Geoff Thomas strikes again!
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
From: Perth
Geoff Thomas strikes again!
From News Limited:
What caused the Swan River seaplane crash on Australia Day | Perth Now
"When the plane crashed it was travelling north-east so the 20km/hr south-west wind would have worsened the situation by affectively reducing his over-the-wing-speed by 20km/hr."
Hmmm...
What caused the Swan River seaplane crash on Australia Day | Perth Now
"When the plane crashed it was travelling north-east so the 20km/hr south-west wind would have worsened the situation by affectively reducing his over-the-wing-speed by 20km/hr."
Hmmm...
Joined: Sep 2000
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: HKG 'visitor'
No fan of GT.
However I guess he was just trying to explain, using low syllable count words to the greater audience, the perils of a downwind turn at low level and high alpha.
That appears to be a factor in this case, and the ATSB will have to investigate and consider without access to real metrics as available from a FDR or like.
However I guess he was just trying to explain, using low syllable count words to the greater audience, the perils of a downwind turn at low level and high alpha.
That appears to be a factor in this case, and the ATSB will have to investigate and consider without access to real metrics as available from a FDR or like.
Joined: Mar 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 9,192
Likes: 961
From: Seat 1A
Originally Posted by Bug Smasher Smasher
Guess the ATSB can just pack up and go home now.
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 218
Likes: 28
From: M.I.A.
What irks me even more is his statement, "reducing his over-the-wing-speed by 20km/hr."
There's extensive discussion about this in another thread.
Given the heading of the aircraft when it stalled, it was actually starting to turn into the wind. Therefore its IAS (Geoffrey, not "over the wing speed"
) would have been subjected to a very slight increase, if anything.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Joined: Apr 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,065
Likes: 222
From: Back home again after another fantastic time in Japan; once again back to the 'real world' and continuing the seemingly never ending search for a bad bottle of Red.
Perhaps not all of the Media are taken in by GT these days. One of the last times I saw him interviewed in a TV News item the subtitle described him as an "Aviation Journalist." Note; not 'expert!'
Thankfully Mrs Pinky had me in an armlock at the time,
otherwise I might just have thrown a bottle of Red at the TV screen if indeed the word 'expert' was shown instead.
Thankfully Mrs Pinky had me in an armlock at the time,
otherwise I might just have thrown a bottle of Red at the TV screen if indeed the word 'expert' was shown instead.
Last edited by Pinky the pilot; 10th March 2017 at 07:46. Reason: Typo
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,204
Likes: 26
From: Australia
However I guess he was just trying to explain, using low syllable count words to the greater audience
That may be because those people the media may try to contact to get expert points of view, prefer to remain anonymous and keep their private opinions to themselves lest they get flamed by those that enjoy flaming Geoff Thomas.
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 569
Likes: 383
From: Australia
It's not that, it's the fact that he isn't even a very good journalist... he is overtly sensationalist just look at his interview for Air Crash Investigation regarding Garuda, he was completely sensationalist and I know it's a small thing but I just HATE how he always says the "plane" did this or the "plane" did that... no one who is serious in the industry calls it a 'plane' that is a childish term that is bandied about by the media and by people who don't know anything about aviation... an aeroplane, airplane or aircraft is what most knowledgeable people say. Is that the end of the world??? No, it's not but those sort of subtle signs show he really knows nothing at all and I and am sure, many others are sick to death of him sticking his face on TV and carrying on like he's an expert. I find Peter Harbison (not sure of the spelling) similarly annoying. I remember him saying once that "If Qantas had not created Jetstar, Virgin would have torn them to pieces" - really, a company with $4.5bn dollars cash in the bank at the time versus a company that narrowly avoided folding and only survived because AN collapsed could have killed Qantas. No. Qantas would have just undercut them to the point they went out of business. These people are held up as experts. It doesn't mean any of the rest of us are journalist types but many people on here would be capable of providing much better commentary and balanced as well and not using every opportunity on camera to big note and advance themselves only because their audience doesn't know any better.
Joined: Jan 2017
Posts: 129
Likes: 1
From: The Couch
By "downwind turn" spleener, I assume you're actually referring to "low-level windshear", as opposed to turning your back on a uniformly moving airmass? (if one couldturn their back on an airmass that they were part of...)
Here we go again!
Here we go again!
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,562
Likes: 952
From: Aus
Aerial, you might just check your dictionary, you'll find it refers to "planes" as aircraft, among many other things. Term was used as far back as 1920 by professionals in the industry. The US Navy have "Plane Captains", Crew Chiefs by name in the Air Force.
Joined: Jul 2009
Posts: 569
Likes: 383
From: Australia
I'm sure you are correct but I still think it sounds amateurish - in thirty years in the industry I never heard anyone call an aeroplane a 'plane except outside the industry... except for one operator (VA) where many also refer to multiple aircraft as 'aircrafts' which definitely is incorrect. As for the US Navy, that may be the case but I've never heard an aviation professional or airline person of any experience in the US call them anything but an 'airplane'. To me, a 'plane' is something you fashion wood with and if it is a shortening of airplane or aeroplane, shouldn't it have an apostrophe at the beginning i.e. 'plane.
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,562
Likes: 952
From: Aus
Aerial, from an Airbus add.
And a Flight Dynamics add, who build your Head-Up Guidance Systems.
One pilot fits all. Thanks to fly-by-wire technology, the flight deck, flight procedures and handling characteristics on Airbus planes are virtually identical. The same goes for our aircraft systems and maintenance programs. So everything from training pilots to managing spare parts is easier and more cost-efficient. Obviously making our planes the smart choice. Airbus. Setting the standards.
seeing these planes as equals in heavy fog doesn't take imagination, it takes Flight Dynamics.
Chalk one up for all airlines, major or regional. Now your fleet can take off and land in extremely low visibility conditions, big planes right along with small ones. Flight Dynamics Head-Up Guidance systems (HGS®) is the great equalizer. This proven system projects full flight guidance information in the pilot's field of view. For more details on how Flight Dynamics can keep your planes flying without delay, call 503-684-5384.
Chalk one up for all airlines, major or regional. Now your fleet can take off and land in extremely low visibility conditions, big planes right along with small ones. Flight Dynamics Head-Up Guidance systems (HGS®) is the great equalizer. This proven system projects full flight guidance information in the pilot's field of view. For more details on how Flight Dynamics can keep your planes flying without delay, call 503-684-5384.
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
From: Sydney
Not by a pilot.
A "plane" is a place in Spain where the rain mainly falls.
Aircraft or aeroplane, (or airplane at a pinch)! Or join GT in the ranks of ignorant half wits.