Bressi buzzed by Beachcraft

[admin]

I came across this article in yesterday’s the North county Gazette, a bit relevant to recent forum topic on Palomar Airport expansion.

“Bressi Buzzed by Beachcraft”
North County Gazette, January 13,2006
Steven Cessna, Staff reporter

Residents of Bressi Ranch development were rudely awakened at 3:30am Monday evening by the repeated passes of a low flying aircraft. The single engine beachcraft piloted by John Turner was experiencing what the pilots call “stuck stick”, which results in the aircraft banking sharply in a turn for an extended period. After 2 hours of circling Bressi Ranch, the pilot was eventually able to free the aircraft controls by repeatedly kicking the stick. Interviewed after successfully landing at Palomar Airport, the pilot commented, “Man, I had that stuck stick for quite a while, I was getting dizzy, I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”

[sdduuuude]

Damn. He runs out of gas and we have another house-landing.

[sdduuuude]

Damn. He runs out of gas and we have another house-landing.

[sdduuuude]

Damn. He runs out of gas and we have another house-landing.

[sdduuuude]

Damn. He runs out of gas and we have another house-landing.

[sdduuuude]

Damn. He runs out of gas and we have another house-landing.

[Coronita]

“I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”.

winnar

So dumb question for pilots of small planes. Are there requirements for small plane inspections,etc? There is for commercial carriers, but what about for smaller planes?

This is why I wouldn’t buy a home near an airport. Because you can have all the rules and regulations, and you still have some folks(albeit more likely a small percentage) with their marbles loose.

[Coronita]

“I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”.

winnar

So dumb question for pilots of small planes. Are there requirements for small plane inspections,etc? There is for commercial carriers, but what about for smaller planes?

This is why I wouldn’t buy a home near an airport. Because you can have all the rules and regulations, and you still have some folks(albeit more likely a small percentage) with their marbles loose.

[Coronita]

“I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”.

winnar

So dumb question for pilots of small planes. Are there requirements for small plane inspections,etc? There is for commercial carriers, but what about for smaller planes?

This is why I wouldn’t buy a home near an airport. Because you can have all the rules and regulations, and you still have some folks(albeit more likely a small percentage) with their marbles loose.

[Coronita]

“I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”.

winnar

So dumb question for pilots of small planes. Are there requirements for small plane inspections,etc? There is for commercial carriers, but what about for smaller planes?

This is why I wouldn’t buy a home near an airport. Because you can have all the rules and regulations, and you still have some folks(albeit more likely a small percentage) with their marbles loose.

[Coronita]

“I’m gonna have to get a couple cans of WD-40”.

winnar

So dumb question for pilots of small planes. Are there requirements for small plane inspections,etc? There is for commercial carriers, but what about for smaller planes?

This is why I wouldn’t buy a home near an airport. Because you can have all the rules and regulations, and you still have some folks(albeit more likely a small percentage) with their marbles loose.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a requirement that privately owned small planes are inspected at least annually and it is a very thorough inspection at that. Depending upon the aircraft there are other inspections and most aircraft have their oil changed every 25-50 hours of flight and a mechanic usually does a review of many safety items during that process. Unfortunately as with all things mechanical, it is possible this pilot took excellent care of his plane but something just broke. I suspect his comment about the WD40 was tongue in cheek. Planes used for rental or lessons have to be inspected at least every 100 hours of flight. Many privately owned planes fly 100 or less hours while an active rental/school plane might fly 3-6 hours per day.

Aircraft owners risk their own lives and those of their families and friends who they fly with so rarely is a plane not well maintained. But as you point out their are a few folks in every walk of life who do have loose marbles. Just impossible given the information posted to know whether this guy was flying a plane that should have been grounded or just had some bad luck. What is important to note is that no one died and no one was hurt. That is usually the case even when small planes do make emergency landing off the airport.

You comment about living near an airport is good to see. As a pilot, I hear so many people complain about the noise or the risk because they bought a house near an airport. Surprise…the airport was there when you decided to purchase the house and likely not much has changed since then. The time to decide if you want to live near an airport is prior to signing a contract. Some people don’t mind and others see it as a major reason not to buy there but don’t try to get an airport closed because it bothers you! We need more airports, not less and we are all going to pay the price in higher airfares, longer delays if new housing developments keep forcing the reliever airports to close. These airports serve an important role in major emergencies (such as wildfires) and provide a lot of jobs and a lot of tax revenue to the municipalities (lots of property tax revenue and they don’t have to provide schools and other services that are required if you replace that jet or plane with a home with 3 kids!)

They tried to close one of the Las Vegas General Aviation airports recently after a couple of crashes this summer. It was well documented that it was not a good idea to build new housing developments near the runways but at the time no one seemed to care. Now they want to close the airport because it is “dangerous” to the residents. The reality is that the risks are small but yes they are there and it is far better that for at least a mile or so around an airport it is better to have either no or low density development. There is a point in the takeoff where you just don’t have enough altitude to turn back to the airport and attemptiong a 180 degree turn would almost certainly cause the aircraft to stall and spiral into the ground. Better to look 30 degrees on either side of your flight path and find somewhere to make a controlled off airport landing. Ideally something flat, minimal trees and no people. Most small planes can slow to about 50MPH just prior to a landing so the impact is not as harsh as one might expect. If you can land in a controlled manner most are survivable. The good news is that having total engine failure is still not very common. Just think about cars and how poorly most are maintained yet how few just suddenlty quit. Aircraft are much better maintained and the engines are well proven designs with very low failure rates. Also many planes have engine monitors that keep very close tabs on certain key parameters so pilots often see trouble developing way before it shuts down the engine. All of this is not to imply that there is not a risk with flying but that the risks are pretty well understood and planes just don’t fall out of the sky that often. Even the recent Hudson river incident shows that with total engine failure with little room to maneuver and few options in a high density environment a well trained pilot with a little luck on his side and a well built plane can avoid a major disaster. I wish all aviation incidents had such a positive outcome. Todays press rarely is going to mention incidents that end safely but will give lots of ink to those that end in disaster.

So I will step down from my soapbox but congratulate you on asking the right questions as a result of an aviation incident. So often people just make assumptions and then try to shoot down general aviation without accurate information. Keep an open mind, learn the facts and make a choice about where you want to live. Nothing wrong with not wanted to be near an airport. As a pilot, I don’t live in close proximity and I am not sure whether I would buy in Bressi or not. I know that I would not want to buy in some airport areas due to noise. The small risk of a crash probably would not weigh heavily in my decision but it certainly would be a consideration and I would expect to get a better “deal” on a home that is impacted by an airport, all things being equal.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a requirement that privately owned small planes are inspected at least annually and it is a very thorough inspection at that. Depending upon the aircraft there are other inspections and most aircraft have their oil changed every 25-50 hours of flight and a mechanic usually does a review of many safety items during that process. Unfortunately as with all things mechanical, it is possible this pilot took excellent care of his plane but something just broke. I suspect his comment about the WD40 was tongue in cheek. Planes used for rental or lessons have to be inspected at least every 100 hours of flight. Many privately owned planes fly 100 or less hours while an active rental/school plane might fly 3-6 hours per day.

Aircraft owners risk their own lives and those of their families and friends who they fly with so rarely is a plane not well maintained. But as you point out their are a few folks in every walk of life who do have loose marbles. Just impossible given the information posted to know whether this guy was flying a plane that should have been grounded or just had some bad luck. What is important to note is that no one died and no one was hurt. That is usually the case even when small planes do make emergency landing off the airport.

You comment about living near an airport is good to see. As a pilot, I hear so many people complain about the noise or the risk because they bought a house near an airport. Surprise…the airport was there when you decided to purchase the house and likely not much has changed since then. The time to decide if you want to live near an airport is prior to signing a contract. Some people don’t mind and others see it as a major reason not to buy there but don’t try to get an airport closed because it bothers you! We need more airports, not less and we are all going to pay the price in higher airfares, longer delays if new housing developments keep forcing the reliever airports to close. These airports serve an important role in major emergencies (such as wildfires) and provide a lot of jobs and a lot of tax revenue to the municipalities (lots of property tax revenue and they don’t have to provide schools and other services that are required if you replace that jet or plane with a home with 3 kids!)

They tried to close one of the Las Vegas General Aviation airports recently after a couple of crashes this summer. It was well documented that it was not a good idea to build new housing developments near the runways but at the time no one seemed to care. Now they want to close the airport because it is “dangerous” to the residents. The reality is that the risks are small but yes they are there and it is far better that for at least a mile or so around an airport it is better to have either no or low density development. There is a point in the takeoff where you just don’t have enough altitude to turn back to the airport and attemptiong a 180 degree turn would almost certainly cause the aircraft to stall and spiral into the ground. Better to look 30 degrees on either side of your flight path and find somewhere to make a controlled off airport landing. Ideally something flat, minimal trees and no people. Most small planes can slow to about 50MPH just prior to a landing so the impact is not as harsh as one might expect. If you can land in a controlled manner most are survivable. The good news is that having total engine failure is still not very common. Just think about cars and how poorly most are maintained yet how few just suddenlty quit. Aircraft are much better maintained and the engines are well proven designs with very low failure rates. Also many planes have engine monitors that keep very close tabs on certain key parameters so pilots often see trouble developing way before it shuts down the engine. All of this is not to imply that there is not a risk with flying but that the risks are pretty well understood and planes just don’t fall out of the sky that often. Even the recent Hudson river incident shows that with total engine failure with little room to maneuver and few options in a high density environment a well trained pilot with a little luck on his side and a well built plane can avoid a major disaster. I wish all aviation incidents had such a positive outcome. Todays press rarely is going to mention incidents that end safely but will give lots of ink to those that end in disaster.

So I will step down from my soapbox but congratulate you on asking the right questions as a result of an aviation incident. So often people just make assumptions and then try to shoot down general aviation without accurate information. Keep an open mind, learn the facts and make a choice about where you want to live. Nothing wrong with not wanted to be near an airport. As a pilot, I don’t live in close proximity and I am not sure whether I would buy in Bressi or not. I know that I would not want to buy in some airport areas due to noise. The small risk of a crash probably would not weigh heavily in my decision but it certainly would be a consideration and I would expect to get a better “deal” on a home that is impacted by an airport, all things being equal.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a requirement that privately owned small planes are inspected at least annually and it is a very thorough inspection at that. Depending upon the aircraft there are other inspections and most aircraft have their oil changed every 25-50 hours of flight and a mechanic usually does a review of many safety items during that process. Unfortunately as with all things mechanical, it is possible this pilot took excellent care of his plane but something just broke. I suspect his comment about the WD40 was tongue in cheek. Planes used for rental or lessons have to be inspected at least every 100 hours of flight. Many privately owned planes fly 100 or less hours while an active rental/school plane might fly 3-6 hours per day.

Aircraft owners risk their own lives and those of their families and friends who they fly with so rarely is a plane not well maintained. But as you point out their are a few folks in every walk of life who do have loose marbles. Just impossible given the information posted to know whether this guy was flying a plane that should have been grounded or just had some bad luck. What is important to note is that no one died and no one was hurt. That is usually the case even when small planes do make emergency landing off the airport.

You comment about living near an airport is good to see. As a pilot, I hear so many people complain about the noise or the risk because they bought a house near an airport. Surprise…the airport was there when you decided to purchase the house and likely not much has changed since then. The time to decide if you want to live near an airport is prior to signing a contract. Some people don’t mind and others see it as a major reason not to buy there but don’t try to get an airport closed because it bothers you! We need more airports, not less and we are all going to pay the price in higher airfares, longer delays if new housing developments keep forcing the reliever airports to close. These airports serve an important role in major emergencies (such as wildfires) and provide a lot of jobs and a lot of tax revenue to the municipalities (lots of property tax revenue and they don’t have to provide schools and other services that are required if you replace that jet or plane with a home with 3 kids!)

They tried to close one of the Las Vegas General Aviation airports recently after a couple of crashes this summer. It was well documented that it was not a good idea to build new housing developments near the runways but at the time no one seemed to care. Now they want to close the airport because it is “dangerous” to the residents. The reality is that the risks are small but yes they are there and it is far better that for at least a mile or so around an airport it is better to have either no or low density development. There is a point in the takeoff where you just don’t have enough altitude to turn back to the airport and attemptiong a 180 degree turn would almost certainly cause the aircraft to stall and spiral into the ground. Better to look 30 degrees on either side of your flight path and find somewhere to make a controlled off airport landing. Ideally something flat, minimal trees and no people. Most small planes can slow to about 50MPH just prior to a landing so the impact is not as harsh as one might expect. If you can land in a controlled manner most are survivable. The good news is that having total engine failure is still not very common. Just think about cars and how poorly most are maintained yet how few just suddenlty quit. Aircraft are much better maintained and the engines are well proven designs with very low failure rates. Also many planes have engine monitors that keep very close tabs on certain key parameters so pilots often see trouble developing way before it shuts down the engine. All of this is not to imply that there is not a risk with flying but that the risks are pretty well understood and planes just don’t fall out of the sky that often. Even the recent Hudson river incident shows that with total engine failure with little room to maneuver and few options in a high density environment a well trained pilot with a little luck on his side and a well built plane can avoid a major disaster. I wish all aviation incidents had such a positive outcome. Todays press rarely is going to mention incidents that end safely but will give lots of ink to those that end in disaster.

So I will step down from my soapbox but congratulate you on asking the right questions as a result of an aviation incident. So often people just make assumptions and then try to shoot down general aviation without accurate information. Keep an open mind, learn the facts and make a choice about where you want to live. Nothing wrong with not wanted to be near an airport. As a pilot, I don’t live in close proximity and I am not sure whether I would buy in Bressi or not. I know that I would not want to buy in some airport areas due to noise. The small risk of a crash probably would not weigh heavily in my decision but it certainly would be a consideration and I would expect to get a better “deal” on a home that is impacted by an airport, all things being equal.

[Anonymous]

Yes, there is a requirement that privately owned small planes are inspected at least annually and it is a very thorough inspection at that. Depending upon the aircraft there are other inspections and most aircraft have their oil changed every 25-50 hours of flight and a mechanic usually does a review of many safety items during that process. Unfortunately as with all things mechanical, it is possible this pilot took excellent care of his plane but something just broke. I suspect his comment about the WD40 was tongue in cheek. Planes used for rental or lessons have to be inspected at least every 100 hours of flight. Many privately owned planes fly 100 or less hours while an active rental/school plane might fly 3-6 hours per day.

Aircraft owners risk their own lives and those of their families and friends who they fly with so rarely is a plane not well maintained. But as you point out their are a few folks in every walk of life who do have loose marbles. Just impossible given the information posted to know whether this guy was flying a plane that should have been grounded or just had some bad luck. What is important to note is that no one died and no one was hurt. That is usually the case even when small planes do make emergency landing off the airport.

You comment about living near an airport is good to see. As a pilot, I hear so many people complain about the noise or the risk because they bought a house near an airport. Surprise…the airport was there when you decided to purchase the house and likely not much has changed since then. The time to decide if you want to live near an airport is prior to signing a contract. Some people don’t mind and others see it as a major reason not to buy there but don’t try to get an airport closed because it bothers you! We need more airports, not less and we are all going to pay the price in higher airfares, longer delays if new housing developments keep forcing the reliever airports to close. These airports serve an important role in major emergencies (such as wildfires) and provide a lot of jobs and a lot of tax revenue to the municipalities (lots of property tax revenue and they don’t have to provide schools and other services that are required if you replace that jet or plane with a home with 3 kids!)

They tried to close one of the Las Vegas General Aviation airports recently after a couple of crashes this summer. It was well documented that it was not a good idea to build new housing developments near the runways but at the time no one seemed to care. Now they want to close the airport because it is “dangerous” to the residents. The reality is that the risks are small but yes they are there and it is far better that for at least a mile or so around an airport it is better to have either no or low density development. There is a point in the takeoff where you just don’t have enough altitude to turn back to the airport and attemptiong a 180 degree turn would almost certainly cause the aircraft to stall and spiral into the ground. Better to look 30 degrees on either side of your flight path and find somewhere to make a controlled off airport landing. Ideally something flat, minimal trees and no people. Most small planes can slow to about 50MPH just prior to a landing so the impact is not as harsh as one might expect. If you can land in a controlled manner most are survivable. The good news is that having total engine failure is still not very common. Just think about cars and how poorly most are maintained yet how few just suddenlty quit. Aircraft are much better maintained and the engines are well proven designs with very low failure rates. Also many planes have engine monitors that keep very close tabs on certain key parameters so pilots often see trouble developing way before it shuts down the engine. All of this is not to imply that there is not a risk with flying but that the risks are pretty well understood and planes just don’t fall out of the sky that often. Even the recent Hudson river incident shows that with total engine failure with little room to maneuver and few options in a high density environment a well trained pilot with a little luck on his side and a well built plane can avoid a major disaster. I wish all aviation incidents had such a positive outcome. Todays press rarely is going to mention incidents that end safely but will give lots of ink to those that end in disaster.

So I will step down from my soapbox but congratulate you on asking the right questions as a result of an aviation incident. So often people just make assumptions and then try to shoot down general aviation without accurate information. Keep an open mind, learn the facts and make a choice about where you want to live. Nothing wrong with not wanted to be near an airport. As a pilot, I don’t live in close proximity and I am not sure whether I would buy in Bressi or not. I know that I would not want to buy in some airport areas due to noise. The small risk of a crash probably would not weigh heavily in my decision but it certainly would be a consideration and I would expect to get a better “deal” on a home that is impacted by an airport, all things being equal.

[Author]

Posts