Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
News

Steve Fossett Missing 317

jd writes "Steve Fossett, the first person to fly a plane around the world without refueling, the first person to fly around the world in a balloon, and possibly the record-holder for the highest-altitude glider flight, is missing in Nevada. He is reported to have taken off in a light aircraft last night and has not been seen since. As he had filed no flight plan, would-be rescuers have no idea where to even begin looking. The plane took off from a private airstrip on a ranch at the south end of Smith Valley in western Nevada."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Steve Fossett Missing

Comments Filter:
  • by jsight ( 8987 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:28PM (#20468375) Homepage
    There aren't exactly a lot of "new bellancas", but if it were one, I don't really understand how that would make a difference. They still use mags, so there's nothing that would kill the engine that would also kill the radio.

    Unless you count post-crash fire. :(
  • by maynard ( 3337 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:31PM (#20468413) Journal
    Which gives him a good shot at safely landing the plane in an emergency. Unfortunately, if he lands in the middle of the desert, he might have a very hard time getting back to civilization before his water runs out. Also: it doesn't matter how good a pilot he is, if there was serious mechanical failure on that plane during flight he would have had to bring it down. There is no option.

    His biggest mistake: not filing that flight plan. Huge *huge* fuckup.
  • by Nimey ( 114278 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:37PM (#20468487) Homepage Journal

    His biggest mistake: not filing that flight plan. Huge *huge* fuckup.


    Quoted for truth. Private pilots, for the love of your friends and relatives, PLEASE file a flight plan whenever and wherever you fly. It's fucking hard to find a crash site if you don't know where to look and have to guess based on the aircraft's range. It's also a major waste of rescue time and resources, and you have an excellent chance of dying from exposure or injuries before you're found.

    IOW, just crash the damn airplane into a cornfield somewhere if you want to commit suicide. Leave a note first.
  • by Surt ( 22457 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:41PM (#20468527) Homepage Journal
    Thank you. I also encourage people to think hard about which is really the more interesting and challenging accomplishment.
  • by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@ y a hoo.com> on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:46PM (#20468593) Homepage Journal
    On the other hand, we can assume that his aircraft had a very respectable two-way radio. Whatever the misfortune was, it must have been fast enough that he was not able to send any kind of message. Well, yes, that assumes that there was no significant obstruction and there was anyone listening - neither of which can be guaranteed in a remote area - but it seems most likely that disaster struck fast.

    Light aircraft parachutes have been around for some time now, and emergency beacons are practically a throw-away item. At this point in the light aircraft/experimental aircraft game, fatal crashes involving the ground (as opposed to buildings, mountains, seagulls, etc) should be relatively rare and rescuers should never be stumped.

    Yes, I most definitely hope Steve Fossett is safe, but whether he is safe or not, I think that given the current state of technology, it would be good if questions were being asked as to why we don't even know. Are the parachutes so overpriced or unavailable that even someone like Mr. Fossett could not afford one? Are the laws on transmitters so onerous that only idiots would fly with a distress beacon of adequate power?

    (Yes, people should be entitled to take whatever risks they like with their own lives, provided they understand what those are, but implicit in the concept of entitlement is that it is practical and lawful to mitigate those risks as much as possible when doing exactly the same thing. Otherwise, it is not the risk that has the entitlement, it's the activity. The risk is mandatory.)

  • Re:Gov't got him? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by morgan_greywolf ( 835522 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:47PM (#20468607) Homepage Journal
    Oh, c'mon. All joking aside, there will be plenty of wild speculation. Let's apply Occam's Razor here and say that most likely, he probably crashed somewhere. He took off from a private airstrip unannounced. No one knew where he was going or even exactly when he left. He could be just about anywhere -- most likely on the ground in pieces.
  • by jollyreaper ( 513215 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @03:54PM (#20468693)

    No, Alanis, that wouldn't be "ironic." It'd be unfortunate.
    You don't think it's ironic for an aviation pioneer and adventurer to die on a sedate, routine flight?

    Irony
    5. an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected.
    6. the incongruity of this.

    Usage Note: The words ironic, irony, and ironically are sometimes used of events and circumstances that might better be described as simply "coincidental" or "improbable," in that they suggest no particular lessons about human vanity or folly. Thus 78 percent of the Usage Panel rejects the use of ironically in the sentence In 1969 Susie moved from Ithaca to California where she met her husband-to-be, who, ironically, also came from upstate New York. Some Panelists noted that this particular usage might be acceptable if Susie had in fact moved to California in order to find a husband, in which case the story could be taken as exemplifying the folly of supposing that we can know what fate has in store for us. By contrast, 73 percent accepted the sentence Ironically, even as the government was fulminating against American policy, American jeans and videocassettes were the hottest items in the stalls of the market, where the incongruity can be seen as an example of human inconsistency.
    Served.
  • by Captain Splendid ( 673276 ) <capsplendid@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @04:05PM (#20468843) Homepage Journal
    For VFR [wikipedia.org] flights, flight plans [wikipedia.org] are optional and very often not filed for (what are expected to be) routine flights.

    I've taken enough flying classes to call BS on that. There is no such thing as a "routine flight". Hell, he could have at least phoned a friend, or one of the guys in the tower and given them a rough idea idea of where he'd be headed.
  • by delcielo ( 217760 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @04:16PM (#20469057) Journal
    As mentioned by others, a flight plan is not required for VFR flight. There are reasons for this (and yes, they are debatable); but it is generally considered that even if they aren't required, they are wise. Statistically, you are found faster if you have one on file. The authorities are pretty good about tracking the overdue planes and initiating search and rescue. As somebody else mentioned, it is a good idea to at least check in with a family member before leaving and again when arriving. I call it, filing with Dad.

    If you're not on a cross-country flight, a flight plan is not much use.

    As for beacons, every airplane has an ELT (emergency locator transmitter) that sends a signal on 121.5Mhz. Satellites listen for that signal and are monitored by (I believe) the Air Force, which initiates search and rescue. The ELT is activated by an impact of 5 g's. Transient g-loads which build and dissipate very rapidly can inadvertently activate them at times. It's a dubious honor to have set one off with a hard landing. On the other hand, it's possible for the ELT to be damaged in an accident, or to lose the antenna for it in an accident, etc.

    Mr. Fosset was a smart man, and obviously had filled fellow pilots/friends in on his intentions. They alerted search and rescue a few short hours after he intended to return. So, to say that his lack of a flight plan was a "huge fuckup" is perhaps a bit harsh. All the search and rescue efforts that would have been activated by the overdue flight plan are in fact, activated.

    I wish him well. That's a hostile environment he is in.
  • by tompaulco ( 629533 ) on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @04:45PM (#20469445) Homepage Journal
    That's a loaded statement. There are plenty of things in the world more dangerous than a GA aircraft. For example: a motorcycle, a chainsaw, a lawnmower. GA aircraft have a slightly poorer record than cars in terms of fatalities per hour, and a much better record in terms of accidents per hour. The vast majority of GA accidents have little to do with the mechanical condition of the plane, and much more to do with stupid things done by the user (imagine that).
  • Re:No he wasn't (Score:3, Insightful)

    by jd ( 1658 ) <imipak@ y a hoo.com> on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @06:14PM (#20470925) Homepage Journal
    Yes he was. There were two in Voyager, so each only flew it half-way.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @06:47PM (#20471343)
    Bearing in mind the guy might be dead, I find it a bit distasteful we're laughing about it.
    He may or may not have been stupid or suicidal or whatever, but for the sake of his family, friends etc, can we stop making cheap fucking jokes about it.

  • Re:party time... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 04, 2007 @09:21PM (#20473023)
    shouldn't be that 4399 others.

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Working...