Plane dive bombing boaters on north Texas lakes

SoonerAviator said:
Side note: the family that was interviewed was a bunch of pansies. "Not going back out on the lake due to fear of the aircraft coming back" is a load of crap. Probably scared of their own shadow. If I came in because of the aircraft, I'd wait until they departed the area, then I'd be right back out on the water. Way too dramatic.
Click to expand...

They're not pansies, just the uninformed general public. It looks dangerous and is, to a degree. If you, a pilot and non-gun user was out at some wilderness park and guys were shooting rifles and pistols in a reckless manner, you'd take your family away, too.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
How is that dramatic? I have two kids and sure as hell wouldn't go back out on the lake that day with that guy buzzing around and endangering everyone's lives. Even without my kids, I would have left and not returned that day. They never said they were never going back to the lake for the rest of their lives... that would have been dramatic. I think you are misreading. No reason to fault the victims.
Click to expand...


Victims?!







Based on what I've seen of July 4th boating, most of those boaters were probably at higher risk to themselves.
 
Dan Thomas said:
They're not pansies, just the uninformed general public. It looks dangerous and is, to a degree. If you, a pilot and non-gun user was out at some wilderness park and guys were shooting rifles and pistols in a reckless manner, you'd take your family away, too.
Click to expand...
I know some gun-users who would be leaving too...
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
How is that dramatic? I have two kids and sure as hell wouldn't go back out on the lake that day with that guy buzzing around and endangering everyone's lives. Even without my kids, I would have left and not returned that day. They never said they were never going back to the lake for the rest of their lives... that would have been dramatic. I think you are misreading. No reason to fault the victims.
Click to expand...

So what would you do if a guy on a jet ski was making a bunch of passes around you for a few minutes, maybe coming within a few boat lengths of you or your children on a tube? Do you head inside for the day/weekend? When the aircraft leaves the area, there's little likelihood of seeing it return. I understand them heading in to port temporarily, but acting like they feared the return of an aircraft so much that they didn't dare get back on the water is a bit of a stretch. I'm also not "faulting the victims", despite my opinion that staying off the lake for the rest of the day is a bit of an over-reaction. It is my opinion, and you're certainly under no obligation to agree with it, I care not either way.
 
Sorry, "potential" victims. Better? One slip up and he could have killed them.

You know what... actually, no. I stand by what I said. They were victims of unwanted harassment.

Regarding jet skis - I'm not a water person, so I'm not familiar with the way they could endanger me or my family if they were behaving as irresponsibly as this guy was. So I can't comment on that.

As for the there being little likelihood of the guy returning, so what? The kids were scared, the parents were ****ed - their day was ruined by this jerk (actually, it sounds like it was two jerks). And little likelihood is not the same as no likelihood.
 
These are complete jackarse's! What did they think was going to happen?
I could here them in the cockpit screaming carp like " this is extreme!...give me another mountain dew BRO...."
There is most certainly video from the plane as well, moron's like that cannot do anything without filming it for their FB, youtube page.

In the end this is just more bad press for the aviation community.
 
When I started reading this post I figured someone was at minimums and the people complained. Then I watched the video and can understand why they were unhappy with it, I would be too. The jet ski analogy is a good one but the perception of someone horsing around on a jet ski is different. A jet ski can kill a person if it runs over them just like any other boat on the water. Aircraft owners and Pilots are held to a different standard, it's part of the culture.
 
Last edited:
How does anybody know that the pilot was a good guy just having some fun?? How does anybody know he was not suicidal? How does anybody know he wasn't on a jihad looking for a target? How does anybody know he was even a good pilot? He may have been on the edge of a stall/spin a bunch of times.

Nobody here knows and neither did the boaters on the water that day. Who wants to watch somebody die? Most people don't and most people don't want their kids to watch somebody die. Not pansies or scared of their own farts, just prudent.
 
SoonerAviator said:
So what would you do if a guy on a jet ski was making a bunch of passes around you for a few minutes, maybe coming within a few boat lengths of you or your children on a tube? Do you head inside for the day/weekend? When the aircraft leaves the area, there's little likelihood of seeing it return. I understand them heading in to port temporarily, but acting like they feared the return of an aircraft so much that they didn't dare get back on the water is a bit of a stretch. I'm also not "faulting the victims", despite my opinion that staying off the lake for the rest of the day is a bit of an over-reaction. It is my opinion, and you're certainly under no obligation to agree with it, I care not either way.
Click to expand...

Jet ski is a little different... a plane certainly has more opportunity to do more damage, and there is the expectation. A brat that only needs to be 16 and fog a mirror can drive a jet ski so you expect a certain level of stupidity. A certified pilot flying a machine orders of magnitude more expensive you would expect a little more responsibility.
 
Cajun_Flyer said:
...

You know what... actually, no. I stand by what I said. They were victims of unwanted harassment...
Click to expand...

They are victims, and they can now sue for millions! Airplane owners are rich: DEEP POCKETS! I can hear it now, "My kids will never be able to swim again. My wife and I can't have sex, because if we hear an airplane, I can no longer function!"

Victims? C'mon.
 
Dav8or said:
....how know he wasn't on a jihad looking for a target?
...
Click to expand...

And the train just went off the tracks.


I'd also know becuse they historically arnt that great of pilots, and it is HIGHLY unlikely a religious nut job with a couple hours training could pull off those passes.


The how do y'all know he wasn't sucidal, well after the first SUCCESSFUL pass I'd say we knew that.
 
Last edited:
tawood said:
They are victims, and they can now sue for millions! Airplane owners are rich: DEEP POCKETS! I can hear it now, "My kids will never be able to swim again. My wife and I can't have sex, because if we hear an airplane, I can no longer function!"

Victims? C'mon.
Click to expand...

Now who is being dramatic?

heh
 
tawood said:
You think I was serious? Heh
Click to expand...

Ah, sorry. You seemed serious. It's good to know you were just joking that they weren't victims of unwanted harassment, or that you believed they would get all sue-happy.

People here are calling the family pansies and accusing them of being overly dramatic, but at the end of the day, they were forced attendees to a dangerous airshow. They made the wise decision to leave. And they mitigated any further risk by choosing not to return that day. Seem pretty smart and sensible to me, so I see no reason to sling mud at them. I do see reason to sling mud at the pilot... lots of mud.
 
He atleast could have done it in a cooler plane than a skyhawk! ;)
 
Good lord. This guy is as much of a hooligan as the kid in the jetski buzzing boaters on a lake. A mid size boat and a 172 probably would do about similar damage in a collision scenario as well.

Don't be an ass and endanger non participants.
Do some risk assessment and be sensible about screwing around for both your sake and especially the others involved.

I am pretty sure most of us have done a buzz job or two. Yes there are risks involved, but you won't immediately die.

Oh and most importantly the 's signifies the possessive, and not a plural. As well trained pilots we should be able to actually use the English language. If such abuse persists we should report the offending pilot to the FSDO to remove the "English Proficient" endorsement from their cert.
 
To see what might happen to you next time you're thinking about conducting some low altitude flight maneuvers over a bunch of boaters on a lake, read this Facebook thread (if you can). Be sure to open the 39 comments under Adam Pick. It's almost scary how fast news travels these days. Smartphone cameras and social media will make short work of you and your certificate. Guaranteed. Smile for the camera.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/320666064456/
 
vontresc said:
Good lord. This guy is as much of a hooligan as the kid in the jetski buzzing boaters on a lake. A mid size boat and a 172 probably would do about similar damage in a collision scenario as well.

Don't be an ass and endanger non participants.
Do some risk assessment and be sensible about screwing around for both your sake and especially the others involved.
Click to expand...

I know folks that have flown over water pretty low and just off the shore for photo ops, but aiming for someone like that is just not cool. Besides the fact that it's reckless, could the prosecutors take it a step further and charge him with something more sinister like reckless endangerment of human life and/or depraved indifference to human life?

According to NY law (which I know doesn't apply here): you are guilty of Reckless Endangerment in the First Degree when you recklessly engage in conduct which creates a grave risk of death to another person.

Dude is lucky I'm not the guy in charge of his destiny, this kind of macho showboating is just begging to have someone throw the book at him, not to mention may open up civil suits for the folks involved as "targets" to sue him.

There's fun, and then there's this.

vontresc said:
I am pretty sure most of us have done a buzz job or two. Yes there are risks involved, but you won't immediately die.
Click to expand...

Don't try to minimize this stupid activity by saying we've all done it..we haven't. And how do you know we won't immediately die? There is NEVER any certainty.
 
I have learned one thing fo sho....................eman1200 is one boring-a$$ pilot. I need to get in an aerobatic plane one of these days.
 
He had passengers. "Watch this bubba!"

I surprise he didn't stall after that zoom climb.
 
over50 said:
To see what might happen to you next time you're thinking about conducting some low altitude flight maneuvers over a bunch of boaters on a lake, read this Facebook thread (if you can). Be sure to open the 39 comments under Adam Pick. It's almost scary how fast news travels these days. Smartphone cameras and social media will make short work of you and your certificate. Guaranteed. Smile for the camera.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/320666064456/
Click to expand...
Wow, that was a nice clear picture of N872SP...
 
Ryanb said:
I see a discussion and a 44709 ride coming up in someone's future.
Click to expand...
i don't. i see an emergency order of revocation in someone's future. getting a complaint from the public is one thing to the FAA, but A video on channel 5 is another. they will pull his ticket, and make it stick.

bob
 
It trickles down hill, if the FAA gets its pecker slapped, an airmans heads' going to roll.
 
vontresc said:
Can you even do an overhead break in a 172, or is that prohibited along with slipping with flaps????
Click to expand...

You have any idea how much work it takes to even enlighten 172 drivers that those "foot rests" move and make the plane do "stuff" lol

It's like teaching a kid the secret contra code in video games!
 
James331 said:
You have any idea how much work it takes to even enlighten 172 drivers that those "foot rests" move and make the plane do "stuff" lol

It's like teaching a kid the secret contra code in video games!
Click to expand...

Did you try the Konami code to unlock the rudders on a 172? :D
 
I think that's what the guy in the video was doing, which would explain the wild control movements.
 
I was in Austin returning to El Paso in the Tiger that day. Locally, we get the same stupid stunts, but over the Rio Grande river where there are people rafting near Las Cruces NM. There are literally only 4 lines across the river at 20 feet AGL in the 75 miles north of El Paso ... unfortunately, these guys found one of them ....

http://www.kvia.com/news/two-people...rio-grande-river-south-of-las-cruces/40224906
 
Dam rich people and their very expensive boats....





....someone had to say it....;)
 
ifly4fun said:
Jet ski is a little different... a plane certainly has more opportunity to do more damage, and there is the expectation. A brat that only needs to be 16 and fog a mirror can drive a jet ski so you expect a certain level of stupidity. A certified pilot flying a machine orders of magnitude more expensive you would expect a little more responsibility.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree on the expectation of responsibility. I would imagine the compact nature/density of a 900lbs jet ski and a couple of 200lbs occupants has just about as much opportunity for damage as a spam can 172 does. Either way, the risk level of having an accident with another one of the drunk boaters on the 4th is much higher than the risk that this guy was going to end up plowing into a vessel on the water. It doesn't excuse the pilot from anything, it just makes me roll my eyes a bit when I hear them tell their story as if they narrowly escaped death.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top