Just pushed to my YouTube suggestions. Didn’t find it on the forum by searching. Perhaps a bit overdramatized, but still a pretty cool stunt.
I was wondering why they didn’t wait till favorable winds; even a 10kts HW would have helped tons and not given unacceptable structure turbulence.
Landing short looks dangerous, long maybe they can regain lift after running off the end. Video was kinda meh for me
Hence the steep approach; falling over the edge ain't no big deal, as that was the takeoff technique.
I saw a video showing them doing that on takeoff. There's plenty of height to accommodate diving to gain airspeed.
It looks like they removed and/or covered the fall fencing. As long as he didn't short it he would just run off the other side and have plenty of altitude to recover. Other than the cool/wow factor, I really don't suspect this was that difficult from a performance capability standpoint of the aircraft and pilot. I've watched cub guys here take off and land on the runway aiming point markings for fun.
There is sort of a low framework around the circumference - I'm not sure it would qualify as a fence. It looks like they put some paneling over it for this event. (The paneling is not present in other photos.) It looks pretty dangerous though. A little lower looks like it could have been catastrophic.
...and hangs over the side. He wouldn't be the first pilot suspended in a pointless Red Bull stunt. Nauga, and a rimshot
Mike talks about that in the "how we did it video". The short answer is that the risk of swirly winds was greater than the risk of overrunning. There was an amazing about of engineering that went into this. Way more than just a cowboy strapping on a carbon cub and yelling "ye-haw"
Maybe an admin can combine the threads? (Weird that mine was posted yesterday and had multiple views but no comments until now, while the other exploded)
What rules are being bent? N-registered aircraft fly to Dubai every day (airliners). Red Bull isn't subject to FAA jurisdiction in UAE, so I'm sure they got whatever waiver they needed from the Emirati gov't. Dubai loves that kind of publicity. I think they've even had a tennis match between Agassi and Federer on that same helipad at the top of the Burj al Arab.
After he bounced it the first couple approaches, the last successful one was very flat making it a bit easier to stick.
FYI: all heliport "fencing" lays horizontal like that. If not it tends to catch helicopters instead of people.
Maybe that is my confusion. I thought US pilots flying N registered aircraft in foreign places were still subject to FAA regulation. Aren't parachutes were required for aerobatic flight when carrying a passenger?
In the US, parachutes are required for aerobatic flight, which is defined as pitch greater than 30 degrees and bank more than 60 degrees. It doesn't matter if there is a passenger. There is an exception for spin training for CFI candidates.
Those pitch and bank angles don’t define aerobatic flight, but they are the limits in the parachute regulation…and yes, it does matter whether there is a passenger on board or not. See 91.305. 91.303 defines aerobatic flight as the two are often intermingled, but are technically different. …among other things.
No, a parachute is not required for aerobatics if flying solo: § 91.307(c) Unless each occupant of the aircraft is wearing an approved parachute, no pilot of a civil aircraft carrying any person (other than a crewmember) may execute any intentional maneuver that exceeds - (1) A bank of 60 degrees relative to the horizon; or (2) A nose-up or nose-down attitude of 30 degrees relative to the horizon.
The claim is he was doing touch and goes for practice. And then the wind was just right so he decided to land instead of Another Touch and Go.
