Slashdot Mirror
Passenger Lands Plane After Pilot Collapses and Dies At the Controls
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "NBC reports that flying instructors at Humberside Airport, near the city of Hull in northeast England, told a passenger who had never flown before how to land a four-seater Cessna 172 after the pilot collapsed and died at the controls. Passenger John Wildey explained to air traffic controllers that he had no flying experience and that the pilot could not control the plane. 'It came down with a bump, a bump, a bump, hit the front end down, I heard some crashing and it's come to a halt,' said Stuart Sykes. 'There were a few sparks and three or four crashes, that must have been the propeller hitting the floor. Then it uprighted again and it came to a stop.' Roads around the airport were closed while two incoming flights to the airport, from Scotland and the Netherlands, were delayed as a result of the incident. The passenger took four passes of the runway, and there were cheers from the control tower when it finally came to a halt on the ground. 'For somebody who is not a pilot but has been around airfields and been a passenger on several occasions to take control is nothing short of phenomenal," said Richard Tomlinson. "He made quite a good landing, actually,' added flight instructor Murray. 'He didn't know the layout of the airplane. He didn't have lights on so he was absolutely flying blind as well.'"
Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop sniffing glue.
Because Obama has tons of influence in northeastern England.
So he basically winged it and hoped for the best?
Yes.
The proverb among pilots is "Any landing you walk away from is a good landing".
Professional pilots obviously hold themselves to a higher standard than that, but for a first-time flyer that landing met the requirements completely.
Ya, it's nice that most of the stories don't say a word about the dead guy. He didn't actually die until after the landing, but he was unresponsive before landing.
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/512649/20131009/john-wildey-humberside-plane-landing-pilot-ill.htm
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
He did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
In general, you're doing a good job if at all times you keep the plane between the two lights on the wingtips.
Any landing you can walk away from is a good landing. Any landing you can walk away from and reuse the aircraft is a great one!
What part of "shall not be infringed" is so hard to understand?
Mythbusters had an episode like this. Basically they stuck Adam and Jaime in a commercial cockpit simulator with no prior familiarization or training and tested to see if they could successfully land a passenger plane with just flight controller coaching. They both were able to do it fairly easily.
I'm sure if you find yourself in this situation in real life, you have the additional element of stress to contend with, but mythbusters did attempt to show that landing a plane isn't all that complicated with modern controls.
Well, yes, but think - is there really much you can say about someone who
a) You're not allowed to identify
b) Their cause of death is unknown
The quote is extended among pilots to "and a great landing is where you can use the plane again".
That said, the aeronautical term for this is called a Pinch-Hitter (taken from baseball). Google brings up many courses (online and off), videos, articles etc of being a pinch-hitter pilot. You'll find most are for small GA aircraft where single pilot operations are common.
If you are a pilot, there are plenty of resources to which you can print out to help your passengers in the unlikely event they need to take over - these sheets include instructions on how to radio for help (basically, how to use the radio) and what to radio for help on. Your passenger briefing that you do before starting up should include instructions on how to work the radio as well.
He must have had the fish.
(I am a student pilot, and I fly a Cessna 172)
This guy is clearly a badass, but his best trait is keeping his head on straight, knowing something about how airplanes work, and figuring out how to talk to someone. Landing is also a lot simpler if you don't care about damaging the plane (he had a prop strike) or landing on a runway that's not 4x longer than you'd usually use. Once you can talk to someone who's flown planes, you're pretty much OK as long as you don't melt down - do what they tell you, which will probably consist of a crash course in flying (what the instruments are, what's important about them, how to control the plane, etc) followed by directions to fly the plane onto the runway and hold on tight. Normally there's more finesse involved in touching down smoothly, in a short distance, at a proper approach speed - but that goes out the window in an emergency.
I don't want to sound like I'm diminishing Mr. Wildey's accomplishment - keeping cool in that situation is very hard, and avoiding being a smoking hole in the ground is even harder with no experience. This guy should take some flying lessons, if this whole thing hasn't soured him on the idea of small planes. Maybe he can even log this in his logbook (not entirely kidding!).
For anybody regularly flies with somebody in a small plane, there are classes out there that will prepare you for exactly such an emergency - a few hours of basic flying, radios, and landings. Don't assume your flight sim experience will do you any good, except for maybe knowing what the instruments are. The most important part is keeping a cool head - you're eventually going to land, and it'll turn out a lot better if you keep calm and think it through.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
IIRC, the likely reason he was unresponsive and didn't die until he reached the airport is that people don't die on airplanes (unless they crash), they die at the airport once they're pronounced dead. It's more a matter of semantics and policy rather than an indication that he was still alive when the plane landed.
Yes, 121.5mhz AM is International Air Distress (GUARD channel). It's also used by distress beacons etc. Not just aircraft monitor. Hell, I monitor in my car when I'm driving in the middle of nowhere. You never know - your hearing that personal locator beacon just might save someone's life.
If you can figure out how to work it, it's also useful to know how to set the transponder to squawk 7700 (emergency) or 7600 (radio failure). That last one might not help you land it, but at least ATC knows something is wrong and that they won't be able to communicate.
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Actually yes, it IS difficult unless you've practiced it. And most of us who practiced it had an instructor who recovered the plane when we fucked it up. And every pilot fucked this up in training.
Flare too little / late: you smack into the runway. If you're descending too fast you're basically crashing right now. If you're nose down you could snap the front gear. Hit with all gear and you can still snap the front or wheelbarrow if you're too heavy on the front. Good chance you'll bounce too. If you're going too fast that bounce could be high and far, and you may bounce oddly if you didn't hit evenly - throwing you off to the side or what have you. Porpoising is particularly nasty: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5ZzktAFJK4
Flare too soon: you balloon upwards and eat up runway fast. If you don't correct or abort you'll run out of runway fast.
Flare too much: you balloon upwards meaning you're getting high and approaching a stall. Stall and you'll slap down rather hard on the runway, potentially from enough height to kill yourself.
A good flare is a continual thing as well. It's not like you just pull back a bit and you're done... you need to keep pulling back to increase the flare as air speed and altitude decrease. Through that entire process you can go too much or too little, causing the issues above.
Oh, and keep in mind that since the plane is in a nose up attitude you can't really see ahead of you very well. You're judging your altitude over the runway largely via peripheral vision. And you height cues vary depending how wide the runway is!
Now try throwing some cross wind into that just to add to your day.
Screw it up and need to go around? There's more than just throwing in the throttle. You need to reduce your flaps, in stages, as you pull out. Slap those suckers full up and you may lose too much lift to soon and plane meets ground rather harshly.
Personally if the idea of landing a plane with zero training doesn't scare the piss out you, you probably don't have a good enough understanding of what you're about to attempt.
A shitty little Cessna with zero auto controls and instant death on a a mistake is a hell of a lot more stressful and panic inducing than sitting in a large computer/gaming rig.
Its REALLY not that hard.
I remember playing MS Flight simulator on my grandfathers IBM XT with hercules monochrome graphics, and we were, after some practice able to land a cessna.
Now before you rightfully mock me... in practice years later we got to actually fly a cessna, and in reality its much easier to land. (at least in half decent conditions). There's lots more feedback to what you are doing and its far easier to line up the runway in the real life than it was in the game.
In other words, its not as hard as you'd think it is, and its actually easier in hte real world than in the simulators IMO.
At least in good weather / good visibility.
Actually, a lot of C172s are ILS-equipped. Most pilots do their IFR training in this or a similar plane.
Cut that Sky Hawk right seater's shirt off his back! That fully qualifies as a "First Solo Flight!"
My condolences to the family of the Aviator that passed away.
Oblig joke: Grandpa died quietly in his sleep. Everyone else in plane was screaming.
He almost certainly did have ILS, actually, but you'd have to be crazy to try and explain shooting an approach to someone who's never flown before. Much better to say "fly at the runway, once you're over it cut the engine and try not to land".
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
Actually, it is. It's the hardest part of learning to land, which is the hardest part of learning to fly. It doesn't take much to screw up the flare, and it doesn't take much of a screwed-up flare to royally screw up a landing.
Example: If you're going too fast and you flare, you'll "balloon" off the runway. Now you'll be 15 feet off and bleeding airspeed - fast. Unless you are pretty comfortable with flying, you'll stall up there and drop like a stone onto the runway.
If I were the instructor, I wouldn't even risk it. I'd tell him to come in fast (~75 knots "dirty") to keep him well away from stall speed and just fly it onto the runway. He had plenty of runway (~7200 feet, C172 needs ~2000 to be comfortable) and nobody was worried about damaging the plane so a nice graceful flare is wholly unnecessary. It sounds like this is pretty much what they did, because he had a prop strike.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
John Boehner just released a statement: "This incident clearly proves pilots are not essential and we can get by without them. Let us furlough them, profit destroying, union joining, commie socialistic, moochers."
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
IMHO small jetliners are easier to land than piston-engined GA aircraft. Throttle response on turbines is more intuitive, even with the lag. Also, a jetliner will have a full blind landing system, including the all-important glide scope, and a bunch of pilot-assist warning systems to remind you of things you need to do. I'd much rather be at the controls of an unfamiliar 100-seat jet than a 10-seat piston engined GA aircraft.
Not on your life... I want to be landing the aircraft that comes over the fence the SLOWEST as possible. Jets are usually NOT slow on final. The problem is that during landing a lot of things happen between short final and full stop, you want to have as much time to think and react as possible and the faster you are going when you cross the fence the shorter time you have. So I want a slow aircraft and a LONG runway that's preferably wide.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
In other words, its not as hard as you'd think it is, and its actually easier in hte real world than in the simulators IMO.
Better graphics and frame rate too...
Totally agree. Landing Micro$oft simulator is much harder than the real thing. And yes, I've done both many times.
The simulator is great for procedure training (how to shoot approaches, do procedure turns, holding patterns, navigation etc.) but it sucks when you get close to the ground. In a real airplane, you get all sorts of feedback, motion, sounds, visual and control feel that make it easier to handle the plane. Doing procedure training during flight is harder than necessary and a really expensive way to learn about the process, it's quicker (and cheaper) to become proficient in a simulator before you go fly them.
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
"possibly had a stroke" "had a history of cardiac problems" "was shot in the head" "was struck by a bird through the cockpit window"
Isn't it nice when the media refrains from absolute wild-ass random speculation and waits for the facts? Wouldn't it be nice if /. posters could be trained to do the same?
"after some practice able to land a cessna." Aye! And good weather/good visitibility, this guy did it as it was mostly dark, and Humberside Airport is notorious for having nasty bumpy air around it. It's very hilly around there, with just the runway the flat bit. For a long time the only reason the airport remained open was to support the North Sea Rigs, and it mostly handled helicopters. Occasional flying sheds from HUY to Amsterdam to get to somewhere useful, wasn't much going on. When it did expand and get the larger planes/holiday makers, it got well known as being bumpy on the last minute of descent, and winds coming in from the NW appeared to catch a few new pilots out, never saw so many aborted landings for the first few weeks of the bigger planes landing. That's commercial pilots being caught off-guard with the winds. No doubt about it, guy was lucky, kept his head on, did a good job not to make a mess of it.
Waiting for an amusing sig.
While he's in the air, he's still able to see other planes (they have their lights on) and there really isn't a lot of anything else he might need to see in the air. Blind? Hardly.
And the airport, well, they have these modern spiffy things called ... lights. They mark the runway. That's how you can see the runway at night.
One of the things that private pilots get trained in when they want to go night flying is how to land at night without "lights". That would be the landing light, of course. Having one isn't mandatory. I've done it, both with an instructor as part of training and when I wound up getting home later than I planned in a plane where the light had burned out. Yes, I know, this guy isn't a pilot (although the article says he is believed to have flight experience), I'm just pointing out that landing at night without a landing light is far far from being "blind".
The other fascinating statement is that the propeller "hit the floor". And then it "uprighted again". It takes a lot for a small airplane to get in a position where it needs to be uprighted, and most airports don't have floors outside.
A shitty little Cessna with zero auto controls and instant death on a a mistake is a hell of a lot more stressful and panic inducing than sitting in a large computer/gaming rig.
Its REALLY not that hard.
I remember playing MS Flight simulator on my grandfathers IBM XT with hercules monochrome graphics, and we were, after some practice able to land a cessna.
And I was able to bullseye womp-rats in my T-16 back home.
When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
Well, if I read the story right, it was a friend up with him, and the family was notified. It would simply be up to the reporter to ask a few questions, like reporters are suppose to. Hell, they got the play by play of how he got the plane on the ground.
Privacy and avoiding speculation isn't an excuse for piss-poor reporting.
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
A nerds dream is not to try and land a plane, a nerds dream is to land a space ship (or get laid, depending on who's stereo type you prefer).
-The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.
I guess the one thing you need to know about the radio is the international distress channel of 121.5?
In an emergency, the best frequency to use to report that is the frequency you are already talking to ATC on. You don't need to change anything, you have zero chance of screwing up the radio settings, and the guy you're talking to already knows who and where you are (most likely). This guy will know what airports are near you and which way you need to turn to get there. He can pick up a dedicated phone line to neighboring controllers to arrange your clear passage and brief them on your situation if he needs to hand you off.
If you're going to need to land right away, you'll probably be able to stay with the same person all the way to the ground. If not, then at least you started by letting someone who is within the system know you are in trouble and don't have to be so frantic in switching to the right frequency to find someone. You'll also have someone on the other end who can probably instruct you on how to change to another frequency if necessary.
Yes, if you've been flying without any contact with ATC and don't have any clue what frequency to call your closest controller on, by all mean, 121.5 MHz is where to go.
For a more complex aircraft, maybe the next thing is a pencil and paper to copy some checklists?
For a non-pilot, a checklist is worthless. Having to write down instructions is a waste of time and distracts from the task at hand. "When you get to X, push this and then this..." Much better for the guy who is probably watching you on radar, or taking to someone who is watching you, to say "ok, NOW push this..."
The fact that the reporter didn't immediately satisfy your every burning question about what happened to other people doesn't automatically make it piss-poor reporting, either.
Untrained landings under pressure are heroic feats as it is. Doing so as it's getting progressively darker outside turns it up to 11.
Actually, flying at night is much easier than in the day, if you're anywhere near civilization and the lights they bring with them. It only becomes really hazardous if you're over a large patch of unlit terrain and you lose spatial awareness.
It is SO much easier to find the airport at night when it is all lit up like a Christmas tree. You aren't looking at every empty space trying to determine if it is an airport or not. When you're lined up with the runway, you know you're lined up with the runway. It's unmistakable. If the ground controller turns on the rabbits (instrument approach lights) there is NO chance you will not find the airport. That's what those lights are there for -- to help pilots flying in the soup find the airport. In the clear at night, it's lovely and simply amazing.
Yes, there is a tendency to descend early and smack the ground before the runway starts. This guy had 1) someone on the radio telling him when to descend, he wasn't using his own judgement, and 2) he had a long runway for a small plane. It doesn't matter if he landed deliberately long.
I told the longer version of this joke (bus driver instead of pilot) to a friend who's father had passed a few days before. (yes, I asked if I could make a joke). He started laughing. Way more than appropriate. Turns out his dad actually was a bus driver. (but no, that's not how/where he died).
I thought the whole point of those big bright landing landing lights was to illuminate the ground when you're near touch down (and for taxi/takeoff).
In a C172, those "bright" landing lights aren't that bright. They may give you a hint where the ground is, but it is better to refer to the runway lights for that reference.
Taxiing at night, perhaps. But take-off? The main function of landing lights during take off is to make you very visible to anyone in the vicinity of the airport, especially at an uncontrolled airport with a potential for someone to be landing the opposite direction on your runway.
I thought the whole point of those big bright landing landing lights was to illuminate the ground when you're near touch down (and for taxi/takeoff). Runway markers may may it easy to see the runway from afar, but aren't going to be as useful for an untrained pilot to see how fast the plane is approaching the ground since a few fast moving dots of light streaming by aren't the same as a broadly lit surface).
Heh - the 'bright light' called a landing light in a C172 is almost as bright as a single car headlight (if you're lucky, like the high beam). It does sweet fuck all to illuminate the runway. If you're waiting to see the runway via the landing light before you flare, you're going to have a bad time - and probably crater. Larger aircraft have much brighter lights, but the effect is still the same.
Night landings are hard. There are no floodlit runways that I know of in existence. The only form of reference you have is the shape of the lights. There are very few clues of your height or speed by looking outside at night. Night flying kills many - as it is VERY easy to fly straight into the ground because you can't see it - this danger is magnified even more when you are on approach to an airfield - especially if it is one with a 'black hole effect'.
During my night flying assessment, I was required to land at an airport 'void of artificial lighting' - ie only runway lights. As you fly towards the airport, imagine a completely black area with two rows of lights. That is all you have. If you're lucky and there is a full moon, you may be able to make out the ground. I'd say it is one of the hardest things I have ever had to do.
Sendmail is like emacs: A nice operating system, but missing an editor and a MTA.
It would simply be up to the reporter to ask a few questions, like reporters are suppose to.
Shockingly, in many countries, it is still legal for the family of a recently-deceased private person to tell reporters to fuck off. And a few reporters still feel enough responsibility to the truth not to just print wild-ass guesses from random bystanders.
~Idarubicin
If you're going to need to land right away, you'll probably be able to stay with the same person all the way to the ground.
Are all ATC's certified on small plane operations?
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Isn't it nice when the media refrains from absolute wild-ass random speculation and waits for the facts? Wouldn't it be nice if /. posters could be trained to do the same?
hey, man, that's why Slashdot runs stories a week late - to avoid all that realtime misinformation.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Inacurate comments are for uninformed, and many of them are on /.
Take another look see. You can get a decent little brand new plane for about the same price as a loaded mid sized car these days ($30K-50). Much cheaper ones can be had if you want a more "windy" experience. What you say was true about 20 years ago when the lawyers were spending all their time suing all the light aircraft companies out of existence. That is no longer the case.
General aviation is a young man's game, but only if he can find a job that will pay for the hours. Aviation is so cert heavy now you basically need to pay to work for the first year (the cost of your private/instrument/instructor/commercial ratings), before you can work for free as an instructor, and then work for poverty level wages as a regional/charter pilot. It's even worse if you want to be a rotocraft pilot. Aircraft mechanics make more than many of the pilots now. I should know I am a aircraft mechanic by trade and a pilot for fun. (Though not that young anymore).
So most Slashdotters can fly a plane, know unix, can code a language or two, and have girlfriends!?
Riiiight.
Agreed it's easier to fly at night, but landings without some kind of aid (VASI / PAPI) can be a real pain in the ass if you're out of practice. Without the aids, unless you do it all the time, setting up a flare over a dark patch of concrete and waiting to be surprised when the wheels touch is not a comfortable feeling.
FALSE Probably the worst stereotype that exists in general aviation today.
It's expensive, yes, but it's not TOO bad - a reasonable used plane can be had for the low 5 digits, and many, many pilots do split ownership. Or they rent.
All in all, you do want to have a decent income - most pilots are middle income families - not rich 1 percenters. Most pilots also don't fly too much - under 100 hours a year. So split ownership or rental is actually very beneficial - the more an airplane flies, the cheaper it is to run (they want to run - the maintenance and everything goes way down if the engine's constantly turning and burning and such). Top end prices for a fully loaded brand new Cessna is probably around a quarter million.
And that's ignoring the biggest growth segment - light sport aircraft. They're currently expensive new, but the costs are way lower.
Now, if you want to talk jets that cost $1-2M, sure, they're for the rich and famous, but the regular avgas sucking sky-hole puncher is well within reach of someone with a decent salary. In fact, most /. readers working in IT probably make much more than the existing pilot population.
Learning to fly isn't too bad - all in all, probably $10,000 or so. It's cheaper if you can save up and do it in a month, more expensive if you have to spread it out over a couple of years. Or do light sport (you can upgrade it to full private pilot's later).
The benefits are, however, immense. If you could cut down a 10 hour road trip to 3 hours, wouldn't that be fun? And instead of endless highways and dirt, you get to see sights that few ever get to see. Avoiding big commercial airports for the little ones can often put you closer to your destination than flying commercial and dealing with security, lineups, etc. Heck, if you're particularly avid, you can fly into the neighbouring state for breakfast, fly back and have lots of time before lunch (many people do - they're called fly-ins, though the crowds are usually so fun they stay a few hours and end up having lunch as well).
As a career, though, being a pilot generally stinks - learning to fly and getting all your ratings, and you're barely making any rent. Finally get right seat at a region carrier and it's in the low 20s it's a joke. The big airlines aren't any better - most /. people are looking at people with 15-20 years seniority just to get the same salary.
However, if you don't want a career, with its lousy hours and routes until you build up seniority, flying for fun is actually quite affordable. And when the weather's beautiful, there's nothing like popping in the plane, flying to a nearby city and getting takeout for dinner after work.
And if you're a city dweller, night flying is so ... serene and even when you're just 2500' high (I was flying local area), you;re above the light pollution and can see the stars. (And by local, I meant flying to cities that would normally take 40 minutes by car take barely 10 by air - or just when you get up, it's time to descend).
Expensive? It's one of the more costlier hobbies, but you can find golfers and scuba divers who'll plunk down huge cash on their equipment and training as well. Ditto car enthusiasts. Maybe even stamp collectors. Or gun enthusiasts (yes, guns can be had for a few hundred dollars, or many thousands). The only "expensive" stereotype comes from the fact that there's no realy "cheap" option (though many have earned flights by working or volunteering at their local airports). It's I suppose like Apple products - they don't make low end cheap stuff.
Hell, there's always the Coast Guard, and many civilian organizations that can subsidize flight training too (usually for SAR, firefighting, etc). It is a very social thing though - you cannot just fly and leave, you'll need to interact with people.
Looking at the youtube video, that was probably the lousiest landing in the history of the airport. But there are some, particularly me, who would like to buy him a drink.
If you are an Airplane! Fan you must watch Zero Hour. Airplane! is completely based in this movie scene for scene. It's supposed to be a drama but once you know all of Airplane jokes it basically acts like the straight man where you can supply they punch lines.
Hi Joey. Have you ever been in a cockpit?
Johnny, how about some coffee?
Looks like I picked the wrong week to stop smoking.
A hospital what is it?
I love Jesus, except for his foreign policy.
Rubbish. I started flying when I was 24. I'm not rich (pretty typical middle class). One of the guys in our flying club when I lived in Houston was a cable guy. He owned a modest Cessna 150 which he kept looking very nice, and made some sacrifices such as not driving a brand new car. Another owner of a Cessna 150 that I knew out there was a lineman for the power company. Both of those guys are as far from "rich" as you can get, but by not spending on conspicuous consumption they could afford it.
While you certainly can't go out and buy a jet or even many decent light twins on a normal income, there's actually a great deal of GA that's available to people on normal incomes, and quite a bit available to working class incomes. Where I live now fuel is a lot more expensive, but I can still afford to own a light aircraft on a pretty typical middle class income.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Your differing opinion is not justification for modding a comment a "troll", read your guidance.
Yeah it's getting trollish these days. Half of the threads seem to have someone who failed to read the last half of the website tagline ("stuff that matters"). Basically it's crap.
The website was always (originally) Rob Malda's blog. He posted stuff that was interesting. Mostly tech, but not always. It's still essentially the same site.
Anyway, some guy operates complex and unfamiliar piece of machinery with only remote assistance is an interesting subject and suitable for nerds. Turns out there are quite a lot of aeroplane nerds on slashdot and they've come out of the woodwork to provide interesting and insightful comments.
Especially the comments about flaring. Having flown gliders, I never even though about that aspect of it. Landing them is quite different in that you by default come in too shallow, and you modulate the air brake to descend faster. Taking care of course not to drop like a stone through the wind shear.
Oh and all the comments on the relative merits and usefulness of flight simulators.
So yeah, I'd say that a post half way down on an already healthy and technically insightful thread whining about the off topicness is at best off topic and at worst a troll.
And now I'm flaming you, so successful troll was successful.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Flying is about as expensive as skydiving. Its well within reach if you spend that beer money on flying rather than beer. When i was flying with my own money as a teenager it was costing me a few 100 per month for the 3-5 hours of flying time.
If information wants to be free, why does my internet connection cost so much?
Don't sully this with your.... facts.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
So airplanes are like a bureaucrat's version of Schrodinger's cat box?
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
He didn't say cheap, but if a $30K-50 mid sized car = "toys of the rich" (as stated by the GP) then I guess anyone who buys a small boat or second car is rich in your opinion. Also, many pilots don't own the vehicles that they fly...it's not necessary.
Just another day in Paradise
Actually, that's about the best way to describe it. Keep the nose dead on the center-line of the runway, get your airspeed low and kill the engine once your wheels are over the blacktop. You should now be very near touching the blacktop. At this point, you're on glide-path and forcing the plane to descend... by trying NOT to land under these conditions, the instinct is to pull up which gives the requisite flare to keep from nosing in. Hopefully, you don't pull too hard and force the tail into the ground, but otherwise a very accurate description for a newb.