• Welcome aboard HomebuiltAirplanes.com, your destination for connecting with a thriving community of more than 10,000 active members, all passionate about home-built aviation. Dive into our comprehensive repository of knowledge, exchange technical insights, arrange get-togethers, and trade aircrafts/parts with like-minded enthusiasts. Unearth a wide-ranging collection of general and kit plane aviation subjects, enriched with engaging imagery, in-depth technical manuals, and rare archives.

    For a nominal fee of $99.99/year or $12.99/month, you can immerse yourself in this dynamic community and unparalleled treasure-trove of aviation knowledge.

    Embark on your journey now!

    Click Here to Become a Premium Member and Experience Homebuilt Airplanes to the Fullest!

Search results

Advertise with us
Find deals on amazon
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
  1. davidb

    Operations on almost Intersecting Runways

    Right. Even if someone was flying a very wide 1.5 mile downwind, the vertical separation would be 700 feet. Also, the AC guidance states that when doing a pattern to other than the preferred runway, that pattern should not interfere with the preferred runway pattern. That “cop” saying that he...
  2. davidb

    Operations on almost Intersecting Runways

    I’m not seeing the problem with flying a straight in to rwy32 with planes in the rwy03 pattern. Even if the straight in crossed directly under traffic on downwind for rwy03, they would have 700 feet of vertical separation.
  3. davidb

    Personal airstrip?

    Construction cost has gone up about 30% in the last couple of years and forecast to continue upward but I don’t think land value has changed much in the same period. For my project, the land is less than 20% of the total cost. What you described above is well into the seven figures for...
  4. davidb

    Runways? We don't need no stinkin' runways!

    My knowledge source is questionable but I thought low wing airplanes have more dihedral than high wing airplanes and for the same reasoning, having the mass of the engine so high would also require more dihedral for stability. Edit add: I had always been calling the wing mounted floats sponsons...
  5. davidb

    Crashes in the News - Thread

    No, I mean the “connect the dots” don’t seem to be in chronological order and some of the data points are not possible. Also, I can’t understand why he would turn north rather than south after crossing the GG bridge. It just doesn’t look like a classic inadvertent IMC/spatial disorientation...
  6. davidb

    Crashes in the News - Thread

    That adsb data to the north of the Golden Gate doesn’t seem right. There’s got to be more to this to explain why he was tooling around over the Marin hills.
  7. davidb

    For the first time in 35 years...

    Oh, you have a picture… painted by you. Well done! Hoping you do more. Cheers!
  8. davidb

    FAA

    For the state of Illinois I see there is an application and approval process but I can’t find specific minimum clearance requirements other than a vague reference to FAA criteria. I gather they are quite flexible with regard to restricted airports. I’m genuinely curious of the factors...
  9. davidb

    FAA

    It is imbedded in the link you posted. All 3 pages are there.
  10. davidb

    FAA

    Pops, you can drag your field as much as you want. The FAA ain’t going to come after you for doing things right. What Trent did has no real correlation to what you described. He’s fabricating controversy and concern for clicks.
  11. davidb

    FAA

    We all need to read the Order of Suspension. They busted him for the “careless and reckless so as to endanger” thing. The landing debate is inconsequential to his suspension. Reads like he put on quite a show. Am I the only person here that read it?
  12. davidb

    FAA

    Without an established airfield, there is no defined approach path or landing direction. So, now it’s up to you to choose the approach and landing path. Choose wisely because the exception has a “when necessary”. If you choose a path over a house when a path not over a house was a viable...
  13. davidb

    FAA

    Since there was no established airfield, I believe the FAA would come after him just for coming within 500 feet of structure/people regardless of whether or not he landed. That’s not to say he couldn’t land/takeoff/go-around on or about his buddy’s property but he has to remain 500 feet from...
  14. davidb

    FAA

    Yeah, you can get to it from the link in post #140. He allegedly was attempting to land in the middle of a circular cluster of houses. You know, areas the FAA have ruled in the past as densely populated areas. Had he actually landed there the FAA would have probably revoked his license...
  15. davidb

    FAA

    A good place to start developing your informed opinion would be to click on the link provided in post #140 above. That link has other links. After some effort, you will see there nearly a hundred cases of FAA action over several decades that are quite similar to Trent’s. Spend some time on...
  16. davidb

    FAA

    Every factor that made that “landing site” unsuitable was observable at or above 500’ agl. Yet, he continued to make multiple low passes that arguably spooked people and horses. Per his reasoning, I can make low passes to the swimming pool in my backyard and adhere to his version of legitimate...
  17. davidb

    FAA

    I get the waves and inviting a lot while flying around the lake in the seaplane. I wouldn’t dare get within 500 feet of them for that reason. Even if they ask for a close fly by, it’s still not legal in a seaplane. Isn’t it legal in a helicopter? I mean you could have gotten close to them...
  18. davidb

    FAA

    Sorry, I just used the “buzz” word as a short way to say “fly less than 500 feet from a house while not on an approach to landing.” Did he deny passing within 500 feet of the house? I don’t recall him saying that he avoided flying closer than 500 feet. If he thinks he was at least 500 feet...
  19. davidb

    FAA

    An “inspection pass” implies an intent not to land during that pass. Sure, it is a step towards an eventual approach and intended landing but it is not “when landing”. I make inspection passes. I frequently get within 500 feet of boats when landing. I don’t get within 500 feet of anything...
  20. davidb

    FAA

    If you have the actual ruling of this case, please post it. All I have seen is Trent’s video of his misguided reasoning as to why he thinks what he did was legal and his misrepresentation of why the FAA is taking action against him. Trent has started a social media uproar of pilots now afraid...
Back
Top