Totaly idiotic flying in a Chipmunk

[Planebeach]

This is a few videos from an airsoft event in Portugal, I was shocked when I watched the videos What is this pilot thinking about!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qHoBdbHM5P4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbTW3C_jdOE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5Ifd7uHHuA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OsTpZZQC0vY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9USIRLq6As

[Fouga23]

That dude is crazy! What's the saying about there being no old bold pilots....

[jet1]

...you get to see the bodies flying apart when you hit them with your 20 mike mike...

[RyanShort1]

Looks like fun, but a bit on the risky side. I'm guessing they had to fly that low so that the airsoft guys could hit them... otherwise, they'd've never had a chance.

Ryan

[ZRX61]

Looks to be about the usual "Duxford Flyby" height to me

[Jack Cook]

Idaknow?? Flying your Chipmonk into the side of your neighbor's hanger is probably worse

[rreis]

( )

Last edited by rreis on Fri Jan 01, 2010 7:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[Iclo]

Hum, looks to be a bit recurrent trouble in Portugal.
After the stupid presentation of the Airbus of the TAP at Evora Airshow last year.

[rreis]

Hum, looks to be a bit recurrent trouble in Portugal.
After the stupid presentation of the Airbus of the TAP at Evora Airshow last year.

I would be so fast to criticize people or events without knowing the background of things. That presentation was thoroughly reversed and planned to ensure it would be safe for the public. It seems pretty easy to be judgemental without the proper info.

[warbird1]

Hum, looks to be a bit recurrent trouble in Portugal.
After the stupid presentation of the Airbus of the TAP at Evora Airshow last year.

I would be so fast to criticize people or events without knowing the background of things. That presentation was thoroughly reversed and planned to ensure it would be safe for the public. It seems pretty easy to be judgemental without the proper info.

Yes, you are right. This appears to be safe and conservative flying without putting anybody's lives at risk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ6t_R-FTUk

[rreis]

Yes, you are right. This appears to be safe and conservative flying without putting anybody's lives at risk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ6t_R-FTUk

"appears", sometimes there is more than meet the eye, don't you agree?

1 - Were you there?
2 - Do you know the configuration of the place of the event, the location of public and other people at the time of the event?
3 - Have you info about the security distances on this event, pre-flight planning and reversals?
4 - Do you know about the prior experience of the pilots involved?

Can you, just taking a You Tube video, put your name in a legal paper stating whatever it is about that particular flight? Better, are you willing to put the money were your mouth is stating this was an unsafe manoeuvre based solely in internet hearsay and videos? If not please let's drop the subject.

best regards,

[warbird1]

Yes, you are right. This appears to be safe and conservative flying without putting anybody's lives at risk:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQ6t_R-FTUk

"appears", sometimes there is more than meet the eye, don't you agree?

1 - Were you there?
2 - Do you know the configuration of the place of the event, the location of public and other people at the time of the event?
3 - Have you info about the security distances on this event, pre-flight planning and reversals?
4 - Do you know about the prior experience of the pilots involved?

Can you, just taking a You Tube video, put your name in a legal paper stating whatever it is about that particular flight? Better, are you willing to put the money were your mouth is stating this was an unsafe manoeuvre based solely in internet hearsay and videos? If not please let's drop the subject.

best regards,

Although I wasn't there, I don't need to be to know that that was a dangerous stunt, unncessarily putting people's lives at stake. I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. I don't care how much experience and/or planning the pilots did, it does not justify what he did. I know the background of the pilot's involved and their experience level. For whatever it's worth, I have nearly 3 times as much flying time in commercial airliners as that pilot had in the A310, and I wouldn't even consider or dream of doing what he did, even with the full blessing of the FAA and unlimited waivers. I would be willing to put my name on a legal paper and testify what they did was dangerous based on the video evidence.

[Iclo]

I base my opinion on the judgement of the pilots who were there in Evora, and who, after watching this presentation, went to the Airshow manager to fill a complain about this presentation.

Similar situation, than the B-52 pilot who made dramatic presentation of the BUFF, until sometime really wrong happened...

[rreis]

I base my opinion on the judgement of the pilots who were there in Evora, and who, after watching this presentation, went to the Airshow manager to fill a complain about this presentation.

Similar situation, than the B-52 pilot who made dramatic presentation of the BUFF, until sometime really wrong happened...

ouh! The pilot of the B52 had a back history of recklessness if I do recall and that manoeuvre was not authorized or inside the aircraft envelope: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1994_Fairc ... B-52_crash

A B52 is not a Vulcan (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X4r0Kk-xX4o)

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but as far my knowledge goes into the matter this was not like the B52 story by a long shot, being carefully planned and trained for: (see http://ideiasfixas2.blogs.sapo.pt/294743.html) :

I spoke with an A310 TAP pilot. Following are FACTS, NOT RUMORS:
1. Capt. César Brito is still flying, because he did in the airshow EXACTLY what was planned and trained to do. That was not a stupid idea executed in a moment, it took weeks of preparation.
2. Brito knew perfectly how Evora airfield is. He's playing with an optical effect; the other side's ground has a slightly downward form.
3. Co-pilot was another A310 commander, and during the show he was focused in altitude to continuously report to César.
4. Plane passed a complete overhaul just before this airshow, so the risk of failures was minimum.
5. Plane continued flying with passengers until retired soon, but after a reccommended inspection by Airbus officials.

Everything in aviation has a risk, the question is how to make the risk acceptable (according to some measure). The only way to have zero risk is not flying.

[warbird1]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions but as far my knowledge goes into the matter this was not like the B52 story by a long shot, being carefully planned and trained for: (see http://ideiasfixas2.blogs.sapo.pt/294743.html) :

I agree 100%. That is a different scenario involving someone who had a prior history of reckless flying and disregarding all rules and authority. That bears very little similarity to the Airbus incident we are discussing.

Everything in aviation has a risk, the question is how to make the risk acceptable (according to some measure). The only way to have zero risk is not flying.

This is true, but the question is - is the reward worth the risk? In my opinion it was not in the TAP Airbus flyby. The chance of something going wrong or not as planned greatly outweighed the reward of providing a few cool flyby videos that could have been accomplished in a much safer manner.