It would have been nice to have more of the competition included or even the beach landing. The photograpehrs covered everything. I was next to a camera man for them when we were taking pictures of the STOL competition. They also dropped a flour bomb with a camera attached, not sure what happened to that footage. The Tweeto's were here for the show, nice folks, visited with lots of people. Marc Payne who did the spin part does a demo on spin recognition, avoidance, recovery that is very good. Very interesting to all levels of photographers. The event it the second weekend in May again this year, any of you that can make it should. We had an estimated 400 planes through last year. With all the snow we have (18 feet and generally the snowy season starts about now) we might have to have a ski cdontest for the fly in. Points North and the other heli operators should have an epic season this year.
Joe

mountainmatt wrote:

Tomo wrote:

totoro001 wrote:Also if Ariel ever gets her pilots license, I'm going to jump off the Stratosphere.

Doesn't she already have her license? But just for the sake of the show...

According to the FAA Airman registry, Ariel only has her student certificate (4/2011). Ayla has her Private Pilot though.

Ah, yep cheers.

SixTwoLeemer wrote:Sew...

Tweto puts his two daughters in the back of his Cub, a move Ive seen elsewhere and I've always wondered.. are Cubs officially 3 seaters ??? or does it matter if your under gross or ???

Ive always believed that each passenger over 2 years of age must be in their own seat and belt but I must be wrong because our Chief Pilot just bought a '75 Maule M5 that has one large seatbelt that stretches across the entire back seat.

Like Zane pointed out, the other thread covered the existence of the mod for two seats in the back. I'm don't think the one seat belt thing was completely answered. The FAA until recently said that one seat belt could hold up to 170 lbs. From AOPA Pilot October 2004 Pilot Counsel:

The seat belt requirement for children has been a subject for debate. It has always been the rule that a child under 2 years of age
need not be fastened in a seat belt if the child is held by an adult who is properly secured by a seat belt. Older children are required to
use a seat belt. But there is a little-known 1972 FAA interpretation, reaffirmed in 1990, that allows two children to share a seat belt.
"As long as approved safety belts are carried aboard the aircraft for all occupants, and the structural strength requirements for the
seats are not exceeded, the seating of two persons whose combined weights does not exceed 170 pounds under one safety belt
where the belt can be properly secured around both persons would not be a violation of the regulations for an operation under Part
91."

Then this last summer, they published a notice of proposed clarification on the subject. This is from AOPA:

The FAA, responding to a request from the National Transportation Safety Board, has published notice of a proposed clarification of how it interprets seat-belt and seating requirements of the federal aviation regulations for general aviation. The document also emphasized that the proper method of restraint for children during flight relies on the operational knowledge and good judgment of the pilot.

The FAA’s prior guidance has stated that shared use of a single restraint may be permissible. Now it has proposed to clarify that interpretation with language stating “that the use of a seat belt and/or seat by more than one occupant is appropriate only if: The seat belt is approved and rated for such use; the structural strength requirements for the seat are not exceeded; and the seat usage conforms with the limitations contained in the approved portion of the Airplane Flight Manual. The proposed clarification also emphasizes that the proper restraint method for children during operations conducted under Part 91 relies on the good judgment of the pilot, who should be intimately aware of the capabilities and structural requirements of the aircraft that he or she is operating.”

The FAA noted in its filing that it continues to strongly advocate for the use of child restraints such as child safety seats for children who are within the weight restriction of the restraint. Whether a child “should be held, placed under a restraint or allowed to share a single restraint or seat with another occupant during Part 91 operations is a matter of prudent operating practice.” Members may comment on the proposed clarification of FAR 91.107(a)(3) until Aug. 22.

The trigger for the FAA’s effort to clarify previous interpretations of seat-belt and seating requirements for GA flights was the NTSB’s discussion of a March 22, 2009, crash of a PC-12/45 in Butte, Mont. The pilot and all 13 passengers—including seven children—were killed.

“The NTSB was unable to determine the original seating position for most of the occupants, but the bodies of four children, ages 3 to 9 years, were found farthest from the impact site, indicating that these children were likely thrown from the airplane because they were unrestrained or improperly restrained. The NTSB noted that if the accident had been less severe and the impact had been survivable, any unrestrained occupant or occupants sharing a single restraint system would have been at a much greater risk of injury or death,” the FAA said.

Members may submit comments under docket number FAA-2011-0628 by Aug. 22 online or by mail to Docket Operations, M-30; U.S. Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE., West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, Washington, DC 20590-0001.



Who are you working for 62L?

None of this really applies to the PA-12, since the PA-12 was certificated for two in the rear seat, and the TC doesn't say anything about age or weight. If it's within legal C/G limits it's legal, UNTIL and UNLESS the FAA decides to TRY to rescind or modify the PA-12 Type Certificate.

Good luck with that.

This ain't a PC-12, folks.

MTV

Can anybody tell me what brand of mountain bikes they were riding on the last episode?

Kevin wrote:Can anybody tell me what brand of mountain bikes they were riding on the last episode?

http://speedwaycyclesak.com/

A lot of $$ for a rigid bike.

Thank you Zane. I will be looking for some type of bicycle to carry in my Bearhawk Patrol and don't want to end up with one of these Dahon type folding bicycles. There is plenty of choices, I have homework to do.

Kevin wrote:Thank you Zane. I will be looking for some type of bicycle to carry in my Bearhawk Patrol and don't want to end up with one of these Dahon type folding bicycles. There is plenty of choices, I have homework to do.

I've had great luck with Montague folding mountain bikes. Reasonable price too, and the fastest to set up.

I just checked the link to the fat tired bikes.....we have a group here in Pocatello riding them, they had a big article in the paper and they look pretty cool. A couple days later I saw one riding a city street, looked pretty stupid there, like seeing Bushwheels on a paved runway, just ain't right! Looks like they would be fun in the snow though.

courierguy wrote:

Kevin wrote:Thank you Zane. I will be looking for some type of bicycle to carry in my Bearhawk Patrol and don't want to end up with one of these Dahon type folding bicycles. There is plenty of choices, I have homework to do.

I've had great luck with Montague folding mountain bikes. Reasonable price too, and the fastest to set up.

Same here, I found one on Craig's list for $300. The front disk brake makes removing the tire easy. 

Kevin wrote:Thank you Zane. I will be looking for some type of bicycle to carry in my Bearhawk Patrol and don't want to end up with one of these Dahon type folding bicycles. There is plenty of choices, I have homework to do.

Curious what you have against Dahon. Not sure of their current line-up, but they used to offer a couple decent mountain bike models with disc brakes, 26" wheels, suspension and middle-of-the road components. Not just urban grocery getters. Granted, Montague looks a little beefier.

Here is another appraoch: S&S Machine will cut your conventional bike in half and make a folding bike out of it.

-DP

I'm not familiar with the current Dahon lineup, just remember a hangar neighbor with one that had little wheels and was ok to ride on level pavement but I wouldn't want to ride it a few miles on gravel, dirt and rocks. Not knocking the brand, just remember the paticular model. Thanks for the S&S link.

FYI: Dahon folding mountain bike

I'll third the Montague bikes! I have 2 and love them. They are as solid as any mountain bike I have ever ridden and are easy to set up/break down. And you can, or used to, be able to find them on eBay for around $150-200 new. But that has been 6-7 years ago.

I might have missed the last two episodes being discussed on another FWA thread, but since I can't seem to find any comments, I'll add mine here.

The last two episodes were two that probably enjoyed the most. Despite all the FWA shortcomings that we've pointed out before (they still are using the twin tach for the 208), I really enjoyed watching Sarah and Ponts upgrading to the 208, flying Merrill pass and pointing out what box canyons are, and, even more so, Ariel's last couple of lessons. I know we only see a fraction (hopefully) of the instruction she has been given, but from what we saw, I was never really impressed with Ponts as an instructor. The frustration Ariel showed was real and I felt for her. Conversely, Luke actually seemed to be instructing and in the last episode, it appeared to me that there was a marked improvement all around in her performance. Also, it seemed like he was able to make a few "light bulbs" come on for her.

Lastly, I loved the crosswind landing...some good side loading, bobble-head action. That "O" face expression after touchdown was priceless. And it was good to see the nerves turn over to the shear excitement of having soloed...something that we can all relate to. Soloing a student, although I don't do it often, always is a nervous event to some degree but always affords an opportunity to relive a bit of the excitement of your own solo. I got that same feeling watching that, which made it enjoyable.

I agree , watching her solo brought back a lot of good memories . I think there is some boyfriend / girlfriend stuff going on. At least it seems that way & when ponts and her fly maybe to much grab ass going on?

Grassstrippilot wrote:I might have missed the last two episodes being discussed on another FWA thread, but since I can't seem to find any comments, I'll add mine here.

The last two episodes were two that probably enjoyed the most. Despite all the FWA shortcomings that we've pointed out before (they still are using the twin tach for the 208), I really enjoyed watching Sarah and Ponts upgrading to the 208, flying Merrill pass and pointing out what box canyons are, and, even more so, Ariel's last couple of lessons. I know we only see a fraction (hopefully) of the instruction she has been given, but from what we saw, I was never really impressed with Ponts as an instructor. The frustration Ariel showed was real and I felt for her. Conversely, Luke actually seemed to be instructing and in the last episode, it appeared to me that there was a marked improvement all around in her performance. Also, it seemed like he was able to make a few "light bulbs" come on for her.

Lastly, I loved the crosswind landing...some good side loading, bobble-head action. That "O" face expression after touchdown was priceless. And it was good to see the nerves turn over to the shear excitement of having soloed...something that we can all relate to. Soloing a student, although I don't do it often, always is a nervous event to some degree but always affords an opportunity to relive a bit of the excitement of your own solo. I got that same feeling watching that, which made it enjoyable.

I totally agree. The last two episodes were great. More flying stuff going on. I must admit that I did get a bit caught up in the drama with Aireal's solo...but...isn't our first solo pretty dramatic? I really wanted to high-five her

so that's it for the series.. Over all I enjoyed most of the episodes. now all I have left is the gold show.. I know Jack is only 2 feet away from striking the bonanza... ..

iceman wrote:so that's it for the series.. Over all I enjoyed most of the episodes. now all I have left is the gold show.. I know Jack is only 2 feet away from striking the bonanza... ..

Really, that's it? I did not recall any "Series Finale" advertisements associated with the show. I thought it was quite successful.

Did anybody notice that on one of the recent shows Ariel Tweto is listed in the end credits as an associate producer? Around the entertainment business we had a joke that the definition of an "associate producer" was anyone who would admit to being associated with a producer. In the "reality TV" age that would be even more of an insult.

Other than trying to sell Jim and Ferno a flap handle last year at the Airmen's show, I never met any of them and have no personal knowledge... but... if I had to bet I'd say that she is turning up the dingbat knob further that it is normally set (on request from the directors and writers). My guess is that this girl has been raised in airplanes from birth, and if the family is in the airplane business she would have been taught more about flying than is being set forth on the show.

Someone said the show is over now - Crap! We could have made some great TV together, me and Ariel. World's greatest TV show product tie-in in aviation history! She reaches for the flap handle and disappears behind the 180 panel, and the instructor starts screaming "hey where'd you go Ariel... who's flying the plane?!?" And then the voice-over announcer saying "The Twetos have placed an emergency call to an inventor from Hollywood, and brought him in to modify the airplane so Ariel can see the runway..." And then I'd step out of a limo in the snow wearing an Armani suit with two blondes on my arms. Ahhh it would have been great TV ... even you hard-asses on BCP would have loved it!

And can somebody tell me why the f**k they picked a DeHavilland Chipmunk with a broken rudder cable to be flying around before every commercial ?!?