Too Low?

[Papa9571]

The Pics tell the story.


http://blog.seattle-deliveries.com/2008 ... ivery.html

[ozzy72]

For the full story http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/u ... 427696.ece

[Slotback]

Not low enough I say.  8-)

[expat]

Mixed feeling, OK to do, but not with PAX on board regardless of who they are.

Matt

[Chris_F]

I don't see the big deal.

1)  The plane was right side up.

2)  It wasn't flying under a bridge.

I've done worse in MSFS land...

[Xyn_Air]

Here's the question I have:

Did all the passengers aboard (it didn't mention how many there were, but it did mention their were some; as this was a delivery flight, I cannot imagine there were very many people on board) know of and consent to this maneuver?

The reason I ask this is, regardless of tower or company permission (which are both important!), if even one person aboard did not know what the pilot was going to do, then he is taking risks with someone else's life that he has no right to do.

And, beyond that, safety rules exist for so many reasons.  If this is a direct to Hong Kong delivery flight (as someone mentioned in the blogs above), then that aircraft is loaded with an awful lot of fuel to be farting around with low level fly-bys.

Fly smart, ne?

Darrin

[OVERLORD_CHRIS]

Looked cool to me.
The same thing would have been done if it was missed pass, so whats the big deal?
And I was under the impression they do this all the time, just before the plane flys the nest for the last time, kinda "farewell birthplace, I'll miss you" type thing.

It's not like they did a power run and run it up a blast fence and made the front end fall off.

[Saitek]

If it was a cargo plane I think he should have been suspended. However, it has passengers on board and he took an extra risk on their life. That is very serious and totally out of line. I hope his appeal fails.

[C]

A I not the only one to suspect the the only "pax" on a delivery flight would have been airline employees. Either way, telling them that they'd be doing a fly through would have been courteous?

Can't see anything technically wrong with doing it - I'm sure the aircraft has a very accurate RadAlt. Doing without authorisation in this day of the youtube generation is utterly daft - you're gonna get caught out. Maybe 100ft would have been  a bit more sensible...

[Celtman]

From the Times:

[quote]A British pilot has been dismissed for

[Hagar]

To the general public all large jet airliners are Jumbo Jets in the same way that all high-wing light aeroplanes are Piper Cubs

[Saitek]

Strictly speaking yes, broadly no. I think a jumbo jet can mean more than just a 747, although originally it was the first to be given the name.

EDIT: Doug beat me!

[Chris_F]

To the general public all large jet airliners are Jumbo Jets in the same way that all high-wing light aeroplanes are Piper Cubs

Heck, most folks call a 737 a jumbo...

[Isak922]

To the general public all large jet airliners are Jumbo Jets in the same way that all high-wing light aeroplanes are Piper Cubs

Heck, most folks call a 737 a jumbo...

Until they see a 747 or an A380


As for the topic; I think that the punishment was a bit harsh. One of the airlines better pilots, who very much knew what he was doing; Decided to show off a tiny bit with a brand new toy.

If this was some rookie pilot just out of Commercial Flight School; then I can understand it. A very skilled pilot, who presumably had full control of the aircraft during the whole maneuver, showing off a brand-new airplane for his company? If anything; it's probably brought more free advertisement to them!

Bah humbug to them, I say.

[C]

As for the topic; I think that the punishment was a bit harsh. One of the airlines better pilots, who very much knew what he was doing; Decided to show off a tiny bit with a brand new toy.

If this was some rookie pilot just out of Commercial Flight School; then I can understand it. A very skilled pilot, who presumably had full control of the aircraft during the whole maneuver, showing off a brand-new airplane for his company? If anything; it's probably brought more free advertisement to them!

Pablo Mason (google if unfamiliar) was sacked very publically for letting a footballer visit the flight deck on a private charter - absolutely no danger to anyone at all.

Rules are rules, and in this day and age, break them, or operate outside of the envelope you are authorised and you have to take responsibility for the consequences.

As I said before, down to 30ft was just plain daft.