Teckair

Ch7 news said she was at 9000 ft when both engines stopped which didn't make sense to me. Probably just incorrect reporting. 

19 minutes ago, Carbon Canary said:

As the saying goes for twin engine aircraft……..”it’s ok if one engine quits - the other will still be able to carry you to the scene of the crash”

There are people on here who claimed that a piston engine twin can fly on one engine with no problems eg Whyalla Airlines. 

Apparently it was not the tug aircraft. News saying it was a ultralight Sabre. Near airports you really need to be reporting on the correct frequency.

How does a tug aircraft collide with the glider? I'm surprised there are not more mid air accidents. Speaking from experience it's nearly impossible to see a aircraft approaching towards you head on.

In about 1989 I was at the Donnington air park. I went for a flight with a guy in a 503 Thruster. He was climbing out at 45 kts. I told him if the motor failed he would crash. He said some times he climbed at 40 kts and he had to do that to get it to climb. I got out of that plane and another passenger got in. During the take off there was a partial engine failure it went from full power to 4000 rpm. This resulted in a crash the pilot was not a old person who had just been warned about the risk. In about 1993 a person I had been instructing in my Thruster at Childers went and bought the Donnington crash Thruster. He went flying with a Bundaberg instructor who I don't think had experience with Thrusters. This instructor pulled the power on take off which resulted in another crash. They couldn't recover even though the motor was still running. 

I had well over 1000 hours of instructing in ultralights. Over 300 was in Thrusters, Gemini, TST, T300, T500, but apparently I don't know what I am talking about. I was part of the solution in solving the Gemini nodding problem but once again I don't know what I talking about. AUF personal and the then Thruster factory at the time knew of the dangers of EFOTF with a 503 fully loaded Thruster. I think I have been reminded why it is a waste of time posting on these forums. 

It was common knowledge that 503 Thusters were dangerous on take off. Are you calling me a liar ?

24 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

Not unlike a thruster at MTOW. A PILOT will instantly note any change in engine sound and act accordingly. Know your aircraft.  

Yes I agree the early Thrusters with the 503 would crash if you lost power on take off. With the 582 you could climb out at 65 kts which gave you time to get the nose down but you still had to be quick.

Surprisingly these machines exist, I have been told in the event of a power failure after one and a half seconds they turn into a homesick manhole cover. I wouldn't get in one.

I have been told Robinson helicopters have low inertia main rotors and in the event of an engine failure you only have 1.5 seconds to react.

No surprise there, what I saw was wreckage in someone's back yard there was video of the accident as well, total BS.

On the TV news I saw tail end of a report  of a helicopter crash in a built up urban area in WA. It appeared to be a different accident to the wheat belt one. There might have been two accidents and four deaths?

Does anyone know what the weather conditions were at the time?

On the news tonight accident west of Brisbane plane departed Dalby and went missing. Three people dead,  wreckage scattered in inhospitable territory. The pilot was reported as very experienced as a well known identity. I am wondering what the weather was like in that area today. 

Just seen on channel 7 news Drifter accident on Woodgate Beach one person in hospital and one ok.

Was a beautiful aircraft but if you end up upside down in a paddock not good can't get out. Pilot has done well I think. 

Happy to see the pilot is OK. 

Can anyone advise as to whether or not trike hire is available in Australia?

There appears to be no fire.

Maybe climate change is now causing these crashes you know the drought and all that?

I think most pilots know that low flying is dangerous but they still choose to do it. I talked to a bloke with who flew in a dangerous manner and he said he was just having fun and I said yeah but you are dead a long time. Now he's dead, it's all a part of evolution, most times you can't change it.

 

You would not have to be very bright to work out the low flying I was talking about was not take off and landing.

I think most pilots know that low flying is dangerous but they still choose to do it. I talked to a bloke with who flew in a dangerous manner and he said he was just having fun and I said yeah but you are dead a long time. Now he's dead, it's all a part of evolution, most times you can't change it.

And that sums it up for the beat-ups doesn't matter how good you think you are.

I think something more than the pilot landed short has happened to cause this. I can't see how anyone flying that plane could not work out they going to be short and fail to do something about it. Watching it again looks/sounds like they put the power on a bit and then messed up the landing maybe this pilot needs to go back flight school?

Why I always did glide approaches. Which in turn is how I survived a lot of engine failures (probably about 20).