Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
That color scheme is VERY distinctive, but there are no CAP emblems or logos on it anywhere. Anyone have more info on the plane or the incident?
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=sfc_morningreport
???
Edited "place" to read "plane"
(https://s8.postimg.cc/jrxfhzofp/n9679a.jpg)
http://registry.faa.gov/aircraftinquiry/NNum_Results.aspx?NNumbertxt=9679A
I just Googled the tail number.
https://flightaware.com/resources/registration/N9679A
Owner
FLY FE LLC
RENO , NV, US
(Corporation)
My guess is it's a former CAP aircraft.
To OP: Would have taken 45 seconds to google the N-number and determine it was not a CAP plane.
One of the Google results does come up with CAP as the owner. It's a pretty good guess that the aircraft was sold with decals removed but paint intact.
They're always sold with the markings removed but paint intact.
Year or so back, a 172 from a flying club or flight school out of Ann Arbor, MI went MIA. Same paint scheme. Found it crashed in northern Ontario, sans pilot.
It costs a fair bit to repaint a plane. You don't just go to Earl Schibe.
Sent from my SM-T550 using Tapatalk
I thought the same thing -- "Dang! That looks familiar." Did a little google-fu and found it WAS a former AKWG CAP Plane. I found the sale -- it was in lot CAP-18-BS01.
Saw it on Fox News this morning. My immediate reaction was "That's a CAP aircraft!"
:-X
Quote from: MacGruff on August 12, 2018, 03:17:24 PM
Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
Quote from: Live2Learn on August 13, 2018, 03:32:51 PM
:-XQuote from: MacGruff on August 12, 2018, 03:17:24 PM
Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
And your point is???
Quote from: PHall on August 13, 2018, 04:56:23 PM
Quote from: Live2Learn on August 13, 2018, 03:32:51 PM
:-XQuote from: MacGruff on August 12, 2018, 03:17:24 PM
Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
And your point is???
Exactly. Some walking organ bank forgets to put gas in the plane and you're up in arms about the reliability of one of the safest aircraft types in use? And what if it was a mechanical issue? How many zillions of rods have these planes flown compared to the number of mechanical failures? If it is built by people, it can break. Sometimes, a smoke is just a smoke...
Sign this guy up - that wasn't a bad landing on an open runway, let alone a crowded highway!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Ci76jGLamE
Quote from: Live2Learn on August 13, 2018, 03:32:51 PM
:-XQuote from: MacGruff on August 12, 2018, 03:17:24 PM
Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
You want reliable look at the Wankel!
Quote from: NIN on August 12, 2018, 07:52:36 PM
To OP: Would have taken 45 seconds to google the N-number and determine it was not a CAP plane.
Ownership was also mentioned in the posted article.
Quote from: PHall on August 13, 2018, 04:56:23 PM
Quote from: Live2Learn on August 13, 2018, 03:32:51 PM
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
And your point is???
The Wankel engine response 'got it'. Our engines aren't the bullet proof, highly reliable machines some of us woud like to believe. EP for power loss is a checklist we are likely to use. Check out the Wankel engines for aircraft site and compare the number of moving parts! http://www.rotaryeng.net/ (http://www.rotaryeng.net/)
Quote from: OldGuy on August 13, 2018, 09:29:47 PM
Quote from: Live2Learn on August 13, 2018, 03:32:51 PM
:-XQuote from: MacGruff on August 12, 2018, 03:17:24 PM
Check out this link about a Cessna 172 that had an emergency landing on a busy freeway in California.
...
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/No-one-hurt-when-plane-makes-emergency-landing-on-13149606.php?utm_source=email&utm_medium=email&utm_content=newsletter&utm_campaign=
"...no damage, no injuries..." and we have yet another loss of power event that won't show up in any official data base. Th event might be recorded as an "incident" (or not). If an 'incident' the record fades away in a very few years and in any case, what 'investigation' occurs is cursory. The event won't be in the NTSB accident db where record retention is several decades. At the pilot's option a report of the event might go into the ASRS system where record retention is also for seval years. However, ASRS records are only of the reporter's view of the facts... i.e. the report (if filed) will be incomplete and a very one sided account of the event. Here we have a very good example of why we really don't know just how "reliable" our 1960's designed piston engines really are.
You want reliable look at the Wankel!
You obviously never owned a Mazda....
Wait, the number of moving parts is now a delimiter of an engine's reliability?
Because a blown engine has zero (moving parts), so over the years I've had some seriously reliable engines.
Wankel's are no more reliable or unreliable then any other internal combustion engine.
They have moving parts and they need to be maintained.
And the design used by Mazda didn't help their rep either.
An-n-n-nd, I think we're done here.
Buh, bye.