11 posts / 0 new
Last post
Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
Airport

Isn't it a blessing I haven't mentioned the Lomita crash?

Group visibility: 
Public - accessible to all site users
Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
Airport

Since the topic is open, I forgot to mention the NTSB's report as to the cause;

"A loss of engine power due to fuel starvation as a result of the pilot's mismanagement and inadequate preflight inspection."

Soon discussions on age restrictions on pilots will need to be conducted as the data will show certain age groups are more prone to taking shortcuts that endanger others. It's not the airports that are the problem, ever.

Lisa Hawk's picture
Joined: 08/07/2007
Posts: 5
Subject for Discussion

Since you're bringing up age as a discussion point for pilots, how about we also bring up age restrictions for certain other kinds of transportation... Motorcycles. The California DMV requires motorcycle riders under 18 to take a Motorcycle Safety Course. Over 18, just has to pass a written test and a simple riding test. TWO age groups tend to be hurt/killed in riding accidents. The young and the middle-aged/senior riders.

 

I wonder why this is. The answer is simple. We all know about young drivers/riders. The older rider is the one that gets hurt/killed because they've just bought a motorcycle, they take the written test and passed a very simple riding test and they don't have the experience to know how to properly ride a large motorcycle and they do not recognize this. Older motorcycle riders who have been riding for years don't seem to have this problem. They have age AND wisdom. Should we restrict the younger AND older riders because some make mistakes? I am not a motorcycle rider, and probably never will be. Does this alter the discussion? Not at all.

 

Airports aren't the problem. Pilots aren't the problem. It's people who do not know about flight safety that mandate unsafe flying practices. Doing as you have suggested many times in the past, requiring a take-off on runway 22 and landing on (the same strip of asphalt) runway 04 literally puts aircraft into a head-on collision course - one taking off and the other landing. This is blatantly unsafe.

Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
AIRPORT, (subject for discussion)

Yes the concept is blatantly absurd. (However, It is done under some conditions). More to the point is the absurdity of the denial that a potential risk exists.

 

Age limitation is a subject for discussion. The more seasoned, the wiser, you reason. In my business, a surgeon needs to recognize the demise of his skills before he endangers a life. After all the credo is "do no harm". In this case wisdom requires self awareness and assessment. If he/she does not recognize his/her limitations, it is done for them. 

 

"Do no harm" is the key. Age-wise, flying-wise, motorcycle-wise, life-wise. 

 

 

Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
Airport

For those interested;

 

43 crashes in California in three months:

 

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp

 

Chuck Lentz's picture
Joined: 08/07/2007
Posts: 116
Airports

Marklin:

 

Concur!  It happens like car crashes.  I couldn't find where anyone was killed or injured on the ground or in their homes other than the people aboard the aircraft ?

 

Correct me if I am wrong. Yes, accidents happen.but compared to what happens on the hiways, Aviation has been the safest since day one.

 

I thought the Rancho Murieta book was closed. 

Jack Tavolario's picture
Joined: 11/07/2007
Posts: 64
Chuck, Chuck, Chuck!  

Chuck, Chuck, Chuck!

 

You know darn well no book ever closes here. Just like people worrying that if motorcycles are allowed in, a sudden surge in raping, pillaging, and even worse, loud mufflers rattling shelves and breaking windows, will suddenly appear, the iggirint folk worry that airplanes will start dropping out of the sky at such a rate, Chicken Little couldn’t keep up with it. Laughing

   

Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
Airport

 

Keep in mind the basic premise of anything intended by me is to alter the pattern so the landing's or takeoff's are not over the RM community.

The data shows that planes crash, regularly and usually from pilot error.

Knowledge gives us an edge as humans who can learn vicariously and apply the information to situations that have not yet occurred and alter the outcome without having to experience it personally.

 

Thank you for the interest in the subject.

 

Jack Tavolario's picture
Joined: 11/07/2007
Posts: 64
I’m not trying to be a

I’m not trying to be a smart guy here, but just how many planes in RMs take off or landing patterns have crashed at all, let alone onto a populated area of the community since the airport opened?

Marklin Brown's picture
Joined: 08/12/2007
Posts: 196
Airport

Actually you can see for yourself here,

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp

but no, not yet in the houses.

 

Ryan Fogleman's picture
Joined: 07/30/2007
Posts: 125
GOD D*MN RIGHT !

Thank you, thank you, thank you Jack ! Someone had to say it ! We are in more danger from the terrorists who claim to be protecting us from terrorism, than planes, motorcycles, lane crossers on scott road, graffiti artists, teenagers puffing a little grass, or electric vehicles running stop signs and yes, gasp ! even people driving faster than 25 mph.

"feed people hope and they will be hopeful, feed them fear and..." well, I think even the scared, shivering, chicken littles can figure out the rest. Innocent

 

Log in or register to post comments

Your comments