Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Down

Author Topic: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight  (Read 86047 times)

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #60 on: July 21, 2014, 09:58:19 AM »

I only refer to her obvious ability to raise funds and attract sponsors.  That is the potential value and possible common ground.   

Still seems like two very different ventures to me, despite the 'common' name - sorry. 
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

jdclassic03

  • T1
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #61 on: July 21, 2014, 10:33:20 AM »

Was there a post that was removed??
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6101
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #62 on: July 21, 2014, 10:34:27 AM »

I only refer to her obvious ability to raise funds and attract sponsors.  That is the potential value and possible common ground.   

I have nothing further to say about Amelia Rose Earhart except to point out that her fund raising challenge is vastly different from ours.  She had a no-risk proposition for prospective backers.  Her name, looks, and charm guaranteed media attention and the flight, using an advanced high-performance turboprop flown by a high-time professional pilot, was as risk-free as a circumnavigation could be. Success was a slam dunk.  In that sense, the project was a stroke of genius.
Our project is not risk-free.  To construct an analogy; we have tried to fly around the world ten times and haven't made it.  Each time we've gotten a little further but each time it gets more expensive.  This time we think we can make it all the way 'round but it's far from a slam dunk.  Finding sponsors in today's world who are not risk-averse is quite a challenge.  How much luck to you think Amelia Rose would have had raising the money to fly around the world if she was doing it herself and had tried ten times?
When we find the Electra and can produce smoking-gun proof (not imagined shapes in coral) I expect we'll have no trouble finding sponsors to do the recovery and conservation despite my name,looks, and charm. That will be the slam dunk that sponsors are looking for.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 10:36:28 AM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6101
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #63 on: July 21, 2014, 10:37:43 AM »

Was there a post that was removed??

Yes.  I moderated myself and removed an imprudent posting.
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #64 on: July 21, 2014, 10:40:22 AM »

As a longtime pilot with an ATP ( Airline Transport Pilot) Certificate, I am having considerable difficulty understanding some of the negative comments that have been made about Amelia Rose. If I understand things properly, the problems seem to center around the question of whether or not she was qualified to act as pilot in command of the aircraft. According to this article she has a Private Pilot Certificate with an Instrument Rating. Since she has previous experience flying a Cessna 182RG I would assume she has been signed off to fly "complex aircraft' although this is not even a factor here. Her Flight Instructor, who was also her co-pilot on the flight (see last part of the above reference), could indorse her for complex aircraft including the Pilatus PC-12, by signing her off in her log book at any time before or during the flight. According to this article from Flying Magazine the maximum take-off weight for the PC-12 is 10,450 pounds which is well below the 12,500 pounds required for a Type Certificate which involves a more complex certification process.

This article from AOPA (the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association) outlines the requirements for flying as the PIC (Pilot in Command) of an aircraft as well as logging PIC time. After a careful reading of these documents and having a first hand knowledge of this aircraft and the requirements for flying it, the major sticking point seems to be, obtaining enough PIC time in the aircraft to satisfy the insurance companies, not the FAA which is most likely why Mr. Jordon went along. According to the write-up about him in the first reference above, he, apparently spent a considerable amount of time flying this way. While I have not read them all here is a Wikipedia article with a story about Amelia Rose and a long list of references for those who might want to read more.
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #65 on: July 21, 2014, 11:26:29 AM »

Good observations, Woody, and I respect those.  It has been explained to me when I was flying with an instructor that I was, as a qualified pilot in-type, considered PIC (when acting as PIC).

One can make what one will of Amelia Rose Earhart's feat, as one chooses, that's for sure.  It can be boiled down to less-than truly 'Earhart heroic' easily enough - the machinery and modern facilities mean there is no real comparison, except by name - should one choose to be excited by that. 

Another way to look at it in the modern corporate sense is that a very fine product was given a world stage, with a very recognizable name - whether regarded 'at the wheel' or aboard as a 'sack of potatoes' (observer's choice) - and it was successful.  Regardless of how I might see that, now a number of young ladies will also benefit from a fair scholership toward flight education - which is a positive.

So Pilatus wins, 10 young ladies win, and I suppose this latter-day Earhart saw a dream come true - however I might choose to look at what she did.  Maybe there is also a net benefit in having the public realize that "one a them Piper Cubs (sic) made it all the way around th' world without falling" and our image climbs a notch - rah.

Do I think she stacks-up to the original AE in terms of raw, gut effort?  No way - just my personal opinion - although in another way, I'm not sure the motives were so different.  Do I think there was good in it?  See above - it's the world we live in and that's how some things seem to be packaged, whether it meets a pure notion or not.  But for sure, she did not strap an L10E onto her backside and risk the open oceans with 1930's technology propelling and guiding her through a hostile back-water world.  Somehow I doubt the public missed that point, at least to some degree - times have changed much.

Nothing new in my points here, I realize.  I guess it comes down to how the individual sees it.  I guess the press got excited about a 'namesake' making the flight (I really did not follow the details), but I always take the press with a few grains of salt anyway (seldom get my news there).  Frankly I'm not overly impressed or excited about her success because it's a bit ho-hum to me in terms of 'pushing the envelope' (she did not push it at all, this was easily done in the craft she chose), but I don't begrudge her.  And she did do something I haven't done (including sending 10 young women $4,400 in scholarships). 

I don't expect most of the public to get the real limits of what was done, nor do I expect them to listen to those who would educate them - or really, honestly see the point in doing so.  Too much else to do and they won't listen much anyway...  Nor do I see the public tossing ticker-tape over it (or is that something else I missed as I eschewed the press for one more day of my life?).

So, blah...  :P

Anyway, I'm glad she's home safe, and I wish her well.  Seems like a nice girl and I'm sure she's a good pilot or Pilatus wouldn't have risked all this, instructor along or not.  I'm sure it won't hurt her career, and maybe she will have the poise and integrity to handle her success in this effort with grace and within the honest context of what it really was, and was not, as the years come and go.

But is an Earhart an Earhart, by any other name?  As different as Hank Arron was from the Babe, I think - something interesting happened, but the playing field was very different.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6101
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #66 on: July 21, 2014, 11:40:33 AM »

As a longtime pilot with an ATP ( Airline Transport Pilot) Certificate, I am having considerable difficulty understanding some of the negative comments that have been made about Amelia Rose. If I understand things properly, the problems seem to center around the question of whether or not she was qualified to act as pilot in command of the aircraft. According to this article she has a Private Pilot Certificate with an Instrument Rating. Since she has previous experience flying a Cessna 182RG I would assume she has been signed off to fly "complex aircraft' although this is not even a factor here. Her Flight Instructor, who was also her co-pilot on the flight (see last part of the above reference), could indorse her for complex aircraft including the Pilatus PC-12, by signing her off in her log book at any time before or during the flight. According to this article from Flying Magazine the maximum take-off weight for the PC-12 is 10,450 pounds which is well below the 12,500 pounds required for a Type Certificate which involves a more complex certification process.


Woody, let me ask you a question.  You're a long time pilot with an ATP.  What types of aircraft have you flown?
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 348
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #67 on: July 21, 2014, 11:45:30 AM »

Ric,
My apologies!  Case closed!  I didn't mean to push you buttons in the wrong way. 
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #68 on: July 21, 2014, 12:54:58 PM »

Woody, let me ask you a question.  You're a long time pilot with an ATP.  What types of aircraft have you flown?

Ric, since you asked, here is at least a partial list:

Airplanes
Aeronca 7AC, 7EC
Beechcraft 36A, 55(Army T42A), Twin Bonanza (ARMY U8D)
de Havilland DHC2 (Army U6A)
Cessna 150, 152, 172, 175 182, 210; Army L19/O1 Bird Dog
Piper J3, PA-28-180, PA31-325, PA31P-425, PA-44
TurboCommander AC690D

Helicopters

Bell 47, Bell 206BIII,LII; Army OH13E,G; UH-1A,B,C,D,H; AH1G
Hughes OH-6A

I have the following certificates:

ATP Airplane Multi Engine Land
Comm Pilot Airplane Single Engine Land, Rotorcraft Helicopter
Instrument

I got my Student License when I was 16.
I got my Private License through the Army ROTC Flight Program.
I got my Commercial, ASEL,AMEL Rotorcraft Helicopter, Instrument through the US Army Flight School at Fort Rucker Alabama in 1968.
I got my ATP in 1990

I flew 750 hours of combat time in Huey helicopters in Vietnam in 1968-69.

Anything else I can help you with?
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged

JNev

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 778
  • It's a GOOD thing to be in the cornfield...
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #69 on: July 21, 2014, 02:12:15 PM »

I knew about the Huey time, Woody, and the TurboCommander... but -

Impressive! 

And again, thank you for your service, Woody.  I know that Huey time in particular did not come easy.
- Jeff Neville

Former Member 3074R
 
Logged

Tim Mellon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 805
  • Blast off!
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #70 on: July 21, 2014, 02:34:45 PM »

As a longtime pilot with an ATP ( Airline Transport Pilot) Certificate, I am having considerable difficulty understanding some of the negative comments that have been made about Amelia Rose.

I agree with Woody. And it's not just a question of ratings or experience in types.

Flying internationally is a whole different ballgame from Sunday flights to enjoy pancake breakfasts 50 miles away in your 172.

International flying requires stricter adherence to procedures, very careful route planning (especially within Europe), frequent position reporting when out of radar contact (which is most of the time), ability to understand the most contorted forms of the English language when you are tired and haggard, dealing with handling agents some of them lazy and/or unscrupulous, and often overcoming physical disabilities brought on from the consumption of "foods" at the various places you stop to rest and refuel.

Oceanic flight is a specialty unto itself. Careful consideration must be given to winds aloft, fuel consumption and points-of-no-return. Survival equipment must be appropriate and its use properly understood. I have just completed my 100th Trans-Atlantic flight: every successful crossing is worthy of a small prayer upon completion.

So Amelia Rose Earhart may not be the last word in aviation, but as someone who has circumnavigated the Earth twice, I feel it unfair for those who have accomplished less than Ms. Earhart to weigh in with much criticism.

Tim
Chairman,  CEO
PanAm Systems

TIGHAR #3372R
 
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 02:52:43 PM by Tim Mellon »
Logged

Dan Swift

  • TIGHAR member
  • *
  • Posts: 348
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #71 on: July 21, 2014, 02:52:16 PM »

Damn Woody!! 
Impressive indeed. 
TIGHAR Member #4154
 
Logged

C.W. Herndon

  • T5
  • *****
  • Posts: 634
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #72 on: July 21, 2014, 02:53:49 PM »

I knew about the Huey time, Woody, and the TurboCommander... but -

Impressive! 

And again, thank you for your service, Woody.  I know that Huey time in particular did not come easy.

Thanks Jeff. Much of the Huey time was very low level, 50 feet AGL or less. Very stressful, especially when you never knew when someone was going to shoot at you. Not much cover in a Huey and you remain a target much too long when 90 to 100 knots is the fastest you can fly!
Woody (former 3316R)
"the watcher"
 
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6101
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #73 on: July 21, 2014, 02:53:58 PM »

Anything else I can help you with?

Thanks Woody.  Your experience is similar to mine (except for the rotorcraft and combat time).  I particularly wondered if you had experience in aircraft analogous to the Pilatus PC-12.  The TurboCommander is pretty close in terms of size, weight, and speed.

I think you'll agree that stepping up from a light complex single like a Cessna 182RG to an airplane like a TurboCommander or a Pilatus is a huge step.  There's more to do, more to keep track of, and everything happens more quickly.  There's something inexorable about a big, fast airplane.  Things are going to happen, whether you're ready for them or not and it takes years of experience to avoid "getting behind the airplane."  I'm sure your T-Bone and Navaho time was good preparation for the Turbo Commander.

I spent many years as an aviation insurance underwriter.  Part of my job was to match airplanes to pilot experience.  If a 400 Private/Instrument pilot had come to me wanting insurance approval to fly a single pilot, 10,000 lb, 9 passenger, 300 mph turboprop I would have told him/her to come back when he/she had 1,500 hours and we'd talk about a FlightSafety program of simulator time and at least 25 hours of dual.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2014, 02:55:34 PM by Ric Gillespie »
Logged

Ric Gillespie

  • Executive Director
  • Administrator
  • *
  • Posts: 6101
  • "Do not try. Do or do not. There is no try" Yoda
Re: Amelia Rose Earhart world flight
« Reply #74 on: July 21, 2014, 03:00:32 PM »

I feel it unfair for those who have accomplished less than Ms. Earhart to weigh in with much criticism.

Did you have an instructor with you?  I think anyone on this forum could circumnavigate the globe in a Pilatus PC-12 with Shane Jordan in the right seat.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7   Go Up
 

Copyright 2024 by TIGHAR, a non-profit foundation. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be reproduced by xerographic, photographic, digital or any other means for any purpose. No portion of the TIGHAR Website may be stored in a retrieval system, copied, transmitted or transferred in any form or by any means, whether electronic, mechanical, digital, photographic, magnetic or otherwise, for any purpose without the express, written permission of TIGHAR. All rights reserved.

Contact us at: info@tighar.org • Phone: 610-467-1937 • Membership formwebmaster@tighar.org

Powered by MySQL SMF 2.0.18 | SMF © 2021, Simple Machines Powered by PHP