Harrison Ford lands on a taxiway @ SNA

exncsurfer said:
Why are all the articles reporting 20L, I heard an ATC recording where they clear him for 1L (I'm assuming 2L has been renamed to 1L). Not that it makes that much difference, but if you were looking to see where it actually happened, you're looking on the wrong end of the runway. Maybe he was used to approaching from the 20L side and when coming in from the 1L(or 2L) side he didn't realize the short RW is now on the right???



fake?
Click to expand...

Other way around.

That Live ATC recording doesn't make sense. The runways are currently 2-20, i.e. 2L, 2R or 20L, 20R. They haven't been 1-19 for many months now.
 
register@teamandras.com said:
Other way around.

That Live ATC recording doesn't make sense. The runways are currently 2-20, i.e. 2L, 2R or 20L, 20R. They haven't been 1-19 for many months now.
Click to expand...
yea, must be fake i guess, i hate to share the link and have more traffic driven to a fake video, deleting the video link
 
exncsurfer said:
yea, must be fake i guess, i hate to share the link and have more traffic driven to a fake video, deleting the video link
Click to expand...

Yep, that page loves trolling the media with false aviation stories. They received a lot of attention in December for an (admittedly funny) article claiming that Christian-owned airlines were responsible for wingtip position lights being red and green.

First clue is that the N-number they use belongs to the Ryan WWII trainer that Ford was flying when he suffered the engine-out at SMO in 2015.
 
colojo said:
He's been a great ambassador for GA, but the last plane he flew without incident was the Millennium Falcon.
Click to expand...
Ummmm.....have you seen those movies? If you call what he does to the Falcon "Without Incident" then we all need you t become an ASI.....
 
PPC1052 said:
Granted, either one will meet the threshold of 91.13. But they are typically distinct terms with different meanings. (Note the word "or" between "carless" and "reckless.") Reckless is worse than careless. It implies a knowing or conscious disregard of substantial and/or unjustifiable potential consequences.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with you. What, and IF, he is violated I have no idea. I was just referencing one FAR he may have violated.
 
mscard88 said:
I'm not disagreeing with you. What, and IF, he is violated I have no idea. I was just referencing one FAR he may have violated.
Click to expand...
I agree with you about the potential violation.
 
colojo said:
He's been a great ambassador for GA, but the last plane he flew without incident was the Millennium Falcon.
Click to expand...
Didn't Harrison Ford crash land the Millennium Falcon on the Starkiller planet?
.
What gets me most is if any of us did this, we might get a 15 second mention of the local news on a slow day. Like other fake news stories from the media, this has garnered 3 days of coverage and I would bet they're not done yet.
 
"he nearly crashed his single-engine Husky plane into a Boeing 737 carrying 110 passengers"

"he nearly caused his second serious plane crash in two years"

"or even lose his license altogether after the near crash"

This stuff is sickening. This type of hype is why I don't watch news and almost never read news anymore. Stop dramatizing things all the time. We aren't all middle school girls who thrive on drama.
 
Last edited:
Joshuajayg said:
"he nearly crashed his single-engine Husky plane into a Boeing 737 carrying 110 passengers"

"he nearly caused his second serious plane crash in two years"

"or even lose his license altogether after the near crash"

This stuff is sickening. This type of hype is why I don't watch new and almost never read news anymore. Stop dramatizing things all the time. We aren't all middle school girls who thrive on drama.
Click to expand...

I totally agree, but what can one expect when mainstream society is fed a steady diet of "reality" TV?
 
It is an inaccurate story. More typical BS news story. The 737 was NOT on the taxiway he landed on. And contrary to the graphic, he overflew the plane on a normal glide, no wild pop up to avoid the jet. Only 2 accidents in 22 years of flying I think is a pretty good record and except for adoing length to a non story, nOT wOrth mentioning. No one ever says how many automobile accidents one has.
And technically, this was an incident. What we don't know was the 737 sitting there waiting to cross or moving up to the hold short line. In fact, while landing on the taxiway might be wrong, if the 737 was moving, that pilot is also at fault, maybe even more so.
If he has to stop flying, I wonder if he could use someone (like me) to keep flying all of his toys. Can someone make an introduction for me? I might be able to handle the Millennium Falcon too, as long as it's a single engine.
 
silver-eagle said:
It is an inaccurate story. More typical BS news story. The 737 was NOT on the taxiway he landed on. And contrary to the graphic, he overflew the plane on a normal glide, no wild pop up to avoid the jet. Only 2 accidents in 22 years of flying I think is a pretty good record and except for adoing length to a non story, nOT wOrth mentioning. No one ever says how many automobile accidents one has.
And technically, this was an incident. What we don't know was the 737 sitting there waiting to cross or moving up to the hold short line. In fact, while landing on the taxiway might be wrong, if the 737 was moving, that pilot is also at fault, maybe even more so.
If he has to stop flying, I wonder if he could use someone (like me) to keep flying all of his toys. Can someone make an introduction for me? I might be able to handle the Millennium Falcon too, as long as it's a single engine.
Click to expand...
"...if the 737 was moving, that pilot is also at fault, maybe even more so."
Please explain.
 
c5baa328a99377a144d719dfe3a533c0.jpg
 
silver-eagle said:
It is an inaccurate story. More typical BS news story. The 737 was NOT on the taxiway he landed on. And contrary to the graphic, he overflew the plane on a normal glide, no wild pop up to avoid the jet. Only 2 accidents in 22 years of flying I think is a pretty good record and except for adoing length to a non story, nOT wOrth mentioning. No one ever says how many automobile accidents one has.
And technically, this was an incident. What we don't know was the 737 sitting there waiting to cross or moving up to the hold short line. In fact, while landing on the taxiway might be wrong, if the 737 was moving, that pilot is also at fault, maybe even more so.
If he has to stop flying, I wonder if he could use someone (like me) to keep flying all of his toys. Can someone make an introduction for me? I might be able to handle the Millennium Falcon too, as long as it's a single engine.
Click to expand...

I think you're wrong. The airliner was on the perpendicular taxiway holding for take off on 20L, where they were supposed to be, or perhaps moving to the hold line. I don't see the airliner at fault at all. Bottom line is HR landed on a taxiway and he was cleared to land on 30L. No one's fault but HF.
 
mscard88 said:
The airliner was on the perpendicular taxiway holding for take off on 20L
Click to expand...
Close.

The 737 was holding short of 20L waiting for Ford to land. A 737 can not depart on 20L. Once across 20L, the 737 departed 20R.

The reason Ford flew over the 737 was that he was lined up with the parallel taxiway instead of 20L.
 
Larry in TN said:
Close.

The 737 was holding short of 20L waiting for Ford to land. A 737 can not depart on 20L. Once across 20L, the 737 departed 20R.

The reason Ford flew over the 737 was that he was lined up with the parallel taxiway instead of 20L.
Click to expand...

Doesn't really matter, the 737 was where he was supposed to be, and holding short of 20L, regardless of which runway he would be using for take off. HF lined up AND landed on the parallel taxiway. With no runway markings. Over the 737 perhaps, still not sure on that.
 
Last edited:
mscard88 said:
Maybe, but that's not a reason to blow it off. What if he hadn't seen that airliner and clipped the airliner's tail? What if he didn't see another plane on that taxiway doing that taxi thing and plowed into it? Sure, IF IF IF, but the fact remains he operated an aeroplane in a careless and reckless manner IMO, and landed on a taxiway when he was cleared by the tower to land on a runway.
Click to expand...

What if your father had pulled out early?
 
mscard88 said:
I wouldn't be posting on POA and apparently annoying you. Whatever. Are you implying HR wasn't at fault?
Click to expand...

I'm saying that I just can't seem to get all worked up over this. As far as incidents and incursions go, if the FAA isn't all bent out of shape over it yet then who am I to pitch a fit about it? There are so many other things to get wound up over, like a 100 LL replacement, ADS-B compliance, or legislation that will allow affordable avionics in certificated airplanes.
 
Lachlan said:
I'm saying that I just can't seem to get all worked up over this. As far as incidents and incursions go, if the FAA isn't all bent out of shape over it yet then who am I to pitch a fit about it? There are so many other things to get wound up over, like a 100 LL replacement, ADS-B compliance, or legislation that will allow affordable avionics in certificated airplanes.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. I don't think anyone is getting worked up about it, however. Just a discussion like any other crash/accident/incident thread on here. Of course his celebrity is a big reason too for the interest for some.
 
mscard88 said:
Fair enough. I don't think anyone is getting worked up about it, however. Just a discussion like any other crash/accident/incident thread on here. Of course his celebrity is a big reason too for the interest for some.
Click to expand...

Like any other? Sure... a passenger jet clips a deer, which causes damage to the airplane, and it garners 6 measly posts. This one, 3 pages. Just like any other. If it was some doofus from Padooka no one would be discussing it and we all know it.
 
Lachlan said:
Like any other? Sure... a passenger jet clips a deer, which causes damage to the airplane, and it garners 6 measly posts. This one, 3 pages. Just like any other. If it was some doofus from Padooka no one would be discussing it and we all know it.
Click to expand...

I did mention his celebrity as a reason too.
 
Mr. Ford was flying a high wing taildragger. The 737 is a low wing trike. According to most pilot forums, Mr. Ford is obviously the better pilot, so he wins. Clearly the FAA knows this as they have backed down.
 
Dav8or said:
Mr. Ford was flying a high wing taildragger. The 737 is a low wing trike. According to most pilot forums, Mr. Ford is obviously the better pilot, so he wins. Clearly the FAA knows this as they have backed down.
Click to expand...
That, and he's pretty handy with a blaster.
 
Dav8or said:
Mr. Ford was flying a high wing taildragger. The 737 is a low wing trike. According to most pilot forums, Mr. Ford is obviously the better pilot, so he wins. Clearly the FAA knows this as they have backed down.
Click to expand...
Don't forget he made the kessel run in less than 12 parsecs.
 
PaulS said:
He contracted distance? He is amazing.
Click to expand...
If you want to geek-out over it...

In the commentary for Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope DVD, George Lucas mentions that the parsecs are due to the Millennium Falcon's advanced navigational computer rather than its engines, so the navicomputer would calculate much faster routes than other ships could. A similar info can be found in the notes Lucas recorded together with Carol Titelman in July/August 1977 to start a knowledge database for the planned sequels:

"It’s a very simple ship, very economical ship, although the modifications he made to it are rather extensive – mostly to the navigation system to get through hyperspace in the shortest possible distance (par-sects).”
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kessel_Run/Legends​
 
Larry in TN said:
If you want to geek-out over it...

In the commentary for Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope DVD, George Lucas mentions that the parsecs are due to the Millennium Falcon's advanced navigational computer rather than its engines, so the navicomputer would calculate much faster routes than other ships could. A similar info can be found in the notes Lucas recorded together with Carol Titelman in July/August 1977 to start a knowledge database for the planned sequels:

"It’s a very simple ship, very economical ship, although the modifications he made to it are rather extensive – mostly to the navigation system to get through hyperspace in the shortest possible distance (par-sects).”
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kessel_Run/Legends​
Click to expand...
Hmmm, didn't know that commentary existed, thanks.
 
Larry in TN said:
If you want to geek-out over it...

In the commentary for Star Wars: Episode IV A New Hope DVD, George Lucas mentions that the parsecs are due to the Millennium Falcon's advanced navigational computer rather than its engines, so the navicomputer would calculate much faster routes than other ships could. A similar info can be found in the notes Lucas recorded together with Carol Titelman in July/August 1977 to start a knowledge database for the planned sequels:

"It’s a very simple ship, very economical ship, although the modifications he made to it are rather extensive – mostly to the navigation system to get through hyperspace in the shortest possible distance (par-sects).”
http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Kessel_Run/Legends​
Click to expand...
Lucas bent over backwards several different ways to try to rationalize that he didn't actually know what a parsec was.

A knowledge database? Flaming BS. If that were the case, maybe having Luke make out with his sister in Empire wouldn't have happened.
 
FastEddieB said:
Confirms that it was hardly a "near miss".
Click to expand...

I don't know Eddie, it looked pretty close to me, not evasive maneuver close, but probably less than 100 feet close. I have 2 problems with this flight now, first that he didn't go around when he saw the airliner on the beginning of his "runway", and the second that he apparently repeatedly referred to himself as a helicopter flight. Those two issues need to be checked out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top