Page 24 of 117
Posted: Sun 27 Nov, 2005 19:37
by bigbang84
Comment il a fait pour se percher en haut dans les fils cet avion là ?!!
Posted: Sun 27 Nov, 2005 19:38
by Die-On
Il voulait acrocher son linge pour le faire sècher surement ! :lol: :lol:
Serieusement je sais pas c'était pas écrit, peut être une panne moteur et il a essayer d'atterrir sur une route sans voir les files...
Quelqu'un a une hypothèse ?
:?
Posted: Sun 27 Nov, 2005 20:19
by snowman.
Je crois que lui aussi ya un sac de chances assez complet ... :wink:
Martin
Posted: Sun 27 Nov, 2005 21:35
by toxedo_2000
C't'un schock hein ?
Gas
Si mes souvenirs sont bon...
Posted: Sun 27 Nov, 2005 22:06
by C-FRSH
Je peux me gourer mais je crois que cet évènement remonte autour
de l'année 99-2000 (J'effectuais ma licence a ce moment...)
C'est carrément une erreur de pilotage (genre crosswind) et le gars
a fini dans les fils. Pas blessé, plus de peur que de mal...
Juste pas commode a décrocher :shock:
Je crois qu'il pilote maintenant des tondeuses à gazon... :wink:
Patrice.
Posted: Mon 28 Nov, 2005 14:14
by gillesdrapeau
Posted: Mon 28 Nov, 2005 14:32
by DeltaMike
Y a pas de l'air à avoir apprécié son vol :lol: :lol: :lol:
Daniel
Posted: Mon 28 Nov, 2005 15:03
by karatoo
L'avion dans les fils électrique ,il s'agit d'une panne moteur,un instructeur et son étudiant.L'instructeur espérait se rendre à un terrain de golf mais n'a pas réussi.
L'instructeur à se que je me rappelle est décédé mais l'étudiant ne fut que légèrement blessé.
André
Posted: Mon 28 Nov, 2005 15:05
by bigbang84
Ok Merci Karatoo pour l'info ;)
Posted: Thu 08 Dec, 2005 17:41
by OlivierC-FWOL
Visez un peu cette saleté!
http://www.airliners.net/open.file/972287/L/
On dirait un Bell 47 qui a pris des stéroïdes...
:lol: :lol: :lol: 8)
Posted: Thu 08 Dec, 2005 18:40
by Willy
La voici la réponse... :oops:
SEA98IA060
On April 9, 1998, approximately 0544 Pacific daylight time, a Cessna 150L, N39AA, became entangled in electrical transmission lines during an aborted landing at Boeing Field/King County International Airport, Seattle, Washington. The commercial pilot, who was the sole occupant, was not injured, and the aircraft, which was owned and operated by the pilot, sustained minor damage. The 14 CFR Part 91 flight, which departed Apex Airpark, Silverdale, Washington, about 20 minutes earlier, was being operated in visual meteorological conditions. No flight plan had been filed, and there was no report of an ELT transmission.
According to the pilot, about one minute after he was cleared to land on runway 31 left, he requested an early (close-in) base. After he received approval, he turned base at a point that allowed him to intercept final just beyond the runway threshold. Then, because he was planning to park on a northern portion of the field, he established a rate of descent that he expected would result in a touchdown just north of the control tower (about 6,000 feet down the runway). When the aircraft came abeam the tower, while still about 20 feet in the air, it encountered what the pilot described as "...violent turbulence." He said that the left wing dropped sharply and the aircraft was quickly turned almost 90 degrees to the runway. He then added full power and started climbing straight ahead. Just past the west boundary of the airport, the aircraft became entangled in electrical transmission lines and remained hanging there for about four hours. Eventually, rescue personnel were able to remove the pilot from the aircraft without injury. Once the aircraft was removed from the wires, it was determined that the flaps were still in the full-down position. Upon being questioned, that pilot confirmed that he had failed to reset the flaps to the 20 degree position during the go-around as called for in the Pilot's Operating Handbook.
A review of amended tower transcripts revealed that the pilot of the 150 had been cleared to land on runway 31 left about ten seconds after a Beech D-18 (Methow 82) was cleared for departure while waiting at the most southerly hold-short line (A-11) of the same runway. Although the clearance for Methow 82 was given at 0641:10, recorded radar data provided by Seattle Departure showed that it was not until 0643:42, 2 minutes and 32 seconds later, that Methow 82 appeared on radar about 4,000 feet off the departure (north) end of the runway. Recorded radar data also showed that the Cessna 150 turned onto final near the south overrun while about 200 feet above the ground, at 0643:01. This was 41 seconds prior to the D-18 arriving at the aforementioned location. The D-18 was handed off to Seattle Departure at 0643:20, which was about 45 seconds prior to the Cessna 150 experiencing "turbulence."
During the investigation it was determined that the Cessna 150 was a Category I aircraft (small aircraft weighing 12,500 pounds or less, with a single propeller driven engine), and the D-18 was a Category II aircraft (small aircraft weighing 12,500 pounds or less, with propeller twin engines). According to FAA Order 7110.65L (Air Traffic Control), proper separation between a Category I aircraft landing behind a departing Category II aircraft ensures that the arriving aircraft does not cross the threshold until the other aircraft has departed and crossed the runway end. But the order further states that if the controller can determine the distance by reference to suitable land marks, and the preceding aircraft is airborne, it need not have crossed the end of the runway if the Category I aircraft is behind the Category II aircraft by at least 3,000 feet.
During the investigation, it was also determined that the poles from which the transmission wires hang are not classified as obstructions by the FAA's Flight Standards District Office (FSDO). The basis for that determination was an Aeronautical Study performed by the FSDO, during which the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's Airport Obstruction Survey Chart was reviewed.
Posted: Thu 08 Dec, 2005 18:50
by Willy
Snowman y'a pas juste toi qui est capable de faire ca un gear up hein. ca ce fait même en 150 :? ...
Posted: Thu 08 Dec, 2005 22:55
by snowman.
Willy wrote:Snowman y'a pas juste toi qui est capable de faire ca un gear up hein. ca ce fait même en 150 :? ...
Je pense qu,a choisir entre les deux :roll: , je préfère le miens... :wink:
Martin 8)
Posted: Fri 09 Dec, 2005 00:54
by toxedo_2000
\
Ça me fait plutôt penser à un petit Apache, pas de plume.
Posted: Fri 09 Dec, 2005 08:39
by PaulD
Voir sous "Close call"...
Il n'a même pas eu le temps de penser faire dans sa culotte. :twisted:
http://66.98.238.14/~compfuse/media/08herct/close-call_139.wmv
Paul :D :D
J'ai déjà passé proche comme ça à Victo. La radio du largueur était en panne. :evil:
Posted: Sat 10 Dec, 2005 00:13
by Die-On
Ca fait peur :shock:
Posted: Mon 12 Dec, 2005 19:17
by PaulD
Posted: Mon 12 Dec, 2005 20:18
by COOLFLY
Est-ce que que vous connaissez le nom de cette hélico ?
j'ai pris cette photo dans les années 70. à bagotville.
Question de satisfaire ma curiositée ! :lol:
André. :wink:
j'ai l'impression que ma photo n'est pas accessible à partir de mon album photo ??? est-ce que quelqu'un peux m'aider ?
webmaster: André les photos des albums ...personnelles sont visibles uniquement si le visiteur sur le site est connecté....
Pour savoir comment insérer une photo dans l'album voir procédure simplifiée sur http://www.ailesquebecoises.com/viewtopic.php?t=1577
Posted: Mon 12 Dec, 2005 20:25
by OlivierC-FWOL
Piasecki H-21, la banane volante.
8)
Posted: Mon 12 Dec, 2005 21:49
by MichelC
Paul, ta photo c'est comme Fat Albert, le Hercules des Blue Angels.
Ils font toujours cette démonstration lors des air shows (de jour par contre, moins spectaculaire).
Michel C-GNCJ