Back to Squawk list
  • 43

FAA suspends licenses of two pilots involved in failed Red Bull stunt

נשלח לפני
 
The Federal Aviation Administration revoked the licenses of two pilots for their "careless" and "reckless" conduct during a failed midair stunt last month in Arizona, officials said this week. (news.yahoo.com) עוד...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


tlfys1
tlfys1 9
To bad the FAA can't do something to Red Bull for sponsoring this and the Drop Zone that allowed it to take place too.
n122vu
Brian Crane 1
Maybe. What if they sponsored it with the understanding the pilots were going to work with the FAA to get an exemption and follow the rules? From what I hear, the main pilot organizer made the call to go forward and didn't tell anyone the FAA had denied the exemption.
sparkie624
sparkie624 6
That could be yet to come.... It was their planes that were used, and I doubt that they were listed as being stolen.
linbb
linbb -6
So you checked the N numbers and they are either leased to them or owned by them? Probably not.
sparkie624
sparkie624 7
They may have been leased. Being leased, it would still be classified as thiers. Airlines own very few planes, but they refer to it as their planes! Leased or not. You never see United say "Welcome abord our leased plane that we just got from Joes Leasing Company"!
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 4
There is a good chance that the planes were not owned by or leased to Red Bull, and that they merely had Red Bull signage on them due to sponsorship agreements with the pilots. That’s a very common situation in extreme sports.
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
Very good point... I did not think of that. I had assumed it would have been owned or leased by them for Insurance Purposes and libility issues. I can also imagine that RedBulls insurance premiums are due to rise!
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 4
If Red Bull didn't own the planes they would have had to indemnify the owners and cover any damages or losses.

I'm sure the overall cost of the project (salaries, equipment, site rental, planning, training etc.) significantly exceeds the value of the planes anyway. That's probably why they pushed ahead even after the FAA denied them -- they had so much invested and no marketable results to show for.
djames225
djames225 1
Red Bull Air Racing own/lease neither of those aircraft. Red Bull merely sponsored the events and the teams. It is up to each team to have qualified, non dumb a** pilots and get proper clearances.
These 2 should have their licence's ripped up and tossed forever.
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
They did have their licenses take away from them forever!
djames225
djames225 2
Revoked and torn up are 2 different things. Revoked can re-earn them down the road (been there seen it happen many many times) but torn up and tossed..no chance
Highflyer1950
Highflyer1950 1
Love it. lol
emkostiuk
Ed Kostiuk 9
Best news this week.
withersfamily
Lee Withers 7
Maybe I’m a little conservative, but why couldn’t they have “safety pilots” in each plane.? The actual stunt would be the same. Bloated egos lose again.
n122vu
Brian Crane 1
That's how they practiced it up to the actual event. And from my understanding, it was the fact they demonstrated through multiple flights it could be done successfully with a safety pilot in each plane that led to the FAA denying their exemption. But that would have removed the "cool factor" from the stunt.
sparkie624
sparkie624 8
It would have added too much of a Safety factor to it... They wanted to be on the Edge and show the world that they knew what they were doing, but the world showed them otherwise!
ExCalbr
Victor Engel 3
Fewer people to risk having licenses revoked. ;)
watkinssusan
mary susan watkins 4
I WOULD SAY THIS IS A VERY GOOD DECISION..
royalbfh
royalbfh 3
Red Bull did violate the FARs these two cocky knuckle head pilots did. While I agree that Red Bull played a part as a sponsor the pilots chose to blatantly disregard the denial letter and without hesitation purposely and willfully violate the FARs. They destroyed a perfectly fine aircraft in the process and if it was insured will add to the ripple effect throughout the insurance underwriters. I personally think they should have their licenses revoked for this,
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 3
What a fast decision to said stunt. It took them longer to revoke the other YouTuber's license. Hopefully, others thinking of similar stunts will think twice about putting their licenses on the line by risking putting others and property in danger.
OccamsRazor
Ben Bosley 4
They asked the FAA for permission and they said no, so the FAA was already on notice
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 4
The Trevor Jacob stunt required a bit of an investigation (though to most it was pretty obvious what had happened), whereas the Red Bull stunt was clear from the beginning -- it was deliberate, not sanctioned, and all the evidence was readily available.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
Yes, but they still acted very quickly by comparison to the norm.
sparkie624
sparkie624 3
I bet the Next Red Bull Pilots will think twice before trying a similar stunt!
ExCalbr
Victor Engel 2
What other YouTuber's license?
sparkie624
sparkie624 4
Trevor Jacob Youtuber who crashed his own plane just to get YouTube Views!
tsilver473
Tony Silverstrå 1
sparkie624
sparkie624 1
What part are you calling Crazy, the Stunt or the FAA?
coralseastudios
Brian McCarty 1
Suspended? Or revoked? Those are two different things.
Greg77FA
Greg77FA 0
Pretty harsh. The stunt may have been dangerous to the pilots, but they did it over sparse land with plans in place and no impact to others.
sparkie624
sparkie624 2
A gift for Understatement.... Was very Dangerous and they Blantantly ignored the FAA as they were already told not to do it.... No punishment is too harse, Time to set an example to the next idiot to try stunts like that,,, There are people out that that will say they did it, I think I will try,,, I mean real,,, It had to be very harsh to set and example and precident.
shenghaohan
Shenghao Han 0
They definitely disserved it.
But on the flip side FAA should just help them secure necessary safety margins.
WhiteKnight77
WhiteKnight77 4
Why does the FAA need to help people with possibly deadly stunts?
bighawaiiandude
ernest eiland -3
someone blab
🤣

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

sparkie624
sparkie624 4
they cannot fly as Pilot In command... they can only fly with a Certified Flight Instructor. Your statement made no since. For them to continue flying would be equivalent or worse than driving a car without a drivers license. They may be able to still fly, but they will not be able to do so legal and if they get caught, there will be repercussions! Your statement alone is off in left field, and BTW, please watch your language! Some younger eyes maybe watching, and others don't want to see it.
djames225
djames225 2
After their names have been plastered all over and the stupidity level they showed, no they cannot "still fly just fine"

כניסה לאתר

עדיין אין לך חשבון? הירשם כעת (ללא תשלום) כדי ליהנות מתכונות מותאמות-אישית, מהתראות טיסה ועוד!
אתר זה משתמש בקוקיות. המשך השימוש והניווט שלך באתר מביע את הסכמתך לכך.
סגור
האם ידעת שמעקב הטיסות של FlightAware נתמך על ידי פרסום?
תוכל לעזור לנו לוודא ש-FlightAware יישאר חינמי בכך שתאשר קבלת מודעות מ-flightaware.com. אנו מתאמצים מאוד להקפיד על כך שהמודעות שלנו יהיו רלוונטיות ולא מטרידות כדי ליצור עבורך חוויית משתמש מעולה. מהיר וקל לכלול את המודעות של FlightAware ברשימה הלבנה ואפשר גם לשקול את האפשרות ליצור חשבונות פרמיום.
סגור