Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2233 »

hogmartin: Mar 27, 2007

I'm not a pilot or an ATC and am not qualified to do poo poo to poo poo but how are pilots not required to have radios? Even if you're flying a little Piper Cub, it's like 1/200th the cost of the goddamn plane in the first place :psyduck:

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 23, 2024 18:24

StandardVC10: Feb 6, 2007; This avatar now 50% more dark mode compliant

hogmartin posted:

I'm not a pilot or an ATC and am not qualified to do poo poo to poo poo but how are pilots not required to have radios? Even if you're flying a little Piper Cub, it's like 1/200th the cost of the goddamn plane in the first place

I believe the earliest Piper Cubs may not even have electrical systems to run radios with.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:10

The Ferret King: Nov 23, 2003; cluck cluck

The weather and visibility rules supposedly remove the need for 2-way comms in some types of airspace. Relying, instead, on see-and-avoid, and right of way rules.

It... Usually works out.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:11

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

I have to imagine there's just a ton of little crop duster flights and grass field touch and go practice and the like that ATC never notices, needs to notice, or gives a poo poo about. But I'm not ATC, I just play one when we're telling aircraft and SAMs for the 90th time that the air corridor 5 miles north of our range space is full of airliners, not red force B-52s.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:13

EvilJoven: Mar 18, 2005; NOBODY,IN THE HISTORY OF EVER, HAS ASKED OR CARED WHAT CANADA THINKS. YOU ARE NOT A COUNTRY. YOUR MONEY HAS THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND ON IT. IF YOU DIG AROUND IN YOUR BACKYARD, NATIVE SKELETONS WOULD EXPLODE OUT OF YOUR LAWN LIKE THE END OF POLTERGEIST. CANADA IS SO POLITE, EH?; Fun Shoe

There are a lot of Class E (no radio needed for VFR) airports out there. There are supposed to be rules for how you approach the field, how you enter the circuit etc to minimize the chance of running into another aircraft and you're supposed to keep a keen eye out for other aircraft.

Like FK said, it usually works out, but I'm kinda glad I didn't have to dodge that Mooney that technically could have flown right in to me without even turning his radio on.

One neat fact about flying is the plane that's going to hit you is the plane that's right on the horizon, where it's the hardest to spot.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:14

The Ferret King: Nov 23, 2003; cluck cluck

And if it's heading right toward you, there's little to no relative motion to catch your attention. See And Avoid is kinda bullshit really.

I call traffic all day long to pilots who never see anything. And that's with me telling them where to look. And I get it, that poo poo is hard to see.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 16:15

Riot Carol Danvers: Jul 30, 2004; It's super dumb, but I can't stop myself. This is just kind of how I do things.

EvilJoven posted:

That airport is a D and that fuckface shouldn't have even been there without a radio, that place is towered from around 4am until well after midnight, if I'm reading it right and remember what timezone Vegas is in.

An experimental flying outside of the class D is not required to have a radio, the idiot went into the wrong airspace and no one had any way of getting in touch with him. Everyone out there was basically having to give reports of where he was until he hosed off to where he came from.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 17:01

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

I can't imagine having money enough to buy any aircraft, and then going "hmm, I don't think the safety afforded to me by a handheld radio that costs perhaps a few hundred dollars is worth it." Even if you don't have a radio that can transmit, you can still listen to other people's radio calls and react accordingly, so it's better than nothing.

It's like filing a flight plan: even in situations where you don't have to, the fact that it's not legally required doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 17:29

hogmartin: Mar 27, 2007

PT6A posted:

I can't imagine having money enough to buy any aircraft, and then going "hmm, I don't think the safety afforded to me by a handheld radio that costs perhaps a few hundred dollars is worth it." Even if you don't have a radio that can transmit, you can still listen to other people's radio calls and react accordingly, so it's better than nothing.

It's like filing a flight plan: even in situations where you don't have to, the fact that it's not legally required doesn't mean you shouldn't do it.

Yep, this is basically what I'm getting at. Even if you're just bombing around cornfields in a Stearman or something, just get an aviation HT and tune it to 121.500 and stick it in your pocket ffs.

Like I said, I'm not a pilot or anything so I can't really speak from experience but holy poo poo, being able to communicate remotely from your heavier-than-air flying machine in TYOOL 2016 seems like kind of a good idea.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 17:52

Vitamin J: Aug 16, 2006; God, just tell me to shut up already. I have a clear anti-domestic bias and a lack of facts.

drgitlin posted:

Given the amount of air those things channel out of the ducts I think they'd get shot down by irate drivers before the FAA even had a chance to do anything. I don't think anyone wants to be run over by a hovercraft.

If you'll allow it, I'd like to use this opportunity to compare my predictions to drones another time. In the past few years there have been a handful of people shooting guns at drones, the FAA has remained silent on these incidents. It has been up to local police departments to pursue charges, some have and some haven't. There are drone slayers out there who are walking free validated by the court. We're talking about people who shot their guns into the air in a residential neighborhood over a perceived slight made by a drone hovering a couple hundred feet above with no repercussions. Reckless maniacs driven by reckless media "are drones spying on your daughter at school?!" taking reckless actions which are validated by the FAA's reckless silence. These incidents have even happened with drones whose pilots had registered with the FAA. Again the FAA remains silent on the subject, hardly makes any effort to educate the public about the proper ways to deal with a suspected illegal drone flights, and most certainly won't publicly acknowledge the rights that drone pilots do have to fly their craft a few hundred feet over a neighbor's property.

PT6A posted:

I don't know what the laws are like in the US, but in Canada I think the "you may not takeoff or land an aircraft in a built-up area except at a registered aerodrome" is going to cover most things pretty nicely.

We already have reasonably tight controls on drones, theoretically speaking. Enforcement is the most difficult thing, but that will change as soon as we're talking about something that's large enough to actually carry a human and is actually practical enough to be used for transportation.

Canada is a good example because the TCCA actually made an effort to rush through drones regs when it was obvious the cat was out of the bag, allowed people to do commercial work, and clarified the recreational rules. The FAA did not have commercial regs until 10 days ago for reference and their recreational regs are inconsistent with the existing AMA's safety guidelines that millions of RC pilots follow every day. In the US the inaction of the FAA turns the whole situation into the wild west. There were and still are commercial UAV companies making millions of dollars selling or flying drones that according to the FAA are illegal...but they're still flying in the US right now.

The FAA has similar regs regarding where aircraft can take off and land, however as I said, I think the hover-bike example is a perfect bridge between something like a hovercraft which is clearly a ground vehicle, and a Cessna which is clearly an aircraft. This is something new that's only possible because of modern technology and will cause just as much of a stink as drones, possibly more.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 18:57

Ardeem: Sep 16, 2010; There is no problem that cannot be solved through sufficient application of lasers and friendship.

hogmartin posted:

Yep, this is basically what I'm getting at. Even if you're just bombing around cornfields in a Stearman or something, just get an aviation HT and tune it to 121.500 and stick it in your pocket ffs.

Like I said, I'm not a pilot or anything so I can't really speak from experience but holy poo poo, being able to communicate remotely from your heavier-than-air flying machine in TYOOL 2016 seems like kind of a good idea.

Anecdote time: that Stearman has an unshielded ignition and is putting out enough RF interference that even if he had a radio, he couldn't hear poo poo. Some people do put in modern/newer wiring harnesses and mags, but they don't have to.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 19:08

drgitlin: Jul 25, 2003; luv 2 get custom titles from a forum that goes into revolt when its told to stop using a bad word.

Vitamin J posted:

If you'll allow it, I'd like to use this opportunity to compare my predictions to drones another time. In the past few years there have been a handful of people shooting guns at drones, the FAA has remained silent on these incidents. It has been up to local police departments to pursue charges, some have and some haven't. There are drone slayers out there who are walking free validated by the court. We're talking about people who shot their guns into the air in a residential neighborhood over a perceived slight made by a drone hovering a couple hundred feet above with no repercussions. Reckless maniacs driven by reckless media "are drones spying on your daughter at school?!" taking reckless actions which are validated by the FAA's reckless silence. These incidents have even happened with drones whose pilots had registered with the FAA. Again the FAA remains silent on the subject, hardly makes any effort to educate the public about the proper ways to deal with a suspected illegal drone flights, and most certainly won't publicly acknowledge the rights that drone pilots do have to fly their craft a few hundred feet over a neighbor's property.

Canada is a good example because the TCCA actually made an effort to rush through drones regs when it was obvious the cat was out of the bag, allowed people to do commercial work, and clarified the recreational rules. The FAA did not have commercial regs until 10 days ago for reference and their recreational regs are inconsistent with the existing AMA's safety guidelines that millions of RC pilots follow every day. In the US the inaction of the FAA turns the whole situation into the wild west. There were and still are commercial UAV companies making millions of dollars selling or flying drones that according to the FAA are illegal...but they're still flying in the US right now.

The FAA has similar regs regarding where aircraft can take

Vitamin J posted:
If you'll allow it, I'd like to use this opportunity to compare my predictions to drones another time. In the past few years there have been a handful of people shooting guns at drones, the FAA has remained silent on these incidents. It has been up to local police departments to pursue charges, some have and some haven't. There are drone slayers out there who are walking free validated by the court. We're talking about people who shot their guns into the air in a residential neighborhood over a perceived slight made by a drone hovering a couple hundred feet above with no repercussions. Reckless maniacs driven by reckless media "are drones spying on your daughter at school?!" taking reckless actions which are validated by the FAA's reckless silence. These incidents have even happened with drones whose pilots had registered with the FAA. Again the FAA remains silent on the subject, hardly makes any effort to educate the public about the proper ways to deal with a suspected illegal drone flights, and most certainly won't publicly acknowledge the rights that drone pilots do have to fly their craft a few hundred feet over a neighbor's property.

Canada is a good example because the TCCA actually made an effort to rush through drones regs when it was obvious the cat was out of the bag, allowed people to do commercial work, and clarified the recreational rules. The FAA did not have commercial regs until 10 days ago for reference and their recreational regs are inconsistent with the existing AMA's safety guidelines that millions of RC pilots follow every day. In the US the inaction of the FAA turns the whole situation into the wild west. There were and still are commercial UAV companies making millions of dollars selling or flying drones that according to the FAA are illegal...but they're still flying in the US right now.

The FAA has similar regs regarding where aircraft can take off and land, however as I said, I think the hover-bike example is a perfect bridge between something like a hovercraft which is clearly a ground vehicle, and a Cessna which is clearly an aircraft. This is something new that's only possible because of modern technology and will cause just as much of a stink as drones, possibly more.

I've seen a dude ride a hoverboard that needed 32 fans to lift him about a foot. I think you underestimate how annoying it would be to have a hover vehicle capable of carrying a human fly directly over your head.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 19:29

marumaru: May 20, 2013

drgitlin posted:

I've seen a dude ride a hoverboard that needed 32 fans to lift him about a foot. I think you underestimate how annoying it would be to have a hover vehicle capable of carrying a human fly directly over your head.

You have any pictures/info on his setup? I kinda have a (probably impossible) dream of one day making a hoverbike with two Hayabusa engines.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 20:22

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

The Ferret King posted:

I just had to write a controller statement for an incident a while back. Somebody climbed and descended in spirals right in the middle of DFW's departure corridor. He went as high as 9000ft then back down. Airliners had to be moved. They tracked him down after he landed.

I don't know what the result will be, I just wonder what sort of mental degradation the pilot was operating with. There is no way a certificated pilot with all their senses intact could be unaware of where they were. They departed and landed at an airport within 10 miles of DFW.

Dallas? Maybe it was Sen. Inhofe.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 21:56

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

Inacio posted:

You have any pictures/info on his setup? I kinda have a (probably impossible) dream of one day making a hoverbike with two Hayabusa engines.

So is the difference between this and a helicopter just that the blades are below?

# ? Aug 11, 2016 22:21

blugu64: Jul 17, 2006; Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?

How is the hover bike not just a multirotor helicopter?

Edit:damnit

# ? Aug 11, 2016 22:35

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

blugu64 posted:

How is the hover bike not just a multirotor helicopter?

Edit:damnit

If an engine goes out on a helicopter it can auto rotate. If the engine goes out on a hover bike you die.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 22:42

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

hobbesmaster posted:

If an engine goes out on a helicopter it can auto rotate. If the engine goes out on a hover bike you die.

DISRUPTION

# ? Aug 11, 2016 22:45

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

Is there any reason that couldn't be done with a "hoverbike" provided the hoverbike had variable-pitch rotors like a helicopter?

That would add a whole bunch of expense to the thing, but it seems like it should at least be possible.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 23:03

The Locator: Sep 12, 2004; Out here, everything hurts.

Vitamin J posted:

In general, the FAA shouldn't need to have 'rules' about shooting at drones, since there are already plenty of laws on the books about shooting things.

If it's way the hell out in the middle of nowhere, it's still illegal to shoot at (and damage or destroy) someone else's property. It's no different than if they shoot your car parked out in the woods.

If it's in a populated area, there should also be laws about that. I know that here it's a felony to shoot a gun into the air in a populated area.

So why create more overlapping rules when there are laws already on the books that could be applied in probably 100% of drone shooting cases?

# ? Aug 11, 2016 23:04

The Ferret King: Nov 23, 2003; cluck cluck

hobbesmaster posted:

Dallas? Maybe it was Sen. Inhofe.

He's too busy making GBS threads things up in Tulsa, where he's based out of.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 23:05

hobbesmaster: Jan 28, 2008

The Ferret King posted:

He's too busy making GBS threads things up in Tulsa, where he's based out of.

Its not that far really. Gotta spread the love.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 23:08

EvilJoven: Mar 18, 2005; NOBODY,IN THE HISTORY OF EVER, HAS ASKED OR CARED WHAT CANADA THINKS. YOU ARE NOT A COUNTRY. YOUR MONEY HAS THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND ON IT. IF YOU DIG AROUND IN YOUR BACKYARD, NATIVE SKELETONS WOULD EXPLODE OUT OF YOUR LAWN LIKE THE END OF POLTERGEIST. CANADA IS SO POLITE, EH?; Fun Shoe

PT6A posted:

Is there any reason that couldn't be done with a "hoverbike" provided the hoverbike had variable-pitch rotors like a helicopter?

That would add a whole bunch of expense to the thing, but it seems like it should at least be possible.

Take those retarded hoverbikes you see on youtube, put a bunch of equipment in them to make them not horrific death traps and then put the rotors on top because quite frankly having them below/beside you is a horrible design choice.

And hey look its a helicopter.

# ? Aug 11, 2016 23:41

Nebakenezzer: Sep 13, 2005; The Mote in God's Eye

EvilJoven posted:

Take those retarded hoverbikes you see on youtube, put a bunch of equipment in them to make them not horrific death traps and then put the rotors on top because quite frankly having them below/beside you is a horrible design choice.

And hey look its a helicopter.

Listen, if I say to the investors "We spent a shitload of your money to discover the best way to do things is with technology 60 years old" they will skin me alive. Get it through your heads, you miserable overworked millennial sons of bitches: HOVERBIKES ARE DISRUPTIVE, HELICOPTERS ARE YOU'RE FIRED. Now can we PLEASE get back to spec'ing this rotor material? The VP told me he doesn't want the pilot being decapitated when the intake duct inevitably ingests a pigeon.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 00:03

Godholio: Aug 28, 2002; Does a bear split in the woods near Zheleznogorsk?

EvilJoven posted:

Take those retarded hoverbikes you see on youtube, put a bunch of equipment in them to make them not horrific death traps and then put the rotors on top because quite frankly having them below/beside you is a horrible design choice.

And hey look its a helicopter which is still a horrific death trap.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 01:28

drgitlin: Jul 25, 2003; luv 2 get custom titles from a forum that goes into revolt when its told to stop using a bad word.

Inacio posted:

You have any pictures/info on his setup? I kinda have a (probably impossible) dream of one day making a hoverbike with two Hayabusa engines.

http://arstechnica.com/cars/2016/04/top-marques-a-show-just-for-supercars-oh-and-a-real-hoverboard-too/

# ? Aug 12, 2016 01:32

marumaru: May 20, 2013

Godholio posted:

So is the difference between this and a helicopter just that the blades are below?

well on a hoverbike there's only one passenger, it's much smaller and well yeah the only difference is that you're way more likely to die

# ? Aug 12, 2016 02:18

Preoptopus: Aug 25, 2008; Ð¢ÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸,
ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾ ÑÑÐ¸ Ð¿Ð¾Ð»Ð¾ÑÐºÐ¸

Nebakenezzer posted:

Listen, if I say to the investors "We spent a shitload of your money to discover the best way to do things is with technology 60 years old" they will skin me alive. Get it through your heads, you miserable overworked millennial sons of bitches: HOVERBIKES ARE DISRUPTIVE, HELICOPTERS ARE YOU'RE FIRED. Now can we PLEASE get back to spec'ing this rotor material? The VP told me he doesn't want the pilot being decapitated when the intake duct inevitably ingests a pigeon.

Why dont we have trolley busses in the us? :colbert:

# ? Aug 12, 2016 02:59

Vitamin J: Aug 16, 2006; God, just tell me to shut up already. I have a clear anti-domestic bias and a lack of facts.

drgitlin posted:

I've seen a dude ride a hoverboard that needed 32 fans to lift him about a foot. I think you underestimate how annoying it would be to have a hover vehicle capable of carrying a human fly directly over your head.

A) Point proven. You have seen someone physically fly through the air on a homebuilt device not registered with the FAA, without any airworthiness docs, and (maybe) without a pilot's certificate.

B) Point proven. It would be annoying but unstoppable without committing attempted murder.

Godholio posted:

So is the difference between this and a helicopter just that the blades are below?

Nothing. A homebuilt traditional helicopter would still qualify. The idea of the Hoverbike type device is that it's two snowmobile engines bolted to a homebuilt frame, something you can built in your garage, and possibly fly in the local park without drawing the attention of the FAA.

The Locator posted:

In general, the FAA shouldn't need to have 'rules' about shooting at drones, since there are already plenty of laws on the books about shooting things.

If it's way the hell out in the middle of nowhere, it's still illegal to shoot at (and damage or destroy) someone else's property. It's no different than if they shoot your car parked out in the woods.

If it's in a populated area, there should also be laws about that. I know that here it's a felony to shoot a gun into the air in a populated area.

So why create more overlapping rules when there are laws already on the books that could be applied in probably 100% of drone shooting cases?

You would think, wouldn't you?

Judge rules Kentucky man had the right to shoot down his neighbor�s drone

# ? Aug 12, 2016 04:31

The Locator: Sep 12, 2004; Out here, everything hurts.

Vitamin J posted:

You would think, wouldn't you?

Judge rules Kentucky man had the right to shoot down his neighbor�s drone

lovely judges don't really change my point of view on this.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 04:33

PT6A: Jan 5, 2006; Public school teachers are callous dictators who won't lift a finger to stop children from peeing in my plane

EvilJoven posted:

Take those retarded hoverbikes you see on youtube, put a bunch of equipment in them to make them not horrific death traps and then put the rotors on top because quite frankly having them below/beside you is a horrible design choice.

And hey look its a helicopter.

Very, very true. I'd rather fly a fully-equipped and certified airplane than an ultralight or some experimental homebuilt, and I'd rather just have a proper helicopter than a hoverbike or some nonsense. Realistically, getting an actual pilot's license is not all that difficult (I've only encountered people who don't like it and quit, or lack the money and quit, never anyone that's flat out unable to do it) and then you can fly all manner of aircraft that probably won't kill you and can actually be used for practical purposes.

I've never been flying and thought, "You know what would be really great? Something like this but less reliable and with worse equipment."

My friend got a powered parachute license and bought himself a powered parachute. That seems like a slightly less lovely compromise because it still involves a parachute, but it's still not something I'd go for.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 04:40

StandardVC10: Feb 6, 2007; This avatar now 50% more dark mode compliant

Preoptopus posted:

Why dont we have trolley busses in the us?

I think I've seen some in San Francisco?

# ? Aug 12, 2016 04:51

marumaru: May 20, 2013

The whole idea of having the blades under the pilot is dumb. I don't really understand why so many hoverbike/human-carrying drone designs do it (if someone does please do tell)

I'd imagine that having the propellers aligned with the pilot's center of mass or slightly above it would be better, as illustrated in this Microsoft Paint picture I made:

# ? Aug 12, 2016 05:10

~Coxy: Dec 9, 2003; R.I.P. Inter-OS Sass - b.2000AD d.2003AD

Inacio posted:

The whole idea of having the blades under the pilot is dumb. I don't really understand why so many hoverbike/human-carrying drone designs do it (if someone does please do tell)

I'd imagine that having the propellers aligned with the pilot's center of mass or slightly above it would be better, as illustrated in this Microsoft Paint picture I made:

Everyone wants a Manta in real life.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 05:20

Kilonum: Sep 30, 2002; You know where you are? You're in the suburbs, baby. You're gonna drive.

Preoptopus posted:

Why dont we have trolley busses in the us?

Bunch of routes in the northern suburbs of Boston

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolleybuses_in_Greater_Boston

# ? Aug 12, 2016 05:32

blugu64: Jul 17, 2006; Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?

Inacio posted:

I don't think you want to be in the plane of rotation when it breaks.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 06:11

Platystemon: Feb 13, 2012; BREADS

blugu64 posted:

I don't think you want to be in the plane of rotation when it breaks.

It�s fine if you use a single propeller and put the blades on a ring that encircles the pilot (as I originally interpreted that drawing).

# ? Aug 12, 2016 06:35

drunkill: Sep 25, 2007; me @ ur posting; Fallen Rib

Good headline
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-08-12/rfds-use-flaming-toilet-rolls-to-light-up-remote-airstrip/7722858

# ? Aug 12, 2016 06:39

mlmp08: Jul 11, 2004; Prepare for my priapic projectile's exalted penetration; Nap Ghost

lmao that the judge ruled you can shoot down a creeper drone hovering over your kids while they sunbathe. :patriot:

# ? Aug 12, 2016 11:07

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 23, 2024 18:24

Nerobro: Nov 4, 2005; Rider now with 100% more titanium!

PT6A posted:

Is there any reason that couldn't be done with a "hoverbike" provided the hoverbike had variable-pitch rotors like a helicopter?

That would add a whole bunch of expense to the thing, but it seems like it should at least be possible.

Yes. Lack of mass in the rotors. Autorotation, at least the landing, depends on the rotors holding enough energy to stop the descent, and land.

# ? Aug 12, 2016 14:23

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Automotive Insanity > Aeronautical Insanity: switching to secondary tolerances

«‹›2233 »