Pilot dies in light aircraft crash south of Townsville

[biggles]

.

 

The assumption that the pilot was trying to turn back may not stand scrutiny when you look at the air shot and the position of the impact . Perhaps there was an in flight fire or control problem Pretty heavy impact if the engine came through the firewall. I'm not prepared to draw any conclusions, now. Hope he didn't suffer . Nev

As I indicated in post 243 the investigators will be relying heavily on eyewitness accounts. All we have here is the usual speculation ..... Bob

 

 

[docjell]

Phat Phil- line drawn!

 

Cheers and fly safe

 

Chris

 

 

[ianwells]

I have just heard from Debbie that Ross's funeral will be at the Woongarra Crematorium on Monday 7 Dec at 2.00 pm

 

Followed by drinks at the Victoria Park Hotel.

 

It will be a very big day.

 

Hope to see some of you there to pay our respects.

 

Ian

 

 

[Yenn]

Well we have heard from numerous experts. psychoanalysis has been carried out on Ross and some of the posters here and we still know nothing. Those who witnessed the crash are silent and that is OK by me, many others have made assumptions that I doubt will be confirmed. All we can take from this accident is that we have lost a good friend and we will hopefully learn from it in the future, when there is a report by those with the ability to come to some conclusion.

 

 

[flyerme]

Some of Ross's pics

 

 

 

 

 

[bull]

I have just heard from Debbie that Ross's funeral will be at the Woongarra Crematorium on Monday 7 Dec at 2.00 pmFollowed by drinks at the Victoria Park Hotel.

 

It will be a very big day.

 

Hope to see some of you there to pay our respects.

 

Ian

Thanks Ian will be there

 

 

[Ultralights]

Those who witnessed the crash are silent and that is OK by me,

Unfortunately i have been a witness to a double fatal accident some years ago, and as a witness, you get interviewed by investigators not long after the event, and the investigators request you not say anything about the investigation in the public domain until they release the investigation, or its deemed that no criminal element is involved.

 

 

[eightyknots]

Whats with the 3rd photo with the fuel can in the cabin.

I think it would be an empty fuel container that Ross would have used to carry fuel to the wing tanks.

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Many pilots carry empty containers to transport fuel from the local servo when travelling.

 

 

[winsor68]

Whats with the 3rd photo with the fuel can in the cabin,

That is why you avoid crashing. This is Ultralight flying...remember. Known in some jurisdictions as "MINIMUM" aircraft.

 

 

[alf jessup]

I have just heard from Debbie that Ross's funeral will be at the Woongarra Crematorium on Monday 7 Dec at 2.00 pmFollowed by drinks at the Victoria Park Hotel.

 

It will be a very big day.

 

Hope to see some of you there to pay our respects.

 

Ian

Unfortunately I will be still in the desert at work & logistically it is almost impossible for me to attend, but i will be thinking of the family & all you guys & girls that attend, if I was home on break I would have been there in a heartbeat to pay my respects

 

Alf

 

 

[rankamateur]

I think it would be an empty fuel container that Ross would have used to carry fuel to the wing tanks.

Along with sleeping bags, that would be the next most likely thing to find in the luggage extension on a Savannah.

 

 

[Tomo]

Hang in there guys, It's tough time for those close to Ross. Let's just keep that in mind no matter how relevant something could be.

 

I think sometimes we all get to caught up in the bad stuff with a disguise of 'to be learned from' that we miss all the good things and run the risk of criticising the person, which can be hard for close friends to hear this soon after his passing.

 

 

[Robbo]

I think we all should just wait for the official report before we start discussing what happened. Just remember someone has lost there life, no matter what people thought of Ross he was a major contributor to this site and also a fellow aviator.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

While I was looking for some info about ground looping, I came across this ..

 

1.3.1.3 Pilots' experience

 

Number of accidents Number of deaths - Number of injuries

 

Experience < 100 FH .. 16 - 1 - 4

 

Experience > 100 FH .. 98 - 19 - 29

 

Total ; 114 - 20 - 33

 

This table shows that limited flying experience does not appear to constitute a significant risk factor. Of the sixteen accidents involving pilots whose experience is less than a hundred hours, there were four injuries and one death. This category of pilots represents around 40 % of licence holders.

 

From here .. http://www.bea-fr.org/etudes/glideraccidents19992001a/glideraccidents19992001a.htm

 

Just an encouragement note to low time flyers that following the theme of "Well if it can happen to the most experienced what hope have I got" isn't necessarily fact. The reason for this crash is uncertain and note that 1020 people had dies in cars as of Oct 30 for 2015 - plenty of whom were highly experienced drivers.

 

 

[rankamateur]

I think we all should just wait for the official report before we start discussing what happened.

We lost Wayne Fisher in very similar circumstances to what took Ross. Equally many unanswered questions and I don't remember seeing a report that answered any of them.

 

 

[facthunter]

We aren't big on good reports. We don't carry black boxes and there is often a lack of "reliable " witnesses. With all due respect also Police are not trained with aviation matters, nor are Coroners..

 

I think most are desirous of wanting to know, not just out of a ghoulish curiosity but to gain benefit from the knowledge of the circumstances, and how they might relate to their own operations. Nev

 

 

[Guest asmol]

Bull, I think you have targeted me before and that is when I said we should change your name from bull to bully, I don't know if this is influencing what you are saying and why you are targeting me but please show some respect.

 

Somebody died in an aircraft accident that resulted in the aircraft burning.

 

Then somebody starts posting photographs showing fuel cans, full or otherwise, unsecured immediately behind the pilot's head. Imagine the media picking up on this, they have an aircraft that crashed and caught fire, they have nice smiley photographs of somebody with fuel behind their head, before you know it it'll be running the headlines about some terrorist in an aeroplane who blew himself up before he got to his target etc. we have to be so careful with what is published here and it surprises that some of the stuff is not referenced in the media more often.

 

The opportunity to comment about this illegal practice and hopefully avoid future fires presented itself and that is why I commented that we should not be carrying fuel in the cockpit area of any aircraft.

 

You are correct that ultralight's and private operations do have some exemptions but fuel cans which are full are or empty are classed by CASA as dangerous goods. Regardless of exemptions for different categories the same rule does apply and that is it is illegal to carry dangerous goods in the cockpit of any aircraft so please don't cherry pick sections of different regulations to suit yourself.

 

Have the honesty within yourself to agree that a full can of fuel or an empty can of fuel should never be carried in the cockpit of any aircraft.

 

The cockpit area in small aircraft is defined by ICAO as anywhere accessible to the pilot in flight.

 

A luggage area is an area which is not accessible during flight and has a barrier to either atmosphere or the cockpit, an example would be a wing locker or a luggage rack that is not accessible during flight and has a barrier.

 

The loss here is terrible but it would be also terrible if I did not comment about the fact that carrying fuel cans in aircraft is not allowed unless CASA issue very specific exemptions and these are required on a case-by-case basis (for aircraft that are flying internationally beyond their normal fuel range etc.)

 

Lesson to be learned, don't carry fuel in a cockpit, don't carry empty cans which are even a higher explosion risk in a cockpit. It's common sense but people continue to ignore common sense.

 

 

[DrZoos]

The one thing I would ask of ALL forumites is we never agree with everyone all the time, please show respect for both Ross and those grieving and hold your tongue on any personal gripes as respect to a passed aviator and to your fellow aviators who are grieving.

 

This post is not aimed at anyone or any individual post, but more aimed at some insensitive posts in general that have been made in the past week.

 

Come on guys, stick together, stand as one and be respectful...

 

 

[dutchroll]

This table shows that limited flying experience does not appear to constitute a significant risk factor.

This is quite true in the small plane - single pilot world. It seems counter-intuitive at first glance, but the worst times for accidents and incidents are often beyond the "very junior pilot" stage.

When you're brand new, you're still too uncertain and desperately clinging to what basic knowledge you have, to do anything too silly.

 

Then you get familiar, the flying becomes easier, and you expand your comfort zone significantly. The risks worry you less as the confidence grows. Often the period where pilots slacken off and cut loose a bit. Danger times.

 

Eventually (and it can be very many years and a lot of hours) there can come a time when you've scared the crap out of yourself enough times and survived that you have a memory bank of "that was really stupid so I won't do it again" incidents built up. The brain slows down and hopefully you accommodate this by slowing yourself and your flying aspirations down along with it. With apologies to Murtaugh from "Lethal Weapon", I call it the "I'm getting too old for this sh*t" stage.

 

There are always exceptions to the above, of course, but being brand new to flying doesn't necessarily make you a giant accident risk.

 

 

[facthunter]

There comes a stage with most where they think they have it all covered. They used to say it was around 100 hours. Just a generalisation of course. Every individual has their own particular experience. I reckon my training was so so. Some aspects of it very good and some ordinary. By the time I did the CPL I had probably had 13 instructors at least. I felt inclined to think I had learned to fly despite some of them. Others were great.

 

The Chipmunk was probably one of the best basic training aircraft around from the pilot point of view, so I was fortunate there.. Regardless of how I might appear here, I generally lacked confidence and assumed just about everybody had more flying aptitude than I did in the early days. As circumstances dictated I encountered a lot of very marginal weather conditions that could have had a bad end, so in retrospect, that wasn't something I would like to see as common, or desired. You might say you can avoid it, but unfortunately the only way to do that is stay on the ground.The central coast of NSW and getting in and out of the Hunter valley can present some challenges weather wise.

 

Anyhow I do question whether a sound basic skillset adequate for our type of flying is being taught. We do have aircraft harder to fly than the usual type of GA plane and we do fly them across a big continent and land on primitive strips. Quite a few times when flying with a pilot I have said why don't you do XYZ? and demonstrated it and the reply is "I didn't know you could do that", I'm not talking about anything extreme or out of the ordinary, Just pretty basic stuff. This worries me somewhat.

 

If any pupil of mine came to grief because of something he wasn't taught and should have been, how would I feel?. If they do something ill advised I don't have a lot of control over that, but if they don't really know what they are doing or can do, that's another matter. Nev

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

This is quite true in the small plane - single pilot world. It seems counter-intuitive at first glance, but the worst times for accidents and incidents are often beyond the "very junior pilot" stage.When you're brand new, you're still too uncertain and desperately clinging to what basic knowledge you have, to do anything too silly.

 

Then you get familiar, the flying becomes easier, and you expand your comfort zone significantly. The risks worry you less as the confidence grows. Often the period where pilots slacken off and cut loose a bit. Danger times.

 

Eventually (and it can be very many years and a lot of hours) there can come a time when you've scared the crap out of yourself enough times and survived that you have a memory bank of "that was really stupid so I won't do it again" incidents built up. The brain slows down and hopefully you accommodate this by slowing yourself and your flying aspirations down along with it. With apologies to Murtaugh from "Lethal Weapon", I call it the "I'm getting too old for this sh*t" stage.

 

There are always exceptions to the above, of course, but being brand new to flying doesn't necessarily make you a giant accident risk.

Yes - when I was instructing it was interesting to watch the development of our students as they matured once they left the nest.

 

It's a generalisation of course but there were three very noticeable milestones - up until 100hrs most were meticulously careful and showed pride in doing everything 'by the book' and keeping the training close to mind. After 100hrs many became a little more brash and tended to show off a little to the 'newbies' and became a little slacker with their procedures and discipline. They occasionally gave themselves a scare which brought them back into line temporarily.

 

The '500 hour syndrome' was the biggie - by that stage many of them knew everything, could do anything and were bullet-proof, whenever they looked in the mirror anyway ...

 

By the time they reached 1000hrs many had had enough scares to realise that learning never stops and we're all vulnerable, the less we think ahead, the sooner will be our next big wake-up call.

 

 

[winsor68]

We aren't big on good reports. We don't carry black boxes and there is often a lack of "reliable " witnesses. With all due respect also Police are not trained with aviation matters, nor are Coroners..I think most are desirous of wanting to know, not just out of a ghoulish curiosity but to gain benefit from the knowledge of the circumstances, and how they might relate to their own operations. Nev

And this was something that I know Ross was passionate about. How ironic.

 

 

[Robbo]

We lost Wayne Fisher in very similar circumstances th to what took Ross. Equally many unanswered questions and I don't remember seeing a report that answered any of them.

It may not... But neither does people speculating.

 

 

[bull]

Bull, I think you have targeted me before and that is when I said we should change your name from bull to bully, I don't know if this is influencing what you are saying and why you are targeting me but please show some respect.Somebody died in an aircraft accident that resulted in the aircraft burning.

 

Then somebody starts posting photographs showing fuel cans, full or otherwise, unsecured immediately behind the pilot's head. Imagine the media picking up on this, they have an aircraft that crashed and caught fire, they have nice smiley photographs of somebody with fuel behind their head, before you know it it'll be running the headlines about some terrorist in an aeroplane who blew himself up before he got to his target etc. we have to be so careful with what is published here and it surprises that some of the stuff is not referenced in the media more often.

 

The opportunity to comment about this illegal practice and hopefully avoid future fires presented itself and that is why I commented that we should not be carrying fuel in the cockpit area of any aircraft.

 

You are correct that ultralight's and private operations do have some exemptions but fuel cans which are full are or empty are classed by CASA as dangerous goods. Regardless of exemptions for different categories the same rule does apply and that is it is illegal to carry dangerous goods in the cockpit of any aircraft so please don't cherry pick sections of different regulations to suit yourself.

 

Have the honesty within yourself to agree that a full can of fuel or an empty can of fuel should never be carried in the cockpit of any aircraft.

 

The cockpit area in small aircraft is defined by ICAO as anywhere accessible to the pilot in flight.

 

A luggage area is an area which is not accessible during flight and has a barrier to either atmosphere or the cockpit, an example would be a wing locker or a luggage rack that is not accessible during flight and has a barrier.

 

The loss here is terrible but it would be also terrible if I did not comment about the fact that carrying fuel cans in aircraft is not allowed unless CASA issue very specific exemptions and these are required on a case-by-case basis (for aircraft that are flying internationally beyond their normal fuel range etc.)

 

Lesson to be learned, don't carry fuel in a cockpit, don't carry empty cans which are even a higher explosion risk in a cockpit. It's common sense but people continue to ignore common sense.

Asmol, I don't know if you are just trying to earn browne points or what but you are really being the one showing disrespect to Ross, as you would already know if you are reading the posts on this thread, you would have seen that Ross was not carrying any fuel in the aircraft that is involved in the accident,also you would see that in ""Ultralight/lsa operations it is common practice to carry a empty fuel container as most small strips do not have fuel and we have to obtain fuel from servos often involving long treks to get it!!! Now please I am not going to disrespect Ross,s memory by arguing with you any more , Just be aware there are a lot of Ross,s friends on here and I,m sure I am not the only one who is a bit peed off with your lack of respect................................