Mike Koerner Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 This just in... http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2569154/British-daredevil-father-fuelled-200-CHOCOLATE-BARS-makes-history-person-fly-Canada-tiny-microlight.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CT4ME Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Is this the same trip? http://ctflier.com/index.php?/topic/2017-jon-hilton-ctsw-adventures tim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cdarza Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Impressive! Please check pictures of the ailerons - Is that what -12 looks like? Seems a bit high. Although, it could have been taken as he was in a turn - but most pics are the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 It says he ate 200 Mars bars over the 18 day trip. I *love* Mars bars, but that seems excessive. What is the point of surviving the trip only to immediately lapse into a diabetic coma? Seems like a real adventure, but I don't know if I could do those long open water legs unless I knew rescue craft were poised to spring into action. The North Atlantic is no joke, even with a dry suit on the survival time in that water is probably less than two hours. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Risk tolerance is a very personal thing. I was OK getting paid to fly cropdusters to South America, but... 1) I flew along the island chain so as to keep my open water legs to the minimum. 2) For the most part it was along shipping lanes. 3) The water was a whole lot warmer, and... 4) Like I said, I was getting paid well to make the trip. But I am not in any way condemning another man's weighing of risks. Charles Lindbergh's flight could easily be viewed in much the same light, as could Amelia Earhart's. More power to this guy - that trip took balls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I'm with Eddie. A lot of my non-flying friends ask me pretty much the same question about every flight I make. Flying is inherently dangerous, at least more so that not flying. I think it's great that there are still flyers out there with the adventurous spirit to do things nobody has ever done before in an aircraft. That fellow got a Brittania Aviation Trophy for doing something nobody else had ever done. I'd love to have such a trophy, but I suspect I wouldn't have the intestinal fortitude to try something with that many unknowns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I used to skydive and I still drive a 200+ mph dragster. I just don't see this flight as all that noteworthy. It's all about what you love. Most would not drive a 200mph dragster, but if you love cars then you might accept the risk. This guy is clearly passionate about adventure flying. I'd love to fly across Australia -- not particularly noteworthy, but parts of that flight would be dangerous. It would be an adventure I'd accept the risks to take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Kinda hard to compare to the two CTs that went around the world... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Kinda hard to compare to the two CTs that went around the world... There is a fine line between adventure and insanity. How did they cross the Pacific?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 There is a fine line between adventure and insanity. How did they cross the Pacific?? http://www.azimut270.ch/en/position.html There were two of them, and they used extra tanks in the passenger side for the extended range, a practice used in a lot of aircraft when flying them over large distances (there's a special tickbox on form 337 for this on certificated aircraft). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 ...I still drive a 200+ mph dragster. Just wondering... ...is it stuck in second gear? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 These types of trips indicate to me that the CTSW has superior capability, how many other SLSA designs can do this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anticept Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 These types of trips indicate to me that the CTSW has superior capability, how many other SLSA designs can do this? Now don't you start doing it too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FastEddieB Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 These types of trips indicate to me that the CTSW has superior capability, how many other SLSA designs can do this? None. They're all dung. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3flyer Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 These types of trips indicate to me that the CTSW has superior capability, how many other SLSA designs can do this? Now you've done it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ed Cesnalis Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Very funny, I picked a CTSW over others due to its range, speed, handling and payload. I live in the real world, I made dozens of posts countering the unrealistic claims like 20% more speed and power when injected. The SW is not magic but it produces the best blend of performance, payload, range, room etc of the SLSA that are out there. In 2006 I wanted a sexier looking low wing but opted for a tadpole with the capability that I needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 It's the carbon fiber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 In 2006 I wanted a sexier looking low wing but opted for a tadpole with the capability that I needed. Capability *is* sexy, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3flyer Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 I picked a CTSW over others due to its range, speed, handling and payload. I live in the real world, I made dozens of posts countering the unrealistic claims like 20% more speed and power when injected. The SW is not magic but it produces the best blend of performance, payload, range, room etc of the SLSA that are out there. In 2006 I wanted a sexier looking low wing but opted for a tadpole with the capability that I needed. I'm preaching to the choir but your did what (almost ) all of us LSA owners did -- analyzed your mission and selected the aircraft that fit. I went with the sexier low wing which matched all those attributes except payload. Hard to beat the earlier CTSWs in useful load but my choice had all I needed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
josjonkers Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 It says he ate 200 Mars bars over the 18 day trip. I *love* Mars bars, but that seems excessive. What is the point of surviving the trip only to immediately lapse into a diabetic coma? I wonder if he also had a bucket on board... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FredG Posted March 5, 2014 Report Share Posted March 5, 2014 Maybe it was the carbon "fiber" that kept the pilot regular after 200 Mars bars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 Perhaps one thing you might like to consider on that side of the pond is just how small Britain is compared to the country in which you fly? Just as an example California is 1.9 times the area of the UK! So, our flying, if we limit ourselves just to the UK is necessarily more limited than yours. BUT, if we wish to go further afield then we have to fly over water - the shortest sea crossings we have are Dover to Calais at about 20 nm if you want to go to France, or Stranraer to Larne again about 20nm if going to Ireland. However both those routes may be inconvenient and from where I live in the North West of the UK (incidentally in the same town Bolton as the now famous Jon Hilton!) my route to Ireland is about 110 nm across the Irish sea (admittedly much of it only 5 to 10 miles off the North Wales coast), and to France I've done a number of routes the longest of which is about 125 nm over the western English channel from Exeter to Dinard in Brittany. I think being dwellers on a small island maybe we have a slightly different mindset about travel & risk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco01 Posted March 6, 2014 Report Share Posted March 6, 2014 You should look at this one: this is in French, trip on going and not completed yet, but excellent blog, right tone, and just Crazy how it looks easy flying over Pacific Ocean.. For European flyers, feel free to welcome Eric back in May 2014 in Bellegarde/France. http://www.flight-marquises.com/tracking/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Runtoeat Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Flying over Lake Michigan to get back to Michigan from Oshkosh is enough open water for me. Flying over open ocean is high risk. I'll just be content to watch the videos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlyingMonkey Posted March 7, 2014 Report Share Posted March 7, 2014 Flying over Lake Michigan to get back to Michigan from Oshkosh is enough open water for me. Flying over open ocean is high risk. I'll just be content to watch the videos. Flying over Lake Michigan is high risk...a lot of pilots have died doing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.