Two Skydiving Pilots Try to Change Planes in Mid-Air (yahoo.com) 102
Streaming right now on Hulu: a three-hour live special in which two members of something called the "Red Bull Air Force" try to make aviation history, reports People:
On Sunday, April 24, Aikins and Farrington will try to switch planes mid-air in a stunt at Sawtooth Airport in Eloy, Arizona, that can be seen exclusively on Hulu, according to a press release from Red Bull. The planes will be "completely empty" and facing the ground when Luke Aikins and Andy Farrington attempt the daring switch, which will air during a three-hour livestream event.
To complete the feat, Aikins and Farrington will fly a pair of Cessna 182 single-seat aircraft up to 14,000 feet before putting them into a vertical nosedive and jumping out, with the goal of skydiving into each other's planes.
The cousins will stop the planes' engines and aim them toward the ground as they complete the stunt. A custom airbrake with the ability to hold the planes in a controlled-descent terminal velocity speed of 140 mph will also be utilized to complete the trick. After catching up to the opposing stuntman's plane, Aikins and Farrington will enter the cockpits and turn the planes back on as normal, piloting them to land.
Aikins is an experienced skydiver, having completed more than 21,000 jumps throughout his career. Farrington, meanwhile, has completed 27,000 jumps.
"I call it more calculated than crazy," Aikins says in an interview with the web site Complex. "We work really hard to make sure that everything's going to be okay. We don't flip a coin and fingers crossed and hope it all works out. We mitigate the risk down to something that's acceptable and what's acceptable to me."
To complete the feat, Aikins and Farrington will fly a pair of Cessna 182 single-seat aircraft up to 14,000 feet before putting them into a vertical nosedive and jumping out, with the goal of skydiving into each other's planes.
The cousins will stop the planes' engines and aim them toward the ground as they complete the stunt. A custom airbrake with the ability to hold the planes in a controlled-descent terminal velocity speed of 140 mph will also be utilized to complete the trick. After catching up to the opposing stuntman's plane, Aikins and Farrington will enter the cockpits and turn the planes back on as normal, piloting them to land.
Aikins is an experienced skydiver, having completed more than 21,000 jumps throughout his career. Farrington, meanwhile, has completed 27,000 jumps.
"I call it more calculated than crazy," Aikins says in an interview with the web site Complex. "We work really hard to make sure that everything's going to be okay. We don't flip a coin and fingers crossed and hope it all works out. We mitigate the risk down to something that's acceptable and what's acceptable to me."
Re:Uh, this is becoming bad and dangerous (Score:5, Informative)
Treveor Jacobs just had his license suspended for this kind of stunt. [yahoo.com] While I'm not sure if they're doing this in the US, if they are I hope they've cleared the stunt with the FAA first.
Doing stunts isn't illegal. Doing stunts in airplanes isn't illegal as long as you take adequate safety precautions and get proper authorization before hand. Lying to the FAA about a stunt, while claiming it was an actual emergency however is illegal. Trevor Jacobs lost his license because the evidence in his own video contradicts the statements he made about the crash.
Re:Uh, this is becoming bad and dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
Jesus Christ /. is filled with dumbasses now.
Re: (Score:2)
Nah, there's only one.
He has a lot of accounts though.
Re: (Score:2)
Now? You know better.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The reason I do not know any different is because most of the story has been behind a paywall when I last tried, and less public than you suggest.
As far as I was aware, he had not been directly questioned by he FAA at all before they made their judgement.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not particularly angry about it... I just tend to object when the media wants to convey a particular interpretation of facts that don't entirely line up with actually available evidence. If Jacobs had indeed been personally questioned by the FAA about his actions and he lied to them, then obviously he should be held accountable for that. As far as it had appeared to me, however, he had only ever really lied in the video and on social media for the sake of publicity, and to the best of my knowledge, e
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Because I've explained multiple times how the behavior, even IF there was a lot done to mitigate any risks, was in breach of multiple laws, and reckless and endangering.
It was not a planned stunt. The information Trevor gave to the FAA was that he was going on a normal flight, with a normal takeoff, and a normal planned landing. This is all a matter of public record; such information is not secret or proprietary in the US.
But he failed to fulfill his posted flight plan. Instead he crashed part way, and repo
Re: (Score:2)
Really? Who here, specifically, did I allegedly berate?
Anyways, I trust the evidence that I know is available, not evidence that I assume exists somewhere (the latter approach is generally taken by people who think that Trump won the 2020 election, for example).
Also, even if nobody sued him for damages, there ought to be some sort of visible evidence at the crash site that damage was done.
And if there is none, then do you *seriously* think it is likely that he actually crashed his plane entirely un
Re: (Score:1)
He even shows visible evidence of damage at the crash site in his own video, so yeah, that's there.
Your incredulity at rocky ground not being destroyed to the point where people sue only shows that you haven't give this matter even cursory thought. Seriously, you think he's going to be sued over smashing an airplane into the ground in the mountains, and that he hasn't been somehow proves this actually didn't happen at all.
I seriously hope you don't vote.
Re: (Score:2)
You mean the same video where he *faked* having a plane emergency? Do you see where I'm going with this?
Kinda lucky there, don'tcha think? Crashing in the middle of a forest and just happening to do so in a place where no damage could have actually occurred?
Re: (Score:1)
So you haven't even skimmed the articles to see what he has been accused of.
But you fight vehemently against the accusations, whatever they may be.
That's so sad.
Re: (Score:2)
None of the articles that I was able to read said anything about the FAA questioning him, or anything about him filing a report that they concluded was fraudulent. All of the focus on the accusation that I was aware of was on the crash itself. Your claims of "the evidence is out there if you just look" are reminiscent to me of claims made by Trump supporters who insist that there are mountains of evidence that election fraud was happening and that the 2020 election was."stolen".
Finally, I have much l
Re: (Score:1)
Yes, because I'm spending my life looking for information I didn't know existed.
Re: (Score:1)
Or, you know, googling the name and reading the articles about the event, which takes a few minutes, instead of telling everyone it's "more likely" that the person actually didn't do anything, as the person I responded to kept telling everyone all over the old thread about this.
Re: (Score:2)
Of the many differences between Jacobs' stunt and this planned stunt, one of the most important parts is that the planes will be going straight down towards a controlled target area, where it will be ensured that no one is in danger should a plane crash. Further, steps will be taken to protect the environment from spilled oil and avgas.
Re: (Score:2)
Doing stunts isn't illegal. Doing stunts in airplanes isn't illegal
I sort of expect? that leaving a planes controls uncontrolled and exiting the vehicle probably is illegal. If they wanted to do this while a trained and licensed professional monitored the controls, sure, but, they have to have a clause in their somewhere saying an active flying plane requires a driver to be present?
Re: (Score:2)
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/u... [nbcnews.com]
I hope the soon ex-pilots are going to enjoy the FAA on their ass.
Re: Uh, this is becoming bad and dangerous (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh sure, over an unpopulated area say where a crashed plane wouldn't cause damage to anyone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
In the case of Trevor Jacobs he did plow it into a forest area, lied to the FAA, and then had the crashed aircraft removed before the NTSB could investigate, I would think the authorities wouldn't even let them think of doing this anywhere near a populated area, requiring a hefty insurance policy to pay for any damages as well.
Still, nosediving two planes could have unpredictable results and I hope that was accounted for as well. Not having Hulu, did they make it?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Uh, this is becoming bad and dangerous (Score:5, Insightful)
I hope they've cleared the stunt with the FAA first.
It's Red Bull, Red Bull are professionals and they have lawyers.
(unlike that social media dumbass)
Re: (Score:2)
Red Bull are professionals
I suggest you google FAA-2022-0315. The FAA criticized them for filing for an an exemption only 5 weeks before the stunt, rather than the 120 days required by the rules.
"Professionals" means you get paid to do something, it doesn't mean you're good at it.
I wonder where they did the stunt because as far as I can see the FAA denied them the request, mind you all I can see here was an exemption to the specific safety rule for this class of aircraft requiring the pilot to sit in his seat and wear a seatbelt...
Re:Uh, this is becoming bad and dangerous (Score:4, Interesting)
Red Bull are professionals
I suggest you google FAA-2022-0315. The FAA criticized them for filing for an an exemption only 5 weeks before the stunt, rather than the 120 days required by the rules.
"Professionals" means you get paid to do something, it doesn't mean you're good at it.
I wonder where they did the stunt because as far as I can see the FAA denied them the request, mind you all I can see here was an exemption to the specific safety rule for this class of aircraft requiring the pilot to sit in his seat and wear a seatbelt...
Also from a CNN article:
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) had previously denied a request from Red Bull to do the stunt, as reported by Fox 10 Phoenix. The agency wrote: "The FAA has considered the petition, and finds that granting an exemption from 91.105(a) would not be in the public interest and cannot find that the proposed operation would not adversely affect safety."
The FAA is now investigating the crash.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want to see professionals swapping pilots in mid-air, there are plenty of Youtube videos of various countries militaries doing it.
Or at least most of the parts of the pilot end up in the other aircraft.
Re: (Score:2)
Word is they didn't have approval and they're being investigated: https://7news.com.au/sport/red... [7news.com.au]
Re: (Score:2)
FAA apparently denied the request and they did it anyway, and one of the planes DID crash, so I'd say there's going to be some suspended licenses over this.
Re: (Score:1)
FAA apparently denied the request and they did it anyway, and one of the planes DID crash, so I'd say there's going to be some suspended licenses over this.
Spoiler alert would have been nice.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course Red Bull won't be liable, just the pilots involved. I'm sure their lawyers thought of that one too.
This takes two people, so ... (Score:3)
I'm guessing one of them isn't Trevor Jacob [engadget.com]? :-)
Re:This takes two people, so ... (Score:5, Funny)
Well it's pretty unlikely that they are both Trevor Jacob.
Re: (Score:3)
Both do claim to be Spartacus, however.
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing one of them isn't Trevor Jacob [engadget.com]? :-)
Well it's pretty unlikely that they are both Trevor Jacob.
Nice, although was hoping for, "No, the other one is." :-)
Apparently sponsored by Red Bull. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How do you get prostate cancer from smoking?
Smoking is a risk factor for all types of cancer, including prostate cancer.
Smoking and prostate cancer [pcf.org]
Re: Apparently sponsored by Red Bull. (Score:1)
So is red wine, caffeine, chocolate and red meat, on other days they help against it. People that smoke will die, people that donâ(TM)t smoke will as well, there is a clear and established link between lung, throat and other cancers and smoking, there is also an increase in the likelihood of getting prostate cancers and dying of all sorts of cancers, although smoking is not considered the cause for most of those cancers.
Basically if you smoke, your health is a lot worse overall. But smoking only CAUSES
Re: Apparently sponsored by Red Bull. (Score:2)
Re: Apparently sponsored by Red Bull. (Score:3)
Why is this on Slashdot? (Score:5, Funny)
Is it because we drink a lot of Red Bull here?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mod up! Aviation stories get some of the most interesting comments, with a bonus point that it generally attracts actual comments rather than stupid political trolls.
Re: (Score:1)
Three hours? (Score:2)
They're kidding, right? One hour is all that's needed. Even Evel Knievel's attempted rocket launch across Snake River Canyon [youtube.com] was allotted two hours of air time, and that included him walking from the helicopter and getting dressed.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We have a supply chain shortage with vultures right now, better get komodo dragons.
Re: Three hours? (Score:2)
Is this really a stunt? (Score:4, Insightful)
I feel like a stunt like this needs to push the envelope of what is humanly possible. The space jump Felix Baumgartner did was that and had an element of real danger to it.
This just feels like a gimmick. As far as I can tell they'll be wearing parachutes and doing this over water, so the only real danger is polluting the ocean.
Re: (Score:1)
Maybe I missed it...but I don't see where it states whether they are going to wear parachutes or not?
It says they are parachutists...but that's all I saw.
Yeah, kinda lame if they're wearing parachutes...kinda lame either way actually.
Re: Is this really a stunt? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
not necessary because there is no situation where anything can be learned from it
If things should only be done when something can be learned, most things should not be done.
hundreds of thousands of dollars in damage providing theres no collateral damage.
Collateral damage seems very unlikely, since they're doing it over the ocean. They could destroy the planes, of course, but presumably whoever owns the planes is fine with that risk.
Re: (Score:2)
... and had an element of real danger to it ... as far as I can tell they'll be wearing parachutes
Do parachutes protect you from being chopped up by a propeller? Do they still work when you're knocked out? Do they help you gain control of a freefalling aircraft?
If you think there isn't an element of danger to this then you're completely detached from reality.
Incidentally one of the planes crashed because it lost control and they deemed it waaay to dangerous to try and get into. So not only was it a dangerous stunt, it was a stunt too dangerous for the stuntman to continue.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow, Hulu (Score:1)
Wow, I can't wait to see this exclusive content posted exclusively on Hulu! I'm going to tune into Hulu to see this! Thanks, editor.
Obviously inspired (Score:2)
By that youtube video that has people up in arms.
This time they are not trying to intentionally crash their planes, but we are going to see more and more of this because of that original video, and Darwin will be waiting with bated breath.
Re: (Score:2)
> and Darwin will be waiting with bated breath.
Pretty sure people willing to change planes mid-air are more than likely the type of people to have pumped out a few kids by now. The Darwin Awards actually make no sense, as evolution is guided by people dying in stupid ways far less than innocent people and children dying tragically all the time. But those hypocrites don't seem to like that idea.
Re: (Score:2)
Very doubtful. This has probably been in planning from before that retarded Youtuber did his "stunt".
This information.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm thinking James Bond movies. Particularly Golden Eye.
Re: Could depression cause this kind of idea? (Score:1)
A youtuber already did that with 1 plane (Score:3)
Now that was a daring act, trying to switch planes with only 1 plane.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/u... [nbcnews.com]
Re: (Score:3)
Ooh, there's an idea for the next Hulu special!
Two skydivers, one plane and one parachute. The skydivers initial jump is without any gear at all - except maybe knives. Or perhaps an alligator.
Re: (Score:2)
How about "Two Skydivers, One Cup"
Re: (Score:2)
How about an alligator and a rope? Smoke me a kipper, I'll be back for breakfast [youtube.com].
Autopilot (Score:2)
Re:Autopilot (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
The way I understand it, the planes are essentially on an automatic pilot that will stabilize both plains in a fixed trajectory, which isn't much different than a human pilot in them doing the same.
The way I understand it from the people who designed it is that they had to custom design the autopilot since no autopilots exists that stabilise a plane in the nose down condition it was in. Everything is a simple control problem when you think about it in advance.
Incidentally it only worked on one plane. The other plane completely lost control and went into a free spin and the pilot couldn't get in.
This will prove one thing. (Score:4, Informative)
Um (Score:1)
1). Not really news for nerds. Unless it livestreaming on Hulu counts.
2). Be sure to update and let us know how many people died. Or didn't.
The Big Question (Score:2)
But will they do the stunt with *fire extinguishers* strapped underneath their pants legs?
Re: (Score:2)
Dear FAA, Too Careless to Have Pilot's Llcense (Score:3)
Bad Press for All Private Pilots (Score:2)
Morons (Score:2)
What is it going to cost taxpayers when these morons crash?
Math Fun (Score:1)
14,000 feet = 2.6515 miles
Terminal velocity air brake: 140 miles per hour
140 mph = 2.3333 miles per minute
Total time from when engine is cut to abrupt halt due to impact with hard surface: 1.1364 minutes = 1 minute 8 seconds = 68 seconds.
Getting out of plane = A seconds
Orienting yourself and traversing from your plane to destination plan = B seconds
Getting into destination plan = C seconds
Starting engine and pulling out of nosedive = X seconds
A+B+C+X must be less than 68 seconds.
The risk of demise is almos
Re: (Score:1)
Increase in Youtube & Instagram subscribers along with MORE VIEWS...
PRICELESS
I seem to recall (Score:1)
Spoiler Alert (Score:1)
Result: Bad Press for All Pilots (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You would have to jump 3 times per day every single day of the year for 20 years to have 21,000 jumps. How?
Well, maybe with each jump he resets some kind of time loop. He's living in Gopher Day.
Re: 21,000 jumps? (Score:5, Informative)
Re: 21,000 jumps? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or ten jumps a workday for ten years, which is not unusual for professionals.