If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#71
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
Gary Drescher wrote:
It's just hard to imagine that flying up the East River in the first place could occur accidentally; you really can't mistake it for the Hudson. I agree, but the seminar presenter stated that it happens all the time. He cited "distracted by the view, following the float planes" as the usual reason. I have no idea where he gets his information, but he seemed to be well respected by the FAA SafetyFest organizers, and he's been doing the seminar for something like 20 years. The "view from the other side" point certainly has merit. |
#72
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
"B A R R Y" wrote in message
m... Gary Drescher wrote: It's just hard to imagine that flying up the East River in the first place could occur accidentally; you really can't mistake it for the Hudson. I agree, but the seminar presenter stated that it happens all the time. He cited "distracted by the view, following the float planes" as the usual reason. I have no idea where he gets his information, but he seemed to be well respected by the FAA SafetyFest organizers, and he's been doing the seminar for something like 20 years. Dunno. Respected FAA presenters sometimes pass along misinformation. Or perhaps I'm underestimating the ease of making a wrong turn there. (Reportedly, though, they'd mentioned that they were about to fly up the East River, so there seems to have been no navigation error in this case.) --Gary |
#73
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:20:00 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote in : - Rather than fessing up and asking for clearance through the LGA space, they attempt impossible turn Most sight-seeing VFR traffic flying up the East River turn around and exit back to the south. The turn is not an impossible turn, if given some planning. Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Is any more known about the exact nature of the emergency reported to ATC? |
#74
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Is any more known about the exact nature of the emergency reported to ATC? Look at more recent news reports. That's long since been retracted. --Gary |
#75
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:16:16 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
wrote in : The turn isn't remotely impossible. It's a routine maneuver. It just needs to be planned and executed properly. It would seem that proper planning would at least include the 500' restriction of FAR 91.119(c). That restriction would reduce the area in which to complete the turn in compliance with regulations by 1,000'. If 91.119(b) were more appropriate for the location of the flight, the Lidle flight would not have been possible under VFR given the 2,000' ceiling at the time. http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text....1.3.10.2.4.10 § 91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General. top Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes: (a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface. (b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft. (c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure. |
#76
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
Larry Dighera wrote:
Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Considering that article was last updated about 10 hours after the crash, I would prefer to wait for some follow-up information about this to be released before I believe this to be a fact. Heck, in the first hours after the crash some news agencies were reporting the aircraft was a twin engine. -- Peter |
#77
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:16:16 -0400, "Gary Drescher" wrote in : The turn isn't remotely impossible. It's a routine maneuver. It just needs to be planned and executed properly. It would seem that proper planning would at least include the 500' restriction of FAR 91.119(c). That restriction would reduce the area in which to complete the turn in compliance with regulations by 1,000'. No, it wouldn't necessarily reduce the legally available width at all. Quite possibly (though I haven't checked in detail), you can be right next to the shore and still be more than 500' from any part of any structure on the ground. If 91.119(b) were more appropriate for the location of the flight, the Lidle flight would not have been possible under VFR given the 2,000' ceiling at the time. If 91.119b were applicable there, then no flight in the East River VFR corridor would be possible, because the Class E ceiling there is 1100'. (The Hudson River VFR corridor would be illegal too.) --Gary |
#78
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:10:35 -0400, "Gary Drescher"
wrote in : "Larry Dighera" wrote in message .. . Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Is any more known about the exact nature of the emergency reported to ATC? Look at more recent news reports. That's long since been retracted. I'd like to read that retraction if you have a link to it. I did hear, that the engine was reported to have been operating at the time of impact, but that does not necessarily preclude fuel issues. I wasn't able to view the CNN video on the page at the link I posted, so I don't know what sort of corroborating evidence it may contain regarding the emergency call reported to CNN. But the radar track apparently shows the aircraft descending rapidly immediately before impact. That might be consistent with a fuel emergency. I find it difficult to believe, that a pilot intent on compliance with regulations would intentionally descend into the 'canyon' of buildings prior to attempting a 180 degree turn there. |
#79
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:54:32 -0400, "Peter R."
wrote in : Larry Dighera wrote: Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Considering that article was last updated about 10 hours after the crash, I would prefer to wait for some follow-up information about this to be released before I believe this to be a fact. The video he http://www.emailthis.clickability.co...0316119&p t=Y or if that link doesn't work for you, the video at the link labeled 'New York crash location' located on the lower left corner of this page: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html , indicates the flight descended from 1,500' to 400' during a 180 degree turn. I find it difficult to believe, that a pilot intent on compliance with regulations would intentionally descend into the 'canyon' of buildings prior to attempting a 180 degree turn there. |
#80
|
|||
|
|||
Airplane in NYC is a Cirrus SR20
"Larry Dighera" wrote in message
... On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 14:10:35 -0400, "Gary Drescher" wrote in : "Larry Dighera" wrote in message . .. Have you any idea how this fact: http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/10/11/plane.crash/index.html There was a distress call from the pilot involving a problem with fuel, government sources close to the investigation told CNN. may have influenced the outcome of Lidle's flight? Is any more known about the exact nature of the emergency reported to ATC? Look at more recent news reports. That's long since been retracted. I'd like to read that retraction if you have a link to it. Just search Google News for 'Lidle mayday' and you'll see dozens of articles. --Gary |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Trip report: Cirrus SR-22 demo flight | Jose | Piloting | 13 | September 22nd 06 11:08 PM |
Cirrus demo | Dan Luke | Piloting | 12 | December 4th 05 05:26 AM |
Parachute fails to save SR-22 | Capt.Doug | Piloting | 72 | February 10th 05 05:14 AM |
Looking for Cessna Caravan pilots | [email protected] | Owning | 9 | April 1st 04 02:54 AM |
"I Want To FLY!"-(Youth) My store to raise funds for flying lessons | Curtl33 | General Aviation | 7 | January 9th 04 11:35 PM |