Human factors RECKLESSNESS

On 28 Apr 2005 10:44:16 -0700,
wrote:

NW_Pilot,
I totally agree that life is short. I also try to live everyday as
if it was my last but I try to make sure that other lives are not at
risk in my pursuit of happiness. I also do everything that I can to
ensure that I can wake up the next morning to enjoy whatever time that
I have left on this earth.
From what I have read so far, no one has criticized your decision
to take up aerobatic flying be it rolling, spinning or whatever. The
concern was with the use of inappropriate equipment (a non aerobat 150)
and the potential risk of other lives (unless you and your instructor
chose a totally unpopulated area for this practice).


Couldn't give a toss about the lives of the people in the aircraft.
I'm ****ed off with him for putting the aircraft in to a situation that
will, over time, over-stress it, potentially killing someone totally
innocent in months or years time.



--

'It is rumoured that his last words were, "Watch this..."'
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=117465

On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:21:07 -0700, NW_PILOT wrote:

Who were them 2 brothers that invented the airplane????? they were called
crazy ect. if they attempted what they did 200 years earlier they would
have
been hanged or beheaded. What about the people that got on boats to prove
the earth was round? And many others that you should thank.



There's a subtle difference between adventurous and pioneering, and
adventourous and reckless. What really confuses me is that you openly
admit, nay brag, about the fact you did it in a non-aerobatic aircraft.



--

'It is rumoured that his last words were, "Watch this..."'
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=117465

Dude, just because the maneuver isn't approved in the aircraft manual
doesn't me it isn't safe to do. The limiting factor is the skill of the
pilot. Stay within the G-limits, airspeed limits, the airplane doesn't
know what it's doing.
Robert A "Bob" Hoover was a military and civilian pilot that did things
with airplanes others said couldn't be done. He did them nonetheless,
repeatedly, in the same aircraft.

B S D Chapman wrote:
There's a subtle difference between adventurous and pioneering, and
adventourous and reckless. What really confuses me is that you openly
admit, nay brag, about the fact you did it in a non-aerobatic aircraft.

"NW_PILOT" wrote in message
...


Plain in simple life is short! You never know
how long you have. So live it like every day is your last.

Actually, you have it backwards. The trick in aerobatics is to live each day
fully expecting that your attitude and skills producing what you do in the
air will allow you to see tomorrow alive :-)

Well, I wish you the best of luck of course, and I certainly don't wish you
any harm, but I can truthfully say to you from my fair amount of experience
training pilots in the aerobatic environment is that if you actually believe
what you are posting out here; live it up while you can, because from what
you're showing me anyway, concerning your attitude toward aerobatics and
flying, you just might not be around all that long.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)

LOL!

Over time overstressing it?
Like a single 6 G incident wouldn't
bend it?

C'mon. Most of (ahem) other student's
landings are at least 4 G's and
these are not the 'good' positive
G's but the 'bad' negative G's.

Planes get sold without logbooks all the time too.

We then give them to an IA, and
he looks over it with a fine tooth comb, and BINGO!
A signature goes in
and a family of 5 goes flying off into the sunset...

If you are saying an aircraft is uninspecable after
high G flying,
you are also saying it is uninspectable after an accident.
I don't think this
is the case.

I do agree that one could potentially
stress an aircraft in between
annuals, but I am unaware of a significant number of
accidents caused
by high-G damage that wasn't detectable by a pilot
preflight.
The T-34s were a notable exception.

I'd be much more concerned about the occupants, and
perhaps those on the ground, than hidden aircraft damage...

At 19:30 28 April 2005, B S D Chapman wrote:
On 28 Apr 2005 10:44:16 -0700,

wrote:

NW_Pilot,
I totally agree that life is short. I also try
to live everyday as
if it was my last but I try to make sure that other
lives are not at
risk in my pursuit of happiness. I also do everything
that I can to
ensure that I can wake up the next morning to enjoy
whatever time that
I have left on this earth.
From what I have read so far, no one has criticized
your decision
to take up aerobatic flying be it rolling, spinning
or whatever. The
concern was with the use of inappropriate equipment
(a non aerobat 150)
and the potential risk of other lives (unless you
and your instructor
chose a totally unpopulated area for this practice).


Couldn't give a toss about the lives of the people
in the aircraft.
I'm ****ed off with him for putting the aircraft in
to a situation that
will, over time, over-stress it, potentially killing
someone totally
innocent in months or years time.



--

'It is rumoured that his last words were, 'Watch this...''
Duke Elegant
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthr...hreadid=117465

Mark J. Boyd

Smutny wrote:

Dude, you really need to step back and take a good look at what you're
exhibiting here.

You know, NW didn't need to post that he was doing aerobatics in a
*nonaerobatic* airplane. He convinced me a while back that he posts for
the shock value, and likely enjoys the huge response he generates as much
as he enjoys doing inappropriate things in/to aircraft.

I've enjoyed some of the resulting conversation (it never occurred to me
that an inadvertent roll might short the battery's terminals, for example),
but let's not give him the reward he craves. It just feeds his addiction,
and he'll be back for more.

- Andrew

NW_PILOT wrote:
I would not say that we are glorifying recklessness, if it wasn't for people
you call reckless we would still be living in caves. Most of us that are in
to flying or other extreme hobbies have a huge respect for life but also
have that need for that adrenalin.


There's a big difference between how you and I see flying. I don't consider it
an "extreme hobby" and do what I can to make sure it stays that way. I don't
look to flying for a rush... I look at it as a technically demanding activity
that provides a lot of satisfaction when done well. I learned a long time ago
it's much more difficult to be smooth on the controls. Any moron can yank the
controls to produce G.


I my-self wake up every day and am very
thankful that I don't have to stick a needle in my arm or suck something up
my nose to get that rush, I have many many other activity's like flying to
get that feeling.


No doubt you'll get it. As the redneck said right before he died, "Hey
y'all.... watch this!"


You will Die one day that's a fact of Life!! You cannot hide from it! You
cannot run from it! So embrace the Life you have been given and enjoy it
with every breath you take because you may never know when it may be your
last.


I suspect I can probably plan a little more long term than you. I learned a
long time ago that lightning doesn't always strike the other fellow; sometimes
it might get you. That being said, does one hide out underground afraid of
every rumble? No, he should go out and live his life, but at the same time he
should do what he can to minimize his risk. Some things just aren't worth
doing.

One other thought, my fatalistic friend: have you ever considered that perhaps
instead of getting killed, you merely get hurt severely? Having crashed an
airplane and suffering an incomplete amputation followed by reattachment of my
arm, I would suggest that there are worse things that can happen to you than
getting killed. You need to consider this before you do something else ill
advised.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

I'd suggest that the key point
being made here is not to be careful when you are an
experienced
airshow pilot, but to be careful when
you are first starting some aerobatics.

There is an amazing (beginning)
aerobatics school 'Amelia Reid Aviation'
nearby here in the San Francisco bay area.

I got a chance to fly with Amelia Reid before she passed
away. The basic training was fun, very cheap, and
we always wore chutes and flew
an aerobatic plane.

I think it is great to do aerobatics.
Just look around a little and find a
properly rated plane on your budget.
They are out there. Better yet, there
are plenty of aerobatic gliders
and some (maybe not a lot) aerobatic
glider instructors. The NCSA at
Byron nearby has low rates and
aerobatic qualified CFIs, for example.

I suspect cost is a little bit of
an issue for you. Trust me, you can
find very reasonable rates AND
appropriate equipment if you
look around a little bit.

At 20:00 28 April 2005, Jsmith wrote:
Dude, just because the maneuver isn't approved in the
aircraft manual
doesn't me it isn't safe to do. The limiting factor
is the skill of the
pilot. Stay within the G-limits, airspeed limits, the
airplane doesn't
know what it's doing.
Robert A 'Bob' Hoover was a military and civilian pilot
that did things
with airplanes others said couldn't be done. He did
them nonetheless,
repeatedly, in the same aircraft.

B S D Chapman wrote:
There's a subtle difference between adventurous and
pioneering, and
adventourous and reckless. What really confuses me
is that you openly
admit, nay brag, about the fact you did it in a non-aerobatic
aircraft.


Mark J. Boyd

B S D Chapman wrote:

Couldn't give a toss about the lives of the people in the aircraft.
I'm ****ed off with him for putting the aircraft in to a situation that
will, over time, over-stress it, potentially killing someone totally
innocent in months or years time.


I thought about that too. I'm reminded about the policy fight squadrons had in
place proscribing victory rolls after a kill. The thought was that there might
be unknown battle damage and the stress of the roll might be the straw that
breaks the camel's back.

Some poor slob might be flying that airplane on down the road and lose a wing in
rough air from the abuse it's experiencing now. Although admittedly, if
NW_Pilot keeps doing what he's doing, he might well be the last owner of that
aircraft.




--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

I've known Bob Hoover for over thirty years. He would be the second in line
(right behind me :-) to tell any pilot even thinking about attempting
aerobatics in an aircraft not approved for that purpose not to engage in
that endeavor.
Everything Bob does and has done in aerobatics with each and every aircraft
he has flown professionally for that purpose has required special waivers
from competent authority.
Please don't equate a non professional pilot performing aerobatics in a
Cessna 150 to Bob Hoover, or if you must do so, send this post along with
the initial post about this issue from the beginning of the thread to Bob
personally and tell him I told you to send it to him for his comment; then
post his response right back here on this newsgroup so that everyone can see
what he has to say about it.
Thank you
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot; CFI; Retired
dhenriquestrashatearthlinktrashdotnet
(take out the trash :-)



"jsmith" wrote in message
...
Dude, just because the maneuver isn't approved in the aircraft manual
doesn't me it isn't safe to do. The limiting factor is the skill of the
pilot. Stay within the G-limits, airspeed limits, the airplane doesn't
know what it's doing.
Robert A "Bob" Hoover was a military and civilian pilot that did things
with airplanes others said couldn't be done. He did them nonetheless,
repeatedly, in the same aircraft.

B S D Chapman wrote:
There's a subtle difference between adventurous and pioneering, and
adventourous and reckless. What really confuses me is that you openly
admit, nay brag, about the fact you did it in a non-aerobatic aircraft.