Page 1 of 1

Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Sun Nov 15, 2009 6:51 pm
by Andrew B
Hello Gang,

I have a cool "App" for Jeb's phone. Its called "Pilot MyCast". Its a $10 monthly subcription from Verizon Wireless. It's a weather application that allows you to plug the local identifier of the airport into the application. After doing that you have the ability to recieve up to date Radar, Prieps, Metars, ect. It even has a lighting strike page that shows where the strikes have been. Pretty cool feature for your weather needs. I would suggest it. Good luck Jeb.

Great Episode as always. Keep up the good work. --Andrew

Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:02 am
by ph-bjb
Foreflight has very good apps for iPhone and Android. You can find them here:

Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:55 pm
by champguy
We went through the "Through the Fence" thing here in Florence a couple of years ago. There was commercially zoned property all around the airport, It was part of the City Comprehensive Plan and the Airport Master Plan to protect the airport.
But because the property couldn't get through the fence commercial development rights it sat vacant for years and finally was sold cheap to a well connected developer. We were able to get no help from the FAA in fighting a zone change to residential. Now we have residential housing closer to the runway centerline than the hangers are. So far no problems, but...
I think the issue for the noodle necks at the FAA is control over who gets into the airport area. With no though the fence there is one public employee who can be held acountable for the only entrance. With through the fence there is a reliance on the community of airport users, over whom the FAA has no chain of command control.
It is just like what goes on in Marinas. If you want to lower the crime rate, let in livaboards. Leave it up to the Port Commision and the underpaid watchman goes home after dark because it is too dangerous to hang around.
Most of us live in communities where folks would like to stay alert, and would report a problem. To bad disfunction isn't reportable. Phones would be ringing off the hook.

Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Tue Nov 17, 2009 5:41 pm
by kb7m
Cool video of the 737 simulator. I wish I had pics and video of the hour I spent in a 747 sim @ Boeing years ago!

It was my first year being in charge of a software development team working on a contract for Boeing. The product was a PC based pilot training package that simluated the instruments in the 747. Anyway, I scheduled a trip to Seattle to deliver the latest release and was surprised when my contact at Boeing insisted that we needed a full week to install and test the release. (It seems my predecessor had been somewhat lax in testing software releases).

To make a long story short, we had the software installed and tested within 4 hours of my arrival. The training lab manager was so surprized and pleased that she scheduled myself and a co-worker for an hour in the 747 simulator as a thank-you.

At that point had NO pilot training, so my only experience was from testing the training software, so I was familiar with the autopilot FMC and CDU but had no clue how to land the thing. Needless to say my landings were not pretty.

Definitely a memorable experience!!


Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Wed Nov 18, 2009 12:15 am
by t0r0nad0
Hi guys,

A couple of things had me talking back to my iPod on my way home from work tonight, I'm sure there will be more as I finish the episode tomorrow:

1) One thing you didn't mention in the OFLOTW article was that aside from the stupid question, the reporter wrote a pretty good article, as best I could tell from the way you summarized it. Here we have a mainstream article about an aviation incident and there were no phrases like, "the engine stalled', "the plane plummeted to the ground, out of control", or "the pilot crash-landed the plane in a field, threatening the lives of the innocent villagers". She just reported the facts in a mostly neutral way. Granted, that's her job, and it's sad that mainstream media has come to a point where just doing her job seems to be out of the norm, but oh well.

2) - 10 hrs ground, 2 hours CPT (a mock-up of the cockpit that lets you get procedures and flows down), and 2 hours full-motion sim time in a 737-800 at the Continental training facility here in Houston - for only $475. I've not done this myself, but I did get to take a tour of that facility once and got 0.5 logged in that very sim. I plan to do this program as soon as I have an extra $475 laying around and log some more time, even though I have no hope of ever actually flying the real thing - unless, of course, both pilots have the fish... :) If any of you three voices in my head decide to do this, I'll offer free use of my guest room, though I'm about an hour's drive from the airport.


Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 12:46 pm
by DJTorrente

About the TSA incident you discussed - I'm very surprised to learn that TSA has the authority to call back a flight that has already taken off. I would not be surprised to learn that the TSA employee in this case was on company business to set a rather shocking precedent. How does the TSA know -- to a man -- who is or is not screened and whether they board their flight? They check photo ID against a boarding pass at the screening station for conformance, but I don't see that information being recorded. Do they compare that against passenger manifests to determine who actually got on the planes? Are there people like Tom Hanks' character in "The Terminal", living inside the 'sterile' area of airports that TSA needs to keep tabs on? The ability/inability of TSA to know whether a given individual on a particular flight did or did not pass through security screening (as opposed to blanket screening such that 'everybody' in the sterile zone has passed security) is what sets off my 'blowing snow' detector on this case, even more than the accepted fact that TSA employees cannot be trusted.

As for the Air Force confusion - this was a scheduled part 121 operation, no? Wasn't the aircraft on an IFR flight plan and in constant contact with ATC? It the AF sees something funny on their radar, wouldn't a call to the local center clear up any misunderstanding?


Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Mon Nov 23, 2009 6:49 pm
by Andrew B
I agree with DJTorrente,

Why would an "unchecked" employee of the freaking TSA cause for a return of an commercial aircraft? You brought up how a TSA employee has an FBI background check and is clearly a somewhat trustworthy individual. Now the fact that the flight was returned to the airport so the poor guy can walk through a metal detector and then get back on that aircraft again and continue on with their flight was one thing, but the TSA's inability to notify the needed agencies/individuals is rediculous. Just imagine the friends this poor guy made on this flight when the jet pulled up to the gate at the originating destination and he was the only one to get off while all the passengers sit there inconveniced because they are now going to miss their connecting flights. The protocal for this type of procedure in the TSA "handbook" is clearly hazy (or the thinking process of the TSA employee in charge of doing this is).

Can anyone tell me whether or not the Air Force was actually mobilized? Again, imagine if the TSA employee had a window seat and looking out and seeing a bunch of F15 Eagles poke out of the clouds and form up off the wing tips of the jet? He sure would have sank in his seat remembering he forgot to go through security that morning. As the boys said in the podcast the TSA continues to make many friends throughout the aviation community. ;)

Thanks again for reading one of my rants. :D

-Andrew Blanchard

Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:13 pm
by Mike
For Multi Engine Sea Plane Ratings I want to go here: ... ing-intro/

I really think I have to go fly their Beech 18 on Floats. It could be the coolest float plane I have ever seen.


Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 10:57 am
by Laminar
It could be the coolest float plane I have ever seen.

Mike, have you seen this one?


Re: Episode #160 "Self-Ejecting Cargo"

Posted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 11:34 am
by Mike
Laminar wrote:
Mike, have you seen this one?


Thats pretty cool, and I love the DC-3 but I have a soft spot for the beech 18.