Dafydd Llewellyn Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Depends on what else is going on at the time; if things are quiet and there's a fatality and there's potentially an airworthiness issue, i.e. something to be learned, I think they may be prepared to look at it; but I understand that hasn't happened in this instance. They usually don't get involved with experimental aircraft, which essentially this is. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 18, 2014 Share Posted July 18, 2014 Things have changed recently; check out the latest developments; They will be investigating more RAA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham brown Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 On the bottom of the pile on photo 18 it looks like the rudder to me. It looks like where the skins are riveted to the tapered tube. I'm constructing one of these so the investigation will be of great interest. Indeed I won't fly it until there is some real information available on this incident. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest russ.mullins Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Gday to everyone contributing to this post, it seems to have moved off track from an expression of sadness for the guys who lost their lives to a kinda soul searching view on what makes us fly when the risk analysis is always going to be in the slightly higher catagory the most other hobbies. Im really interested to hear what caused this accident because I fly a similar plane. On the matter of whether flying was the right hobby for me I can report that despite months of absolutely terrible weather I wanted to get aloft before I went on holidays if only to keep my skills up and to get back onto the horse. Last weekend there was a break in the clouds and I did my risk analysis and went up in a 20 kt wind. It was a headwind so other than the turns it was safer for landing than most as I was touching down at a TAS of about 20kts. It actually felt fantastic to be aloft and reminded my why I need to get better at this caper and why I love to fly. I should also mention that a portion of my initial emotive post was driven by more than just the tragic death of 2 of our bothers, it was also a frustration at the way I perceive we are treated by RAA. I sometimes think that the way we are criticised in the sports flyer magazine is more about them demonstrating to CASA that they are dealing with compliance than a genuine belief that we have cowboys amongst us and our organisation being a basket case, but from my view as a member I usually feel they are taking free kicks at a whole group of ppl who are doing all we can to be safe and stay alive. I dont know anyone who knowingly takes risks indeed the biggest risk taker I have flown with was a GA pilot. so just to balance the ledger I can report that I arrived in london 24 hrs ago to hear that some scumbag murderers killed a whole plane load if innocent ppl. This really cleared my head about flying my plane, in the flights I have been in charge of I have narrowly missed an eagle at 6000ft over burrinjuck dam, I have had a piper warrior appear 20m above me as I was about 200m from touchdown while I was doing my GA training in Cessnock (indian trainee pilot on first solo, froze and forgot his calls ) and I still fly despite those incidents beyond my control. For me its time to reflect on the death of the 2 guys and to remember why I love to fly and just keep doing what I do, being as safe as I can, and driving to NATFLY instead of flying to avoid the unjustified fear of a CASA rampcheck.. really looking forward to RAA putting out the ramp check checklist, then I might start flying in again. Off to Ireland tomorrow then Belgium First world war battlefields, lets hope I dont sprain an ankle in a pothole while im away, the flying should be the safe bit! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biggles Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 Gday to everyone contributing to this post, it seems to have moved off track from an expression of sadness for the guys who lost their lives to a kinda soul searching view on what makes us fly when the risk analysis is always going to be in the slightly higher catagory the most other hobbies. Im really interested to hear what caused this accident because I fly a similar plane. On the matter of whether flying was the right hobby for me I can report that despite months of absolutely terrible weather I wanted to get aloft before I went on holidays if only to keep my skills up and to get back onto the horse. Last weekend there was a break in the clouds and I did my risk analysis and went up in a 20 kt wind. It was a headwind so other than the turns it was safer for landing than most as I was touching down at a TAS of about 20kts. It actually felt fantastic to be aloft and reminded my why I need to get better at this caper and why I love to fly.I should also mention that a portion of my initial emotive post was driven by more than just the tragic death of 2 of our bothers, it was also a frustration at the way I perceive we are treated by RAA. I sometimes think that the way we are criticised in the sports flyer magazine is more about them demonstrating to CASA that they are dealing with compliance than a genuine belief that we have cowboys amongst us and our organisation being a basket case, but from my view as a member I usually feel they are taking free kicks at a whole group of ppl who are doing all we can to be safe and stay alive. I dont know anyone who knowingly takes risks indeed the biggest risk taker I have flown with was a GA pilot. so just to balance the ledger I can report that I arrived in london 24 hrs ago to hear that some scumbag murderers killed a whole plane load if innocent ppl. This really cleared my head about flying my plane, in the flights I have been in charge of I have narrowly missed an eagle at 6000ft over burrinjuck dam, I have had a piper warrior appear 20m above me as I was about 200m from touchdown while I was doing my GA training in Cessnock (indian trainee pilot on first solo, froze and forgot his calls ) and I still fly despite those incidents beyond my control. For me its time to reflect on the death of the 2 guys and to remember why I love to fly and just keep doing what I do, being as safe as I can, and driving to NATFLY instead of flying to avoid the unjustified fear of a CASA rampcheck.. really looking forward to RAA putting out the ramp check checklist, then I might start flying in again. Off to Ireland tomorrow then Belgium First world war battlefields, lets hope I dont sprain an ankle in a pothole while im away, the flying should be the safe bit! Nothing to worry about Russ , providing you are doing the right thing of course . Enjoy your holiday in the UK ,come back refreshed and get back into the Cheetah . (Some reading material for you ) Bob I’m a Sport pilot and have been selected by a CASA inspector for a ramp check Printer-friendly version What happens now? I’m a Sport pilot and have been selected by a CASA inspector for a ramp check The inspector will ask you for, or confirm, your pilot certificate and other relevant documentation You should carry your pilot certificate with you when you fly. However, some sport organisations may have different rules, so check your organisation’s operational manual or regulations. It is also suggested that you carry a copy of your log book page with last flight review. Current/valid RAAO membership Aeroplane operated in accordance with the privileges and limitations of your pilot’s certificate Correct endorsements for flight You must carry your current aviation medical certificate if applicable and you must be compliant with any restrictions or endorsements on your medical certificate or driver’s licence (e.g. the wearing of corrective lenses). The inspector will then check your preparation for flight Flight plan Have you maintained a navigation/fuel log? Have you made a careful study of forecast weather and applicable NOTAMs? ≥ 50nm from departure point ELT/PLB required for two-place aeroplane If carrying a passenger - passenger endorsement ≥ 25nm from departure point – cross country endorsement Are you carrying the appropriate, current charts and documents? Are they easily accessible? Are you carrying an EFB for your charts and documents? Back-ups considered? Finally, the inspector will check your aircraft The inspector will check: The aircraft’s registration is current Condition of the aircraft The daily inspection Pilot’s operating handbook (POH) or flight manual Emergency checklists Warning placard if applicable Copy of CofA if applicable Aircraft has a placarded maximum take-off weight in accordance with the flight manual Aircraft is operated within weight and balance limits Required emergency equipment on board is serviceable and accessible if applicable Personal locator beacon (PLB) has current registration with the Australian Maritime Safety Authority (AMSA) Document references Operations manual CAO 95 series as applicable Operations Responsibilities of the pilot in command before flight – CAR 233 Planning of flight by the pilot in command – CAR 239 Navigation logs – CAR 78 Fuel requirements – CAR 234 Weather and NOTAM – CAR 233 & AIP ENR 1-10 paragraph 1. EFBs – CAO 82.0, CAR 233 and CAAP 233-1(1) Aircraft Checklists – CAR 232 Emergency equipment – CAR 252A (two-place aeroplane only) *Regulation details current as of December 2013 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted July 19, 2014 Share Posted July 19, 2014 It was a headwind so other than the turns it was safer for landing than most as I was touching down at a TAS of about 20kts. Hi Russ just being helpful here as you may already know this but what you meant there was ground speed (GS). Richard. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Virago Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 Some have made reference to photographs of the remains of this aircraft but I can't find any links to them. As I am building one myself I would like to see them. John. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dafydd Llewellyn Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 Quote: " I did my risk analysis and went up . . ." That's precisely what you do every time you get into either an Experimental or a CAO 95.55.1.5 ( -19 registration) aircraft. It is, in fact, one of your freedoms (the right to assume personal risk) as an Australian citizen; recognition of this was the reason the Howard government in 1994 instructed CASA to introduce an American-style Experimental category; and thus why it was introduced in CASR Part 21, in 1998 - I know, because I was involved. So it's not actually something to be sarcastic about; SAAA and AOPA had been fighting for this for decades. However, you cannot assume a risk unless you understand fully the nature of that risk. How completely do you (or for that matter the vast majority of RAA members) actually understand the risk? What do you really know of aircraft safety standards? Or are you what the hillbilly described as "Iggernut"? (Iggernut = doan know an' doan wanna know). 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graham brown Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 http://www.southcoastregister.com.au/story/2416205/plane-crash-wreckage-brought-ashore-photos/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oscar Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 There's an even more complete set at: http://www.batemansbaypost.com.au/story/2419290/plane-crash-search-for-answers-continues-photos-video/?cs=12#slide=1 , though that has many photos of people and other subjects beyond actual crash wreckage. They're chilling. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reggie Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 So Dafydd, What is your point? I guess Im a hillbilly, maybe a Iggernut. At the most just a pleb. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M61A1 Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 So Dafydd, What is your point? I guess Im a hillbilly. I would take a stab that it means along the lines of, since people started buying off the shelf factory built LSA aircraft, they rely heavily on what the manufacturer says it is capable of, it's durability and what maintenance it requires, rather than been involved in the design and testing themselves. So then they really know bugger all about it. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reggie Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 Yep thats fine. We all buy factory built. So what about people building their own but follow the instructions and don't change the plans to suit what they think is better? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 Good Lord. That thing must have hit the water at a very high speed to explode like those pictures show. The thing is barely recognisable. There doesn't appear to be one piece left in its original shape. Even the engine oil filter is crushed. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 The witness statements did say say it went straight down rather than spinning so the terminal velocity would be the maximum. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teckair Posted July 20, 2014 Share Posted July 20, 2014 When the manufacturer is able to do the certification themselves, isn't that like putting the fox in charge of the hen house? Is the manufacturer required to have any qualifications to produce certified LSA aircraft? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fly_tornado Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 have to meet ATSM standards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Richard, LSA is fairly well controlled (we hope). 19 Kits may be more of a worry because you need some confidence the builder is competent and has significant knowledge of the effects of his hand work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 The witness statements did say say it went straight down rather than spinning so the terminal velocity would be the maximum. Like hitting a concrete slab I would imagine Tubz, the poor buggas wouldn't have stood a chance, something catastrophic must have happened for neither of then to be able to regain control. May they rest in peace. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
motzartmerv Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 yes. Horrible. Theres many factors the investigators will be considering. Both experienced, one with in excess of 20,000 hours, aerobatic, test pilot of all sorts of weird and wonderful contraptions, including a flying saucer, ground effect ferries, and every make and model you could think of. The sequence being a review, knowing the way the Instructor generally did things, the timing is perfect for the upper air work component of the review. (stalling etc) The fact the aircraft was reasonably low time post build. No mayday call given I can assure you, the RAA will be doing their absolute best to get to the bottom of this. Not only due to the seemingly "clear blue sky' component and the implications of that, but also the fact these are a common kit aircraft and the questions about a failure will need to be addressed, only AFTER and IF its proven to be the case. 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ozzie Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Sitting on the bottom while a big swell was running for 8 days then dragging it up from 20 mts would have finished it off. It is amazing what the power of water can do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thruster87 Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 There appears to be a large fuselage side sheet that has all the rivets sheared rather then the sheet torn. Anyone know what brand / type of rivets used or recommended by Morgan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Well I'd imagine if you hit the water at a high speed, the water entering the fuselage from the front would literally blow the metal off all the rivets on the fuselage because of the huge concussion pressures. From what I saw of the photographs and what was reported; what you see on the photographs would appear understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thruster87 Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 What has all that to do with the question of brand /type of rivet used, or are you saying it matters not on the type of rivets in the construction process due to the forces en-counted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Isaac Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Yes, I was suggesting that the nature of the forces would have popped the Al sheet off the rivets. The forces could possibly have been uniform and concussive in nature. I'm not a metallurgist, I was just surmising using basic physics. I cannot speak with any authority on this matter it is simply an assumption on my part as to why the Al looks like it does. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now