| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
dtbushpilot
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3290
Registered: 1-11-2007
Location: Buena Vista BCS
Member Is Offline
Mood: Tranquilo
|
|
Keeping your insurance up to date would be a good idea. Flying a conventional gear (tail dragger) plane would be helpful. Although they would be great
for rough field operations I haven't heard of any of them being stolen......dt
"Life is tough".....It's even tougher if you're stupid.....
|
|
|
Crusoe
Senior Nomad
Posts: 731
Registered: 10-14-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Gaurds will only work until someone bribes them with enough money. ++C++
|
|
|
capt. mike
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8085
Registered: 11-26-2002
Location: Bat Cave
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sling time!
|
|
Arrowhead - you don't need the 12" letters to go to mexico - you need them to re enter USA and cross the ADIZ.
my mooney M20F (great plane for baja BTW!) didn't have 12", only 3" std - so we taped on N3535X with 2" black electrical tape for trips for the 5
years that plane went to baja and mainland - 1985-1990. Everyone used to do it. the tape comes off easily once back home and no damage to paint.
removing a plane's prop, especially like my comanche's constant speed 3 blade McCauley is a total pain because it's messy - all the hyd runs off,
takes 2 guys if you want to be careful about it, and also a pain to line up the studs & re install - and if it has been dynamically balanced
($125-175) you're going to lose that by pulling it.
its not a pragmatic option - there are quite a few others tho - with some research you can do a lot of disablers, it takes them a long time to figure
out - by then they give up - or destroy it. My 210 flying buddy, 10 yrs air force AI A&P has made his pretty theft proof after all the 210's were
ripped the past 6 years, 3 of which from friends of mine, one taken from supposedly secure Hermosillo - well we suspect that one was inside job. He's
got a new plane but he's never gone back to Mexico, once burned twice shy. too bad - he was a great Sam's member.
Lee - i don't get you - why the incendiary attitude? pilots are normally a great bunch and represent a special brotherhood. you come across so bitter
- why?
i am not flying as much now and not going out of the country either. My plane is not desired by the cartels. but i will eventually get back into it
when the time is right.
i can't believe they ripped a 172. maybe some one said it was a 182 mistakenly and when they got there they figured take it anyway. a 172 is useless
as a drug hauler. it's a 2 person plane really - 4 if you have 2 small kids in back. but if it was his baby i feel for him - no theft insurance? how
does that happen? unless he was simply not carrying a hull policy - most insurance covers theft in mexico, canada and bahamas with your hull premium.
Mexico only requires liability. Some guys are ok with "self insure".
but if it bends or goes missing.....you're out.
keep flying mexico, all you guys that can. it's still the most fun you can have with a plane - well at least until the USA gov't makes it completely
impossible with stupid regs.....i see it coming. too bad.
formerly Ordained in Rev. Ewing\'s Church by Mail - busted on tax fraud.......
Now joined L. Ron Hoover\'s church of Appliantology
\"Remember there is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over....\"
www.facebook.com/michael.l.goering |
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
If Only I had known.........
Then what I just learned here.
When I think back to all of those trips I flew in 172s with four adults on board flying out of Thermal in the Summer. Especially those trips to
Gonzaga with food and drink aboard too. Thank God none of us were over-weight back in those days.
Just pure dumb luck, I guess.
Now, if you want to talk about a plane with 4-seats that shouldn't, it was the Cherokee 140-4 I used to rent because it was the cheapest 4-seater
available at Thermal. I took off a couple of times in that with 4 on board in the summer. Nice long runways at Thermal. Good thing.
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by capt. mike
Arrowhead - you don't need the 12" letters to go to mexico - you need them to re enter USA and cross the ADIZ. |
OK, now let me show you where you are entirely wrong. First off, I said nothing abount needing 12" letters to go to Mexico. I said lack of 12" letters
are an ADIZ violation. Here is my exact post:
| Quote: | | Hey! If that is a current picture of the plane, that owner has problems. No 12" letters? FAR § 45.29. They've got him down for an ADIZ violation.
|
Secondly you are wrong about only needing 12" letters to renter the USA. ADIZ's are not uni-directional. The rules apply no matter which direction you
are heading -- inbound or outbound. I am sure as the experienced pilot you are(cough, cough) you are fully aware that there are ADIZ's entirely within
the territorial limits of the US, like the one over the White House.
Here's the regulation:
| Quote: | | FAR § 45.29(h) After March 7, 1988, each operator of an aircraft penetrating an ADIZ or DEWIZ shall display on that aircraft temporary or permanent
nationality and registration marks at least 12 inches high. |
Note the lack of specificity as to what direction you happen to be heading when you penetrate the ADIZ.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
LancairDriver
Super Nomad
Posts: 1593
Registered: 2-22-2008
Location: On the Road
Member Is Offline
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by MrBillM
Then what I just learned here.
When I think back to all of those trips I flew in 172s with four adults on board flying out of Thermal in the Summer. Especially those trips to
Gonzaga with food and drink aboard too. Thank God none of us were over-weight back in those days.
Just pure dumb luck, I guess.
Now, if you want to talk about a plane with 4-seats that shouldn't, it was the Cherokee 140-4 I used to rent because it was the cheapest 4-seater
available at Thermal. I took off a couple of times in that with 4 on board in the summer. Nice long runways at Thermal. Good thing.
|
Cessna 172 performance specs.
2300 lbs gross takeoff weight
1000 lbs useful load
MINUS-
42 gal fuel =252 lbs
4 adults @ 170 lbs each=680 lbs(hope nobody weighs more)
Leaves 68 lbs for luggage for 4
(takes care of the 1000lb useful load)
Don't pack heavy.
leaves 68lbs for luggage for 4
|
|
|
fishbuck
Banned
Posts: 5318
Registered: 8-31-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
Put on two hours of fuel. 1 pilot and about 500-700 pounds off "cargo".
I think a Skyhawk has an 800 foot talkoff roll.
No a bad little jungle hopper. If you are way out in the jungle with no roads it sure beats bringing your "cargo" out by donkey.
Land near a hiway and put the "cargo" on a northboard truck.
It's not a heavy hauler or long hauler. But it beats walking.
And while it may not be legal, I knew a teen pilot who carried full fuel, 4 pax and gear many times.
[Edited on 8-22-2009 by fishbuck]
"A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for." J. A. Shedd.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. – Albert Einstein
"Life's a Beach... and then you Fly!" Fishbuck
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Gee Thanks for all that Additional Info.
Of course, I could have gotten it by looking in the Aircraft Manual for that model. Although I don't fly anymore, I still have the manuals for every
plane I ever checked out in stuffed in the bookcase. I appreciate the concern for my education, though.
The Trips to Gonzaga in the 172 DID require keeping the Beer load down and drinking a lot of Coronas but, other than that, No Problema.
AND, everybody DID weigh under 160. Those were the good old (young and slim) days.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
I was a fully rated commercial pilot for years (I guess I still am???), tho I don't fly anymore---haven't for years. Cessna 172's were the scaryiest
airplane I EVER flew----------due to their lack of power.
I will take a 182, or better, any day over a 172 and it is ALL BECAUSE OF THEIR LACK OF POWER TO GET YOU OUT OF INADVERTANT SITUATIONS, or handle HOT
DAYS. I much preferred 206's and 210's, but a 182 is a fine aircraft.
----no 150's or 172's please.  
Barry
|
|
|
fishbuck
Banned
Posts: 5318
Registered: 8-31-2006
Member Is Offline
|
|
C152's and 172's are fine planes but it's the difference between flying the wing and the engine.
But ya, that's why I love to fly the Cherokee 6, Lance or Saratoga. 300HP's are more fun.
"A ship in harbor is safe, but that is not what ships are built for." J. A. Shedd.
A clever person solves a problem. A wise person avoids it. – Albert Einstein
"Life's a Beach... and then you Fly!" Fishbuck
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
You sure have a point, Fishbuck, but I was in too many thunderstorms in the southeast, and a low powered aircraft leaves you at the mercy of up, and
down drafts and that is spooky. I also had encounters with the edges of the Sierra Wave in Owens Valley in low powered aircraft-----1000 feet up, and
then 2000 feet down----------THAT was not much fun at all!!!!
I like my macho engines better than my glider wings. 
To each his own------------
(never flew a glider, so that may have changed my mind????)
Barry
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Scary
I must have missed something. I never found the 150, 172 or any other plane I flew SCARY. Like anyone else, I had a few occasions
when I found myself in a tough situation, but none of them had to do with the aircraft itself. I thought that the Cherokee 140-4 was a Pig, but it
didn't ever scare me. It was nice to land, though, for those used to High-Wings.
Granted, the 150 and 172 could have used more power, but that thought usually came to mind on LONG flights over territory I'd covered before. The FBO
at 29P bought a 172XP while I was flying there and I spent quite a few hours with it, including once to Gonzaga. That extra HP and Prop made it the
perfect 172. I don't think it was very popular, though.
Different strokes, I guess. I knew one (OLD) pilot who used to come out every weekend to fly around in the Cloth-covered Piper Pacer he'd owned for
many years. He seemed REALLY happy. Senility, I guess. I did hear that the Tri-Pacer could be a scary plane to land in crosswinds. Never had a
chance to find out.
Personally, I LOVED the 150 and spent many afternoons alone ground-attacking dunes in the desert. I probably spent 80 percent of my flying time alone
or with only one other person aboard so a two-place would have been perfect. If I'd ever bought a plane, the C150 would have been it. I remember at
one time "someone" was building 150/150s, putting the 150hp Lycoming in the C150. THAT would have been fun to own, especially on Hot Summer days.
SCARED ? Nah !
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
I learned to fly, and had about 230 hours in, a cloth-covered Aeronca Tri-champ two seater, one behind the other, with a stick between your leg. I
too spent many hours in this plane over the deserts and coastal mountains, alone, and it was a dream to fly. Never scary at all. I took several 500+
mile cross country flights in that aircraft, at 90 mph it took forever. What a blast!!!!
Sorry, I can't say the same for 150's and and 172's.. both dogs!! IMO.
Like you say, Bill, "different strokes for different folks"------I was never sure I was getting home in either of those "entry level" Cessnas.
My favorite was the Beech Baron twin.
Barry
|
|
|
arrowhead
Banned
Posts: 912
Registered: 5-5-2009
Member Is Offline
|
|
Looks like he put on 12" letters sometime between July, 2008 and July, 2009.
No soy por ni contra apatía.
|
|
|
Lee
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 3508
Registered: 10-2-2006
Location: High in the Colorado Rockies
Member Is Offline
|
|
No theft insurance? 80% of aviation accidents/incidents are pilot error.
| Quote: | Originally posted by airmech
KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN
This is the plane that was stolen. The owner was fishing, had a huge prop lock on it and NO it wasn't for the insurance money...It wasn't insured for
theft. |
| Quote: | Originally posted by Lorenzo
Unfortunately, despite all the anti-theft gadgets we install, it’s difficult to stop a professional from entering aircraft and flying them
away. We are confident that our plan to immediately coral aircraft in the tie down area, thus preventing access to the airstrip, should deter
any further incidents. |
US Marines: providing enemies of America an opportunity to die for their country since 1775.
What I say before any important decision.
F*ck it.
|
|
|
MrBillM
Platinum Nomad
Posts: 21656
Registered: 8-20-2003
Location: Out and About
Member Is Offline
Mood: It's a Zip-a-Dee-Doo-Dah Day
|
|
Fear of Flying ?
Wow. I am amazed to find out how truly Scary those Cessnas could be. Imagine flying an airplane that you don't think is going to get you back home.
And, doing it more than ONCE. That's something. It demonstrates either a bravery beyond belief or foolishness.
It must have just been Damned good luck along with blissful ingnorance that didn't result in my early demise. There but for the grace of God and all
that.
It IS another example of neglect on the part of the Federal Government that the FAA would allow those "Death-Traps" to continue to fly to this day.
AND, it's Amazing that those lethal aircraft form the backbone of almost ALL General Aviation Instruction. I suppose The Thought must be that
Training in such undependable aircraft will leave those who survive as better equipped to fly more stable craft. Start with the worst and learn to
master that.
Now that I've found out about my having been "Extremely" lucky, I'm curious to know WHAT danger(s) lurking in said craft presented the greatest
danger ?
Engine Failure ? Was there something different that Lycoming did with those Cessna deliveries as opposed to Piper, Grumman and others ? Fuel
delivery problems ?
Airframe Failures ? Control Surfaces Falling Off ? Lost Wings ? Catastrophic Electrical failures ? That Danged FAA not issuing NOTAMS or
Airworthiness Directives as they should ? Allowing defective equipment to kill again and again ?
It's incredible to think how many people are out there in danger right now and the Government is turning a Blind-Eye.
THAT is an outrage.
I suppose, though, that the one upside to this latest stolen plane is that the thieves saved the 172 owner from eventual certain death. He should
give thanks.
AND, those dirty thieves may be already dead somewhere in said Death-Trap.
Thanks, Barry, for alerting an ignorant public of this danger.
Hallelujah. I'm thankful to have survived.
|
|
|
Barry A.
Select Nomad
Posts: 10007
Registered: 11-30-2003
Location: Redding, Northern CA
Member Is Offline
Mood: optimistic
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by MrBillM
Wow. I am amazed to find out how truly Scary those Cessnas could be. Imagine flying an airplane that you don't think is going to get you back home.
And, doing it more than ONCE. That's something. It demonstrates either a bravery beyond belief or foolishness.
It must have just been Damned good luck along with blissful ingnorance that didn't result in my early demise. There but for the grace of God and all
that.
It IS another example of neglect on the part of the Federal Government that the FAA would allow those "Death-Traps" to continue to fly to this day.
AND, it's Amazing that those lethal aircraft form the backbone of almost ALL General Aviation Instruction. I suppose The Thought must be that
Training in such undependable aircraft will leave those who survive as better equipped to fly more stable craft. Start with the worst and learn to
master that.
Now that I've found out about my having been "Extremely" lucky, I'm curious to know WHAT danger(s) lurking in said craft presented the greatest
danger ?
Engine Failure ? Was there something different that Lycoming did with those Cessna deliveries as opposed to Piper, Grumman and others ? Fuel
delivery problems ?
Airframe Failures ? Control Surfaces Falling Off ? Lost Wings ? Catastrophic Electrical failures ? That Danged FAA not issuing NOTAMS or
Airworthiness Directives as they should ? Allowing defective equipment to kill again and again ?
It's incredible to think how many people are out there in danger right now and the Government is turning a Blind-Eye.
THAT is an outrage.
I suppose, though, that the one upside to this latest stolen plane is that the thieves saved the 172 owner from eventual certain death. He should
give thanks.
AND, those dirty thieves may be already dead somewhere in said Death-Trap.
Thanks, Barry, for alerting an ignorant public of this danger.
Hallelujah. I'm thankful to have survived. |
Good one, Bill. Barry
|
|
|
capt. mike
Elite Nomad
Posts: 8085
Registered: 11-26-2002
Location: Bat Cave
Member Is Offline
Mood: Sling time!
|
|
Arrowhead - you are right on the rules. I just didn't always add my tape till the morning of my return to USA - and a few times i didn't and CBP
didn't even notice at OLS or YUM.
i'd cross the ADIz southbound sans numerals for years cause no body cared or watched - we didn't even need discrete sqwawk codes - just 1200 VFR - if
i was doing flight following with ABQ or LA center they'd say C-ya services terminated when they could see me cross. i mean - those filed plans were
usually non stop SDL or DVT (phoenix satellites) to Guaymas or Loreto if not la paz. Who is reading the numbers when you are at 10,000 ft? - but i
know - the law is the law. i bought a 12" letters decal for the comanche before i had it painted - got tired of the tape dance.
now.....about the venerable 172 - here's my quick tale
once when i was in a club before i bought into the mooney in 1985, we had 2 cherokee 180s , 2 C-177s, one fixed one retract, a comanche 250 and a 172.
You reserved by phone with a service.
so i always flew the 180s to baja and if i could get them for stateside trips too.
we planned the 1984 Reno air races and i had one of the 180s reserved for 5 days. when i got to the airport to leave it wasn't there - some one had
double booked it and the perp knew i had it 1st!!
all the other planes were taken except the fricking 172! i had to fly that useless pud knocker from phx to Reno in hot Sept!! talk about anemic - and
i was peeed too!! it was so slow we decided to stop in vegas, partially since the scheduling snafu got us a late start. i was steaming the entire time
from PHX to Vegas North airport. then we had to finish the slog to Reno the next morning.
in the 180 that trip would have been one day. i can do it all the time in 3.5 NS in the comanche now.
formerly Ordained in Rev. Ewing\'s Church by Mail - busted on tax fraud.......
Now joined L. Ron Hoover\'s church of Appliantology
\"Remember there is a big difference between kneeling down and bending over....\"
www.facebook.com/michael.l.goering |
|
|
mtgoat666
Select Nomad
Posts: 18395
Registered: 9-16-2006
Location: San Diego
Member Is Offline
Mood: Hot n spicy
|
|
| Quote: | Originally posted by shari
solution? maybe military guards at airstrips? |
military should protect military airports.
private airports should provide their own security. if pvt strips need to more money for security, they should provide security instead of looking
for govt handout, and operator should increase landing fees to cover cost of security.
if airplanes are being stolen, then pilots should complain to person who collects the landing fees.
|
|
|
Skeet/Loreto
Ultra Nomad
Posts: 4709
Registered: 9-2-2003
Member Is Offline
|
|
Very good Thread . Excellent comments. Takes me Back!
So that you all know where I am coming from, I was an Aviation Accident Investigator for several years, mostly the Pacific Northwest, Alaska and Baja.
I have a little over 6,000 Hours flying time.
If I may address the Cessna 172 Aircraft- There are 3 172's stack up at Christmas Valley just off the runway at Tahoe::
Why? At one time Reid-Hillview Airpoer FBO was training pilots in Cessna 150"s, when they got their 40 hours they would rent a 172, take their friends
and head for Tahoe{7,00o FT.}
I took delivery on a brand New 172 and flew it for many hours. There is nothing wrong woh the Aircraft if flown with in its limitations, Its the
Pilot of the Aircraft that gets in Trouble.
I have about 2,000 Hours in a Cessna 170{My favorite Aircraft} flying Baja.
I spent 3 years towing Gliders into the Sierra Wave in a Super Cub Out of Bishop.
Don"t blame the Aircraft for getting you into trouble!! It is YOU!
I stopped flying my 172 in Baja when on my last trip I took off downwind at 105 degrees out of Sta Innez. Had two passengers and a load of Fish. Just
did make it!!. Decided right then I was going to be taking more weigh, shorter strips, I needed a different Airplane.
Help to protect from Thief: Thake inspection plates off, install Fuel Cutoffs put plate back on and each time you are going to leave yopur aircraft,
take off plate shut off Fuel. Also drain your fuel from the engine therefore it will never start.
It will take some time and effort to find the shut offs in the wing.Skeet
|
|
|
| Pages:
1
2
3
4 |
![[*]](images/xmbforum/default_icon.gif){kind=icon}
