Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
More from AOL Travel:
Airline tickets,
Hotel reservations,
Rental cars,
Vacation packages,
Discount cruises,
Travel deals
Travel Guides:
New York City,
San Francisco,
Las Vegas,
Boston,
Chicago,
Washington, DC,
London,
Venice,
Beijing,
Dubai,
Rio de Janeiro,
Bangkok,
Costa Rica
Travel Ideas:
Adventure,
Asia Travel,
Beaches,
Cruises,
Europe Travel,
Foodie Travel,
Healthy Travel,
Holiday Travel,
International Destinations,
National Parks,
Skiing,
Travel Blogs,
Travel Tips,
Travel Photography,
US Destinations,
Weekend Getaways
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | Advertise With Us | About Our Ads
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
11-06-2012 @ 11:05AM
3000 hour pilot said...
That airport has a 400' long displaced threshold, and that road looks to be about 50' from the start of the pavement. Given a "normal" glidepath, that means the pilot should have been 15' in the air crossing the road, if he intended to land on brick one. Since an SUV is only about 6' tall, that's a problem. He was intending to land where he shouldn't. Further, this airport actually has restrictions published that require a somewhat steeper descent than normal; he should have been higher. That being said, there's no excuse for the SUV ignoring the stop sign and driving into harm's way, but the pilot, familiar with that airport as he was, should have also been looking at the road to insure his own safety. Yes, he was a student pilot, but he should have been taught a little more situational awareness and risk assessment to understand likely scenarios - especially he should have been looking after the first car drove across his flight path!
Reply