Yep, I’m seeing visions of certificate action in his future. So ridiculous.

https://www.avweb.com/aviation-news/plane-crash-video-sparks-online-backlash/

I hope they find out just how staged this accident was and they jerk his license. What a fool and what a waste of a good aircraft. These guys will do anything for attention.

Curious just what laws / regs people think were broken?
Reckless operation, endangering people / property on the ground is a given.
Otherwise, being a frigging idiot is not against the law.

hotrod180 wrote:Curious just what laws / regs people think were broken?
Reckless operation, endangering people / property on the ground is a given.
Otherwise, being a frigging idiot is not against the law.

Totally agree that being an idiot isn’t against the law.

Speculation here, but it is possible that laws/regs violated include:

Not flying with enough fuel to meet vfr day requirements?
Public endangerment? (Uncontrolled projectile, forest fire risk)
Was the plane registered and airworthy?
Insurance fraud?
Lying to the FAA and the NTSB with waste of tax payer resources to process the incident and file reports?
Whoever owns the land may take issue with the wreckage, especially if determined a publicity stunt? Lawsuit there?

Who knows? Interesting that these questions may best be answered by an idiot.

Delete

For starters, he might to be forced to run a gauntlet of former and active T-Craft pilots

hotrod180 wrote:Curious just what laws / regs people think were broken?
Reckless operation, endangering people / property on the ground is a given.
Otherwise, being a frigging idiot is not against the law.

§ 91.13 Careless or reckless operation.

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

If it is determined that it was not actually an emergency, which I suspect will be determined, other regulatory violations may also be found.

If they determine that he was in violation of any regulation, the severity of the penalties are at the discretion of the feds, I believe. One can get a light slap on the wrist or their privileges permanently revoked for a violation of the very same regulation.

Beyond the other obvious clues that this was a staged "accident," it is odd that his friend's ashes fit in that itty-bitty baggie... When my mother was cremated, the ashes filled a container 3X than that. Same for my 95-lb mother-in-law's ashes. Like others, I'm a bit ashamed that I contributed to his "view" count...

Part 107 violations are 364 days and $5k each violation, but only address UA's 55 lbs or less.

For over 55 lbs, a 49 U.S.C 44807 Grant of exemption or other privilege, like a special airworthiness certificates in the experimental category (SAC-EC) is needed. None would be granted in any case, and I doubt the clown knows what any of that means, or knows what 14 CFR part 11 is.

A lack of any of these might be in violation of 49 U.S. Code § 46317, and subject to 3 years in Federal prison and $250k in fines for each violation.

To a non-lawyer like me, it looks like a situation the laws were designed for, and I would hope the intentional launching of an unapproved unmanned and uncontrolled aircraft recklessly should attract the max sanction. And that's just the feds. Who knows what civil action options are available to CA.

But the feds seem pretty erratic at enforcement.

And last but not least let’s not forget the insurance? If he did have insurance on that aircraft then they are likely to not want to pay for the recovery of that aircraft. None the less somebody will be responsible for the removal of that Aircraft from the property whether it be public or private land and most likely he will be responsible for that and it probably will not be cheap. And everybody is calling this an accident lol much of an accident here looks like intentional.

Insurance? I'm wondering what kind of condition the plane was in before it was used as a movie prop.

He's in level flight here. Look at that yoke. It's not just for a few seconds either to account for wind. Or is that a Taylorcraft thing, equivalent to leaning your seat way back?

Why land your parachute next to the plane? To retrieve your cameras and to turn the mixture and fuel lever back on.

Why not leave your expensive, heavy parachute rig there to make hiking out easier? Because you don't plan on coming back.

Just speculation of course.

My gut told me it was staged as I watched. All the valid comments here tell me that it must have been staged.
It was sad to see a classic plane destroyed!

I find it hard to believe that even a modern parachute could cover the same amount of ground as a plane that was still flying relatively straight and level when he left it. Modern parachutes can cover a lot more ground than the old, round, para-commander cutes I learned to jump under, but they still can't compete with a gliding airplane for glide angle. This stinks to high heaven as a highly staged publicity stunt. It was also a pretty tiny amount of his friend's ashes he was carrying. Maybe that's all he could get for this shtick. Or maybe the ashes were as fake as everything else in this video. Right now, I'm sorry I contributed to his view count.

It doesn't go in a straight line though, it begins to spiral downward almost immediately.

And I agree about the ashes. I've spread both of my parents ashes and I would expect it to be closer to a gallon ziploc bag in size.

Another aspect of this video that is both sadly humorous and condemning is his attempt to get his propeller stopped. His video is clearly aimed at the non-aviation community because the pilots out there have absolutely skewered him across all media platforms.

Pilots know that propellers will usually continue to windmill when our piston engines fail. But laypeople wouldn’t understand this. For this charlatan, if he were performing before the pilot audience, he would just report that his engine quit and jump. But for his non-pilot viewers, they might not believe the engine had quit because they are unable to reconcile the discrepancy between the spinning propeller and the reported loss of engine power. So he needs to stop the propeller. And he even shows the moment that it happens including the several seconds before this happens as he oscillates the plane into the stall to try and get the prop to stop. Ah, there, see? The engine has truly quit and the prop is confirmed visible and not blurred. True engine out.

If this were real and he really intended to bail out because there were no good landing options, then who would give a shit if the propeller were windmilling or not unless he were legitimately attempting to extend the glide.

I had to laugh at this unnecessary detail in the video and his extemporaneous act caught on camera. It is equally humorous when the propeller starts windmilling again as the plane dives toward the ground.

Modern parachutes have about half the glide of a Taylorcraft. That said, unless you are jumping a small fast swooping canopy, landing speeds and suitable(ie no injury) landing options are much higher on a reasonable sized parachute with a skilled jumper than a light airplane. Not taking away from the fact that the whole thing is a hoax and the guy is an idiot.

JP256 wrote:Beyond the other obvious clues that this was a staged "accident," it is odd that his friend's ashes fit in that itty-bitty baggie... When my mother was cremated, the ashes filled a container 3X than that. Same for my 95-lb mother-in-law's ashes. Like others, I'm a bit ashamed that I contributed to his "view" count...

Yeah it's kind of a pisser that it's drawing so much attention, resulting in more hits for his channel. I watched it once, and felt dirty afterwards.....

The ashes were so far off the usual volume that I expected him to add "a portion of", but he didn't, yet another annoying as hell detail.

Per
https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-14/chapter-I/subchapter-F/part-91/subpart-E/section-91.403
"(a)...The owner or operator of an aircraft is primarily responsible for maintaining that aircraft in an airworthy condition...."

Searching
https://registry.faa.gov/AircraftInquiry/Search/NNumberResult?nNumberTxt=n29508
reveals an owner of record in Lincoln, California.

Searching Airmen registry
https://amsrvs.registry.faa.gov/airmeninquiry/Main.aspx
for similar names in California reveals person of same name as owner at same address, holding a Private Pilot and Ground Instructor - Advanced.

Curiously, per
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm3849367/?ref_=ttfc_fc_cr118
a similar named person was also the Aerial Ground Coordinator for the mentioned film.

Pilots know that propellers will usually continue to windmill when our piston engines fail. But laypeople wouldn’t understand this. For this charlatan, if he were performing before the pilot audience, he would just report that his engine quit and jump. But for his non-pilot viewers, they might not believe the engine had quit because they are unable to reconcile the discrepancy between the spinning propeller and the reported loss of engine power. So he needs to stop the propeller. And he even shows the moment that it happens including the several seconds before this happens as he oscillates the plane into the stall to try and get the prop to stop. Ah, there, see? The engine has truly quit and the prop is confirmed visible and not blurred. True engine out.

this right here, when I watched the vid I saw this and was like wtf

Hmmmmmmmmm……