Single pilot around the world non stop

I thought it was cool but what drove me nuts was the people on CNN saying, what does this mean for aviation?

I watched this with a couple of guys I work with who have forgotten more about aviation than I'll ever know, and they both said in unison, absolutely nothing.

And one of the added, but it's cool.

And it was. It's really cool but it doesn't mean jacksquat.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That was cool.

Can you fly on Virgin Atlantic airlines more than once?
spin2.gif


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeap but you can't call it Virgin the second time around.
cool.gif
bandit.gif
grin.gif


Sorry I could'n resist..
 
I'd agree with that. It's a great personal accomplishment, good he completed it safely, etc. But the speed at which America has forgotten about "Spaceship One", I can't see how how in the grand view of things that it's more or less just 'cool'.

Unless it's going to spark a brand new era of single-passenger, single-engined transoceanic personal flying vehicles. But even then, I'd want to take my wife and I certainly wouldn't want to even try crossing Lake Michigan on a single engine.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Unless it's going to spark a brand new era of single-passenger, single-engined transoceanic personal flying vehicles. But even then, I'd want to take my wife and I certainly wouldn't want to even try crossing Lake Michigan on a single engine.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agree. If I'm going to cross an ocean single engine, I'm taking the wife. Either that or spending all my dough in Vegas and cancelling the life insurance first.
nana2.gif
 
Shoot, save the telephone call! If Prudential found out that you were nuts enough to cross the Atlantic in a single, they'd cancel it for ya automatically!
smile.gif
 
My pictures are coming... I didn't have my camera, so I used my friends and he's still at work. We got there kind of late, and knew that we wouldn't be able to get a parking spot anywhere in the airport so we parked about a mile and half north of runway 17. There were tons of people/cops where we were, and we figured he'd still be pretty high when he passed us. We saw about 15 people walking across this wheat field to get closer to the runway, and no one was stopping them. I'm sure it was trespassing, but we decided to do it anyways to get a better view. Sure enough, we ended up about a half mile from 17 and got a perfect view of Fossett on final. The pictures on the camera looked pretty decent, so I'll post them tomorrow when I get a chance. Also, would anyone be willing to host them?
All in all, it was a pretty fun event although I do agree that it wasn't as significant as some made it out to be.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Okay kids, not to burst your bubbles, but let's put this into perspective.

And here's a little nugget. The circumference of the Earth at the equator is about 24,859.82 miles. If he didn't go around the equator he didn't fly that whole distance.

Things like this do not impress me. What was the danger element of this? If he ran out of fuel, even if he was over water mission control would've had someone out to pick him up before it was a problem. If he was off course the computers would correct him, and if he lost his computers then mission control would've gotten him the course corrections. To me this thing was the same as having a Predator Drone doing this.

Send someone off in a modified C172 with minimal equipment and without a fully loaded mission control and I'll be impressed.

Naunga

[/ QUOTE ]

In the bubble bursting category...and thanks for the compliment but you missed the mark a little...at 62 I'm not a "kid"!

To be precise to be certified as an around the world flight there is a minimum distance, and if you do a little research on the web, you too can find it. This in fact was a reason for one of the delays. The necessary tail winds were too far north and the distance flown would not have been enough to meet the minimum distance for "around-the-world" status. How about that “nugget of knowledge”?

Kind of a cavalier attitude while sitting at a computer, ground speed zero, AGL altitude the height of your chair, eh?

Over the ocean, motor quits, in a airplane that by any standards is "fragile" in a cockpit seven feet long, and you're now going to ditch in the water! Danger...naw, not by your standards. By mine...you betcha! Impress me...you betcha!

Now if you contend the "pick up before a problem" was some sort of inflight extraction before the airplane hit the water...well that's a different story.

“Predator Drone”…yeah, uh huh. A “manned” Predator Drone. Makes a big difference.

When you fly your C172 around the world solo, without a mission control...then I'll grant you the expertise to classify Steve's accomplishment as "unimpressive"!

FWIW would you classify a polar circumnavigation of the globe as "around the world"? I mean all you have to do is know two headings, 180 and 360. Trivia question: How do you program an INS (not GPS) to fly over a pole? (N or S)

(story about this and a pair of KC10s)
 
[ QUOTE ]
I thought it was cool but what drove me nuts was the people on CNN saying, what does this mean for aviation?


[/ QUOTE ]

This morning CNN is really into "weighty" issues.

Martha Stewart's release from the "Big House".

Michael Jackson's "Freak Show Trial".

And the beat goes on...
 
You make good points, but let me ask you this.

Would you put the airmanship that Fossett needed on the same level as Charles Lindbergh's transatlantic flight?

That's my point.

That's not to discount his other achievements like going around the world in a balloon. That is a test, because you put yourself at the mercy of nature or running the Iditarod.

As far as the motor quiting issue goes, look again this guy didn't build this thing in his garage. In fact I doubt he did much more than supervise his engineers. You want to impress me build the plane and then fly this trip on its maiden voyage, but instead he had a team of engineers and test pilots do the work for him. I can't speak from fact on that, but I'm willing to bet he didn't screw in one screw. As yes I think that they had rescue aircraft standing by near his route if he had to ditch. I'd bet a months pay that he'd have been plucked out of the water before his skivies got wet.

I mean this quote right here pretty much sums it up.

[ QUOTE ]
But like the fictional Dorothy who needed help to get home, Fossett relied on his engineering wizards to help him return safely to Kansas.

[/ QUOTE ] (from Yahoo News)

It doesn't say he had to rely on his wits and courage to make it. It says "engineering wizards".

And oh the horrors he had to endure...
[ QUOTE ]
He also had to stave off boredom, saying there wasn't much to look at in the air.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, it's not that it wasn't an achievement, but an achievement for what? Aviation technology? Perhaps, but I would like to hear from an engineeer about how much of the technology is applicable to new aircraft. Was it a test of human will? It took him 3 days, even if he stayed awake for 3 days (which I doubt he did) there are truckers driving through the mountains who haven't slept for 3 or 4 days and are hyped up on Red Bull and Nodoz, and if you ask me I'm much more impressed by those guys (who don't kill themselves or anyone else) than I was by Fossett. How about the airline pilots who fly themseleves and their passengers safely to and from their destinations day in and day out? Risking themseleves and hundreds of people daily, and sometimes in aircraft that are hardly as pristine as the Global Flyer, or the guy flying freight doing single pilot IFR flying organs for transplants in a single engine turboprop? Those guys impress me a HELL of a lot more than some multi-millionaire who sits in an aircraft engineered by MIT grads, loaded up with the latest avionics, some of which probably was specifically designed for this trip.

When you've got sensors up the wing-wang one your aircraft it's a good bet that you've got an auto pilot too. If a C172 has one then his aircraft did as well, and chances are it was monitored by his ground control. I mean they were the ones who told him about his fuel problem. Was it a test of airmanship? Maybe, but again I doubt that he was making course corrections with a memo pad and a slide rule.

So with all that aside what else is there? In my view it was simply someone who had the money to do something. Like someone else said, Fossett has figured out that if you do something like this every so often people don't forget about you.

Our society loves to hold up people with money who do things as amazing and super-human and more worthy than other people. I mean you can be the worst pro-football player out there and you still can draw a multi-million dollar salary. You can take a bunch of drugs that turn you into a mutant and smash a bunch of homeruns and people are awed. Babe Ruth was an impressive ball player, because he wasn't super human. He didn't have a gym full of trainers and doctors. Hell most of the time he was probably drunk out of his skull.

Look it comes down to this analogy. If you take a kid from the poorest neighborhood in town, put him in a good home, getting him into the best private schools, hire all the tutors he needs, and spare no expense in making him into a doctor. Chances are very good that he'll be a doctor. In fact no one doubted that he'd be a doctor, and it's just not all that impressive. Sure it's great that people swooped him up and gave him that opportunity, but what is impressive what inspires people is when that same kid becomes a doctor ON HIS OWN. No tutors, no private schools, the world against him, and nothing but his own ambition and vision to get him to his goal.

You could've replaced Fossett with a trained monkey and the flight still would've gone as planned (maybe a little better since the monkey wouldn't have weighed as much as Fossett did).

You want to know about real tests of human will, courage, and that people with money a lot of times are just that? Read "The Proving Ground" by G. Bruce Knecht about the Sydney to Hobart yacht race.

So I'm still not impressed. Hell I'm more impressed by that cat who survived a 10 mile trip on top of a car.

[ QUOTE ]
thanks for the compliment but you missed the mark a little...at 62 I'm not a "kid"!

[/ QUOTE ]
My mama always told me not to look a gifted horse in the mouth.
wink.gif


Naunga
 
So what's wrong with crossing the ocean in a single? It happens all the time. People buy airplanes and ferry them across. The military had to get their F-16's over to Iraq somehow.

Why worry about your engine quitting? Do you worry about your heart stopping?
 
[ QUOTE ]
Would you put the airmanship that Fossett needed on the same level as Charles Lindbergh's transatlantic flight?

[/ QUOTE ]

The interesting thing about those times, I've come to believe, is that it was not so much airmanship as willingness to die young.

For example, when Lindbergy was in management positions he was known as a reckless pilot who pushed his pilots to do unsafe things. Other famous aviators, like Post, were known as fearless characters more than fine airmen. Undoubtedly some of the finest airmen died and some other fools lived. That's the way it often works. There are many many (who knows how many) pioneer airmen who died in obscurity for every Lindbergh who made it and became famous.

Which doesn't diminish the accomplishments, in fact makes them more awesome. And it makes the debt of gratitude we all owe even greater. They didn't just get poor pay and no benefits, many died young pioneering our modern aviation system.

As for Fossett, this was an easy, relatively low risk, project compared to most he's done. But the man has definitely laid it all on the line more than once to set his records. Which is worth a hat tip at least. Or a nana:
nana2.gif


And by the way, thank goodness for billionaires who like to throw their their money into interesting projects like this. Don't be jealous. It's a good thing. It's the same kind of people that backed risky, hair-brained projects like heavier-than-air flying machines and airlines.
 
Nothing is particularly "wrong" with crossing an ocean single-engine. Let's not confuse "nothing wrong with/not illegal" with "prudent".

Yes, I kind of worry about my heart stopping! Beer, hot wings and bbq pork ribs aren't conducive to c-v health!
 
---Just a little tidbit: Being that my home airport is right on Lake Michigan, I know quite a few people who have crossed it in 172's and 152's. They have all told me that it was the scariest time of thier flying lives when there was a bank of haze and they could see neither side (with just VOR and ADF). One of my buddies said that he had never been so anxious to get on the ground so fast. Gives me the heeby-jeebies thinking about it. I fly on the lakeshore almost every flight and it is so tempting to cross "into the unknown" but I always tell myself "no" because I have yet to see ANY time that it has ever been even close to being worth the risk.---
 
[ QUOTE ]
You make good points, but let me ask you this.

Would you put the airmanship that Fossett needed on the same level as Charles Lindbergh's transatlantic flight?

[/ QUOTE ]

In the context of time, yes! Considering this is the FIRST ever, SOLO circumnavigation of the earth, non stop, unrefueled, a DEFINITE YES!

Consider this...there have been just a handful of flights around the world. This one was solo!


[ QUOTE ]
That's my point.

[/ QUOTE ]

The above is my point.

[ QUOTE ]
That's not to discount his other achievements like going around the world in a balloon. That is a test, because you put yourself at the mercy of nature or running the Iditarod.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Iditarod is an endurance event more dependent on the dogs. All at ground level, all with a cast of thousands monitoring, following, ready to rescue, help, assist on a moments notice.

I think the Dakar Rally is way above the Iditarod in terms of human endurance! Not too many killed in the wreck of a dog sled.

[ QUOTE ]
As far as the motor quiting (sic) issue goes, look again this guy didn't build this thing in his garage. In fact I doubt he did much more than supervise his engineers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Never said it was some homebuilt. It was built to do a very specific thing. Fly around the world, nonstop, unrefueled. I doubt if the crews who flew the B52s around the world, "Operation Power Flight" in the 50s had much to do with designing or building that plane either. But they were the first to fly nonstop around the world.

[ QUOTE ]
You want to impress me build the plane and then fly this trip on its maiden voyage, but instead he had a team of engineers and test pilots do the work for him. I can't speak from fact on that, but I'm willing to bet he didn't screw in one screw. As yes I think that they had rescue aircraft standing by near his route if he had to ditch. I'd bet a months pay that he'd have been plucked out of the water before his skivies got wet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Assuming that a craft, fragile by any definition, had survived a landing at sea. For my own edification, what information do you have that rescue vessels were stationed at sea all along his route? How many do you think that would take to affect that instantaneous rescue? One every 500 miles? One ever 300? 100? And what of the overland portion? Think that airplane could make a landing on, oh say the middle of the Sahara desert?

Don't know what your monthly pay is, but I'll take that bet!

[ QUOTE ]
I mean this quote right here pretty much sums it up.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
But like the fictional Dorothy who needed help to get home, Fossett relied on his engineering wizards to help him return safely to Kansas.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could say the same about Lindberg. Consider his time and the technology he had available. Not something the Wright Brothers had a quarter century earlier!

[ QUOTE ]
It doesn't say he had to rely on his wits and courage to make it. It says "engineering wizards".

[/ QUOTE ]

Define "wits and courage". Did Neil Armstrong have "wits and courage". How about the shuttle crews? Those who explore the bottom of the oceans?

[ QUOTE ]
And oh the horrors he had to endure...

He also had to stave off boredom, saying there wasn't much to look at in the air.

[/ QUOTE ]

I flew a KC10 from Barksdale AFB, in Louisiana to Diego Garcia, in the Indian Ocean. Halfway around the world. Nonstop. Unrefueled. Trust me, it was BORING! BORING! BORING!

[ QUOTE ]
Again, it's not that it wasn't an achievement, but an achievement for what? Aviation technology? Perhaps, but I would like to hear from an engineeer (sic) about how much of the technology is applicable to new aircraft. Was it a test of human will? It took him 3 days, even if he stayed awake for 3 days (which I doubt he did) there are truckers driving through the mountains who haven't slept for 3 or 4 days and are hyped up on Red Bull and Nodoz, and if you ask me I'm much more impressed by those guys (who don't kill themselves or anyone else) than I was by Fossett.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somehow I don't think a OTR truck driver stays awake for 3 days, all while driving continuously!

[quote}How about the airline pilots who fly themseleves (sic) and their passengers safely to and from their destinations day in and day out? Risking themseleves (sic) and hundreds of people daily, and sometimes in aircraft that are hardly as pristine as the Global Flyer, or the guy flying freight doing single pilot IFR flying organs for transplants in a single engine turboprop?

[/ QUOTE ]

"Day in and day out?"...sounds almost routine. FWIW I did that for a while too.

[ QUOTE ]
Those guys impress me a HELL of a lot more than some multi-millionaire who sits in an aircraft engineered by MIT grads, loaded up with the latest avionics, some of which probably was specifically designed for this trip.

When you've got sensors up the wing-wang one your aircraft it's a good bet that you've got an auto pilot too. If a C172 has one then his aircraft did as well, and chances are it was monitored by his ground control. I mean they were the ones who told him about his fuel problem. Was it a test of airmanship? Maybe, but again I doubt that he was making course corrections with a memo pad and a slide rule.

[/ QUOTE ]

And your point is? Had he not had those things available, he probably wouldn't have made the flight. But that's not the point. The advances in technology did make the flight possible. The FIRST solo global circumnavigation, nonstop, unrefueled. If it's such and easy task, for oh say a C172, why didn't someone do it? Not enough courage? Not enough wits? Naw, not enough technology. Some things are done because they are possible, some aren’t because they aren’t.

[ QUOTE ]
So with all that aside what else is there? In my view it was simply someone who had the money to do something. Like someone else said, Fossett has figured out that if you do something like this every so often people don't forget about you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kind of like Daedalus huh? Or Lindbergh? Or Armstrong? Or any of the other aviation pioneers who did the FIRST of something?

[ QUOTE ]
Our society loves to hold up people with money who do things as amazing and super-human and more worthy than other people. I mean you can be the worst pro-football player out there and you still can draw a multi-million dollar salary. You can take a bunch of drugs that turn you into a mutant and smash a bunch of homeruns and people are awed. Babe Ruth was an impressive ball player, because he wasn't super human. He didn't have a gym full of trainers and doctors. Hell most of the time he was probably drunk out of his skull.

[/ QUOTE ]

How did your argument morph to baseball players? Each of us makes relative worth comparisons, you have yours, I have mine. May be different. And neither apply to ALL of "Our society", at least not unless you contact each and every one to ask them.

[ QUOTE ]
Look it comes down to this analogy. If you take a kid from the poorest neighborhood in town, put him in a good home, getting him into the best private schools, hire all the tutors he needs, and spare no expense in making him into a doctor. Chances are very good that he'll be a doctor. In fact no one doubted that he'd be a doctor, and it's just not all that impressive. Sure it's great that people swooped him up and gave him that opportunity, but what is impressive what inspires people is when that same kid becomes a doctor ON HIS OWN. No tutors, no private schools, the world against him, and nothing but his own ambition and vision to get him to his goal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can't say that's a good analogy to accomplishing something like an around the world flight. Makes a good human interest story though.

[ QUOTE ]
You could've replaced Fossett with a trained monkey and the flight still would've gone as planned (maybe a little better since the monkey wouldn't have weighed as much as Fossett did).

[/ QUOTE ]

Or have it unmanned. But I'm not sure if there is an FIA category for that. If you remember, animals, dogs and monkeys were the first in space, after unmanned spacecraft. But none of them made it to the moon and back. Or did a spacewalk and repaired the Hubbell Telescope.

[ QUOTE ]
You want to know about real tests of human will, courage, and that people with money a lot of times are just that? Read "The Proving Ground" by G. Bruce Knecht about the Sydney to Hobart yacht race.

[/ QUOTE ]

As it relates to a nautical event maybe...but misses one of the three elements in flying...altitude and the necessity of keeping it. Sure a boat can be sunk. But just losing power, it still floats. Plane over water, loses power…comes down, and unlike a boat may not float.

[ QUOTE ]
So I'm still not impressed. Hell I'm more impressed by that cat who survived a 10 mile trip on top of a car.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't take much to impress you it seems. Dog races, yacht races, cat trips.

Speaking of “Firsts”…I mentioned the B52 circumnavigation of the earth back in the 50s. They were the early models that had the gunner in the rear. Two of the tree gunners rode up front, but one elected to remain in the tail gunner position for the entire flight. Came the first man, and probably to this day the ONLY man to fly around the world, BACKWARD! Now that’s an accomplishment!

On a semi-related note.

One of the disappointments in my career came in the early 80s. We had planned a circumnavigation of the world in a pair of KC10s. What was going to make this unique, and set something like five world records in the process, was that this was to be a polar circumnavigation. Start in Alaska, over the north pole, down the Atlantic, over the south pole, back up north over the Pacific ocean to Alaska. Would only fly over land during the arctic and Antarctic land masses. Four inflight refuelings, two as a tanker, two as a receiver. Approximately 45 hours flying time.

Some interesting concepts. Never change airplane heading! 360 until you reach the north pole, when the compass switches to 180 but the airplane doesn’t turn. Same thing again at the south pole. No time zones to worry about. No flying into or away from the sun. No head or tail winds…maybe a cross wind from time to time.

The thing that shot it down was the Brits and the Argentineans mixing it up in the Falklands. We’d planned to use Ascension Island for refueling support and that wasn’t an option with the war raging. Plus our route was going to take us pretty close to the war zone.

Sure wish it had gone off…like I said one of my aviation disappointments.
 
The "haze" over water was just the thing JFK jr was confronted with. Perfect setting for a fatal case of vertigo, especially by a pilot who is not proficient in instrument flying under actual instrument conditions.

I haven't flown for a while, and even with all my experience I'd never consider flight into IFR conditions without doing some practice to gain some proficiency.

"There are bold pilots and old pilots, but no bold & old pilots." Old saying.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Beer, hot wings and bbq pork ribs aren't conducive to c-v health!

[/ QUOTE ]

A life without beer, hot wings and bbq pork isn't worth living!
 
Quote
___________________________________________________
Speaking of “Firsts”…I mentioned the B52 circumnavigation of the earth back in the 50s. They were the early models that had the gunner in the rear. Two of the tree gunners rode up front, but one elected to remain in the tail gunner position for the entire flight. Came the first man, and probably to this day the ONLY man to fly around the world, BACKWARD! Now that’s an accomplishment!
___________________________________________________

grin.gif
 
No doubt. Pizza, beer and bufallo wings tonight at the Taylor hogan!
 
Back
Top