Ep# 262

A place to post misc. feedback to individual eps.
Forum rules
We'd love to have you Reply to posts in this Forum, but please don't create new Topics here. One exception: If we haven't created a thread for a particular episode, feel free to get it started. For other subjects, I suggest creating new Topics in Virtual Hangar=>Other Topics. Thanks.
User avatar
Posts: 1413
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 9:37 pm
Location: Florence, (Coastal) Oregon

Ep# 262

Postby champguy » Thu Nov 24, 2011 5:38 pm

Great Ep as always. Got me through the Coast Range in conditions I'm not flying in. Had to respond to Dave's comment about wires being hard to see from the air. Most don't get much time or experience down in the lower flight levels with Champs, Eagles with real feathers, and Canada Geese below their migration cruise, but wires are not hard to see. They are invisable, but strung between poles which can be seen unless the poles are hidden in the trees along ridge lines at each side of a river. Lesson, go not, where you have not gone before, and taken notes.
Sorry about the insurance company's heliocopter, but everyone walked away. Maybe not pretty, but still a good landing under the circumstances.
Remember, not all who wander, are lost.

User avatar
Posts: 403
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2008 11:13 pm
Location: Billerica, MA/KBED

Re: Ep# 262

Postby Scofreyjet » Sat Nov 26, 2011 1:28 am

See the shownotes for Episode 262, which now includes a link to the NTSB preliminary report. The report characterizes the event as a "hard landing". The landing included a rollover and was followed by a fire that appears to have destroyed the heli.

As a side note the pilot/owner, Chuck Surack, is the founder/CEO of Sweetwater Sound, a major purveyor of gear for the audio-inclined. He was reported to have returned to work shortly after the incident.
Jeff Ward
I love things with wings!
Scofreyjet on Twitter

Posts: 28
Joined: Fri Aug 15, 2008 1:25 pm
Location: KTEW

Re: Ep# 262

Postby thelaker » Sun Nov 27, 2011 10:04 pm

There was a brief mention in this episode of the Russian (actually Soviet) built ground effect vehicles (aka ekranoplans). I've always thought that this was one of the more interesting tidbits of Cold War/military history. The most impressive example is the "Caspian Sea Monster" (the Lun-Class ekranoplan), which a Russian blogger documented the only example in it's current condition in these posts (text is Russian, but the photos are worth checking out):

Outside photos: http://igor113.livejournal.com/51213.html
Inside photos: http://igor113.livejournal.com/52174.html#cutid1

User avatar
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2010 12:01 pm

Re: Ep# 262

Postby navionguy » Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:31 pm

Another great episode! I agree, a Navion is a great bargain of an airplane.

Keep up the good work guys. Even if you don't keep talking about Navions. :)
Fly Navion, ask the man who owns one.

Posts: 298
Joined: Fri Sep 25, 2009 1:54 pm

Re: Ep# 262

Postby gmarshall » Mon Nov 28, 2011 5:38 pm

I said as much when I filled out my listener survey, but just want to reiterate publicly...

I love the airplane talk. IE: Talking about what you guys think about specific models of airplanes.

"Lovely control harmony, but glides like a greased crowbar"

In addition, personal anecdotes, flying tales and sharing wisdom gained is something I love listening to. Amy's ditching story was one of my favourite episodes, for example.

Anyway, great episode, as usual. :)

User avatar
Posts: 132
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: (Eric) Dunedin, Florida

Re: Ep# 262

Postby Soccer-Jock » Mon Nov 28, 2011 10:17 pm

I haven't even listened to the episode yet... but I've already had a great chuckle over the title!

Posts: 5
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 9:40 am
Location: MS

Re: Ep# 262

Postby audioflyer » Tue Nov 29, 2011 12:54 am

With regards to the FAA charging for charts, I seem to remember from copyright class that all government-produced material is not protected by copyright and therefore subject to fair use. That being the case, I don't think there is any reason someone (like AOPA) couldn't just purchase the charts and make them available to everyone for free. Am I wrong here?

User avatar
Site Admin
Posts: 1297
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2007 5:07 pm
Location: Lookout Point, Nottingham, NH / Nashua Airport (ASH)

Re: Ep# 262

Postby jackhodgson » Wed Nov 30, 2011 3:31 pm


That's a good point. One that had crossed my mind. Worth looking into.

// Jack

Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Aug 19, 2008 2:31 pm
Location: Kansas

Re: Ep# 262

Postby PropFan » Thu Dec 01, 2011 10:53 am

Re: Charging for Charts

Where do you draw the line? The federal government currently provides mountains of data for free download in numerous areas: e.g., United States Code, Code of Federal Regulations, Federal Register, federal court cases, to name a few. Why have FAA charts been singled out? If I have to pay for a current copy of the AF/D will I just let it slide and use an outdated copy? How does that promote safety?

User avatar
Posts: 902
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2007 10:10 am
Location: KGPM Grand Prairie, Texas

Re: Ep# 262

Postby PilotBillFromTexas » Thu Dec 01, 2011 8:34 pm

Let's just call it a "chart tax," which is what it is. They are charging it because they think that they can get away with it. I think that Jeb's explanation sounds plausible that someone in the big business chart industry is using the FAA to implement a barrier to entry into their lucrative space for them. Jeppesen or whoever can charge whatever they want for their product because they are the only game in town, the FAA gets to collect a little bit of money to offset the expense reductions that they have had to eat and they only have to deal with one data vendor, not several.

Return to “Episodes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests