How to cite cfr Videos

GarethMilkManMoore:If one failed landing qualifies a country for "filled with fucking retards" status then add Denmark to that list because this aircraft tail number indicates that it was a Danish registered aircraft. One would assume that the pilot was also Danish. But that's just an assumption based on logic. I know my reply angers you but just so you know NOTHING you respond with will anger me. You don't sign my paycheck so your narrow opinion of me and "retards" from my country don't matter.

well since you have absolutly no clue as to the situation onboard that's a harsh and dumb remark. maybe the pilot did not have a choice due to some situation onboard. Just thinking you are a bit quick with judging based on pretty much nothing but a vid that tells you, again, nothing of the situation on the plane. which doesn't mean if he did it on purpose for no reason he's stupid, I just can't believe someone would be able to progress to jets thinking he can land with tailwinds and high rpm.

Pilot Responsible for overrun, last year a Citation CJ2 landed 1,000 feet down the 2,948-foot-long runway at Bader Field in Atlantic City, N.J., and crashed into the water. There were no serious injuries to the four occupants. The NTSB recently released its final report and concluded the accident was caused by the pilot's "improper decision" to land on a runway of insufficient length, to land on that inadequate runway with a tailwind and "his failure to obtain the proper touchdown point."

He came in too fast and with the wind instead of into the wind. He went long on the runway and as a result, couldn't stop before running off into the river. Shutting off the Master fuel and electrical switches would have been helpful. Speaks volumes for the Citations structural strength. Even with only one engine running it stays in one piece being pushed through water. Nothing something are designed or tested to do. The Asymmetrical load had to be severe.

I can't believe the engine caught. What a chain of events that would need to happen... 1. Fuel not cut off 2. Autostart not disengaged. 3. The engine was drowned but not inoperably so 4. Electrical power would need to remain operable The second point would assume that the restart was not the result of waterlogged avionics... In any case, the whole restart could have been prevented if the pilot had cut the fuel off.

@cpta2020 The engine didn't just "spool up". The engine was not running at all until *something* caused it to spin itself back up, to the point where, at 5:12 in the video, the engine finally caught, and started pushing the jet around. Had the engine been running all that time, those boats would have been nowhere near that aircraft (safety and common sense)

Citations are horrendously bad with thier fuel firewall shutoffs. If they had the fuel firewall valves in the close positon, but the standby boost pumps on fuel can trickle in. Furthermore with the water reacting with the hot fan blades, there could have been enough compression to restart. This is backed up by the compressor stall when it first restarted

The fuel was probably mostly expended, and here's a hint-he went in the drink. And finally its usually underwing engine aircraft that explode because when the pods are crushed, the redhot turbofan blades go into the fuel tanks in the wings. But primarily it is the water thing-the gear probably more or less survived the turf as it went into the bay.

Idiot pilot for 3 reasons: 1. The wind was blowing downwind. Pilot's always land as close INTO the wind as they can 2. Found out that the Atlantic City chart he was using said "Airport closed to JET traffic". The Citation is a JET aircraft. 3. Not using the fuel cutoff switches before evacuating from the aircraft.

WIth the Atlantic City skyline so close, I knew it had to be Bader Field (KAIY), which permanently closed not long after this happened, and was closed to jet traffic when this happened. There's a reason no jet traffic was permitted there - runways too short and too close to the water.

I'm willing to bet that that #2 engine is beyond being servicable after sucking in all that salt water LOL. Not sure why the genius decided to land on a short runway with a tail wind but it provided us with some interesting video footage. Thank's Citation Pilot.

suck a fat cock you nigger GarethMilkManMoore OH WAIT you live where? THATS RIGHT YOU LIVE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM WHERE YOUR CONTROLLED BY A KING AND QUEEN, YOU HAVE NO ECONOMY LOL YOU CANT EVEN TAKE A PISS IC ANT WAIT TILL hitler 2 invades your country

maaaaaaaaaaaaaaan thx for the cool video u know buddy i tried 15 kts tailwind in a micor light airplane and honestly hardly could make it at the last feets of runway how come when its just very bad idea maybe if it was 4 kts i will think about also

how does that work? doesnt that citation use apu bleed to start the engine? the apu would be under water. i am not sure about the model. might not have one but in any way this is weird. how did that engine start without a pilot in first place?

Any pilot who lands downwind 1000ft past the approach end deserves everything he gets. It's a miracle there were only a few minor injuries, especially considering he did not operate fuel cutoff! A comedy of errors. Nutjob.

It's just such a classic aviation safety video now for ADM. Just glad no one was hurt much and we can laugh a bit watching the james bond boat plane. Sorry to see Bader Field go too just like Meigs in Chicago.

If the pilot were qualified to fly that equipment, they would have pulled a miss when they didn't make the tip of the runway. 10kts tail wind, 2700 foot runway, in a jet? WTF. Land the other direction pls.

He came in far too fast for the conditions of the runway, he should have taken it a bit slower. Also bmwboy2007 i find that incredbily racist what you said espically since i am English.

They don't teach you to switch off the engines and fuel pumps after a crash. But damn, if I ever have to ditch on water, I'd like it to be one of these, they just don't want to sink.

very cool title! but cooler title is 'CITATION GOES AMPHIBIAN'! but how the hell is the engine still running?? is the pilot still in it n try to sail the plane to the ground?? lol

Worst. Landing. Ever. Look how hard he touches down. Also he seems much too fast. Might be because he landed downwind, but accounting for that, it still looks much too fast to me.

Thats kinda crossing a line, though 'GarethMilkManMoore' is wrong in what he says. No country should be blamed or critizised here. UK aint that bad, and I doubt USA is either.

I'll bet the pilot received a citation for the accident. He flooded his engine. That's the plane truth. He was winging it when he landed. Now he's underwater on his payments.

good video, love the way at the start when his mate goes run! and he does about 3 steps and looks like he gives up.. (i know his car was next to him just looked funny)

@Historymaker2001 Right engine was running... you can clearly see the the thrust attenuator on the right engine was deployed indicating that the engine is in idle...

This is another reason that Bader Feild closed. Atlantic City doesn't need that close of an airport anyways. Use the longer runway inland, and take a bus, rookie.

My philosophy on this is the same that I apply to some drivers on the road. Just because someone has a license doesn't mean they should be driving(flying).

Honestly I'm surprised he didn't request an upwind landing or reverse direction landing. Do deal with the wind. would have been a safer thing to do.

This was hes private jet evigt he flew himself (my Dad flew with him as pilot) the owner of This plane is from Denmark (As i am myself ofcourse)

+Theredundantrose Un petit point bancal, tout de même !

+Theredundantrose Y'a pas de soucie , vous avez bien fait, je comprends parfaitement. Bonne soirée à vous aussi et encore merci pareillement...:-)

+ilona Je ne faisais qu'un petit 'point' pour expliquer facilement, rien de sérieux ... Je vous souhaite une bonne soirée et beaucoup de bonheur... :)

+Ewen Goisot Eh oui, l'année zéro n'existe pas !Quand on est jeune, c'est désagréable de passer pour une andouille, même si on a raison. Avec l'âge, c'est un plaisir de fin gourmet de passer pour une andouille auprès d'un troupeau d'imbéciles.Sage réflexe en tout cas, de vérifier le choses dont on n'est pas sûr, c'est le début de la sagesse et la clef d'acquisition d'une connaissance réelle et solide.Pour moi, cela me paraissait évident qu'un siècle donné se définit par ce qu'il est entamé (ex. : 1248 c'est le 13è siècle car il y a 12 siècles pleins + des années ayant entamé le 13è) mais je conçois que pour d'autres l'évidence ne soit pas au rendez-vous. Tout cela n'est qu'affaire de connaissance et de conventions. Plus sioux est la charnière d'un siècle donné...

+Theredundantroseen fait si, il y a besoin d'aller sur Wikipédia (ou sur un autre site, ou un livre ou une vidéo, peu importe) pour savoir ça.nous sommes des humains, pas des dieux, nous ne sommes pas omniscients, nous avons besoin d'une source pour savoir les informations (sauf peut-être dans les sciences abstraites).je peux te dire qu'en troisième, ma prof de latin avait affirmé qu'une personne née en -50 et morte en +50 (le même jour par exemple), serait morte à 100 ans, je l'ai contredit, affirmant que c'était 99, car l'année 0 n'existe pas... et me suis ridiculisé devant toute la classe!! (parce qu'à priori, les gens vont plutôt croire leur prof qu'un élève...) pourtant j'avais raison (je l'ai su grâce à une vérification ultérieure effectuée sur Wikipédia justement).Des exemples comme celui-là, j'en ai plein, c'est pour ça que je préfère justifier mes affirmations.aussi parce que ce que l'on apprend en cours (ou ailleurs) n'est pas toujours la vérité, je pense que c'est une bonne chose de faire des petites vérifications de temps en tempset réfléchis: si des gens disent que c'est le 13è et d'autres disent que c'est le 14è, il n'y a aucune raison de croire un groupe plus que l'autre, sauf si des preuves sont apportées.

+Theredundantrose "+Ewen Goisot :)) on n'a pas besoin de wikipedia pour savoir ça :)) Bonsoir!""+ilona eh bien, non, le 1400 c'est le XVème siècle... étudiez vos siècles svp :)) 2000 c'est le XXIème siècle, 20ème c'était 1900... et ainsi de suite.."Apparemment, toi, tu as besoin de wikipédia pour comprendre quand commence et quand finit un siècle. Tu aurais mieux fait de t'abstenir plutôt que de raconter des conneries et de reprendre les autres, car tu as dit une vérité et une connerie donc, au final tu racontes des conneries !ilona s'était trompée mais quand je lui ai expliqué sa méprise, elle l'a reconnue. Fais-en de même car là, tu es aux fraises !L'an 2000 c'est encore le 20è siècle! Le 21è siècle ne commence que le 1er janvier 2001 !

+Theredundantrose Juste , c'est vrai, y'a eu une confusion de ma part, je sais j'ai fais une erreur :-/

+TheTiobiloute62 "protocole des sages de sion" ?Que veux-tu dire à ce propos ?

+islamofuge  "protocole des sages de sion"

+ilona L'erreur est humaine. Ne pas admettre ses erreurs c'est là un vrai problème, surtout en matière de doctrines du salut.Il faut éviter de se jeter tête baissée dans des affirmations non fondées. Et apprendre de ses erreurs passées. Là est l'essentiel.NB : souviens-toi aussi, car c'est une erreur très courante, que l'an finissant par zéro à chaque siècle n'est pas le siècle suivant. Par exemple l'an 2000 faisait encore partie du 20ème siècle, ce n'est qu'à partir du 1er janvier 2001 qu'a commencé le 21ème siècle.Sois bénie !

+ilona"1352 c'est le 14ème siècle.?? absolument pas , c'est le 13 ème, le 14 éme siecle commence des 1400 ans"Non, ilona, avec tout le respect fraternel que j'ai pour toi, tu fais erreur. On dit qu'on est à un siècle donné quand on a entamé le siècle en question. Si tu es en 1352, c'est que tu as déjà passé un peu plus de 13 siècles et demi depuis le début de notre ère et que, depuis 1301 (et jusque l'an 1400 inclus car il n'y a pas d'an zéro), tu as attaqué le 14ème siècle. C'est le fait d'avoir entamé le siècle en question qui compte. Ce n'est pas une doctrine du salut mais, tout de même, il fallait faire cette petite mise au point.NB : l'an zéro n'existe pas : notre ère chrétienne commence en l'an 1.

+ilona justement, si je regarde sur wikipedia,https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/XIVe_si%C3%A8cle on trouve:"Le xive siècle (ou 14e siècle) commence le 1er janvier 1301 et finit le 31 décembre 1400.",donc islamafuge a raison, 1352 c'est le 14ème siècle.

+Carlitos__21 Il ne nous reste plus que la 3 eme guerre mondiale . J'ai hate pour qu'on en finisse avec ce système satanique .

alex jones is a retard who need to be executed in usa... he destoryed the entire 911 movement... all the scholars of 911 said it was israel behind it and there were NO airplanes...but this retard said it was inside job and there were airplanes... he also used one of my clip in 2008 in his trailer and his website... he says there is no al qaida and now he says it is .... i wish for him a painful death...cant stand his ugly face and voice

He is very much correct. I figured backed during the Libya incident that CIA instigated this for the purpose of setting a change in regime in the middle east friendly to the U.S. (and controlled covertly) and to pressure Iran and flank Russia. This is a strategic power play in the never-ending Cold War that goes on right now at the cost of 1,000's of innocent lives... Very Sad indeed!!

I'm afraid you have it all wrong. It is not the USA or Israel or other western country that is doing it. Those countries have been invaded and taken over by globalist illuminati, and THEY are the ones behind it. Most of the people under their control are against the wars, as I am.

You have to remember one fact - wars will never ends. You, little human being will stop drop coming from the tap but you will never stop a WAR. Good talk , too bad because its not working.

You mean because he is telling the truth?? or because he is blowing Al-Quadea cover, which is it?? The U.S. public is learning about the real force behind this "Arab Spring" Thank God!!

Part of Agenda 21? The Dark Team of Illuminati hard at work!? Al Qaeda probably wears TSA regulation underpants.

wow,, he keeps critisizing the country that gives him free speach and his wife and family freedom to learn.

Anybody who INTENTIONALLY targets children (such as happened in Beslan Russia) are evil terrorist..

full of conspiracies and still no evidence besides bullshit supporting more bullshit.

Zbigniew Brzezinski and his evil at work, civillians getting slaughtered by terrorist!

Why?? for telling the truth?? Sure glad someone is telling the truth!!

Ouch Alex, your satire really hurts but unfortunately, in part, true

Al Qadea = CIA and Mossad= SAME TEAM

And your point is?

no, the U.S

Anyone who speaks or writes in code is a cult.!!It is to hide the truth...These scumbags are going straight to Hell..!!!

Great Video!!!