M6RV6 wrote:WTFO
Dam,
If his engine had not quit someone would have put it up on facebook and been sayin Woo Hoo!!
Sure hope there aint any glass houeses on this subject!!
His engine quit low level with tall trees and a narrow road to land on in a new development that had not been cleared for house yet!!
Tough dam crowd on here!!
Everyone that can look in the mirror and say they have never been in a spot where if the engine quits they would have made a safe landing and not hurt the plane, stand up now and do a little preaching!!

As Forrest Gump said! All I'm going to say about that!!

GT

"Like"

scottf wrote:We simply can't afford to demonstrate carelessness with such a large audience. I'm all for having fun but at least try to keep a low profile when doing it.

+1

My post had nothing to do with the details of the crash--I don't know any of the details, I wouldn't be in any position to be critical even if I did, and I am just glad they survived. My post was entirely about flying low and hard near houses, boats, and people who didn't sign up for an airshow. If pilots keep doing that in the age of the cell phone camera, we're going to keep getting our name in the paper in ways we don't want (and all the additional regulations that might go with it).

Opinions...

When flying a seaplane, I have found, it is really important to be courteous. We come into a lake doing 60mph and it can really freak some people out. I do not want anymore seaplane related regulations in Oregon!

It is a privilege and an honor to fly, both intellectually and politically. We pilots need the public's approval, that will never change.

But, nobody's perfect so I hope this incident is mitigated quickly and brushed under the rug. Lesson learned.

Can't be doing that stuff today around a crowd of houses. Just the way it is. Glad they walked away. Wonder what the cause of the engine failure was? Hopefully the air to fuel in the tank ratio was off and it wasn't mechanical.

M6RV6 wrote: WTFO Dam, If his engine had not quit someone would have put it up on facebook and been sayin Woo Hoo!! ........

Yeah, you're only a second or two away from "yee haw" to "aw shit", or in this case from "how cool" to "he coulda killed us". After watching the video clip, I'm reminded again why the three most dangerous words in aviation are "hey watch this".

Ignoring whether this lake was a congested, other than congested, or sparsely populated area.....FAR 91.119 "minimum safe altitudes" says you may not operate closer than 500' to people vessels vehicles & structures. Also, the maneuvers seem to meet the FAAs definition of "aerobatic flight", which is not allowed below 1500' AGL -- see FAR 91.303. I'm guessing the FAA is not gonna be very sympathetic.

I don't think the maneuvers are "aerobatic" per se, but they're definitely too low over either a congested area (1000') or a non-congested area (500'), and "careless or reckless... so as to endanger the life or property of another." First degree dumb also comes to mind, although so far that hasn't been codified in any regulation. I agree; the FAA isn't likely to be very kind to the pilot.

I once represented a pilot in a certificate action whose actions weren't much different. He was a VFR-only pilot flying a 170. Right now I'm not recalling where this happened--somewhere in western Wyoming--where the airport is at one end of town and his destination direction was from the other end of town. There was an extremely low ceiling but as is common in Wyoming, pretty much unlimited visibility below the ceiling. So he took off with his wife aboard and found that the ceiling was lower than he thought--at 100' AGL, he was brushing the clouds. So he dropped to the deck, flew through the town along the main street. Witnesses said that he was at about 2nd story level, below the tops of most of the downtown buildings--sounded like one of the scenes from "The Great Waldo Pepper".

As he left the town, though, the terrain rose slightly, and he realized that even at 25' AGL, he was going to be in the clouds. So he tried to turn back, planning another run through town to the airport to wait until the scud rose more. But he clipped a wing on a bush and cartwheeled the airplane. Miraculously, neither he nor his wife was hurt.

The FAA did an emergency revocation of his certificate, and of course, he wanted me to try to get it reduced to only a temporary suspension. He didn't offer any information that would justify doing so, and his cavalier attitude told me that he'd make a lousy witness for himself. Then on top of that, he admitted that he did all of his own mechanical work on the airplane without being an A&P, that he hadn't had a physical in half a dozen years, and I forget what else--but so far, the FAA hadn't mentioned any of that, because he hadn't responded to their demand for the airplane's logs, his logs, and his medical certificate and pilot certificate.

I suspect that not only will the pilot in this case be scrutinized pretty closely by the FAA, but so will the company. Not wise in so many ways to do what he did and jeopardize everything.

Cary

Cary wrote:I don't think the maneuvers are "aerobatic" per se, ....

From FAR 91.303:
"for the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, and abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for mormal flight".

Hotrod 180,

The definition calls anything not "normal" acrobatic. I emphasized to my Ag students that we did not want to move controls to the stop and time the roll out. We wanted to make the airplane go where we needed to go as efficiently and safely as possible. We were heavy and wasting any energy, engine or natural, was dangerous. Looks acrobatic, meets the definition, but the objective and execution are very different.

A big advantage was that, to the FAA, we were "those of whom we do not speak." That worked for us. Like Cary said, these kids will have a problem personally and for their business.

Contact

hotrod180 wrote:

Cary wrote:I don't think the maneuvers are "aerobatic" per se, ....

From FAR 91.303:
"for the purposes of this section, aerobatic flight means an intentional maneuver involving an abrupt change in an aircraft's attitude, and abnormal attitude, or abnormal acceleration, not necessary for mormal flight".

Kinda like flyin in the BC!! at times

The probability that Just Aircraft will be subject to serious FAA scrutiny will likely be increased since this is the second factory aircraft destroyed this year while doing a demonstration flight. The other accident happened on the company "strip" and was piloted by the co-founder. That plane (a Just Highlander) impacted trees when they apparently tried to go around at the last minute. Both the pilot and passenger survived that one as well, but there were serious injuries that required hospitalization. The Just aircraft are pretty amazing toys, and under normal operations they have a lot of performance margin. Flying them at the edge of their capability all the time removes most of that margin and doesn't provide any slack for when things go sour. And things will go sour at some point. I like to pad my luck account with a little performance margin when I fly. That padding has prevented me from visiting some places, but it has also prevented me from overdrawing my luck account. What the Just Aircraft people do when flying solo is their business, and I'll never challenge their personal risk management decisions. What they do when flying with potential customers that don't fully understand the risk calculation seems to be more questionable.

The Just aircraft are pretty amazing toys,

Ouch……hmmm, how much does an aircraft have to weigh before it's a "real" aircraft? ….. my flying buddies that sold their Super Cubs and 180s and now put 200-300 hours a year on their backcountry sport planes are curious…...

Zenithguy wrote:

The Just aircraft are pretty amazing toys,

Ouch……hmmm, how much does an aircraft have to weigh before it's a "real" aircraft? ….. my flying buddies that sold their Super Cubs and 180s and now put 200-300 hours a year on their backcountry sport planes are curious…...

It is guys like this doing stupid stuff that ruin it for all of us. Some of the stupid stuff I see in person and some of the stupid stuff I see posted in videos just amazes me. The unfortunate thing is when someone does stupid stuff and it doesn't work out they injure or kill someone else in the process as well as leave loved ones and friends behind. This guy did not do his company any favors.

Kurt

I'm hoping their airplanes are better than the factory pilots would appear to be.....

MTV

FWIW: A good example of the survival ability of an LSA type (slow) bird.

I do a lot of stupid stuff, (just today as a matter of fact....) but I make damn sure no one sees me, and I do it by myself. Easy to do where I live, probably harder back east. A whole new ball game with EVERYONE having vid cameras, for sure.

Flyhound wrote: The Just aircraft are pretty amazing toys..., .

I figure if you aren't using it commercially, it is just a toy even if it has 2 engines and a 2000 pound useful load. Some toys just cost more than others.

I think give the guy a break.. He has a great company, builds great planes and is a great pilot. If your one the guys out there doing it a lot, you know that occasionally s#!t just happens - no matter how good you are, or how good your plane is.

Water in the fuel... http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Wa ... 673-1.html

Coyote Ugly wrote:I think give the guy a break.. He has a great company, builds great planes and is a great pilot. If your one the guys out there doing it a lot, you know that occasionally s#!t just happens - no matter how good you are, or how good your plane is.

Give the guy a break? Really? Not me. What he did before the crash was intentional, not an accident or a mistake which we can all have happen but intentional. He is lucky the engine did not quit on his pull up. He is deserving of criticism of his pre accident flying in the video clip. He just tarnished the image of his great company and great airplane.

"If you are one of the guys out there doing this a lot" (flying low over populated areas steep pull up's like this guy), you should probably re consider how you fly and what you do.

G44 wrote:..."If you are one of the guys out there doing this a lot" (flying low over populated areas steep pull up's like this guy), you should probably re consider how you fly and what you do.

I have to agree. Unless you're an airshow pilot in an actual airshow, if you're doing stuff to thrill the crowd you just might be an accident waiting to happen. IMHO the "hey watch this" factor was pretty high in the video-- otherwise he'd have been doing his flying over an empty lake.