ARE RAMP CHECKS RAMPING UP?

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 23:48:51 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:

Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense. I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller


Inquiring minds want to know why?


Why? Because it's there.

Mike Weller

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

Dave Stadt wrote:
"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense. I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller



Inquiring minds want to know why?

What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there some
kind of safety violation?

Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Mike Weller

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

Dave Stadt wrote:
"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the
FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember
doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense.
I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller



Inquiring minds want to know why?

What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there some
kind of safety violation?

Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Mike Weller

On other words you don't have an answer.

On Sat, 28 Jan 2006 04:40:18 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


"Mike Weller" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

Dave Stadt wrote:
"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the
FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember
doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense.
I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller



Inquiring minds want to know why?

What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there some
kind of safety violation?

Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Mike Weller

On other words you don't have an answer.


No I don't, and that was my point.

There are too many variables that we face while flying to have to have
a "reg" to determine what we do. Obviously some are, but judgment is
just too hard and fast to be written in any form.

Mike Weller

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 22:09:27 -0600, Mike Weller
wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:

Dave Stadt wrote:
"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:


Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense. I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Inquiring minds want to know why?

What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there some
kind of safety violation?

Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Sounds like they were showing energy conservation and exchange of
kinetic energy for friction, timing things perfectly to barely need
brakes at the fuel station.

Mike Weller wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:


Dave Stadt wrote:

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...


On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:



Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of the FAA
if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can remember doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than rolling up
with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make sense. I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller



Inquiring minds want to know why?

What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there some
kind of safety violation?


Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Mike Weller


I'm STILL trying to figure out what "line" was crossed and what the
chewing was all about.

Cal Vanize wrote:



Mike Weller wrote:

On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 18:42:05 -0600, Cal Vanize
wrote:


Dave Stadt wrote:

"Mike Weller" wrote in message
...


On Fri, 27 Jan 2006 01:43:04 GMT, "Dave Stadt"
wrote:



Handle what things? Guess I am dense but what business is it of
the FAA if
I want to shut down and coast to the pumps? In fact I can
remember doing
just that on a couple of occasions. Seems safer to me than
rolling up with
the meat cleaver spinning. Sorry, but the story doesn't make
sense. I'd
say Mr. Whitmore stuck his nose where it didn't belong.


Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Impressive, but not exactly the thing to do in front of "THE MAN".

Mike Weller




Inquiring minds want to know why?


What did they do wrong? What actual reg did they break? Was there
some kind of safety violation?



Now that is good question.

For many reasons pilots, and flight instructors in particular, are
expected to be better than average.

You don't have to break a "reg" to show that maybe, just maybe, that
what you're doing is not the right thing to do.

It's a very fine line sometimes.

My opinion of the incident was that the pilots stepped over the line
and deserved to get being chewed out by Mr. Whitmore.

Mike Weller



I'm STILL trying to figure out what "line" was crossed and what the
chewing was all about.

The only issue I can see was if they ran out of fuel and that was the
reason for the "shutdown." EVen then, I think it would be hard to bust
them, but a good lecture might be in order in that event.


Matt

I've seen a lot of people asking WHY this was something they'd get in
trouble for, and I think I have an answer. First, from Mike Weller's
post:

Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Take a look at the distance involved. To coast from the runway, around
that corner and all the way to the pump, they spent most of the taxi at
well above brisk walking speeds. Unsafe taxiing speeds can do a lot of
damage and pose a risk to anyone walking around there, especially with
the engine off.

Additionally, if they taxi past a bunch of planes and lose a tire at 40
mph or so, how well do you think they'll be able to avoid smacking into
the parked aircraft?

So, in summary: They were taxiing way too fast.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message
ups.com...
I've seen a lot of people asking WHY this was something they'd get in
trouble for, and I think I have an answer. First, from Mike Weller's
post:

Put it into the context of when and where it happened.

They shut off the engine on the runway, the prop stopped, and then
they rolled at least a another quarter of a mile after making a 45
degree turn off the runway, rolled down the taxiway, and the made
another quick turn and stop to get to the gas pumps.

Take a look at the distance involved. To coast from the runway, around
that corner and all the way to the pump, they spent most of the taxi at
well above brisk walking speeds. Unsafe taxiing speeds can do a lot of
damage and pose a risk to anyone walking around there, especially with
the engine off.

Additionally, if they taxi past a bunch of planes and lose a tire at 40
mph or so, how well do you think they'll be able to avoid smacking into
the parked aircraft?

So, in summary: They were taxiing way too fast.

Ben Hallert
PP-ASEL

You were there?

Originally Posted by Larry Dighera

On 24 Jan 2006 08:32:14 -0800, "
wrote in
::

I made copies that I presented rather than my originals

.

Copies are not acceptable. If the inspector wants to see your certificate, then he wants to see the certificate, not a copy of the certificate. The certificate is not yours, you are in possesion, but it actually belongs to the US government. In other words, if you don't let him examine the original certificate, then you are in violation. The regs don't mention that a copy is acceptable. Same thing goes for the airworthiness certicficate or registration certificate in the aircraft.