Report of 'Light Aircraft' on fire near Gatton

[Tex]

That is all I have ATM.... Report of 'Light Aircraft' on fire near Gatton (Qld) from Twitter feed.

 

 

[DrZoos]

Tragically it Appears to be fatal

 

• CHRIS MCMAHON
   
   
  
• THE COURIER-MAIL
   
   
  
• MARCH 02, 2014 7:56AM
   
   
  

 

 

A PLANE has crashed on Princes Road at Gatton, west of Ipswich, this morning.

 

The plane is believed to have crashed into an embankment about 7.20am and caught on fire.

 

 

[DrZoos]

 

Police confirmed one male deceased. Rip

 

 

[Tex]

That is the Gatton Airpark I know a few people out there...

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

I hope it isn't true about how I heard it happened.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

An RV type aircraft that impacted the bank after a pass down the runway at around 7 am. Condolences to the gentleman s family..............Maj...

 

 

[BLA82]

Sad to heat RIP

 

 

[pete8862]

Does anyone know if this fellow lived at the air park

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

yes he lived at the park…his name was said on the Ch 10 news

 

 

[Kyle Communications]

Ch 7 said his name is John Sawtelder I think they said

 

 

[pete8862]

Just heard who it was, John was a very nice guy, my heart goes out to his family he will be missed

 

 

[David Isaac]

Regardless of how, very sad to hear, especially to family and friends.

 

 

[dutchroll]

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-035.aspx

 

Regardless of how nice a guy he is reputed to have been, this makes me angry.

 

 

[SDQDI]

It doesn't shed a nice light on it does it. And seems to say he had been flying it for a couple of years without the appropriate licence.

 

I guess the fact it was totally avoidable and shouldnt have happened makes it a worse loss in a way.

 

 

[dutchroll]

Yeah it's stuff like this which RAAus has to really crack down on. This report is now permanently on the public record with "Experimental" and "Recreational Aviation Australia" splashed all over it. CASA knows about it as does everyone else. It's not flattering.

 

 

[SDQDI]

"The ATSB did not identify any organisational or systemic issues that contributed to the development of the accident or that might adversely affect the future safety of aviation operations and assessed that no safety issues would be identified through further investigation. On that basis, the ATSB has decided to discontinue its investigation."

 

I don't think you can blame that one on the RAA dutchroll seems the ATSB don't, and they did quiet pointedly allocate the blame.

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

It was a VH aircraft what has RAAus got to do with it. This is a CASA problem.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

A self induced accident, no insurance for his family, just the trauma of cleaning up the mess he left behind. that's so tough on his family.

 

 

[dutchroll]

It was a VH aircraft what has RAAus got to do with it. This is a CASA problem.

It was an RAAus licensed pilot. This implies that he was RAAus trained.

That an RAAus licensed and trained pilot was flying a type for which he was not qualified, and for the icing on the cake was doing something really stupid, makes it become an RAAus issue to consider whether RAAus likes it or not.

 

This is not the same thing as directly "blaming" the RAAus. This is saying "hey, one of your boys killed himself doing something both illegal and dumb". I would think that the safety people within the organisation would take a look at this and say "well even if we don't mention it directly, it would be nice if our people learn some lessons from this". At least that's what any other aircraft safety organisation would do.

 

You can't just wash away the issues of pilots trained in your own organisation by saying "oh yeah well the aircraft wasn't registered to us so none of that matters". The SAAA doesn't do it. The EAA doesn't do it. The big boys don't do it.

 

A CASA problem? The cause of the accident had nothing to do with the aircraft type and had everything to do with the "pilot in command". That it was VH registered was incidental! And CASA may well make it your problem if that type of thing continues to happen!

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

Even if we wanted to the RAA has no durisdiction over an accident involving a VH registered aircraft. Of course our ops people would make note of the fact that the pilot held an RAA certificate Additionally. But basically it was a non VH licensed pilot flying a VH registered aircraft = Illegal operation....fully in CASAs ballpark as I see it..............Maj....

 

 

[dutchroll]

Ah yes OK. I get the point. "What our certified and trained pilots do is nothing to do with us".

 

Very good. Carry on. This is not going to end well for you if that same attitude is persisted with over time.

 

 

[Geoff13]

He held a Casa Student Pilot licence for the aircraft that he was flying but was not authorised to fly as PIC.

 

We can hardly hold RAA responsible.

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

It was an RAAus licensed pilot. This implies that he was RAAus trained.That an RAAus licensed and trained pilot was flying a type for which he was not qualified, and for the icing on the cake was doing something really stupid, makes it become an RAAus issue to consider whether RAAus likes it or not.

 

This is not the same thing as directly "blaming" the RAAus. This is saying "hey, one of your boys killed himself doing something both illegal and dumb". I would think that the safety people within the organisation would take a look at this and say "well even if we don't mention it directly, it would be nice if our people learn some lessons from this". At least that's what any other aircraft safety organisation would do.

 

You can't just wash away the issues of pilots trained in your own organisation by saying "oh yeah well the aircraft wasn't registered to us so none of that matters". The SAAA doesn't do it. The EAA doesn't do it. The big boys don't do it.

 

A CASA problem? The cause of the accident had nothing to do with the aircraft type and had everything to do with the "pilot in command". That it was VH registered was incidental! And CASA may well make it your problem if that type of thing continues to happen!

Dutchroll

 

If I hold a License to drive a car, and I end up illegally driving a truck then the issue is me, not the authority in charge of car licenses, nor the authority in charge of truck licenses (assuming they were different)

 

Anything that suggests the problem lies anywhere but with me is sugar coated BS or blame shifting.......I doubt I would find a single RAAus member in my area that would hold any thoughts that its perfectly acceptable for an RAAus certificate holder to drive a VH registered aircraft with that certificate and therefore I have to assume he knew and broke the rules.

 

The question that should be asked of local aviators (and I care not for their breed) is, who else was aware that he was doing this and did nothing about it.

 

Anyway that's my opinion......As a follow on, lets say that, wrongly in my view, RAAus puts its hand up and says yep it was us, its our responsibility, then what exactly would you have them do? Do we need more legislation? clearly there isn't enough in CASA already? more training? in what exactly, how to break rules and not get caught?

 

Andy

 

 

[Cooda]

It could be argued that his RA-Aus (and GA) training had failed to instil in him a reasonable level of respect for the laws governing flying in this country.

 

And having him identified as holding a Pilot's Certificate in a report that very few people will read is not great PR for RA-Aus.

 

But the registration of ownership of the aircraft is a CASA matter.

 

The illegal operation of that aircraft by an unlicensed person is a CASA matter.

 

And, by no stretch of the imagination, is teaching or carrying out aerobatics (legal or not) a RA-Aus matter. CASA has maintained full responsibility for that activity.

 

Nevertheless, good bloke or not, it might prove useful for our magazine to run an article on the sanctions he might have received, had he survived.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Yeah it's stuff like this which RAAus has to really crack down on. This report is now permanently on the public record with "Experimental" and "Recreational Aviation Australia" splashed all over it. CASA knows about it as does everyone else. It's not flattering.

This is all dutchroll said before all the bristles came up and yet again people did their very best to promote letting other people continue their unsafe activities.

 

I've mentioned a number of times that all the people involved in advising, helping, employing, training etc. someone to the point where he is doing something and comes unstuck may well have a duty of care, so RAA, and RAA instructors could well be a defendant if there is a claim. It has nothing to do with jurisdiction and nothing to do with current registration, and nothing to do with current licensing - it's all about who had the duty of care in creating this pilot.

 

Hopefully there will not be a claim, and dutchroll is being very responsible suggesting that RAA crack down on this type of uncontrolled behaviour, particularly since it has been openly boasted about on this and other forums.

 

It doesn't matter which branch of recreational aviation it's happening at the time, apart from the risk of big lawsuits, authorities are beaten up by Ministers to clamp down.