed at altitude until approach with a normal enroute altitude profile.
The big rub was the ongoing interaction between the right and left seats on
whether to ditch in the sea under power with the remaining fuel or try for
the approach and take a chance the engines would quit.

I remember them dumping everything they could overboard since they
couldn't maintain altitude, and then arguments over running flat
out as far as possible, or leaning aggressively. I don't remember
them in ground effect, except for barely clearing Portola Ridge on
approach into San Francisco.

John
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

Knowing the gang on this forum, I'll bet someone finds the answer before
this thread is finished :-))

Threads finish?

Jose
--
Quantum Mechanics is like this: God =does= play dice with the universe,
except there's no God, and there's no dice. And maybe there's no universe.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.