Cessna down with 4 on board

[alf jessup]

Sad that someone has passed in this accident, the pilot probably did his best to handle the situation ahead of him at the time.

 

He is only human like the rest of us

 

Shame we are always going to be judged by our last landing whether it be good or bad

 

Lot of could haves - should haves but it is what it is and cannot be changed

 

Sad part is the pilot will live for the rest of his life knowing someone lost their life while he was in charge

 

 

[ozbear]

Sad that someone has passed in this accident, the pilot probably did his best to handle the situation ahead of him at the time.He is only human like the rest of us

Shame we are always going to be judged by our last landing whether it be good or bad

 

Lot of could haves - should haves but it is what it is and cannot be changed

 

Sad part is the pilot will live for the rest of his life knowing someone lost their life while he was in charge

Condolances to all on board and to family and friends of the deceased flying is a risk and sometimes accidents happen we can only try to avoid them and keep risk to a minimum and learn from what's happened once we know I feel for the pilot having this happen while sharing the sport he obviously loves.

 

 

[Teckair]

In the local paper they are saying the pilot was a hero because 'He crashed plane on beach so no one would drown' for me that leaves more questions than answers. Also they are saying it happened on Middle Island is that aeroplane beach? I have landed on aeroplane beach it was a excellent landing area hence the name but I am pretty sure it was not on a Island.

 

 

[Yenn]

It is an Island, but one that would be hard to define because it appears to be part of the mainland. Nearby is Boyne Island which is similar. You wouldn't know it was an island unless you were told.

 

I still find it hard to comprehend that an engine failure caused the crash, unless the approach was way too low.

 

Using a normal 1000' circuit height you should be able to make the beach, or if not you wouild land before you got to Bustard Head Light, which is where they have landed in the past.

 

 

[Teckair]

I still find it hard to comprehend that an engine failure caused the crash, unless the approach was way too low..

I would have thought that beach at low tide would be an ideal place if you had an engine failure unless you were low when it happened and could not line up with the beach.

 

 

[Yenn]

If you were low wouldn't you be contravening the rules?

 

Possibly if you were flying at 500' above GL in the normal circuit area you could be in trouble, but who would you blame for that?

 

 

[Teckair]

If you were low wouldn't you be contravening the rules?Possibly if you were flying at 500' above GL in the normal circuit area you could be in trouble, but who would you blame for that?

I'm thinking something is wrong with this picture but it probably is best to wait for the official report seeing as there will actually be one.

 

 

[Kununurra]

Jumping to conclusions will not provide any learnings at all, we all know how long it takes for the facts to be investigated which will provide the learnings for us all,nothing can change what has happened this is a tragic event, let's all hope the remaining injured people pull through ok.

 

 

[gibby]

 

There are a couple of these videos on youtube. From another website this is allegedly the company involved, not good for a commercial flight. I am not saying this was the reason for this accident but it dosnt paint a great picture!

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

There are a couple of these videos on youtube. From another website this is allegedly the company involved, not good for a commercial flight. I am not saying this was the reason for this accident but it dosnt paint a great picture!

Yes, I found half a dozen similar videos and it appears to me that there's a rather questionable 'culture' in that operation. Most of the videos feature Bruce as the pilot, and if the boss operates in a particular way I think it'd be likely to have a rub-off effect on other pilots in the line.

 

Things I noted from the videos that appear to flout the CASRs for a Commercial joyflighting operation might be -

 

• Pax not under instruction but permitted and encouraged to manipulate the controls
   
   
  
• Aerobatics in utility category aircraft that are probably not rated for it
   
   
  
• Rear seat passengers carried during aerobatic flight - this could move the CG aft of the most aft position permitted during aerobatic flight and/or could make the AUW over the max weight permitted for aerobatic flight (if the aircraft was permitted to perform aerobatics in the first place)
   
   
  
• Passengers told to remove their seatbelts then deliberate negative G operations conducted
   
   
  
• Deliberate aerobatic flight with unsecured items in the cabin
   
   
  
• Extended periods of low-level flight which was not during take-off or landings
   
   
  

 

 

Though it might be the kind of madcap antics that backpackers actively seek, as you said gibby, it doesn't paint a great picture. I can think of a few shoes I probably wouldn't want to be in as CASA and ATSB delve deeper into this investigation.

 

 

[BLA82]

Judging by that video what a f wit

 

 

[Oscar]

IF that video was taken on one flight, then the rh front pax and the lh rear pax exchanged places in flight (or so it appears to me.). Possibly, they landed and exchanged places, and I missed it? I admit to being almost instantly turned off watching closely from the 'does anyone like roller-coasters?' comment: I am of the opinion that a responsible pilot does NOT scare the sh*te out of the pax. unless they have specifically signed up for aerobatics and therefore unusual attitudes.

 

IF that flight was specifically advertised as a 'thrill-a-minute' experience, then maybe fair enough. However, I don't think the choice of aircraft for such a flight was appropriate and the amount of unrestrained objects in the cabin is evidence of inadequate attention to safety.

 

Light aviation does not need and should come down heavily on 'cowboys'. We - as a group - absolutely will be affected by society's reaction to a perceived high accident rate. A few cowboys making a few $$ from dodgy practices will result in more restrictive legislation, higher insurance premiums and lost respect from the general community. Lost respect can mean the loss of useful airfields, airspace restrictions etc.

 

I make no judgment on the specifics of this incident from that video - it may well be that it is totally unrepresentative of the operation of this company. However, if the PIC in that video is still operating in that manner, then he needs to be taken out behind the shed and given a real, thorough, kicking.

 

 

[poteroo]

Can't say I've ever seen more Regs busted in one flight than that one. A scenic flight? You've got to be joking!

 

 

[David Isaac]

IF that video was taken on one flight, then the rh front pax and the lh rear pax exchanged places in flight (or so it appears to me.). Possibly, they landed and exchanged places, and I missed it? ......

They landed on the beach Oscar, if you blinked you would have missed it ...

 

 

[Oscar]

Thanks, DI, I must have blinked.. So scratch one of my objections. I would really like it if the rest of them could be also proven wrong.

 

 

[Yenn]

I believe that video is not recent and that the pilot has been dealt with by CASA, unless it is a different video to the one I saw some time ago. Can't be bothered to sit through it again.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

I believe that video is not recent and that the pilot has been dealt with by CASA, unless it is a different video to the one I saw some time ago. Can't be bothered to sit through it again.

Might be old but that only poses the question of how long this has been going on.

 

Here's another of several on Youtube, posted in 2007 ... and the poster introduces it with -

 

"Plane trip in australia, the town of 1770. The pilot, Bruce, decided to show us some acrobatics and plummets us into free fall without warning. Leeroys face is priceless, he hates rollercoasters."

 

You can see the pilot's face quite well in the opening part of the video, looks remarkably like a ten years younger Bruce Rhoades, the owner of the air service, based on the picture of him in the news reports earlier in this thread. Same kind of 'acrobatics' too.

 

 

 

 

[alf jessup]

AOC should have been pulled for reckless behaviour, pilots licence taken away for ever

 

What a cowboy operation

 

Wasn't a matter of what if it was a matter of when and when has come and gone

 

 

[Yenn]

Alf. CASA did something about it at the time, but possibly it was not enough.

 

Another fatal a few years ago by a well regarded pilot who lost his commercial licence, but still kept doing joy flights must have been known about by CASA, but nothing done.

 

I wonder about CASA, how can someone be admonished by them, then allowed to carry on and eventually stuff up big time. But I can also see their side of the picture. I did a demo flight at a fly in, consisting of a high speed pass and a slow pass. Talking to the CASA rep later he told me that what I did could have been illegal, but he decided not to pursue it.

 

So there you see maybe I should have had my licence removed forever to stop me doing something stupid again and huurting someone. How can we decide what is serious contempt of rules and what is a minor event? Or rather how can CASA decide. The two that CASA decided not to come down heavily on were probably considered by CASA to be redeemable, but were not in actuality.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The paper may well be making many more reports over the next six or seven years Richard; these things are never over the day after they happen.

 

 

[poteroo]

I did a demo flight at a fly in, consisting of a high speed pass and a slow pass. Talking to the CASA rep later he told me that what I did could have been illegal, but he decided not to pursue it.So there you see maybe I should have had my licence removed forever to stop me doing something stupid again and huurting someone.

My guess is that the man from CASA was more interested in whether you flew the hi/lo speed passes at 50ft rather than 500ft. Once you decide to fly below 500ft - holding an ag, or a low level rating is a necessity. At a private fly-in, you don't have to be cleared by CASA to participate as a display pilot: but you do need to ensure your display doesn't endanger any other traffic or pose a potential danger to the non-aviation public present. If you plan to 'demo' an aircraft at a fly-in, be sure that you comply with the Regs, and all your paperwork is legit. happy days,

 

 

[Yenn]

I was asked to do a demo.

 

There is a reason for doing a high speed pass that could have enabled me to prevent conviction and anyway I am not sure the rules were broken as you can go below 500' or even 50' when landing or taking off.

 

Anyway I am happy that the CASA rep didn't think I was dangerous enough to take action against me.

 

If I went on to do other dangerous things of course his inaction could come back to haunt him.

 

I can assure you that I am will not.

 

 

[SDQDI]

If you are doing a low pass for a low passes sake then that is illegal without the proper endorsements. Having said that I am all for casa giving warnings especially for first offences rather than having too heavy of a hand up front.

 

 

[David Isaac]

Most people don't realise that if you are an ordinary PPL, RPL, RPC or what ever without a low level endorsement and you fly a low pass over a runway without the 'intent' to land, it breaches the regs. The exceptions are a baulked approach, a precautionary and a go around.

 

 

[Oscar]

Absolutely NOT having a shot at Yenn here: but isn't there a proscription about 'low-level flight' over 'public gathering' crowds?

 

I reckon that in 99.9% of the time, a sensible,well- considered low pass down a runway with almost NO chance of danger to the public by a competent pilot is as safe (or safer) for everybody than driving your car along a public road. If it's a private fly-in situation, one could reasonably expect that all the 'spectators' are aviation-aware people who have voluntarily chosen to be in the vicinity. In terms of liability, IF something happens, the argument that 'Recreational Aviation is an inherently dangerous sport' MIGHT mitigate any damages in the case that there is an accident involving 'spectators', who could be argued to be voluntarily engaging in 'Recreational Aviation.'

 

I would NOT like to be the one to be on the receiving end of having that tested in Court.

 

And, let's face it, not ALL low-passes' at fly-ins go to plan. IIR, the 'SuperSTOL' demonstrator had a crash at one such fairly recently ( though having seen some of the vids. of his slow passes, I was not impressed by his judgement of safe flying). I am sure that there are many, many impromptu demos. of aircraft at fly-ins etc. that are conducted with complete observance of the best standards of airmanship - and since Yenn's passes were absolutely incident-free (just an apparent minor technical breach of the regs.), I think we all should assume that this was the case.

 

However, 'compliance' with regulations is the first line of defence: 'I was doing everything in accordance with the requirements: this was an accident not foreseen by the regulators, therefore could not be foreseen by me'.

 

The temptation to demonstrate one's aircraft and to provide a bit of entertainment for the crowd, is very natural.

 

We talk about the emergence of 'the Nanny State' in disparaging terms - but even in the 1970's, EVERY ticket to a motor-car race meeting had the statement printed on it: 'Motor Racing is Dangerous, you Enter Onto the Circuit at Your Own Risk'. Small print, perhaps, but EVERY sanctioned motor-sport event carried its specific Public Risk Insurance premium cost.

 

And this is where it gets serious: it will take only ONE high-profile 'tragedy' at a fly-in or similar, where standard regs. were ignored, to have every 'public-involvement' Rec. Av. activity subject to strangling new regs. .No 'Brekky Barbecues', no Lolly Drops at Christmas, no 'come one, come all' fly-ins without permits, huge insurance premiums, etc.

 

Yes, it's sad and a reflection on how society has evolved. BUT: we cannot ignore it.