Pattern Madness

EdFred said:
I've just seen a higher % of E-A/B people say in not so many words that I'm an idiot for flying certified,
Click to expand...
that's from your own insecurity

Every product has its place in the market.
An instructor must teach on a certified plane (preferably with high wing with slow Vs speed),
while a techno geek would want the freedom to tinker with bells and whistles.


EdFred said:
... Yeah, there is *almost* an E-A/B for every SE mission, but the "it's cheaper, it's cheaper, it's cheaper" chant is not as true as much as they wish it to be. If it was so cheap, I should be able to buy 2 equivalent experimentals for the price of my Comanche.
Click to expand...

cost is only but one of the considerations.

technology is another...
eg. people have been flying synthetic vision for over 3 years.

see this Highway-in-the-Sky demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu1Pqa1409Y
 
Troska said:
One thing that EAA does help with is the Flight Advisor program. I utilized this resource, and I found it very helpful prior to first flight.

I wouldn't argue that more can't be done, but there is a first step out there that is available. It would be interesting to see how many people participate in it before their first flight.

In my case, in addition to being useful, it was a requirement if I wanted my insurance to apply to Flight no.1.

As a kudos to the RV community, several different local RV pilots offered me stick time in their aircraft prior to my first flight. I don't have an RV, but the controls are similarly light and responsive.

Idea for improvement: Didn't they used to have mandatory inspections of the aircraft during the build process? They don't anymore, and I can't think of a reason to object to it. I know nobody wants more regulation, and there are plenty of options for "non-official" inspections, but I'm almost at loss of what else can be done.

Other Ideas?

Tim
Click to expand...

I guess what really needs to be determined is whether the crash rate on first flights (or within the fly off period) or whether there is a higher percentage of stupid pilot tricks in the EA-B community.

There's no sense in suggesting putting new tires on your car if your alignment is out of whack.
 
Panew said:
that's from your own insecurity

Every product has its place in the market.
An instructor must teach on a certified plane (preferably with high wing with slow Vs speed),
while a techno geek would want the freedom to tinker with bells and whistles.




cost is only but one of the considerations.

technology is another...
eg. people have been flying synthetic vision for over 3 years.

see this Highway-in-the-Sky demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uu1Pqa1409Y
Click to expand...

I have nothing to be insecure about, I just don't feel like spending 2-3000 hours building something when I could spend 2-3000 FLYING something.

I have synthetic vision it in my plane as well, for less than $2000.
 
Just picked up an EFIS with EMS for ~$3,000 out the door.

I'm not sure you could do the in a certified aircraft, but I don't really care if you fly an experimental or certified. I've owned both and they each have their advantages and disadvantages.
 
EdFred said:
I have nothing to be insecure about, I just don't feel like spending 2-3000 hours building something when I could spend 2-3000 FLYING something.

I have synthetic vision it in my plane as well, for less than $2000.
Click to expand...

you have confused moving map with synthetic vision.


so you are changing your tune -- you don't hate experimentals, you just don't have the time/inclination to build. (which is just fine... experimentals are not for everybody. neither is a float plane, or twin, or high wing, etc.,)
 
.

they closed the thread at the Red Board

.
 
Last edited:
You know, I kind of like the military paint schemes, interiors, etc that pay homage to warbirds of the past. However, the installation of guns, rockets, drop tanks, etc by you guys is really a bit over the top. :D
 
Panew said:
you have confused moving map with synthetic vision.


so you are changing your tune -- you don't hate experimentals, you just don't have the time/inclination to build. (which is just fine... experimentals are not for everybody. neither is a float plane, or twin, or high wing, etc.,)
Click to expand...

No I have not. I have synthetic vision and HITS in my unit. Where did I say I hate experimentals?
 
steingar said:
No matter what you do, angrily denying that a problem exists will do nothing to solve it.

If I may further my analogy, I detest motorcycle stunters, especially those who perform their acts on the street. They create the perception that motorcycles are dangerous. Now, motorcycles are indeed dangerous, but most of the crashes and fatalities arise from other sectors. The less we have that points out the dangers, the less likely municipal government will clamp down and spoil the fun.

My analogy easily applies to experimental aircraft. Overhead breaks, impromptu aerobatics, and other stupid pilot tricks are not where the accident statistics lie. They do foster the perception that experimental aircraft are dangerous, however. We are in a far more delicate position than bikers. We are far more visible. One aerobatic airplane ending its routine by creating a crater in the middle of a grade school will be enough to doom the entire sector, and you know it.
Click to expand...

You are confusing experimentals with "Overhead breaks, impromptu aerobatics, and other stupid pilot tricks".

Stupid pilots do stupid things, it is not an experimental exclusive.
 
Panew said:
You are confusing experimentals with "Overhead breaks, impromptu aerobatics, and other stupid pilot tricks".

Stupid pilots do stupid things, it is not an experimental exclusive.
Click to expand...

However, overhead breaks, impromptu aerobats, and other stupid pilot tricks are more the province of the experimental world. I simply can't do any of that very effectively in a Cherokee, and truly aerobatic aircraft are bloody expensive. Again, such behavior gives the appearance of recklessness and danger. It may not be where the accidents lie (then again it may be. The E/Ab rate of crashes is up to 6 times higher. Plenty of room for crashes caused by the behaviors above, though I have no data to demonstrate such).

Once again, you are truly doing the equivalent and shouting at the top of your lungs "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" The FAA sees this as a problem. If you don't care what I think, fine. Honestly. I'm no expert, and won't pretend to be. Were I you, however, I would worry a great deal what the folks at the FAA make of this. They could easily put the kibosh on the whole thing.
 
Overhead breaks is not a stupid pilot trick,
it is an accepted operation.
 
Panew said:
You are confusing experimentals with "Overhead breaks, impromptu aerobatics, and other stupid pilot tricks".

Stupid pilots do stupid things, it is not an experimental exclusive.
Click to expand...

Not exclusive but because of the design of most of them, they are more conducive to a higher percentage of impromptu aerobatics and intentional stupid pilot tricks than certified.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruJ3_ZaVJms
 
steingar said:
However, overhead breaks, impromptu aerobats, and other stupid pilot tricks are more the province of the experimental world. I simply can't do any of that very effectively in a Cherokee, and truly aerobatic aircraft are bloody expensive. Again, such behavior gives the appearance of recklessness and danger. It may not be where the accidents lie (then again it may be. The E/Ab rate of crashes is up to 6 times higher. Plenty of room for crashes caused by the behaviors above, though I have no data to demonstrate such).

Once again, you are truly doing the equivalent and shouting at the top of your lungs "LA LA LA, I CAN'T HEAR YOU!" The FAA sees this as a problem. If you don't care what I think, fine. Honestly. I'm no expert, and won't pretend to be. Were I you, however, I would worry a great deal what the folks at the FAA make of this. They could easily put the kibosh on the whole thing.
Click to expand...

this is like saying all black people are bad, and if you live in certain states, you have the same last name as your wife.
 
Panew said:
this is like saying all black people are bad, and if you live in certain states, you have the same last name as your wife.
Click to expand...

That's not what he said at all.
 
Panew said:
Overhead breaks is not a stupid pilot trick,
it is an accepted operation.
Click to expand...

EdFred said:
...when done at the correct entry altitude.
Click to expand...

of course, that is a given. (no need to nitpick or argue about that.)

any operation that is not performed correctly is not an accepted operation.


this is like the guy going a 5 mile circuit in a C-150...
sorry, you are not doing a circuit, you are just loitering.
 
Panew said:
of course, that is a given. (no need to nitpick or argue about that.)

any operation that is not performed correctly is not an accepted operation.
Click to expand...

And a lot of the people that are doing them seem to be doing them at the wrong altitude...by descending into the pattern. And from what I can the vast majority are done by pilots in E-AB. Not ALL, but a very significant majority.

I agree with you on the 5 mile circuit. In a Cherokee 180 I used to be less than 3 minutes/per full pattern.
 
EdFred said:
And a lot of the people that are doing them seem to be doing them at the wrong altitude...by descending into the pattern.
Click to expand...

you are adding variable into the discussion...

you are lumping the the bad guys with the bad habit and bad attitude doing a look-alike manuvour -- with an accepted operation, and call the operation bad as well.

using your own example, most of the motocyclists are bad? therefore motocycles are bad?
 
Panew said:
you are adding variable into the discussion...

you are lumping the the bad guys with the bad habit and bad attitude doing a look-alike manuvour -- with an accepted operation, and call the operation bad as well.

using your own example, most of the motocyclists are bad? therefore motocycles are bad?
Click to expand...

That's not what I said either. I am saying that certain subsets of both motorcyclists and pilots are going to have a higher percentage of acts of dumbassery committed than the whole group, or other subsets of that group.

If you are going to see stupid bike tricks done, you are most likely to see them done on crotch rockets. That does not mean that the majority of crotch rockets are doing stupid bike tricks.

If you are going to see impromptu aerobatics and incorrectly done overhead breaks, you are most likely to see them done in E-AB planes. That does not mean that the majority of those planes are doing them.

In either case when one witnesses either of these, it is most likely to be a crotch rocket or E-AB. MOST LIKELY, not an absolute, but most likely.

Just as if I was to tell you I have blonde hair and blue eyes, you would assume I am a white person, but I'm sure somewhere out there is a black guy with blonde hair and blue eyes. But for the most part blonde/blue = white. Just as these maneuvers are oft-correctly associated with those groups.
 
Last edited:
steingar said:
one of the reasons I will not be renewing my AOPA membership.
Click to expand...

hmmm, maybe I'll have to reconsider my decision and once again become a member.

:)

clarification: not because of you not renewing, but because they closed the thread.
 
Ron Levy said:
:rofl: Don't bet on it. That stuff happens in every make and model, production or otherwise.
Click to expand...

A lot of Cherokee 140's come screaming into the pattern for the OB?

:)
 
BellyUpFish said:
Quality cherry pick. A+ for your efforts.
Click to expand...

It wasn't a cherry-pick. It was refuting a really awful attempt at dragging the professional aerobatics folks into the argument, as if they were a good excuse for non-professionals to do it.
 
EdFred said:
Not exclusive but because of the design of most of them, they are more conducive to a higher percentage of impromptu aerobatics and intentional stupid pilot tricks than certified.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ruJ3_ZaVJms
Click to expand...

Apparently whoever posted it also knows it's probably not a video he/she wants everyone seeing...

"This video is unlisted. Only those with the link can see it."
 
denverpilot said:
It wasn't a cherry-pick. It was refuting a really awful attempt at dragging the professional aerobatics folks into the argument, as if they were a good excuse for non-professionals to do it.
Click to expand...

Reread what I said. Cherry pick.

Either way, it doesn't matter. This thread had turned into the ultimate flop contest.

I'm out of here, :)
 
I actually agreed with most of what you said, right up until you tried to drag the pros into it. Quoting out only the part someone is interesting in replying to is pretty normal on Internet boards. Why clutter up the reply with the whole post?

Having met a few of those folks, they work way too hard to get the privilege to do aerobatics at air shows to get lumped in with "Billy Bob's Overhead Break Airshow and Flying Circus"... ya know?
 
denverpilot said:
Apparently whoever posted it also knows it's probably not a video he/she wants everyone seeing...

"This video is unlisted. Only those with the link can see it."
Click to expand...

The person that posted it is not the person that is flying. The person who did originally post it was the pilot flying (in a Sonex) and got slammed for it hard on the red board, before the original poster could pull it down, someone saved it, and reposted.
 
EdFred said:
That's not what I said either. I am saying that certain subsets of both motorcyclists and pilots are going to have a higher percentage of acts of dumbassery committed than the whole group, or other subsets of that group.

If you are going to see stupid bike tricks done, you are most likely to see them done on crotch rockets. That does not mean that the majority of crotch rockets are doing stupid bike tricks.

If you are going to see impromptu aerobatics and incorrectly done overhead breaks, you are most likely to see them done in E-AB planes. That does not mean that the majority of those planes are doing them.

In either case when one witnesses either of these, it is most likely it is a crotch rocket or E-AB.
Click to expand...

E-AB is a very broad category.
Just like motorcycles, you don't call every 2 wheeler a crotch rocket.

There are slippery 2 seaters with big and powerful IO-540s,
and there are sub-100 hp powered fabric wings that cruise at 95 mph,
and everything in between.

Are you saying, the "majority" of the E-ABs are crotch rockets?

Sorry to disappoint you, if you go to AirVenture, or visit any EAA meeting, you will likely find people like these than hot blooded jocks with octane coming out of their breathe.

Eaa1410_4.jpg



[edit] ok, the picture is pushing a bit too far. ;-)
 
Last edited:
Panew said:
E-AB is a very broad category.
Just like motorcycles, you don't call every 2 wheeler a crotch rocket.

There are slippery 2 seaters with big and powerful IO-540s,
and there are sub-100 hp powered fabric wings that cruise at 95 mph,
and everything in between.

Are you saying, the "majority" of the E-ABs are crotch rockets?

Sorry to disappoint you, if you go to AirVenture, or visit any EAA meeting, you will likely find people like these than hot blooded jocks with octane coming out of their breathe.

Eaa1410_4.jpg
Click to expand...

No. Is English your twelfth language or something?
 
EdFred said:
No I have not. I have synthetic vision and HITS in my unit. Where did I say I hate experimentals?
Click to expand...

for less than $2,000?
it is either non-certified,
or out-of-production unit from a defunct company (ie database not up-to-date).



[edit] wait a minute, you can't even get that in a non-cert.
 
Panew said:
for less than $2,000?
it is either non-certified,
or out-of-production unit from a defunct company (ie database not up-to-date).
Click to expand...

Database is updated every 28 days. Sits right next to my 430.
 
Panew said:
Overhead breaks is not a stupid pilot trick,
it is an accepted operation.
Click to expand...

As are all other entries to the pattern..but does that make it a must do once in a while?

Not unless you can get 4-5 other pilots to do it with you to pump up your ego.
 
denverpilot said:
I actually agreed with most of what you said, right up until you tried to drag the pros into it. Quoting out only the part someone is interesting in replying to is pretty normal on Internet boards. Why clutter up the reply with the whole post?

Having met a few of those folks, they work way too hard to get the privilege to do aerobatics at air shows to get lumped in with "Billy Bob's Overhead Break Airshow and Flying Circus"... ya know?
Click to expand...

I wasn't dragging anyone into anything. I made a statement about people getting their panties in a bunch over the overhead break and several commented about how dangerous they were. I made no statements about the abilities, etc of the airshow circuit performers. They are great folk. I have taken several "courses" given by Greg Koontz - awesome fellow. I in no shape for form was attempt to take anything from these professionals. I *think* my reply was to someone saying people only come to see the crashes at airshows.

I made a statement about the death ratio of professional, highly trained pilots dying during closed airshow performances - Jim LeRoy, Younkin, Franklin, Amanda Younkin-Franklin, etc, etc, etc, etc versus the number of people who have died from "non-professional" pilots doing the overhead break.

This thread started out a rant about the OB when the OP wasn't even "accosted" during an overhead break, then it turned into a thread about the OB being safe if done at the correct altitude and it's been all over the board ever since.

If you'll go back and read what I said, without TRYING to find fault in my comments, it might read differently.
 
Tom-D said:
As are all other entries to the pattern..but does that make it a must do once in a while?
Click to expand...

Just curious, can you point to a poster who has stated it is a MUST do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top