Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
User avatar
By MattL
#1847428
@skydriller yes there used to be plenty of evidence of flying indiscipline on ‘last trips’. If done right it seemed to go well - someone would know they were on their last few weeks of flying but after a trip they would be met with the whole retirement champagne, group photo etc.. and that would be it.
By IMCR
#1847465
I think I have probably read most of Martha's articles since she started writing for Flyer. I wasnt quite sure what to make of her to begin with, she seemed out of keeping with the other contributors, and yet clearly bags full of experience and stories. I sensed she was proud of being a non conformist and of an era when pilots were given more latitude than they are today. Somehow I suspect she will be flying again and will hopefully drift into a happy and safe retirement.

The video blogs always present an interesting view point. I have been an advocate for a long time of pilots pushing boundaries. One of the things I am more pleased than most things that I did was initially an aeorbatic course, and then some. I think there are many pilots if honest with themselves who would admit to being scared of their aircraft. I dont mean scared generally, but definitely not really comfortable with unusual manoueveres. They become reluctant to practise these and when they do, tend to bale well before a great deal is to be taken. When was the last time you put an aircraft into a full stall? They placate themselves with the rational spins were dropped from ab intio training. It will not happen to me, I will always remain with the aircrafts envelope, and it is more dangerous than the benefits it brings. No doubt there is some rational in this argument, but, equally, I think it is one of those that may work better for some than others. Certainly it works until the one time every thing conspires against you whatever that combination may be and you could not have avoided. Mine was a landing at Cambridge with a Hercules doing fulll power run ups with the wash at right angles across the runway. Maybe I should have seen it, but I didnt and there really wasnt any reason to be looking and I wasnt warned. I dont think any of us would not have been caught out.

In my view everyone who can should do an aeroabtics course. You dont come away a better pilot, you come away a transformed pilot. You may never make or be comfortable with aeros, but all of a sudden you will become a great deal more comfortable with all the basic stuff. As I think the video blog makes clear it is the comfort level that is critical. The absence of panic, and the sense that you have seen this before and have a pretty good idea how the aircraft will react.

It is the best money you will spend on flying. You know it makes sense.
Last edited by IMCR on Mon May 17, 2021 1:13 pm, edited 2 times in total.
User avatar
By Josh
#1847467
I also wonder what would happen if you did the same here? Appearance before the beak I assume?
User avatar
By rf3flyer
#1847475
A4 Pacific wrote:...This pilot didn’t just attempt to conceal their rule breaking...

You don't know that and, I suspect, neither do the FAA. You may and they suspect it and the FAA may have decided it the most likely scenario, but neither they nor you can know it.
By riverrock
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1847477
IMCR wrote:Yep, in the UK I would have no doubt it would be fast track to her Magistrates.

Unless your bridge is more than 500 feet high / wide. Then it could be argued that it's legal :pirat:
User avatar
By PeteSpencer
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1847478
riverrock wrote:
IMCR wrote:Yep, in the UK I would have no doubt it would be fast track to her Magistrates.

Unless your bridge is more than 500 feet high / wide. Then it could be argued that it's legal :pirat:


Not so: The bridge deck would have to be at least 1,000ft high......................... :roll:
The 500 ft rule or its successor applies in any direction.
User avatar
By Paul_Sengupta
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1847482
PeteSpencer wrote:Not so: The bridge deck would have to be at least 1,000ft high......................... :roll:
The 500 ft rule or its successor applies in any direction.


In the UK that would only apply if there were people, structures, vehicles or vessels under the bridge. Otherwise 500ft would work. Well, maybe 520ft.

As has been stated before (probably by me), in France they don't have the Rule 5 (or ex thereof) exemption so there's one particular bridge in France where it's illegal there, but wouldn't be here.
JAFO liked this
User avatar
By Josh
#1847488
I do find it strange that in the UK we are very quick to prosecute for all forms of infringement of licence privileges (this is the case at sea as well as in the air) but almost never seems to revoke or suspend licences.

It’s the complete opposite in the states, where the Feds are very quick to take action, demand retests, issue suspensions and so on but legal sanctions are very rare. I always feel it’s a side of the US scene that’s ignored when we have the “can’t the CAA be more like the FAA” conversations - given the uproar over the infringement courses I can’t imagine how long the threads would be if we were treated summarily in the “call this number after you land” fashion!
JAFO, Iceman liked this