MiG-21 over ran the runway today at FCM...

[51fixer]

Sandberg did have Warbids over the years based there and visiting his shop where he also had a business repairing and overhauling V-12 and Radial aircraft engines.
Bob Pond had a larger collection as a museum in Eden Prairie in the late 70s, 80s and 90s.
The Corsair was damaged around 1985 and was acquired by Bob Pond in 82-83.

[One-0-Wonder]

Oh dear.

Regarding the differences between an 'incident' and 'crash', it's all very well us venting that it gets mis-reported and exaggerated, but it's semantics at the end of the day - For most people it's an 'accident', and any 'accident in aviation' = a crash.

Best way of avoiding the semantics or news scaremongering it not to have the incident at all... Easy to say, harder to do, and vital to be trying.

Regards,

The International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) has very clear definition of what technically constitutes an accident and it is this definition that the investigative agencies (air accident) of most countries use to categorise an occurrence.

Accident- An occurrence associated with the operation of an aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft with the intention of flight until such time as all such persons have disembarked, in which (a) a person is fatally or seriously injured as a result of: being in the aircraft; or direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts which have become detached from the aircraft; or direct exposure to jet blast (except when the injuries are from natural causes, self inflicted or inflicted by other persons, or when the injuries are to stowaways hiding outside the areas normally available to the passengers or crew); or (b) the aircraft sustains damage or structural failure which: adversely affects the structural strength, performance or flight characteristics of the aircraft and would normally require major repair or replacement of the affected component (except for engine failure or damage, when the damage is limited to the engine, its cowlings or accessories; or for damage limited to propellers, wing tips, antennas, tires, brakes, fairings, small dents or puncture holes in the aircraft skin); or (c) the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccessible. (ICAO Annex 13)

Everything not falling under the definition of an accident is then categorised as an incident. With all this being said, the media will use whatever words they believe will net them the most viewers/listeners/readers, regardless of accuracy. As a general rule, the media never let the truth get in the way of a good story.

[b29driver]

5000 ft runway ? REALLY, for a Mig 21 ? Ridiculous !

I concur. There is also the obvious issue of experimental aircraft operating limitations that prohibit operations in/over congested areas. This accident/incident really gives the FEDS a lot of red meat to feed on!!!

[RickH]

Operating over populated areas is somewhat of a given just landing and taking off from an airport. It used to say " unless otherwise directed by ATC.

Nevermind.

Last edited by RickH on Fri Jul 13, 2012 11:36 am, edited 1 time in total.

[T33driver]

Some of these inflammatory comments will only serve to marinate and season the red meat in an already precarious regulatory environment where those charged with oversight of warbird operations are predisposed to grounding them. This kind of knee-jerk venting is destructive, premature and inappropriate. Hurray for your command of Mig-21 performance data. No lesson-learning going on here, only coffee talk laced with schadenfreude and rocks being hurled in the glass house. I hope you get better treatment than you've given if God forbid your operation ever has an unfortunate event.

[davidbray]

Some of these inflammatory comments will only serve to marinate and season the red meat in an already precarious regulatory environment where those charged with oversight of warbird operations are predisposed to grounding them. This kind of knee-jerk venting is destructive, premature and inappropriate. Hurray for your command of Mig-21 performance data. No lesson-learning going on here, only coffee talk laced with schadenfreude and rocks being hurled in the glass house. I hope you get better treatment than you've given if God forbid your operation ever has an unfortunate event.

Well put.

Sad to see the MiG in it's current state. Hope he can get it up again, it's been living in my area for a little while now. Got to see him fly it a while back. The 2-seater that's based here has no problem with our 7000... weird really.

[b29driver]

Operating over populated areas is somewhat of a given just landing and taking off from an airport. It used to say " unless otherwise directed by ATC.

Nevermind.

Did ATC direct him to overfly congested area and land on a 5000' runway against his will?

[Flagon]

Excuse me,just a little question.

Pilot OK,very well indeed,do you think the aircraft will be repaired ?

Damage seems major:dislodged radome,bent and battered front fuselage,front undercarriage wiped off,starboard wing with two dents and an upturned wingtip.

Maybe better to buy a new one,sadly.

Scratch one Mig 21 ?

Ciao,Francesco.

[mustanglover]

Operating over populated areas is somewhat of a given just landing and taking off from an airport. It used to say " unless otherwise directed by ATC.

Nevermind.

Did ATC direct him to overfly congested area and land on a 5000' runway against his will?

This is the current way these limitations are being written:

X. The aircraft will remain within United States airspace, and not allowed to operate over densely populated areas, excluding takeoffs and landings, or in congested airways in accordance with 14 CFR 91.319(c).

XX. The pilot in command of this aircraft must notify air traffic control of the experimental nature of this aircraft when operating into of out of airports with operating control towers. The pilot in command must plan routing that will avoid densely populated areas and congested airways when operating VFR.

[Wildchild]

Here's the main question of the day:

Who's the pilot?

[Mr. Scott]

Well said T33driver!

[Merlin51]

Here's the main question of the day:

Who's the pilot?

Who are you? Why does it matter to you who the pilot was? He's OK, and that is all the matters. All you armchair quarterbacks move along. I don't condone the what happened, but read T33Driver's post. Warbird owners and operators facing increasing pressure from the FAA, these accidents don't help, and neither does the WIX witch hunt and public rock throwing.

[Wildchild]

Here's the main question of the day:

Who's the pilot?

Who are you? Why does it matter to you who the pilot was? He's OK, and that is all the matters. All you armchair quarterbacks move along. I don't condone the what happened, but read T33Driver's post. Warbird owners and operators facing increasing pressure from the FAA, these accidents don't help, and neither does the WIX witch hunt and public rock throwing.

Who are you? ive never seen you post here before..... I'm wondering because the pilot can say what happened to him, why the 5,000 ft runway didn't work, and if there was a mechanical failure. And i never made one rude remark to the pilot, and i don't think anyone here is on a "witch hunt"

[Mr. Scott]

Just did a little research but this was taken from http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-21-specs.htm and to show a relevant issue.

Landing Runway:
F-7M = 600-900 m (1,970-2,955 ft) with brake-chute
J-7 III = 550 m (1,805 ft) with flap blowing, drag-chute and brakes

With that I would say that a 5,000' runway is adequate.

[Merlin51]

Here's the main question of the day:

Who's the pilot?

Who are you? ive never seen you post here before..... I'm wondering because the pilot can say what happened to him, why the 5,000 ft runway didn't work, and if there was a mechanical failure. And i never made one rude remark to the pilot, and i don't think anyone here is on a "witch hunt"

If you wanted to know about what happened, mechanical failure, the runway length, etc, then ask those questions. However, posting one question on this whole thread asking only who the pilot was, will not get you answers to your question. The answer to your question only serves to "call out" the pilot. I'm sure with a little google searching you could find out who the pilot is, but that would be too easy, and not serve your point.

Threads like these are the reason why you don't see any posts from me on this board.