Plane Lands on 36 Street NE

[speedog]

From this morning, NB 36 Street NE just south of 16 Avenue - if something nutty is gonna happen, chances are it'll be in the NE...

81816

Edit.

Plane had engine problems. Quite amazing that the pilot got that plane down safely on 36 Street considering all traffic, lights, poles and LRT overhead cabling. Kudos to the pilot.

About 300 meters between the lights at 12 Avenue and the next set of lights at 16 Avenue, to me it seems quite something the pilot got that place down safely in that short stretch in the dark - obviously they were familiar with that stretch of road or they were just very lucky. Actual distance was about 200 meters to put that plane down there as there's a set of power lines crossing 36 Street south of 16 Avenue.

[D'z Nutz]

http://www.660news.com/2018/04/25/plane-makes-emergency-landing-northeast-calgary-roadway/

989118843363643395

[ExtraSlow]

Surprised he didn't hit up some of those unidriveways.

[lilmira]

Gotta pick up some bokchoy at TnT

wonder if the pilot waved

[Aleks]

About 300 meters between the lights at 12 Avenue and the next set of lights at 16 Avenue, to me it seems quite something the pilot got that place down safely in that short stretch in the dark - obviously they were familiar with that stretch of road or they were just very lucky. Actual distance was about 200 meters to put that plane down there as there's a set of power lines crossing 36 Street south of 16 Avenue.

To get a plane of that size down in that spot in some decent wind gusts without hitting something big is amazing.

[rage2]

To get a plane of that size down in that spot in some decent wind gusts without hitting something big it amazing.
Was thinking the same thing. Light posts, C-Train, power lines, and the biggest obstacle of all, NE drivers haha.

[revelations]

Good airmanship - but sounds like a zero fuel issue (highly unlikely to lose both pistons engines otherwise) - which usually means pilot = fired.

[Tik-Tok]

Was thinking the same thing. Light posts, C-Train, power lines, and the biggest obstacle of all, NE drivers haha.

I can picture the NE drivers just mosing along at 55km/h in the 70 zone, an airplane in their oversized rearview mirrors getting closer and closer. But since they never check them they didn't even notice and continued on to work.

[Aleks]

Was thinking the same thing. Light posts, C-Train, power lines, and the biggest obstacle of all, NE drivers haha.

Hoping this is on Mayday in the future. :clap:

[Tik-Tok]

Hoping this is on Mayday in the future. :clap:

Not likely. It actually happens more than you would think, just not inside a city. Besides, no deaths or destruction doesn't make a very profitable episode.

[nzwasp]

According to CBC he did hit some light standards on the way down.

[Aleks]

According to CBC he did hit some light standards on the way down.

Yeah the right wing tip is torn off in the pics.

[Thaco]

Early reports are that it landed south of marbank/12th ave... and came to rest just before 16th, pretty impressive to have that little damage given the circumstances

81818

[rage2]

Wonder if he ran the red at 12th Ave. That light is always red for me when I drive through there.

[Gman.45]

Good airmanship - but sounds like a zero fuel issue (highly unlikely to lose both pistons engines otherwise) - which usually means pilot = fired.

I thought the same. Great airmanship whatever the cause, to get that crate in that area down with no souls lost, even damaged = great job. That said, most twins - it's been a long time since I worked on my twin engine rating (haven't flown in years, perhaps 95 and Mazda and other pilots will chime in here), but IIRC both engines have to have independant fuel pumps and other gear, sometimes back when Transport Canada ran things when I was an ATC and private pilot, again, IRRC there had to be redundancies even in place depending on multi engine aircraft class. It's very, very common for it to be a lack of fuel issue when both motors are out on a twin. There are however a few things that can occur which aren't fuel related which can cause both engines to fail. If the pilot uses inlet heat improperly on both engines, it can cause both to fail. Also, environmental causes like ice/snow/etc can simultaneously affect both motors and cause a dual engine failure. Not that likely though, it most cases it's a fuel calculation error that can easily be avoided. Gimly Glider, great example.

[Lex350]

Good airmanship - but sounds like a zero fuel issue (highly unlikely to lose both pistons engines otherwise) - which usually means pilot = fired.

Passengers wee quoted as saying a fuel pump issue...not a fuel issue.

[Mista Bob]

Do planes have horns on them? Seems insane that it managed to get through an intersection without issue, no matter what time of day it is.

[Aleks]

Looks like it was coming from Medicine Hat according to online flight tracking.

[Tik-Tok]

Passengers wee quoted as saying a fuel pump issue...not a fuel issue.

Well not having any fuel to pump is an issue. :rofl:

There's two pumps per engine, one electric, one mechanical. For all 4 of them to die would be pretty astronomical odds.

[Gman.45]

Well not having any fuel to pump is an issue. :rofl:

There's two pumps per engine, one electric, one mechanical. For all 4 of them to die would be pretty astronomical odds.

Heh, that's what I posted, it's mandatory for each engine to have it's own pumps/etc, and that there were requirements for redundancy. You're absolutely correct, odds of 4 pumps failing is astronomical. I know from the MANOPS for ATC that for dual engine jets, the odds of a failure in a single engine is 1 per 1 million flight hours, for both engines to fail in airliner/jet class multiengine/twins, the odds are it'd take over 1000 years of flight ours with the world's current fleet, like 1 in trillions odds wise (fuel problems not withstanding obviously). Of course prop/smaller class aircraft this doesn't apply, but it's still got be be astronomically high for 4 units to all shit the bed simultaneously.


Looks like it was coming from Medicine Hat according to online flight tracking.

I was going to check flghtradar24/whatever but was too lazy this AM. Heh, that's not much of a distance, not for that aircraft, couple hundred miles +20 or so. If it was a fuel calculation error, that will suck for the pilot(s). Still, at least they got it on the ground and didn't kill anyone on board or on the road, props for that above anything else IMO.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Passengers wee quoted as saying a fuel pump issue...not a fuel issue.

If I were the pilot that fucked up the fuel calcs, that's probably what I'd be telling the passengers too, haha.

[D'z Nutz]

Given the direction where it was heading and where it landed, would there have been a safer place to land?

This reminds me of the Gimli Glider incident. Pretty cool story:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gimli_Glider

[lilmira]

36st has the longest straight on his approach to the airport from the south. The next is 52st or barlow which is a bit off. I have no idea when he decided that they won't make it to the airport.

[Tik-Tok]

36st has the longest straight on his approach to the airport from the south. The next is 52st or barlow which is a bit off. I have no idea when he decided that they won't make it to the airport.

Probably around Peigan Trail.

[G-ZUS]

Probably around Peigan Trail.


peigan is about 8km south and runs the opposite direction

[300havoc]

peigan is about 8km south and runs the opposite direction

I think he was trying to answer the question as to when the pilot decided they wouldn't make it to the airport. Not as another place to land the plane.

[revelations]

The Piper PA-31 also has an emergency FP. The failure of all of these systems is pretty astronomical.

As per the FOM, the outboard tanks must be deselected manually for takeoff/landing/maneuvers. The outboard tanks are used in cruise only.

Here is an accident where this happened. https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjo65LBgNbaAhVC4GMKHSOvB5sQFggzMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atsb.gov.au%2Fpublications%2Finvestigation_reports%2F2008%2FAAIR%2Fpdf%2FAO2008048.pdf&usg=AOvVaw0PGnNih4MkXj0CTdYZiZTg

[Tik-Tok]

I think he was trying to answer the question as to when the pilot decided they wouldn't make it to the airport. Not as another place to land the plane.

:thumbsup:

[G-ZUS]

:thumbsup:

My bad!

[speedog]

Security camera footage...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=MNSCCcNtdVI

[Tik-Tok]

Got some new information from a close source. Aux tanks were empty, mains were 3/4 full. Aux are only used in cruise, and switched to mains during take-off/landings. So either one of the pilots accidentally switched the fuel to off instead of mains after the Aux tanks emptied (3-position selector), or possibly the mains were filled with bad fuel (maybe jet fuel and not avgas, who knows).

Also a few other possibilities, but improbabilities.

[rage2]

Security camera footage...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=10&v=MNSCCcNtdVI
Didn’t even run a red haha.

[revelations]

Got some new information from a close source. Aux tanks were empty, mains were 3/4 full. Aux are only used in cruise, and switched to mains during take-off/landings. So either one of the pilots accidentally switched the fuel to off instead of mains after the Aux tanks emptied (3-position selector), or possibly the mains were filled with bad fuel (maybe jet fuel and not avgas, who knows).

Also a few other possibilities, but improbabilities.

That pretty much lines up with the accident I cited earlier. Fuel mismanagement.

[jutes]

Got some new information from a close source. Aux tanks were empty, mains were 3/4 full. Aux are only used in cruise, and switched to mains during take-off/landings. So either one of the pilots accidentally switched the fuel to off instead of mains after the Aux tanks emptied (3-position selector), or possibly the mains were filled with bad fuel (maybe jet fuel and not avgas, who knows).

How is the feed system not automatic? i.e. Aux tanks feed into mains to keep an even weight distribution.

[revelations]

How is the feed system not automatic? i.e. Aux tanks feed into mains to keep an even weight distribution.

Its a manual process in most light AC. The Navajo isnt exactly cutting edge .... lol

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/4825567/ao-2014-017_fig1.jpg

[Tik-Tok]

How is the feed system not automatic? i.e. Aux tanks feed into mains to keep an even weight distribution.

Because it's a Navajo not a Airbus, lol. 45 year old design small commuter piston pounder, where weight savings is everything.

[taemo]

part of City of Calgary art program for the NE
people were stopping by to take pictures yesterday afternoon
https://s31.postimg.cc/6xdr3y6a3/IMG_3683.jpg

[jutes]

Its a manual process in most light AC. The Navajo isnt exactly cutting edge .... lol

pic

oh my god. :facepalm:

[D'z Nutz]

part of City of Calgary art program for the NE

See, I could get behind that over blue rings and leftover construction material 10 times out of 10.

[LilDrunkenSmurf]

oh my god. :facepalm:



It's a navajo, not a CF-118. Gawd jutes.

[lilmira]

I'm surprised that no one stole the wheels.

[Maxx Mazda]

I haven’t flown a Navajo in about 12 years but I remember on the chieftains (PA-31-350) the fuel selectors were three position levers on the floor, aft end of the Center pedestal. They each could be selected to MAIN, AUX, or OFF. Again, my memory is rusty, but I remember we’d run the mains on takeoff and landing and the aux tanks in cruise. If you forgot to switch tanks on approach, you could run into a fuel exhaustion issue.

That being said, it’s very unlikely that both engines would fail at the exact same time. You’d have slightly more fuel in one tank or the other, and a competent pilot will quickly switch tanks if an engine begins to run rough as a way to remedy the problem.

I know that Super-T aviation (the operator) out of YXH is a reputable one. I believe the female pilot was relatively new from what I’ve heard from other industry insiders.

[revelations]

I haven’t flown a Navajo in about 12 years but I remember on the chieftains (PA-31-350) the fuel selectors were three position levers on the floor, aft end of the Center pedestal. They each could be selected to MAIN, AUX, or OFF. Again, my memory is rusty, but I remember we’d run the mains on takeoff and landing and the aux tanks in cruise. If you forgot to switch tanks on approach, you could run into a fuel exhaustion issue.

That being said, it’s very unlikely that both engines would fail at the exact same time. You’d have slightly more fuel in one tank or the other, and a competent pilot will quickly switch tanks if an engine begins to run rough as a way to remedy the problem.

I know that Super-T aviation (the operator) out of YXH is a reputable one. I believe the female pilot was relatively new from what I’ve heard from other industry insiders.

If thats the case, she'll will likely be shown the door. Breaking a plane like that due solely to pilot error is not easily forgiven in smaller outfits.

[SKR]

female pilot

There's the problem.

[The_Penguin]

There's the problem.

Nice. Jeez.

[jutes]

It's a navajo, not a CF-118. Gawd jutes.

This is a 82 hornet, how dare you!

You are right, a CF18 would probably crash outside the city limits having the glide performance of a refrigerator.

[rage2]

Got some new information from a close source. Aux tanks were empty, mains were 3/4 full. Aux are only used in cruise, and switched to mains during take-off/landings. So either one of the pilots accidentally switched the fuel to off instead of mains after the Aux tanks emptied (3-position selector), or possibly the mains were filled with bad fuel (maybe jet fuel and not avgas, who knows).

Also a few other possibilities, but improbabilities.
Well look at that, your inside info was dead on.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/local-news/tsb-releases-report-on-airplane-that-landed-on-36-st-n-e

[95EagleAWD]

Man... that is a pretty stupid mistake.

Every goddamn cause check I've ever done is "Mixture, throttle, props, fuel, mags" or a combination of that order. That's pretty poor situational management by the pilots.

[revelations]

Im sure she was out the door the following day, having explained to her employer what happened.

[95EagleAWD]

Im sure she was out the door the following day, having explained to her employer what happened.

Yeah, I’d be pretty curious. Looks like it had two pilots on board, and neither one of them went for the fuel selectors....

That said, people aren’t exactly lining up for shitty Navajo jobs these days, so I wonder if they got fired.

[spikerS]

yeah, one of the things drilled into my head when I was doing my pilot training was "BBGUMPS" in preparation for each landing. Had that been followed, the 3rd step would have shown their issue pretty quick...

B - Breaks functional
B - Belts, windows, and door secured
G - Gas selector set to "both"
U - Undercarriage down
M - Fuel Mixture set
P - Propeller pitch setting
S - Switches and fuses check

[schocker]

Headline from CFCN :facepalm:

Report says plane that landed on Calgary road ran out of gas
https://calgary.ctvnews.ca/report-says-plane-that-landed-on-calgary-road-ran-out-of-gas-1.4047326

[J-hop]

Is this an easy mistake to make? Also what are the chances of restarting the engines? I assume they were decending at that point so might not have been an option.

Kinda reminds me a lot of the average driver (even a significant portion of ‘enthusiasts’) that even if given a check list probably couldn’t do a roadside diagnosis under pressure but I expect a bit more from pilots. I sure as hell hope most pilots have a high level of mechanical knowledge.

[Tik-Tok]

Is this an easy mistake to make? Also what are the chances of restarting the engines? I assume they were decending at that point so might not have been an option.

Kinda reminds me a lot of the average driver (even a significant portion of ‘enthusiasts’) that even if given a check list probably couldn’t do a roadside diagnosis under pressure but I expect a bit more from pilots. I sure as hell hope most pilots have a high level of mechanical knowledge.

Easy mistake for one inexperienced pilot perhaps. Two? That's just incompetence. If they caught the mistake, they could have restarted pretty easily.

And no, not many pilots have any mechanical knowledge. Most just know checklists.

[J-hop]

Easy mistake for one inexperienced pilot perhaps. Two? That's just incompetence. If they caught the mistake, they could have restarted pretty easily.

And no, not many pilots have any mechanical knowledge. Most just know checklists.

That’s sad/scary. It’s pretty stupid when you think about it, in a profession where computers are taking more and more control people aren’t even putting in the effort to make a case for human intervention. Probably better to push to have planes fly themselves if that’s the kind of effort the average pilot puts in....

[revelations]

Easy mistake for one inexperienced pilot perhaps. Two? That's just incompetence. If they caught the mistake, they could have restarted pretty easily.

And no, not many pilots have any mechanical knowledge. Most just know checklists.

Thats probably the worst part - they didnt do their checklists properly when they started noticing fuel quantity issues. I think it was about 5-10 minutes from the first signs of issue to the actual engine out.

[Maxx Mazda]

That’s sad/scary. It’s pretty stupid when you think about it, in a profession where computers are taking more and more control people aren’t even putting in the effort to make a case for human intervention. Probably better to push to have planes fly themselves if that’s the kind of effort the average pilot puts in....

I take a bit of an exception to this. I’ve been flying for 17 years, and I’ve always taken great pride in being a professional. Being an expert at what we do is sort of the job itself in a nutshell.

Many moons ago I flew for some sketchy operators, I’ve had engines quit on me in the Arctic in the middle of February, thousands of kilometres from the nearest airport. But you learn from experiences like that and through training.

That being said, there is a certain type of person that you have to be in order to make it as a pilot. At least professionally, I’ve found in my experience. Some people just aren’t made to fly, but with the shortage in the industry right now it’s pretty easy for someone with limited experience to get a job with a small operator like this.

[J-hop]

I take a bit of an exception to this. I’ve been flying for 17 years, and I’ve always taken great pride in being a professional. Being an expert at what we do is sort of the job itself in a nutshell.

Many moons ago I flew for some sketchy operators, I’ve had engines quit on me in the Arctic in the middle of February, thousands of kilometres from the nearest airport. But you learn from experiences like that and through training.

That being said, there is a certain type of person that you have to be in order to make it as a pilot. At least professionally, I’ve found in my experience. Some people just aren’t made to fly, but with the shortage in the industry right now it’s pretty easy for someone with limited experience to get a job with a small operator like this.

Probably just my extreme ignorance I just find it hard to believe the average pilot doesn’t have an intimate understanding of the mechanics of the machine they’re flying.

[spikerS]

Probably just my extreme ignorance I just find it hard to believe the average pilot doesn’t have an intimate understanding of the mechanics of the machine they’re flying.

Do you think the formula 1 drivers have that intimate knowledge with their car? or do they have a team of mechanics that inspect it, repair it, and tell the driver what changes to make during a race or whatever? I think all pilots have a basic understanding of how thier plane operates mechanically, but I would think pilots that have an "intimate knowledge" or a "master mechanic" is a unicorn usually reserved for someone that actually built their plane.

[revelations]

Probably just my extreme ignorance I just find it hard to believe the average pilot doesn’t have an intimate understanding of the mechanics of the machine they’re flying.

Youre thinking bush pilots - they know everything about their aircraft - which themselves are very simple.

[BerserkerCatSplat]

Probably just my extreme ignorance I just find it hard to believe the average pilot doesn’t have an intimate understanding of the mechanics of the machine they’re flying.

What is an "average pilot"? Sure, a person who flies bush planes probably knows their craft very well, but a 787 pilot cannot possibly be expected to know the mechanics of such a comparatively complex aircraft. They have to rely on their flight instruments and cockpit indicators to let them know what's happening.

[Maxx Mazda]

Probably just my extreme ignorance I just find it hard to believe the average pilot doesn’t have an intimate understanding of the mechanics of the machine they’re flying.

Like I said, at my level (airline) there’s no room for error. You need to know your machine inside and out. At the smaller operators, there’s a big push for getting it done on the cheap, so often times the training and experience levels of the pilots suffer bigtime, which is sort of backwards. At the airline level there are so many safeguards in place, checks and balances, that it’s pretty hard to fuck something up. At the lower tier operators where you NEED more protection, there often isn’t any.

The Navajo is a single pilot airplane. There is no requirement for two pilots. I’ve flown that type by myself before, it’s a busy time, but not an unmanageable one by any stretch of the imagination if you’re on top of your game and thinking ahead of the airplane.

Had they realized their mistake, the engines would have roared back to life as soon as the tanks were switched.

[Maxx Mazda]

What is an "average pilot"? Sure, a person who flies bush planes probably knows their craft very well, but a 787 pilot cannot possibly be expected to know the mechanics of such a comparatively complex aircraft. They have to rely on their flight instruments and cockpit indicators to let them know what's happening.

You’re right in a way. There’s a big push to have us just follow a procedure and not troubleshoot anything, if something goes wrong. Where experience and systems knowledge comes in, is when you’re faced with something that isn’t in the QRH (our emergency / abnormal checklists.) understanding how systems work and what systems interact with each other is a HUGE benefit in that regard.

[J-hop]

Do you think the formula 1 drivers have that intimate knowledge with their car? or do they have a team of mechanics that inspect it, repair it, and tell the driver what changes to make during a race or whatever? I think all pilots have a basic understanding of how thier plane operates mechanically, but I would think pilots that have an "intimate knowledge" or a "master mechanic" is a unicorn usually reserved for someone that actually built their plane.

That is completely utterly different as an f1 driver has at team inspecting the vehicle constantly throughout the race and constant visual contact as well as (as far as I’m aware) constant live data monitoring from every monitored system in the entire vehicle. They also aren’t responsible for the lives of passengers and aren’t thousands to 10s of thousands of feet above the ground.

[spikerS]

That is completely utterly different as an f1 driver has at team inspecting the vehicle constantly throughout the race and constant visual contact as well as (as far as I’m aware) constant live data monitoring from every monitored system in the entire vehicle. They also aren’t responsible for the lives of passengers and aren’t thousands to 10s of thousands of feet above the ground.

I would disagree with your entire statement. The driver/pilot is there primarily for operating the vehicle. They have next to zero responsibility towards maintenance and repairs as there are dedicated teams to do just that. and as an aside, besides having troubleshooting checklists, what kind of repairs are you going to make to a plane while in flight? Regardless, in my opinion, with the exception of pilots doing scratch builds and pilots that are literally flying in/out of the bush, outside of a basic understanding of how a plane works, that will be the limit for most pilot's knowledge.

[J-hop]

I would disagree with your entire statement. The driver/pilot is there primarily for operating the vehicle. They have next to zero responsibility towards maintenance and repairs as there are dedicated teams to do just that. and as an aside, besides having troubleshooting checklists, what kind of repairs are you going to make to a plane while in flight? Regardless, in my opinion, with the exception of pilots doing scratch builds and pilots that are literally flying in/out of the bush, outside of a basic understanding of how a plane works, that will be the limit for most pilot's knowledge.

I don’t mean necessarily a hands on repair knowledge unless you’re a bush pilot and you are you’re crew. But an intimate knowledge of how the systems work gives a pilot an idea of how they can fail.

Look at a car for example, when a car sputters and dies what are the two things you need to confirm as an initial diagnosis?

[95EagleAWD]

I don’t mean necessarily a hands on repair knowledge unless you’re a bush pilot and you are you’re crew. But an intimate knowledge of how the systems work gives a pilot an idea of how they can fail.

Look at a car for example, when a car sputters and dies what are the two things you need to confirm as an initial diagnosis?

I'm a bush pilot. I do zero repairs on my airplane (short of adding oil), since I'm not a mechanic. We have mechanics for that. Those days (at any decent operator) are long gone, and thank goodness. It's way safer now.

Do I help troubleshoot problems with it? Of course; but I don't fix anything.

- - - Updated - - -


That’s sad/scary. It’s pretty stupid when you think about it, in a profession where computers are taking more and more control people aren’t even putting in the effort to make a case for human intervention. Probably better to push to have planes fly themselves if that’s the kind of effort the average pilot puts in....

Trust me, there's no computers in a Navajo lol.

[J-hop]

I'm a bush pilot. I do zero repairs on my airplane (short of adding oil), since I'm not a mechanic. We have mechanics for that. Those days (at any decent operator) are long gone, and thank goodness. It's way safer now.

Do I help troubleshoot problems with it? Of course; but I don't fix anything.

- - - Updated - - -



Trust me, there's no computers in a Navajo lol.

Missing my point completely.

Anyone with even basic rudementary mechanical knowledge should immediately think lack of fuel as one of the top causes when and engine cuts out. Doesn’t matter if it’s a plane, car or lawn mower. The fact you have people flying These things tha can’t even make that connection who apparently made it through flight school is scary as hell and a joke.

I think I went way off trying to make my point and put up too many straw men people are going after instead of seeing the fundamental point im trying to make.

It’s not like a car and you can just pull over and call AMA because you don’t know your vehicle....

[Aleks]

"The captain held a valid airline transport pilot licence –
aeroplane, Class 1 aeroplane instructor rating, a Group 1 instrument rating, a glider pilot licence, and
a category 1 medical at the time of the occurrence. She had accumulated over 9500 hours total flight
time, including 250 hours on type. In addition, she was type-rated on the Cessna 501 and the
de Havilland DHC-8.
The captain had been employed by Super T Aviation since March 2016 and had last successfully
completed the captain pilot proficiency check for the PA-31 on 27 March 2018.

The first officer held a valid commercial pilot licence – aeroplane, with multi-engine and Group 1
instrument ratings at the time of the occurrence. In addition, he held a valid Class 3 instructor rating
and a valid category 1 medical. The first officer had accumulated 948 hours total flight time and
23 hours on type.
The first officer had been employed by Super T Aviation since May 2017 and had last successfully
completed the first officer pilot proficiency check for the PA-31 on 23 March 2018"

So a captain with a huge number of flight hours. The only thing that sticks out to me is that they both just got checked out on the plane 1 month before the incident and both had relatively low number of hours on this type of plane.

[95EagleAWD]

Missing my point completely.

Anyone with even basic rudementary mechanical knowledge should immediately think lack of fuel as one of the top causes when and engine cuts out. Doesn’t matter if it’s a plane, car or lawn mower. The fact you have people flying These things tha can’t even make that connection who apparently made it through flight school is scary as hell and a joke.

I think I went way off trying to make my point and put up too many straw men people are going after instead of seeing the fundamental point im trying to make.

It’s not like a car and you can just pull over and call AMA because you don’t know your vehicle....

You straight up said “hands on repair unless youre a bush pilot” and I just said as a bush pilot I do zero hands on repairs.

[J-hop]

You straight up said “hands on repair unless youre a bush pilot” and I just said as a bush pilot I do zero hands on repairs.

I was simply accounting for the possibility that someone running to remote areas might have to. Wasn’t saying all or even many obviously