Click here to close
New Message Alert
conclusion: flying at 1500 or 2000 wouldn't necessarily (NT)
conclusion: flying at 1500 or 2000 wouldn't necessarily (NT)
Author:
have changed a thing here
Date:
2/9/2024 11:13:07 AM
+0
/
-1
Show Orig. Msg (this window)
Or
In New Window
Reply
Return-To-Index
Display Full Msg Thread
Rules of Engagement
Terms of Use
So pilot error in OK AEL crash. Flying at 500 feet at night. (NT)
+0
/
-3
Smacked geese. Killed his crew. 2/9/2024 9:01:04 AM
according to the FAA, 90% of the bird strikes
+0
/
-1
occur below 3000 AGL. 2/9/2024 10:57:38 AM
conclusion: flying at 1500 or 2000 wouldn't necessarily (NT)
+0
/
-1
have changed a thing here 2/9/2024 11:13:07 AM
conclusion: flying at 1500 or 2000 wouldn't necessarily
+0
/
-1
say wut 2/9/2024 11:17:15 AM
If 90% of bird strikes happen below 3000 ft, where do the other 10% happen? (NT)
+0
/
-1
and how many between 1500 & 3000 ft 2/9/2024 11:36:48 AM
If 90% of bird strikes happen below 3000 ft, where do the other 10% happen?
+0
/
-1
say wut 2/9/2024 11:51:22 AM
Bingo! So, nobody can say that it wouldn't have happened had the pilot
+0
/
-1
flown at 1500. 2/9/2024 11:57:53 AM
Bingo! So, nobody can say that it wouldn't have happened had the pilot (NT)
+0
/
-1
spruce goose flew at 5 ft Above water 2/9/2024 12:05:26 PM
