Jump to content
Jabiru7252

plane hits ferris wheel - video

Recommended Posts

This happened years ago but this is the first time I have seen any video...

 

https://www.9news.com.au/2019/03/11/19/41/news-nsw-plane-crashes-into-ferris-wheel-trapping-riders

 

 

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Interesting claim by the pilot against the airfield.

It's the way of the world. "It wasn't my fault. Somebody else did the wrong thing. Money will ease my mind."

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought you guys would have remembered the incident...the threads at the time were long enough on it about where the ferris wheel was placed and it was inside the takeoff angle from the airstrip at Old Bar. Although that is the first video I have seen of the crash thats for sure

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I think that this is the first time this particular video has been released. The original newsreel videos showed the aftermath only. It clearly shows the Ferris wheel within the takeoff splay. The "Aviation Fuel" was actually Mogas but nonetheless equally dangerous if there had been a spark big enough to ignite it. I met Paul when I was in Taree to pick up my Sierra kit before this happened. He seemed like a nice bloke. Later he bought a Cheetah from Garry Morgan ( possibly to "Get back on the horse") but developed psychological problems I believe related to the crash and sold it and gave up flying.

 

I am surprised that the Council hasn't settled these claims by now. They can't surely believe that they did everything right.

Edited by kgwilson
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is about the average time it takes for lawyers to investigate all the details, decide if there is to be a claim, get the paperwork done, and for the court process to start. Normally they would go after all the people who had a duty of care at the airfield, so it wouldn't necessarily be just the Council.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, turboplanner said:

Interesting claim by the pilot against the airfield.

The girl has sued the pilot. I suspect that his insurance company (RAAus liability insurance?) don't want to foot the entire bill and so are looking for someone to share the cost hence the pilots insurance co. is suing the council.... The pilot has to be a part of the proceedings otherwise his insurance co. wont pay out to the girl and he will have to personally pay.

 

Subrogation

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/subrogation.asp

 

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From the SMH.

 

The now 21-year-old says she now suffers psychological problems and she's suing the Greater Taree City Council as well as the pilot.

Mr Cox himself is suing the local council, claiming it was negligent in a number of ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's strange that years ago when something happened you dealt with it and moved on. Now everyone has psychological problems or suffers embarrassment, humiliation etc at the drop of a hat spurred on of course by the promise by lawyers of a big payout. The lawyers are normally the only winners with their costs eating up most of the payout.

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With all the cross litigation the biggest part of the cost will be lawyers fees and charges, just the photcopying bill (at $50 a sheet or whatever they charge) would be in the millions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I hope for the greater good of the community that Taree council has the same success as Kempsey council in the kangaroo case. Some of the trees (they are noted in the AIRFIELD guide) seem to be as high as the Ferris wheel. The pilots poor performance and very late decision to go around caused this accident. I would like to fly to Old bar in the future but may not get that opportunity.  

  • Agree 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(a) The plaintiffs have to prove that there was a duty of care, and it was breached, as they always have since Donoghue V Stevenson became the precedent in 1932, so there must be some very old members if they want to gripe about the "good old days".

 

(b) The cases are about to be heard, so it would be very unwise to speculate about possible causes or details of the incident.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a photocopier and I can cut it back a bit less than $ 50 / A4 sheet (A3 a bit extra) ............................... if there is any work out there ?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I fail to see how he flew straight into it. I know I wasn’t there but there doesn’t even look like a last minute roll or anything.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, BLA82 said:

I fail to see how he flew straight into it. I know I wasn’t there but there doesn’t even look like a last minute roll or anything.

 

I have a vague recollection that there was some claim by the council or maybe it was the people suing the pilot that there was a cross wind and that the aircraft was pushed across into the Ferris wheel. 

They claimed that if flying in a cross wind and maintaining his desired path was beyond the pilots skill then he was negligent in flying in conditions beyond his skill. 

His counter was that the Ferris wheel was erected within the required splay of the airfield which is required by law precisely because crosswinds can cause drift in even the best pilots and that flying within the splay demonstrated adequate skill. The negligence being that the Ferris wheel has been erected within the splay. 

 

I dont know whether that initial assertion or the pilots response had any effect on the outcome. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even if there was something in the splay, I would still be trying my best NOT to fly into it....

 

Is it a bit like watching someone ilegally cross the road in front of you but not slowing down, and hitting them because you were in the right......?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

His statement then was he saw the trees & knew he could avoid them but just didn't see the Ferris wheel. Old Bar is pretty short and he hit the Ferris wheel on the second go-around. It was definitely within the 5 degree splay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  IF you are climbing at or near the max pitch attitude for best climb angle you are not getting the best view over the nose of what's in front of you, in most single engined planes. In an extended climb, clearing the nose was taught to be done periodically to avoid other traffic etc  At low levels this won't be done generally as you are concentrating on just flying it accurately till you get a bit of height under you..

   Erecting that Ferris wheel where it was contravened the usual rules where a splay runs from each end of the runway,  for the exact reason that a plane may need such a splay to exist for safety reasons in unusual circumstances.. IT should not have been there.. That is quite clear and the circumstances proved that to be the case. .. Nev

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 There's nothing new in what I've written. and it should apply to all ALA's.  Maybe Ferris wheels  Trees  etc will not be in splays, and that won't be a bad thing. Nev

  • Agree 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, facthunter said:

 There's nothing new in what I've written. and it should apply to all ALA's.  Maybe Ferris wheels  Trees  etc will not be in splays, and that won't be a bad thing. Nev

No, but the participants may not know what you know, or you may influence the proceedings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IF I'm providing facts, what's the problem? Anyone who does a bit of searching can find what I'm saying and   it's relevant to the situation  and other similar situations, potentially.  Also this is a pretty old case. People are entitled to debate issues openly for the sake of safety, and that's the way I've always approached these matters, and my purpose in commenting....   Nev

  • Agree 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Downunder said:

Even if there was something in the splay, I would still be trying my best NOT to fly into it....

 

Is it a bit like watching someone ilegally cross the road in front of you but not slowing down, and hitting them because you were in the right......?

Not if you are nose up, on climb out. The Ferris wheel would not be in his field of view. (As he stated in the case ) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

This discussion of details needs to stop because of the current court cases in progress. 

No it doesn’t. None of us are associated with the case and nothing anyone says here is prejudicial to any outcome. We are an uninformed group discussing a public event. 

  • Agree 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Register for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×