| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
patmike
Joined: 15 May 2011
Posts: 18
Location: New Britain Ct.
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 29, 2011 4:14 pm Post subject: this is a scary takeoff |
|
|
| http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/81613520/ |
|
| Back to top |
|
theoarno
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 59
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 30, 2011 11:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| It looked even more foolish than scary. |
|
| Back to top |
|
drseti
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 1390
Location: Lock Haven PA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 01, 2011 8:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| I hear the guy sold the Stinson after that flight, and has never flown again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
zaitcev
Joined: 05 Jan 2010
Posts: 258
Location: Albuquerque, NM
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| As far as I know, it's not the case. For one thing it was a woman. She posted about it at PoA boards when this video started making circles again. She is current and active (the question of sale did not come up, IIRC). A few PoA posters knew her. |
|
| Back to top |
|
drseti
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 1390
Location: Lock Haven PA
|
| Posted: Sat Jul 02, 2011 10:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I was apparently misinformed. Thanks for clarifying, Pete. |
|
| Back to top |
|
theoarno
Joined: 26 Mar 2010
Posts: 59
Location: Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I am really surprised that an aircraft of that size would take so long to get off the ground. Is that model known to be underpowered? |
|
| Back to top |
|
drseti
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 1390
Location: Lock Haven PA
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
theoarno wrote: Is that model known to be underpowered?
Not at all. That looked like a Stinson 108. They normally had either a 150 or 165 HP Franklin engine (though some of the early ones had 125 HP Lycomings, and some were later upgraded to a 180 HP Lycoming O-360 via an STC). Max gross is 2400 pounds, and normal takeoff roll is around 600 feet. So, I don't think power was the issue here. I would guess a density altitude problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Jon V
Joined: 21 Apr 2011
Posts: 156
Location: Dallas...
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 05, 2011 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| That kinda looks like one of those little airports where planes take off and land in opposite directions due to an obstruction at one end. Come in over the lake, land, turn around, and take off out over the lake. So on top of density altitude the pilot might've been launching with the wind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
bshort
Joined: 09 Jul 2010
Posts: 59
Location: Ca
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 06, 2011 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| One of those just did the same thing at a local airport yesyerday, but didn't make it. He ran into the brush at the end and it was consumed by fire. Both occupants OK. Density altitude? About 100F yesterday at that time. |
|
| Back to top |
|
drseti
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 1390
Location: Lock Haven PA
|
| Posted: Fri Jul 22, 2011 5:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It's very hot around here this time of year (today's flight was at 106 deg F, 41 deg C). Be sure to check density altitude. Don't let this happen to you:
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| |
