Please Help “Not Cool” Cirrus Pilot

Yesterday at Mackinac Island, a pilot of a Cirrus airplane landed and taxied to the ramp for parking. There were a number of open tie down locations available that could be taxied into directly without the need to relocate the airplane after engine stop. The pilot chose to bypass those spots and perform an aggressive, high power U-turn surrounded by parked airplanes, then maneuver closely between two airplanes and taxi off of the hard surface ramp into the grass, perform another aggressive, high power U-turn, now clearly blowing debris from prop wash onto surrounding airplanes, then taxiing back onto the concrete ramp in tie down position. Even my student pilot wife was surprised by what she’d witnessed.

A very wise aviator once told me there are three key rules for aviators — be safe, be legal, and be cool. I thought this might have been a new pilot and if I had not been waiting to start our engine to get ahead of weather into Oshkosh, I’d have stopped to have a polite conversation on flying etiquette.

I understand there was a COPA fly in to Mackinac Island and hopefully a fellow Cirrus aviator will see this post and know the pilot of this Cirrus and take it upon themselves to help this apparently new pilot of (deleted by moderator) in their journey of continuous improvement.

Suggestion: If you just spent a few bucks to join COPA, you could easily look him up, contact him privately, and maybe make a new friend

That would probably solve your problem without the drive-by disparagement from the public Guest forum. Most people don’t read the non-member posts.

Thanks James, I no longer fly a Cirrus and would rather not spend dollars on a one time COPA Forum posting. If anyone in the Cirrus community is willing to get this message to the pilot privately I’ll happily remove this post.

Dear Flysafelegal Cool,

We don’t permit anonymous identities on COPA. Even in the Guest forum.

While I hope that everyone on COPA is courteous on the ramp, this is the wrong way to solve this.

I will delete the personalization of this post so that it does not reflect on that individual. They may figure out who they are by the post, but will take the details out.

I will leave the actions so they may possibly figure it out.

You are welcome to open your identity and post again. If you are gonna say it, own it.

Okay Roger. Wife insisted on anonymous posting given the character demonstrated by the pilot… I hope all the other Cirrus pilots at Mackinac Island on July 20th aren’t unfairly implicated. This ends my efforts on this.

This strikes me as an opportunity for a philosophical discussion with your wife. Proposed Topic: By publicicizing the ID of the purported offender while keeping your own identity hidden, were you guilty of a different but equally egregious misdemeanor as the one you perceive?

I hear ya and suspect the effort was well intentioned. We can debate the process, but that is a waste of time.

Thanks, I hope the person hears and that accepts your intent as positive.

Maybe this sounds too harsh, but … From when I was grown up I never needed other people’s approval to use my name (no, I do not ask my wife)

(If you hesitate to sign a post (anywhere on the internet) with your name, maybe you shouldn’t post at all …?)

I get and completely agree with what everyone is saying. With that said, “FlySafe” was not really harsh and took time out of his busy day to bring this to the attention of the community. I hope that before the info was deleted that it was recorded and possibly this post was shared with the offender (assuming s/he is a member). We all make errors that, at the time, we do not realize. It is very possible that the offender realized his/her error right away.

I would rather that “FlySafe” came here rather than post on FB negative publicity.

There’s some real trash being thrown out on FB the last day or two. Yuck.

@Flysafelegalcool,
I want to apologize to you on behalf of the majority of COPA members for some of the responses you received on this thread. I’m ashamed that some COPA members choose to take the approach they do under these and similar circumstances.

You witnessed some tacky airmanship by a Cirrus Pilot and you went to the effort to post it here and appropriately so. Kudos to you and thank you for bringing it to our attention. I can guarantee for anyone that reads this thread they will be even more vigilant and more courteous as they taxi.

Folks do read the guest threads, especially those that use the iCOPA app.

Highlighting the virtues of vigilance and courtesy is laudable. No one complained about that. Attempting to shame and smear a specific COPA member from behind a veil of anonymity is not cool. At least not by my value system.

The only thing Roger edited out was a pic of the purportedly offending aircraft with the tail number crystal clear.

So… what, and whom, are you apologizing for? Please be specific.

Tony, thanks for this post.

I was flying all day.

Thanks to FlySafeLegal for taking the time to give folks the opportunity to help a Cirrus pilot.

I have done so many bonehead things that I found out were bonehead things only after I had done them.

who knows?

If I saw a Cirrus operated in a Careless or reckless manner and I was not a Cirrus owner, I probably would not thought of going to the trouble to point it out on the type club website. While, the pilot of Nxxxx might be temporarily embarrassed, many others may recognize something in the way they operate from the telling of this incident. More good than harm can come from this.

I agree. And I do think the OP was being respectful. And well mannered and with good intentions.

That is why I left the facts up and only removed a photo and tail number.

Anonymous is not how we roll here (there go those silly rules). Further, I don’t think it is in good taste to let a non member cast aspersions on a member in the guest section. Even well intended.

The point was made and it remains on the forum. The offender will see it if he cruises COPA and he will know who it was intended for.

I think a reasonable compromise to get the point out and the heat off. I realize that is a judgement call, but it is the one I made.

Hard to win around here - tough crowd wink

Roger you did good. Somehow the term “reckless or careless” appeared in the thread, upping the ante. Anon can basically say anything with no accountability, and then David responds as if he knows the account to be true. I suspect most readers assume the same. All in the name of “being cool”.

I’m apologizing specifically for your pompous BS James. This guy is a guest poster going to the effort and calling out shitty airmanship by a Cirrus Pilot. And you go on about how he should have a philosophical convo with his wife and ask if he is the guilty one.

This is not how long term COPA members should contribute to the guest forum particularly when a non-member is trying to go out of his/her way to respectively provide necessary feedback.

Each of us have a responsibility to be an ambassador here. That’s all I have to say on this matter.

Onwards and upwards.

David,

I respectfully disagree. It’s simply not a good idea to post something like that anonymously with a picture of the N-number. And if he chose to do it with the picture, he could at least use his name. The internet is full of anonymous BS and conspiracy stuff and using real names is a good way to prevent that from happening.

PS: Some weeks ago I landed on a small grass strip in the Czech Republic and since the grass was a little high and I had to taxi a bit uphill I had to use more power when I was turning to park than I would usually use. After I killed the engine a guy came up and asked me if I was crazy … and it was only then that I realized that I had forgotten about the glider that was parked behind me. Two men had to hold it down when I advanced the power … It was probably the most stupid thing I have done the last ten years of flying (that, and the two lost fuel caps …) … but it happened and I apologized for it (about 5 times :-)). End of story.

I am not an ambassador for those who violate COPA rules by posting under fictitious names to hide their identity. I do not condone publicly smearing of named COPA members (yes, the Guest Discussion forum is public). COPA is not a Yelp, even if you wish it were.

COPA members are not tools the unidentified OP should use to remedy his grievance. I recommended how he could resolve his complaint himself and perhaps make a new friend in the process. Did you notice that? Would you like it if we all chimed in to publicly condemn our member based on an Internet post from an unknown person?

I do hope the OP (and his wife, since she dictated the anonymity) will introspectively examine their choices here.

Consider: If the OP had posted his complaint exactly as you see it now (without the pic Roger removed) the worst he would have received is a gentle reminder that anonymous posts are not permitted. But he chose to go in a different direction. He can live with the minor consequences of his choice.

I hope COPA never becomes the wide-open, no-rules organization you advocate. But I am not sanctimonious about it. If you want to change COPA, follow your heart or your gut. That is what everyone does.

Well done, Roger, Solomon couldn’t have split the baby better.

The original beef, from the plaintiff attorney, is still up, no doubt the offending pilot has already had 5 phone calls about it, he’ll be more careful next time. But let’s not forget, we haven’t heard from the defense attorney, the judge, or the jury.

All we got was the prosecutor’s story and the lurid crime scene photo, since ruled inadmissible.

We’ll take it under advisement, absolutely, but we’re not so naive we think we have all the facts, and that’s the end of it, right? We’re big on amendments here- don’t forget the 6th and 7th. Every dog is entitled to his day in court.

If the actions are 100% accurate as described, the anon poster has accomplished most of what he was trying to do, as well as several things I see that I assume he wasn’t trying to do. I believe his intent was honest.

But the poster’s plane wasn’t started, and the offending pilot was right there. A short, polite conversation right then might have been more effective, might have been perfect.

If it got under your skin bad enough that you thought about it all the way to Oshkosh, and then posted anonymously from there- hey, just get it off your chest.

I guarantee the offending pilot saw it a different way. You both could have covered your points in 2 minutes. He would have understood your points exactly, and made his rebuttal, if there was one. Maybe he had his reasons, maybe he was a bonehead- either way, you’d both KNOW.

If it was thoughtlessness, and he is usually introspective and thoughtful, you’ll make him a better pilot for life.

That’s the pride pilots take in their work, and that would have been a great day’s work for you.

I believe you’d shake hands at the end, and both feel somehow improved.

Nowadays we live on line, nobody talks much any more.

But we’re not cops.

It’s hard to be a cop, to sort out fact from fiction, discern motive from method.

As we aren’t cops, let’s not be judge, jury or executioner, either.

Do I believe the anonymous poster is 100% accurate, that it wasn’t all a result of dyspepsia from sausage and eggs hurried under threat of weather?

With the half we know, I believe him- there’s probably something to his complaint.

But really, it could have been some loud noise followed by a crescendo conversation with his student pilot wife, their delicious self-righteousness gaining a momentum all its own. I’m a married man, myself.

If the events are mostly true, what’s the best way to fix the rookie, given that the idiot is unreachable?

I say- tell him, not me.

In the offender’s defense-Cirrus are heavy for their relatively small mains- they are hard to turn around in grass, especially if it’s wet or gravelly. I have experienced this problem, and I feel for Alex’s dilemma, and appreciate- from both sides- what happened next in Czechoslovakia.

So the rest of the observations might have just been a couple squeeze betweens, seen from the wrong angle- the pilot seeing a few feet clear on each side, no problem. Seen from 50 yards, at a 30* offset, by an observer already made edgy by IO-550 noise, it might seem a damning confirmation of arrogance, ineptitude.

There is no contentious passion that cannot be reshaped into ethereal wonderment by your musing. Thank you.