Bridport TAS ultralight crash 17 July 2016

[FlyingVizsla]

Two men injured in light aircraft crash at Bridport in Tasmania's north

 

 

Light aircraft accident at Bridport in Tasmania's north

 

 

 

Paramedics are treating two men after a light plane crash at Bridport in northern Tasmania.

 

The plane went down in a paddock outside the town at about 3:00pm. .... "What we can see from our property is just ... a blue tail of a plane and all the emergency workers are around that part of the plane."

 

 

 

 

Category: | The Mercury

 

The Mercury is reporting one person to hospital and it being a privately owned ultralight

 

 

[JEM]

Europa. Not an ultralight? Hope the injuries are minor.

 

Link to photo ‘Lucky’ crash landing

 

 

[red750]

Europa has a single main wheel with outriggers under the wings. You can see the left outrigger on the photo of the crashed aircraft. Photo of type:

 

 

 

[Downunder]

No prop damage......

 

 

[Nobody]

I wonder what engine type. From the CASA register the engine manufacturer is listed as "ROTEC ENGINES PTY LTD" and the type is "912". I wonder if they mean rotax?

 

 

[Downunder]

The prop looks about Rotax size.

 

 

[Yenn]

Rotec is an Australian manufactured radial. 7 or 9 cylinder. That plane pictured is not necessarily the one which crashed. See where it says photo of type and it is also British rego.

 

 

[Nobody]

Yenn, I was basing my guess on the photo at the ABC news link here, Pilot in serious condition after light plane crash at Bridport, which shows the rego as VH-BWI. The CASA register search shows this as a EAB Europa with and engine made by "ROTEC ENGINES PTY LTD" and the type is "912". As you point out I suspect that there is an error here as that data is inconsistent.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

I see ATSB has started a case file but I am personally very disappointed it is heading "collision with terrain".

 

Yep it was An engine failure, a forced landing into paddock with what looks like minimal or no damage.

 

The reports of the injuries are just onlooker guesswork etc

 

but all in all it was not a collision but a landing. Is this a new level of sensationalism creeping into ATSB?

 

 

[Marty_d]

Well, every landing is a "collision with terrain" when it comes down to it, it's just the impact speed that differs.

 

Yes the lack of damage seemed amazing to me too. I'd be putting this in the "forced landing" rather than "crash landing" basket, injuries notwithstanding.

 

 

[facthunter]

It's a fairly old design. I've only seen one, ever and I think they have a a Rotax 912. The Rotec radial is not light in weight and the Europa is designed to be efficient. Hence the single wheel, and flying tail. Nev

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Well, every landing is a "collision with terrain" when it comes down to it, it's just the impact speed that differs.Yes the lack of damage seemed amazing to me too. I'd be putting this in the "forced landing" rather than "crash landing" basket, injuries notwithstanding.

The "injuries" could be anything or nothing. Don't believe at this stage the "spinal injuries" or the "serious injuries". Not saying they have none or something but just saying don't believe anything you read/hear in the media.

 

Anyone with back pain is always said to have "suspected spinal injuries". And of course spinal injuries are serious, so ipso facto a sore back after an impact is "serious injuries. "

 

Even when "confirmed by a hospital spokesman" usually means someone who looked like they might be hospital staff was cornered on the footpath outside the hospital and asked what they knew. Which of course is usually nothing because firstly very few people are usually involved with direct care of the patient and anyone who actually looks after the patient is bound by patient confidentiality.

 

One hospital I worked at the media used to hang around where the wards men walked out the back gate to the staff carpark. But of course the wardies had no idea themselves but they just relayed the murmurings around the hospital but were often quoted as "hospital spokesperson".

 

 

[Marty_d]

The "injuries" could be anything or nothing. Don't believe at this stage the "spinal injuries" or the "serious injuries". Not saying they have none or something but just saying don't believe anything you read/hear in the media.Anyone with back pain is always said to have "suspected spinal injuries". And of course spinal injuries are serious, so ipso facto a sore back after an impact is "serious injuries. "

 

Even when "confirmed by a hospital spokesman" usually means someone who looked like they might be hospital staff was cornered on the footpath outside the hospital and asked what they knew. Which of course is usually nothing because firstly very few people are usually involved with direct care of the patient and anyone who actually looks after the patient is bound by patient confidentiality.

 

One hospital I worked at the media used to hang around where the wards men walked out the back gate to the staff carpark. But of course the wardies had no idea themselves but they just relayed the murmurings around the hospital but were often quoted as "hospital spokesperson".

Yeah I wondered about the "spinal injuries" thing given the apparent lack of damage to the airframe, but then I thought that it could be neck - violent jolting etc - there's probably a lot of things that could cause pain even in a low-damage forced landing. The fact that they got the rescue chopper out for it seems to indicate they took it seriously.

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Yeah I wondered about the "spinal injuries" thing given the apparent lack of damage to the airframe, but then I thought that it could be neck - violent jolting etc - there's probably a lot of things that could cause pain even in a low-damage forced landing. The fact that they got the rescue chopper out for it seems to indicate they took it seriously.

Absolutely. Could be something. Even a heavy vertical drop may not look bad on the photos but create spinal compressive forces that cause serious problems.

 

On the medical front its best to keep a very open, but somewhat conservative, mind when anything from the media is presented. Their knowledge of medical matters is even less than their knowledge of aviation facts.

 

 

[facthunter]

ALL speculation. No point to it. You can get concussion walking into a post while you are texting. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...keep a very open, but somewhat conservative, mind when anything from the media is presented. Their knowledge of medical matters is even less than their knowledge of aviation facts.

Crickey Jab, that's a serious allegation!

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Yep. Maybe I should temper my remarks for fear of litigation.

 

 

[Bats]

Wasn't that aircraft for sale fairly recently? I don't know which engine this one has but as far as I know all of the Europas in Aus have either a Rotax 9 series or Jab 3300 up front. Various others have been tried overseas, incl. BMW Boxer and Subaru, with mixed success I believe. I've always had a soft spot for them, since the original rave reviews in Pilot magazine (UK version) and seeing how well one got along on 80hp. The detachable wing mechanism also struck me as a good idea - I wouldn't want to do it every time I fly, but a big help to be able to drag the aircraft home for the occasional going over or upgrading something.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Wasn't that aircraft for sale fairly recently? I don't know which engine this one has but as far as I know all of the Europas in Aus have either a Rotax 9 series or Jab 3300 up front. Various others have been tried overseas, incl. BMW Boxer and Subaru, with mixed success I believe. I've always had a soft spot for them, since the original rave reviews in Pilot magazine (UK version) and seeing how well one got along on 80hp. The detachable wing mechanism also struck me as a good idea - I wouldn't want to do it every time I fly, but a big help to be able to drag the aircraft home for the occasional going over or upgrading something.

I agree, I like a lot about them, including that big retractable well-sprung single wheel.