I'm leaning towards it being some extremely cheeky DCS/flightsim nerd because of the shortness and randomness of the flights.
It's not so easy to land a plane in real life, even if you have a lot of flightsim experience. It is definitely possible and there are people who have done it, but I don't think it's the norm. A lot of flying, especially landing, involves sensory inputs. Additionally, replacing the battery in that Cessna probably requires taking the cowling off. Not properly securing the battery or cowling may result in a bad time if something comes loose. Once again, doable, but you can do as quickly as you can with a car.
> I know literally nothing about flying. How does this work? Wouldn't the air traffic controllers see it on radar and try to radio it then call in the military (I've probably watched too many movies.)? Always blows my mind when I hear this kind of stuff in this day and age.
If you takeoff from an uncontrolled airport and stay clear of controlled and restricted airspace you don't have to say a single thing on any radio and no one will care about you. The controllers would see the blip on their radars but there's no requirements to check in with them (although it's generally a good idea) so they'll mostly keep other aircraft who they are talking to away from you.
Now, if you do fly into controlled airspace near an airport with a tower without talking to anyone, things will change. A slight excursion into the controlled airspace for a short time may go unnoticed, but the more blatant and prolonged the deviation, the larger the response will be. Fly into LAX's airspace and get in the way of their flights and you'll eventually get a visit from some friendly fighter jets. (There are some exceptions. For instance, there's a few narrow corridors through LAX's airspace that don't require talking to ATC. One of those corridors even goes directly over LAX's runways at a few thousand feet.)
Before those electronic methods became ubiquitous pilots used paper charts and references and used ground references, pilotage and navigation aids to determine their position on that paper map. For instance, here's the complex airspace around the aircraft owner's home airport. https://skyvector.com/?ll=33.897663018511054,-117.6024627647...
I dunno where I'd put it on the difficulty scale of things, but with lots of flight sim experience, it seems you're a lot better equipped than others. I've landed a Cessna, and I'm not a pilot, just eager enthusiast with some flight sim experience over many years. The person co-piloting/supervising told me I did great, and that he only allowed me to land the plane because I demonstrated proficiency in the air. I wouldn't say it's "hard", probably I'd have more trouble with finding and replacing the battery than the actual flying part.
Plenty of children (once they get big enough to reach the pedals) can take a car for a spin. That doesn't mean that driving safely in all conditions you may find yourself thrown in is easy, even with e.g. lots of racing game experience.
Absolutely, I agree. But I also didn't claim I'm now a professional airline pilot able to handle all situations, only that the "It's not so easy to land a plane in real life, even if you have a lot of flightsim experience" part isn't accurate based on my own experience.
The suggestion that proficiency "in the air" correlates to ability to land, and the referring to the PIC as "co-piloting" are both pretty good indicators that there's more to the story. Flying is fun, but doing so without training is terribly unforgiving.
Happy to share if you have some specific questions rather than insinuations :)
I'm not saying it wasn't reckless, but I also don't think the "It's not so easy to land a plane in real life, even if you have a lot of flightsim experience" part is fully accurate, but that's just anecdotal and based on personal experience.
Maybe your claim is more along lines of landing an airplane is easy in general. I’ve been flying for 10+ years and still have the occasional one that makes me think That landing really sucked. Let’s grant that you started making decent landings on your first flight lesson or two, and if so, you are in a tiny minority. The Gleim private pilot syllabus has first solo at Flight Lesson 11, which will be at 15 flight hours or more into training. Even then, I’m only soloing students on calm days with plenty of ceiling and visibility.
We had a DPE here in north Alabama who liked to talk candidates who were still wearing foggles all the way to the runway on their final landing of the practical test. He probably could have coached a brand new compliant student to a successful landing, but he had 40k+ hours in his logbook and gave more than ten thousand checkride approvals (not just attempts).
https://www.aopa.org/news-and-media/all-news/2017/june/14/so...
Why do these exist?
For details, take a look at the Los Angeles Special Flight Rules Area[0] on the Los Angeles TAC. It gives a narrow set of exceptions. Note the specific assigned altitudes that depend on direction of travel. Also notice that the other VFR transition routes do require ATC clearance.
[0]: https://skyvector.com/?ll=33.630638921294874,-119.6291085071...
For example, ATC might give an altitude restriction for safety: “Cessna 123AB, maintain VFR at or below three thousand for crossing traffic.” Observing this restriction is important, but staring at the altimeter will likely result in the heading wandering all over the place and ironically even a tendency to over-control altitude that may cause wandering up and down. The proper way to execute it is to learn what the level sight picture looks like, put the nose there, trim for straight-and-level flight, and occasionally peek at the altimeter and VSI to confirm that it’s staying there. If the pilot gets distracted, say looking down at an iPad for a bit, look outside first to get back on heading if necessary, check the instruments (“take a picture with your mind”), and make small adjustments to get back to where it should be.
ATC operates on lots of buffers. For a restriction of three thousand, that crossing traffic is likely to be at 4,000 or higher.
Look outside, and learn what correct looks like. References on the ground are already giving you gobs of information. The feel of the yoke and the sounds from the engine are also giving you continuous clues about what the airplane is doing. No sim I’ve seen reproduces all of those additional channels of information.
Where simulators are really helpful is with procedural flying, like practicing instrument approaches. You can’t log your desktop sim for currency, but advanced training devices are good enough in the FAA’s eyes.
You’re generally operating well away from a perilous state with ample margins of safety. I find flying incredibly relaxing.