Register

If this is your first visit, please click the Sign Up now button to begin the process of creating your account so you can begin posting on our forums! The Sign Up process will only take up about a minute of two of your time.

Page 43 of 55 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast
Results 1,051 to 1,075 of 1375

  1. #1051
    eddieC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Jackson, MI
    Posts
    2,057
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Calm down there, SP. Someone musta slipped some 5-hour energy into your Ensure.

    UAV + Airliners = Not Good .
    I might not be very good, but I am fun to watch!

  2. #1052
    Silent-AV8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    4,838
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Team Futaba - RClipos.com

  3. #1053
    bradpaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Apopka, FL
    Posts
    906
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R View Post
    I guess John did dial 911

  4. #1054

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    hemet , CA
    Posts
    899
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    ill fly a drone i dont care what the faa says

  5. #1055

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by GerKonig View Post
    Last week a judge grounded a fleet of 4 drones in Texas. He stated that until the FAA does not issue the regulations, they will not fly (it was a commercial operation). He added that the FAA had until the end of next year (2015) to do so. I guess those 4 were being used commercially w/o a license.

    Gerry
    Kudos to the judge. I must admit that for coTexan he surprises me.

  6. #1056

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by bradpaul View Post
    I guess John did dial 911
    Would have but wasn't there, got blown away to Oz for a short time.

  7. #1057

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by oneaew@msn.com View Post
    ill fly a drone i dont care what the faa says
    I fly drones all the time at a club field, I have FAA approval. I hope you have $10K handy.

  8. #1058

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R View Post
    Was that the guy in your post #1036? LOL! About time.

  9. #1059

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    joliet, IL
    Posts
    1,072
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by oneaew@msn.com View Post
    ill fly a drone i dont care what the faa says
    Yep and us that fly rc planes dont care what you fly or what the faa says to you either as long as it does not cause any rain on our parade . joe

  10. #1060
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,387
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by eddieC View Post
    Calm down there, SP. Someone musta slipped some 5-hour energy into your Ensure.

    UAV + Airliners = Not Good .
    What made you think I was excited or upset? It is just a matter of fact observation that he made no reference in his post, nor was it in the link.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  11. #1061
    Hossfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    New Caney, TX
    Posts
    5,912
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by GerKonig View Post
    Last week a judge grounded a fleet of 4 drones in Texas. He stated that until the FAA does not issue the regulations, they will not fly (it was a commercial operation). He added that the FAA had until the end of next year (2015) to do so. I guess those 4 were being used commercially w/o a license.

    Gerry
    This morning, Thurs. 05-01-'14, Fox News (LOCAL, Houston, TX) had a short blurb about all the good things that the commercial drone fleet is going to bring to the world. The item showed some rather large drones ( I estimate some 10 ft wingspan or about) being catapulted off some kind of rig to perform such. Light airplane drivers better learn to look outside. It seems that so many pilots these days cannot take their eyes out of the cockpit. Actually "these days" are really the period of some 10 years before I retired from UAL some 18 years ago. We "Old FaXts" learned to scan the skies but the newer ones kept thinking a cockpit was just another "simulator". Civil Drones are simply going to be "incoming" rockets. I really dislike flying these days in commercial aircraft!
    Horrace Cain AMA L-93

    “Peace is the brief glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.\" T. Jefferson

  12. #1062

    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Levittown, PA
    Posts
    1,845
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Hossfly View Post
    This morning, Thurs. 05-01-'14, Fox News (LOCAL, Houston, TX) had a short blurb about all the good things that the commercial drone fleet is going to bring to the world. The item showed some rather large drones ( I estimate some 10 ft wingspan or about) being catapulted off some kind of rig to perform such. Light airplane drivers better learn to look outside. It seems that so many pilots these days cannot take their eyes out of the cockpit. Actually "these days" are really the period of some 10 years before I retired from UAL some 18 years ago. We "Old FaXts" learned to scan the skies but the newer ones kept thinking a cockpit was just another "simulator". Civil Drones are simply going to be "incoming" rockets. I really dislike flying these days in commercial aircraft!
    Of course, if you have the money you get the best mouthpieces you can. People that will defend any position trough distortion or misinformation. I think it will be a problem for GA if you have drones that are small, and hard to see. I flew GA and yes we were trained in scanning the sky, but if you scan for another airplane your size or bigger, piloted by a guy doing the same, is one thing. Here we are talking something much smaller than a GA airplane, hard to see, and the drone might not be looking out for you...

    Gerry

  13. #1063
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,387
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Hossfly View Post
    This morning, Thurs. 05-01-'14, Fox News (LOCAL, Houston, TX) had a short blurb about all the good things that the commercial drone fleet is going to bring to the world. The item showed some rather large drones ( I estimate some 10 ft wingspan or about) being catapulted off some kind of rig to perform such. Light airplane drivers better learn to look outside. It seems that so many pilots these days cannot take their eyes out of the cockpit. Actually "these days" are really the period of some 10 years before I retired from UAL some 18 years ago. We "Old FaXts" learned to scan the skies but the newer ones kept thinking a cockpit was just another "simulator". Civil Drones are simply going to be "incoming" rockets. I really dislike flying these days in commercial aircraft!
    I agree with you, at least initially. I think lthe early UAV's may have issues with sensing other aircraft. If done by video only the resolution will not be enough to do a good job. However I suspect technology will eventually improve enough that they may do better than a good pilot with sharp eyes. At least for UAV's intended for navigable skys. For those flying under 400 feet I suspect that the FAA will require that you keep them in sight, at least at first.

    A far as GA pilots not scanning the sky's I believe it is the large airliners that are the worst on that. Maybe not in your time, but now the instument panel is above eye level and many either do not have a seat that does not raise above the instrument panel or pilots do not bother to use them. I recall a crash above San Diago many years ago where the airliner pilot did not see the small plane because he did not raise his seat for landing configeration.
    Last edited by Sport_Pilot; 05-01-2014 at 11:48 AM.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  14. #1064

    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    hemet , CA
    Posts
    899
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    about time to remove the drone section been on over 24 hrs

  15. #1065

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
    Posts
    2,455
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Your lazy and lame reading capacity is almost as astounding as your steel trap mind that is welded shut! A pointer was provided that most seem to have understood. Go back before the post your panties are in a wad over and try reading a bit.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post

    A far as GA pilots not scanning the sky's I believe it is the large airliners that are the worst on that. Maybe not in your time, but now the instument panel is above eye level and many either do not have a seat that does not raise above the instrument panel or pilots do not bother to use them. I recall a crash above San Diago many years ago where the airliner pilot did not see the small plane because he did not raise his seat for landing configeration.
    HORSE MANURE!

    The panel can be below eye level when the seat is lowered so the crew can exit.

    What airliner and what date or is this "crash report" yet another one of your lies?
    Last edited by Jim Branaum; 05-01-2014 at 05:33 PM. Reason: darn, wrong directon - lol
    Jim Branaum AMA 1428
    Sig Brotherhood 30 Sig Kadet Brotherhood 99
    P-51 Brotherhood 53 P-38 Brotherhood 18 Club Saito 806
    Spitfire Brotherhood 204 P-40 Brotherhood 95

  16. #1066

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Posts
    134
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by oneaew@msn.com View Post
    about time to remove the drone section been on over 24 hrs
    I say let it take it's course my friend. I have learned a lot during this thread. Despite all the bickering, There has been some information that I had not considered.

    James
    undesirable model airplane flying renegade

  17. #1067
    Sport_Pilot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    13,387
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Go back before the post your panties are in a wad over and try reading a bit.
    That would only prove you made no reference, the prior post made no mention of foamies.

    The panel can be below eye level when the seat is lowered so the crew can exit.
    Yes it can, but all do not. Regardless of if the panel is above or below eye level many have seats that raise above the normal position and the normal position is above the lower exit position. This was PSA flight 182 and the seat issue was an NTSB finding that is not mentioned in most accounts. I believe I recall it in a recent Air Disaster episode.
    Glow Head Brotherhood #15

  18. #1068

    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Fair Oaks Ranch, TX
    Posts
    2,455
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Sport_Pilot View Post
    That would only prove you made no reference, the prior post made no mention of foamies.



    Yes it can, but all do not. Regardless of if the panel is above or below eye level many have seats that raise above the normal position and the normal position is above the lower exit position. This was PSA flight 182 and the seat issue was an NTSB finding that is not mentioned in most accounts. I believe I recall it in a recent Air Disaster episode.
    Either go back in the thread and read where a reference was made to foamies damaging airliners or drop it and admit you are just too lame and lazy to do anything other than try to pick a fight, because you are wrong. Unless you are extremely slow it shouldn't take you over 15 minutes to find the reference that I have pointed you to twice now.

    I was going to ask you to stop making things up and then I realized it was on TV so you believe it instead of getting the facts just like many dumb Americans who are spoon fed right and wrong by the entertainment media called 'the news'. Previously I have said you needed to check your facts. Here is the final conclusion about seat position TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM THE NTSB REPORT of that incident that seems to conflict with your report of an NTSB finding. Enjoy.

    The visibility study showed that when the 0859:39 and 09OO:lS
    advisories were issued, the Cessna would have been almost centered on
    both pilots' windshields. Even if their eyes were lower and slightly
    aft of the design eye reference points, the cockpit structure of the
    Boeing 727 would not have prevented either pilot from sighting the
    Cessna. Since the sun was above the horizon and the Cessna was below
    It, the pilots would not have had to look directly into the sun to find
    the Cessna', and the white surface of the Cessna's wing could have
    presented a relatively bright target in the sunlight.



    Because I already know your response, here is where you can go to READ the whole thing for yourself, it is educational for many of the different aspects of this thread.

    http://www.airdisaster.com/reports/ntsb/AAR79-05.pdf
    Last edited by Jim Branaum; 05-02-2014 at 11:22 AM. Reason: Wrong tense of verb and link added for Doubting Thomas
    Jim Branaum AMA 1428
    Sig Brotherhood 30 Sig Kadet Brotherhood 99
    P-51 Brotherhood 53 P-38 Brotherhood 18 Club Saito 806
    Spitfire Brotherhood 204 P-40 Brotherhood 95

  19. #1069
    Silent-AV8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    4,838
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Now FAA fine levied against NYC Phantom quad operator:

    http://www.suasnews.com/2014/05/2892...phantom-pilot/
    Last edited by Silent-AV8R; 05-03-2014 at 08:28 AM.
    Team Futaba - RClipos.com

  20. #1070
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,715
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by Silent-AV8R View Post
    New FAA fine levied against NYC Phantom quad operator:

    http://www.suasnews.com/2014/05/2892...phantom-pilot/
    Seems the FAA has their own wheel fortune for assessing fines...$2,200 for this one vs. a $10,000 fine for the incident this thread is about...maybe they care less about genuine safety and more about someone making a buck...at least that's how appears.
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  21. #1071

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf View Post
    Seems the FAA has their own wheel fortune for assessing fines...$2,200 for this one vs. a $10,000 fine for the incident this thread is about...maybe they care less about genuine safety and more about someone making a buck...at least that's how appears.
    What about the severity of their actions?

    Here is pirker's list of 12 safety infractions, you will note that the list includes flying within 100 ft of a helipad.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Pirker Actions.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	172.4 KB 
ID:	1992038

    Compared to Zablidowsky, I would think that Pirker deserved a higher fine.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	David Zablidowsky.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	113.8 KB 
ID:	1992039

  22. #1072

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    sheridan, IN
    Posts
    1,110
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf View Post
    Seems the FAA has their own wheel fortune for assessing fines...$2,200 for this one vs. a $10,000 fine for the incident this thread is about...maybe they care less about genuine safety and more about someone making a buck...at least that's how appears.
    Calculating the average fine per infraction($833 for Trappy and $314 for Mr. Z), we see a significant disparity.
    The NTSB judge obviously thought Trappy's fine excessive, so FAA is trying to find the "sweet spot"--what the market will bear, so to speak.
    It will probably end up at about $500 in the future, I'd guess.
    Maybe FAA will publish an ala carte list of infractions/fines for us so we will know how to plan our dangerous flights, based on what we can afford.

  23. #1073
    littlecrankshaf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    here
    Posts
    4,715
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by JohnShe View Post
    What about the severity of their actions?

    Here is pirker's list of 12 safety infractions, you will note that the list includes flying within 100 ft of a helipad.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	Pirker Actions.jpg 
Views:	14 
Size:	172.4 KB 
ID:	1992038

    Compared to Zablidowsky, I would think that Pirker deserved a higher fine.

    Click image for larger version. 

Name:	David Zablidowsky.jpg 
Views:	21 
Size:	113.8 KB 
ID:	1992039
    Yea, Pirker's flying near a statue and below tree top level is pretty bad but just the thought of flying under a crane...absolutely horrific!!

    Look, rationalize a defense of FAA's arbitrariness however you wish...You're already down for being someone that enjoys turning in violators of their "code"... Whatever that is.

    FWIW I think 804's observation is more insightful and not just some goofy purcyfied rationalization...
    It is very important to understand that Jesus not only died for our sins but died because of our sins...even harder to understand now, exactly what were those sins???

  24. #1074
    Silent-AV8R's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    4,838
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Seems the FAA has their own wheel fortune for assessing fines...$2,200 for this one vs. a $10,000 fine for the incident this thread is about...maybe they care less about genuine safety and more about someone making a buck...at least that's how appears.



    The latest action has nothing to do with commercial use or making money. This one pertains to the fine fellow who launched his quad from his apartment balcony in Manhattan and then promptly lost control slamming it into buildings ad then the quad crashing into the sidewalk 25 stories down.
    Team Futaba - RClipos.com

  25. #1075

    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Round Hill, VA
    Posts
    776
    Gallery
    My Gallery
    Models
    My Models
    Ratings
    My Feedback
    Quote Originally Posted by littlecrankshaf View Post
    Yea, Pirker's flying near a statue and below tree top level is pretty bad but just the thought of flying under a crane...absolutely horrific!!

    Look, rationalize a defense of FAA's arbitrariness however you wish...You're already down for being someone that enjoys turning in violators of their "code"... Whatever that is.

    FWIW I think 804's observation is more insightful and not just some goofy purcyfied rationalization...

    I consider both Pirker'S and Zwhatever's violations dangerous. And If i witnessed or felt threatened by such behavior, I will turn them in. I know you think that you are a comedian and you like to twist things, but don't quit your day job.


Page 43 of 55 FirstFirst ... 33414243444553 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:39 AM.

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.