frcabot

BHO = Best Hot Officeholder. Point out by quoting where I am "whining," I'm curious.

I don't think gays need defending. Is that what I'm doing? I thought I was laughing at your phobias.

Nope, still here but more laughing my ass up at how upset John is that gays can marry. As far as Christians not interfering... Um, the Mormon Church was the biggest donor to Prop 8. So yes, they do ;-). As far as BHO goes, I think he's been one of our better presidents and I think history will judge him very kindly. Clinton was also unpopular at the time and now he's one of our most beloved presidents. Besides, much of the criticism towards BHO is completely irrational and unfounded -- one just needs to scratch the surface to see that those railing against him have no idea what they're talking about.

Someone here has a serious hard on for King Airs.

Just following up in case anyone else stumbles on this thread. I spoke to Rick Gardner from Caribbean Sky Tours, who was extremely helpful. I highly recommend that organization for great information about flying to the Caribbean and Mexico and Central America. I'll quote liberally from his e-mail: "These fees are definitely outrageous and unacceptable. Here is the situation. San Jose del Cabo / “Los Cabo” (MMSD) and Puerto Vallarta (MMPR) are both government airports run by private companies under a concession granted by the Mexican Federal Government. In addition at MMPR there is an FBO which has the highest fees in all of Mexico (and the Caribbean as well for that matter). However, at both airports there is General Aviation Parking (Aviación General) which is available to pilots like yourself. You DO NOT have to use the Aerotron FBO. In the case of Cabo San Lucas (MMSL) this is a privately owned and operated airport which does not receive any Federal subsidies and has the liberty of setting their own rates. ... The MMSD quote should be about US$ 8 for landing, another US$ 9 for loading and unloading and then approximately US$ 10 per night for parking. Again all of this plus 16%." I called MMSD at the number that Rick had provided me. At first I was told that the fees were $25-28 per day for parking with another $65 per person charge, which was way out of line with what Rick had said to expect. The person I was speaking with then said something like "let me check" and he came back with $10 landing fee, $6-7 per passenger and $11/day for parking, which sounds right in line with what Rick had quoted. It sounds like (and I sure hope) that the handling fee at the FBO is not necessary. As for MMPR, I called and spoke with an employee at the airport (after a lot of runaround). According to her the landing and parking fees combined at MMPR are about 455 pesos for the week or 65 pesos per day, which seems quite reasonable (about $35 for the entire week). No per passenger fees, thank god.

Make sure you get the flammability certificate thingy if you so that.

Wow. I'm pretty familiar with fixed wing wake turbulence but not with the way rotor wash propagates. I'll have to do some research

And given the 4 seconds between master warning and engine shutdown of the good engine, the pilots obviously did not follow proper flow to confirm engine failure where PNF calls for engine shutdown of the proper engine which is then confirmed by PF.

On Feb 6th 2015 Taiwan's ASC reported that the investigation so far determined from flight data and cockpit voice recorders: the aircraft received takeoff clearance at 10:51Z, in the initial climb the aircraft was handed off to departure at 10:52:33Z. At 10:52:38Z at about 1200 feet MSL, 37 seconds after becoming airborne, a master warning activated related to the failure of the right hand engine, at 10:52:43Z the left hand engine was throttled back and at 10:53:00Z the crew began to discuss engine #1 had stalled. At 10:53:06Z the right hand engine (engine #2) auto-feathered. At 10:53:12Z a first stall warning occured and ceased at 10:53:18Z. At 10:53:19Z the crew discussed that engine #1 had already feathered, the fuel supply had already been cut to the engine and decided to attempt a restart of engine #1. Two seconds later another stall warning activated. At 10:53:34Z the crew radioed "Mayday! Mayday! Engine flame out!", multiple attempts to restart the engines followed to no avail. At 10:54:34Z a second master warning activated, 0.4 seconds later both recorders stopped recording due to impact. Later the day Feb 6th 2015 the ASC also released an English version of the initial release detailing further that when the first master warning activated associated with the right hand engine the crew "called it out", then the left hand engine thrust lever was progressively retarded to flight idle. At 10:53:24Z the condition lever was set to fuel shut off position resulting in the shut down of the left hand engine. Following several call outs to restart the left hand engine the parameters suggest the left hand engine was restarted at 10:54:20Z, however, at 10:54:34Z another master warning sounded, the CVR recorded impact sounds and both recorders stopped.

I'm way more afraid of bad pilots than I am of a bad airplane.

Wow... That's fucked up. Not the first time that's happened though.

Plus, knowing how South America works, it's very possible that money changed hands to ensure that the conclusion would be undetermined rather than loss of flight control surface. I imagine that doesn't do much for sales.

The report also states in 3.3.10 that analysis of the brief emergency transmission audio by the NTSB established that the engines were operating during the spiral and forensic analysis showed that the blades had been spinning at the time of impact. I think based on all of the above it would be fairly safe to say that structural failure was the cause, although the Chileans are apparently more reserved with their probable cause determinations than the NTSB is since they simply said the cause was "undetermined."

Also the report mentions corrosion on the right side of the fuselage in conclusion 3.2.3, but said that due to the total destruction of the aircraft it was not possible to determine the extent or progression of the corrosion. Also, apparently the operator of the plane had not complied with King Air's corrosion prevention program. (3.2.4). My spanish isn't great but it sounds like there were other maintenance issues as well.

Also if you look at the chart on page 21 of the report http://asndata.aviation-safety.net/reports/Chile/20120322-1_B350_CC-AEB.pdf, there was no decrease in speed until AFTER the departure from controlled flight occurred. And then, it took less than a minute and a half for the plane to impact the ground, so that's a descent rate of about 20,000 ft/min. If that doesn't sound like structural failure, I don't know what does. It couldn't be a stall induced spin or engine failure if the decrease in airspeed didn't occur until after the spiral had started.

If that were the case he would have reported engine out. The spiral would not have been instantaneous. The only call he made was "emergency" after the spiral had started. And it was an extremely fast spiral. Which makes me think it was probably a structural failure. Those really scare me. It doesn't matter how good of a pilot you are if your wing falls off in flight.

My point is, religious institutions are as free to discriminate against the icky gays as ever. No reason to panic, 4352H. As far as wanting a private restroom, what makes you think that? He's gay, not transsexual. Does shit-talking a 16 year old kid make you sleep better at night or something? You have absolutely no proof that he was "disruptive," simply talking out of your ass as seems to be usual.

He wasn't unconscious, he let out a mayday call as he was spiralling down. It only took a minute or so from normal flight to crash.

BTW, here you go. See, N4352H, you Christians are perfectly free to discriminate against 16 year old gay kids as much as you want.Congratulations! Does that make you happy? http://www.towleroad.com/2015/02/texas-high-school-responds-to-gay-vloggers-viral-video-saying-he-was-threatened-with-expulsion-.html#more "Earlier this week, Towleroad's Kyler Geoffroy broke the story about gay teen vlogger Austin Wallis, who posted an emotional video recounting how he was forced to leave his high school because of his sexual orientation. Since then, Wallis' video has been viewed more than 170,000 times. Today, we learn that the school that threatened Wallis with expulsion if he didn't go back in the closet is Houston's Lutheran High North, a small, private, religious school with 162 students. ... “Lutheran High North reserves the right, within its sole discretion, to refuse admission of an applicant and/or to discontinue enrollment of a current student participating in, promoting, supporting or condoning: pornography, sexual immorality, homosexual activity or bisexual activity; or displaying an inability or resistance to support the qualities and characteristics required of a Biblically based and Christ-like lifestyle,” the clause states. Ken Upton, senior counsel at Lambda Legal, told the Observer that although he believes the school's actions qualify as abuse, Wallis has little recourse: “The short answer is that if it’s not a government school, if it’s a strictly private school, the First Amendment doesn’t apply to them,” Upton said. “If they’re a private school, then I think it’s game over. They’re entitled to discriminate.”

Icing? Or pilot disorientation?

I want your balls in my mouth. Is that wrong to say?

How would cabin decompression cause a spiral into the ground? And how would an engine failure cause decompression short of having exploding parts penetrate the fuselage?

... Are you coming on to me?

Although I can't imagine what would cause loss of controlled flight at that altitude other than a pilot or icing induced stall/spin or physical damage to the plane like a wing or rudder shearing off.

How is it CFIT if he "departed controlled flight at FL280"? If he was not in controlled flight at 28000 ft then he sure wasn't in controlled flight when he smacked the ground.