L-39 Albatross in the news(and not in a good way)

[hews500d]

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-flyby8-2009nov08,0,7365252.story


Be sure and click the link on the left side of the page to watch the video. Probably a lot of unwanted attention from the FAA on the jet warbird community as a result.

Darrell

[Txmmy83]

video is interesting stuff



BR
Tom

[hews500d]

video is interesting stuff



BR
Tom

I have to wonder from the angle a couple of them are filmed from if the plane is as close to the pier as the camera makes it look. It doesn't look like any energy was directed at the crowd on the pier but still, seems like several FAR's were busted.

Here's a link to an interesting discussion over at the Warbirds Information Exchange forum
http://warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=32946

Darrell

[Francois]

ROFL..... we did that in a Cessna a few weeks ago, flying low (20 feet)over the sea off the English coast. NOT over the people of course.... but I am pretty sure peeps in this continent would not go running off in a frenzy like that...... :icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

[Prowler1111]

..If i was there..i would be clapping and whoing so loud, people would run away from me, c´mon!....and watching those people running and yelling "OMG!", i bet it was a stampede effect, you know, someone ran, and the rest followed without really knowing why...God, in the 80´s that would´ve been some great afternoon at the pier!
Anyway...i´m censoring myself

Prowler

[hews500d]

eh.. Unfortunately in our post 9/11 world and with most of the "general population" thinking airplanes are annoying, noisy things, and most of them probably never having seen an L-39 they were probably thinking we were under attack, especially the 1st caller that was referring to them as "military jets"


I agree Prowler, I would have been on cloud 9 seeing that!

Darrell

[sandar]

There is an L-39 for sale on eBay.uk for around £15,000 if anyone is interested, not airworthy though.


http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/JET-FIGHTER-PLANE-COLD-WAR-AIRCRAFT-AVIATION-AIRFORCE_W0QQitemZ160375727859QQcmdZViewItemQQptZU K_CPV_Aviation_SM?hash=item25572366f3

[sandar]

ROFL..... we did that in a Cessna a few weeks ago, flying low (20 feet)over the sea off the English coast. NOT over the people of course.... but I am pretty sure peeps in this continent would not go running off in a frenzy like that...... :icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:


A couple of us did a similar stunt years ago over the Welsh coast with an Auster and a Linnet (British, licence built Emmeraude), except we flew parallel to the beach and wave height. Great fun it was too, no one seemed to mind.

[Dain Arns]

..If i was there..i would be clapping and whoing so loud, people would run away from me, c´mon!....and watching those people running and yelling "OMG!", i bet it was a stampede effect, you know, someone ran, and the rest followed without really knowing why...God, in the 80´s that would´ve been some great afternoon at the pier!
Anyway...i´m censoring myself

Prowler

Free airshow! YAY! I would have right there next to you doing the same thing.

Seriously, what is it with some of the people in the Los Angeles area? There is a hatred of anything aviation that permeates from that area it seems. Maybe Howard Hughes crashing into those house started it? I dunno.

[Lotus]

I couldn't agree more with Prowler, this kind of response to someone out having some fun just makes my blood boil. The pursuit of "safety" is the quickest way to never experience anything in life, which begs the question... what's the point in living then exactly? ;)

I'd heard about this incident but had never seen video of it. The 'outcry' from an aviation illiterate public that fears their own shadows these days aside, I thought it was a masterful bit of flying, well done.

I know Riggs, met him last August, sat in his jet and flew formation with him in another L-39, months before this occurred. At no time did he do anything that I would consider crazy, a very competent pilot. As for the FAA being worried about the mechanical state of his L-39, that's hogwash. That thing is immaculate. It gets worked hard and well taken care of. It was perfectly maintained by its previous owner as well, whom I also know (and who helped me immensely during development).

This incident reminds me of a drive I took in my mom's porsche as a teenager, reaching speeds well over 100 mph in the pre-dawn hours on a deserted road. The next week she got a letter from the police advising that her car was seen "moving at an unsafe velocity" on that particular date. That letter is still taped to my fridge 15 years later. I consider it trophy. "On this date at 4am your son was *living*". :)

-Mike

[dswo]

but I am pretty sure peeps in this continent would not go running off in a frenzy like that...

Maybe on your continent. On my continent, peeps are more spirited:

22P9vx3o7Y4

[dswo]

This incident reminds me of a drive I took in my mom's porsche as a teenager, reaching speeds well over 100 mph in the pre-dawn hours on a deserted road.

Mike, I love your model. But what you're describing is a little different, don't you think? When you were driving that car, there was a risk, but it was limited to one person. If you weren't as good as you thought you were -- and fortunately you were -- the only person you would have maimed, killed, or discomfited was yourself.

The people out on the pier that day were having fun their own way; maybe it wasn't ours, but they were entitled to it, on the same condition as we are: namely, that what they do doesn't endanger other people. I'm sure your friend is a skilled pilot and all, but the folks on the pier didn't know that -- shouldn't have to know that, frankly. If you want to buzz the onlookers, invite them to an airshow. When you do that, everyone gets what he signed up for: the spectators as well as the pilot.

If you want to be free -- and I really do -- you have to respect other people's freedom too. The pilots that I saw in the video weren't doing that.

[falcon409]

I was unable to pull up the video, my player doesn't seem to want to work right now, but aside from that I have mixed feelings about this. From simply an Aviation standpoint and how the general public reacts to these things I think there's a lot of "Post 911" anxiety that drives how some people react and especially those who don't have any interaction whatsoever with aviation. A lot of folks still see it as unsafe and an accident waiting to happen and any chance they get they'll fight against it and I'm very sure the local airports and FAA office were getting an earfull about this little display over the Pier.

Then, there's the FAA. . . .sometimes I see those guys as a necessary evil. We need an agency that can setup standards to maintain safety across the board in aviation from Commercial aircraft all the way down to Light Sport and Ultralight. But sometimes I wonder if they have kept up with the aviation industry and really have a grasp of what's actually going on out there. . . .like a little common sense would go a long way!!

I don't know this guy Riggs, but apparently Mike does and has no problem with his aircraft, but the FAA, for whatever that's worth, does have a problem with him and it seems to be an ongoing problem since they keep pulling his license. He also seems to be a guy who either constantly finds himself surrounded by the wrong people who take advantage of him, or he's as crooked as the day is long and can't stay out of trouble, sorry Mike.

Bottom line here tells me that until he squares himself with the FAA, he needs to stay out of the cockpit. But if he wants to continue to fly despite the FAA, then he needs to exercise a lot more common sense than he has up til now or he may find himself banned for life. He may have thought the stunt he pulled over the Pier was cool and great advertisement, but apparently the public on the Pier didn't think so.

[Lotus]

Hey David. I guess I should clarify my statement a bit, because you're right, it was a dangerous stunt that they pulled, I won't debate that. My greater issue is with the fact that as a society we've become afraid of just about anything we don't understand. That bothers me to the core, so I enjoy seeing people break the rules sometimes, to grab their freedom and run with it even though they know they're going to get in trouble for it. As for Dave specifically, he isn't my friend, but I have met him and talked to him a few times.

As for airshows, they don't cut it for me much anymore, the risk and excitement factors are nil now. I feel like I might as well just park at the end of the runway at any airport and watch airliners land. Here in Canada the planes aren't allowed to fly over the crowd at airshows at all these days. Back when I was a kid they used to start each airshow here in Vancouver with a transonic pass by an F-5 over the crowd at 100 feet AGL directly from behind. You could literally see 400,000 people duck at once. It was exciting and excellent. Nowadays that sense of adventure is gone from airshows, except maybe at Axalp in Switzerland. Again, all in the name of "safety". I don't want safe, I want to be thrilled and lit up, to be impressed by the power of the planes and skill of the pilots.

A Canadian F-18 pilot pulled a similar stunt in the early 90s over downtown Vancouver, buzzing houses at 200 feet off the deck, simply because he wanted to show his parents (who live here) what he really did for a living. That entire night every parent was talking about how dangerous that stunt was and every kid was talking about how cool it was! Long story short, I like to see people bend the rules just for the heck of it, provided nobody gets hurt. To me the public and FAA are just "fun police". What Dave did was silly yeah, but part of me applauds him for it.

-Mike

[Dexdoggy]

Thank goodness they can't stop us having this sort of fun in the sim! (Well, not yet anyway!) I'm pretty certain there are a few virtual homes in my sim with the roof paint missing! I just set the radar alt in the '39 and try and keep the warning light on the whole time!

[centuryseries]

I couldn't agree more with Prowler, this kind of response to someone out having some fun just makes my blood boil. The pursuit of "safety" is the quickest way to never experience anything in life, which begs the question... what's the point in living then exactly? ;)

I'd heard about this incident but had never seen video of it. The 'outcry' from an aviation illiterate public that fears their own shadows these days aside, I thought it was a masterful bit of flying, well done.

I know Riggs, met him last August, sat in his jet and flew formation with him in another L-39, months before this occurred. At no time did he do anything that I would consider crazy, a very competent pilot. As for the FAA being worried about the mechanical state of his L-39, that's hogwash. That thing is immaculate. It gets worked hard and well taken care of. It was perfectly maintained by its previous owner as well, whom I also know (and who helped me immensely during development).

This incident reminds me of a drive I took in my mom's porsche as a teenager, reaching speeds well over 100 mph in the pre-dawn hours on a deserted road. The next week she got a letter from the police advising that her car was seen "moving at an unsafe velocity" on that particular date. That letter is still taped to my fridge 15 years later. I consider it trophy. "On this date at 4am your son was *living*". :)

-Mike

You might find that 'fun' Mike but for those of us who lost a dear school friend late at night on a deserted road caused by a careless speeding driver going the opposite way, it's actually not that fun - especially 14 years later when I drive by the exact spot marked with a cross everyday to get to work. Please consider that not everyone makes it out the other side like you did that day.

[Navy Chief]

I am reminded of the movie 1941, with John Belushi, when the Jap sub fires at the ferris wheel..............

GL3X_txAkgI&feature=youtube_gdata

NC

[dhl1986]

He may have thought the stunt he pulled over the Pier was cool and great advertisement, but apparently the public on the Pier didn't think so.


I have to side with falcon409 on this one. A military jet is quite a spectacle even to us, people who have an interest and likely know quite a bit about them. Your average Joe on the pier knows military jets exist, but that is about the extent of his knowledge, and now there is one flying right over his head in a seemingly aggressive style (to him)

I think any one of us would have immediately known that it was an aerobatic display, and I for one would have felt like I had just won the lottery if I witnessed an unexpected display from the L-39, but these people had no idea what was going on, they were there with their families.... I can definitely see why some were worried.

[Lotus]

You might find that 'fun' Mike but for those of us who lost a dear school friend by a careless speeding driver, it's not actually not that fun. Please consider that not everyone makes it out the other side like you did that day.

I agree, which is why I save my speed for the racetrack these days (where everyone signs up for the risk), and if not there, then it's somewhere way out in the boonies where the only person I'm going to hurt is myself. I don't see speed as the problem as much as seriously bad judgment and lack of training. I also think 70% of drivers shouldn't even have licenses to start with, most simply don't understand the essential physics of car control and friction at all, and they're never taught these things during their driver training.

Granted my opinions on such things tend to be extreme because I believe in common sense, good training, strict evaluation and licensing, calculated risks, and loathe blanket rules that hinder those with skill by trying to make up for the yahoos that slip through the system.

Again I'm not really defending Dave's actions as much as commenting on a trend of fear, ignorance, and ever increasing regulation concerning aviation that worries me. Sometimes I think the FAA would prefer that everyone fly perfectly straight and level at 30000 feet all the time, or just not fly at all. If that's ultimately where we're headed I'll just tear up my PPL right now.

-Mike

[mfitch]

Thank goodness they can't stop us having this sort of fun in the sim! (Well, not yet anyway!) I'm pretty certain there are a few virtual homes in my sim with the roof paint missing! I just set the radar alt in the '39 and try and keep the warning light on the whole time!

Amen to that. I love flying low (100' AGL) and fast (up to supersonic) over open water in ways the FAA strictly forbids for good reason in real life.

For those who are not adrenaline junkies, stunts are scary for good reason. My wife will never attend an airshow, because at her last (as a child) she watched a pilot die.

[guzler]

I agree, which is why I save my speed for the racetrack these days (where everyone signs up for the risk), and if not there, then it's somewhere way out in the boonies where the only person I'm going to hurt is myself. I don't see speed as the problem as much as seriously bad judgment and lack of training. I also think 70% of drivers shouldn't even have licenses to start with, most simply don't understand the essential physics of car control and friction at all, and they're never taught these things during their driver training.

Granted my opinions on such things tend to be extreme because I believe in common sense, good training, strict evaluation and licensing, calculated risks, and loathe blanket rules that hinder those with skill by trying to make up for the yahoos that slip through the system.

Again I'm not really defending Dave's actions as much as commenting on a trend of fear, ignorance, and ever increasing regulation concerning aviation that worries me. Sometimes I think the FAA would prefer that everyone fly perfectly straight and level at 30000 feet all the time, or just not fly at all. If that's ultimately where we're headed I'll just tear up my PPL right now.

-Mike

Fantastically put. not specifically in reply to this thread, but to life in general.

[centuryseries]

I agree, which is why I save my speed for the racetrack these days (where everyone signs up for the risk), and if not there, then it's somewhere way out in the boonies where the only person I'm going to hurt is myself. I don't see speed as the problem as much as seriously bad judgment and lack of training. I also think 70% of drivers shouldn't even have licenses to start with, most simply don't understand the essential physics of car control and friction at all, and they're never taught these things during their driver training.

-Mike

I'm not a kill joy, I love speed like the next person, however I believe that sticking to the rules as much as possible on the highways or anywhere else makes life safer for everyone. These rules are there for a reason.

I'm certain that there were kids running, and I don't think they thought it was 'cool'!

Had the L-39 stunt crew warned people then that would've been slightly better. But even so, at that low level by the coast a Seagull in the intake could've ended everything for those innocent bystanders.

[centuryseries]

ROFL..... we did that in a Cessna a few weeks ago, flying low (20 feet)over the sea off the English coast. NOT over the people of course.... but I am pretty sure peeps in this continent would not go running off in a frenzy like that...... :icon_lol::icon_lol::icon_lol:

I hope you were by yourself when you did that. :isadizzy:

People do get scared of abnormal low flying, there were several phone calls to the military and UK Police when an Army Puma with a reckless flight crew decided to break the rules and try and perform low level maneuvers for which they were apparently not qualified. Ended up killing a fair few people that day.

[lukecrowley571]

Sometimes, in certain situations, FS is just more fun than real life. :mixedsmi:

In FSX, you can hop into an L-39, buzz Santa Monica pier for as long as you want, then when you finally get bored with that, head for downtown and pop some knife-edges through the skyscrapers, after which you can head for the Hollywood hills and do some serious terrain-following, before finishing it all off with a full-throttle blast along Malibu beach at 50 ft and landing at KLAX just because you feel like it. :applause:

[centuryseries]

Sometimes, in certain situations, FS is just more fun than real life. :mixedsmi:

In FSX, you can hop into an L-39, buzz Santa Monica pier for as long as you want, then when you finally get bored with that, head for downtown and pop some knife-edges through the skyscrapers, after which you can head for the Hollywood hills and do some serious terrain-following, before finishing it all off with a full-throttle blast along Malibu beach at 50 ft and landing at KLAX just because you feel like it. :applause:

:icon_lol: thats why I like FSX too.

[Lotus]

I totally agree on the danger of bird ingestion. I lived next to Santa Monica (Marina del Rey) for a few years and there are a *lot* of gulls there, especially around the pier with all that junk food laying around. At those speeds though ingesting a bird would give you plenty of time to exchange airspeed for altitude and bail out over the water. If the bird took off a wing though... yeah not so good!

As for the road rules I must respectfully disagree as to their purpose. Most of the restricted speed limits came into play during the fuel crisis of the 70s as a way to decrease petrol usage across the board. A nice side effect of course is the insane amounts of money municipalities receive from speeding tickets. Skilled drivers don't obey those limits because they can do better and idiots don't because they don't know any better.

I say the solution is in the training and licensing. It needs to be 10x as thorough as it is currently. In Finland drivers are required to spend 3 days learning spin recovery on a skid pad before they can get their license. That in my opinion is proper training. It's the same rationale behind practicing stalls and spins when getting your PPL. You need to know how to recognize and deal with it when it happens, instinctively, and that has to come before you fly solo. I don't believe it's possible to understand true car control until you've been way past the limits and out of control many times and learned to recover. No driving instructor here will ever tell you that throttle and speed can actually save your life in certain situations, but it can, and it's saved mine twice because of mistakes other drivers have made. Unfortunately the only way to learn car control properly in North America is to take racing courses, something I think every driver should do.

Maybe times have changed and I live in a dream world, dunno! :)

-Mike

[centuryseries]

I totally agree on the danger of bird ingestion. I lived next to Santa Monica (Marina del Rey) for a few years and there are a *lot* of gulls there, especially around the pier with all that junk food laying around. At those speeds though ingesting a bird would give you plenty of time to exchange airspeed for altitude and bail out over the water. If the bird took off a wing though... yeah not so good!

As for the road rules I must respectfully disagree as to their purpose. Most of the restricted speed limits came into play during the fuel crisis of the 70s as a way to decrease petrol usage across the board. A nice side effect of course is the insane amounts of money municipalities receive from speeding tickets. Skilled drivers don't obey those limits because they can do better and idiots don't because they don't know any better.

I say the solution is in the training and licensing. It needs to be 10x as thorough as it is currently. In Finland drivers are required to spend 3 days learning spin recovery on a skid pad before they can get their license. That in my opinion is proper training. It's the same rationale behind practicing stalls and spins when getting your PPL. You need to know how to recognize and deal with it when it happens, instinctively, and that has to come before you fly solo. I don't believe its possible to understand car control until you've been out of control many times and learned to recover. No driving instructor here will ever tell you that throttle and speed can actually save your life in certain situations, but it can, and it's saved mine twice because of mistakes other drivers have made. Unfortunately the only way to learn car control properly in North America is to take racing courses, something I think every driver should do.

Maybe times have changed and I live in a dream world, dunno! :)

-Mike

In the UK, where roads seem to be forever crowded I must respectfully disagree. I believe that it is better to avoid being in situations where you can spin the car by driving according to road conditions, thus removing the need for spin recovery skills. Finland gets more snow and ice than us, and therefore it would help them greatly, but be of little benefit to us here.

For most people here the chances of spinning their cars is so slim that spin recovery skills would be long forgotten if it ever happened to them!

What about a birdstrike to the front windshield? Being an oldish plane my guess is that the glass/plastic material would break? :engel016:

[Lotus]

Absolutely it's best to drive to the road conditions, but even more important in both flying and driving is to know your own personal skill limits. A new driver can probably take a wet and slippery corner at the speed limit and be ok, a rally driver can do it in the same car at 4x that limit with no problem. To me skill is everything. The more you practice the better you are and the higher your limits and better your judgments are. I want to see the bars raised, not lowered. Compare the cost of driver training that is 4x as long and complete to the cost of a single accident that could have been avoided with better skills. Easy!

As for the plexi windscreen, the L-39 manual doesn't list its bird strike tolerance, just checked, but given how overbuilt the rest of the plane is I'd have to assume it's pretty tough stuff. :)

-Mike

[tigisfat]

A few things here:

The FAA is not the "fun police". The FAA has plenty of provisions for @$$hole pilots like myself who want to fly on the edge. There are simply programs to ensure that pilots fly aerobatics at safe altitudes and not over gatherings of people and a rule that says how low we can fly. The program and altitude restrictions are very liberal. Waivers are given for airshows, and competency checks are done for pilots who will fly in those airshows. All of the above are easy to obtain if your motivation is sound. Myself and other aerobatic pilots will always strive to maintain an image of professionalism and honed skill, not one of testosterone and risky behavior.

If you're not over a densely populated area, you may fly no closer than 500 feet to a person or piece of property. That's more than fair. 500 feet is quite low. This L-39 may very well have never come within 500 feet of the pier, depending on how the camera made it look.

As for his rolls? If he was over 1,500 feet before he started aerobatic maneuvers, then he was legal. Aerobatics are (simplified) defined as abrupt maneuvers and bank/pitch angles greater than 60 degrees. He may have to pay the pied piper here.

Stupid people: The media are questioning the use of military aircraft, as if they are lawmakers and have the qualifications to question activities and redirect attention. Most aircraft designed for unlimited class aerobatics are capable of maneuvers no fighter jet could ever dream of. What's so bad about having jet fighters in the hands of civilians?

[Francois]

That pilot was in error, I fully agree. But the reactions to it were the usual kneejerk stuff from that coast :icon_lol: Glad I live on another west coast..... :gameon:

[waka172rg]

Love the vid L-39 looks good low level and pull up roll roll yeh harrr!!

[GT182]

He will face severe fines and maybe a loss of his flight ticket. Last I knew it was 700' for minimum altitude unless you got a special clearance. And it's highly doubtful he got any sort of special clearance to pull a stupid stunt like that. Sorry, but you fly by the rules or you don't fly.

That said, this past Sunday I was up in an L-39. Retired Airforce Capt. J. Gano was the pilot and I was in the RIO seat. And yes it was Pipsqueak that Mike has done in his L-39 Albatros for FSX. Tho not intended, we actually ened up in a highspeed stall, which we recovered from because we were at a safe altitude. If the same had happened to Riggs I can only, and thankfully so, imagine what the outcome would have been seeing he was so low.

BTW... I joined the 7G Club, twice in the one flight. And safely I might add.