Murwillumba aircraft missing.

[Old Koreelah]

Gee that's amazing. the guy who new almost exactly where it went down also being an aviator didn't seem to get the message to the search people in a timely manor, something odd there! Hope they get to the bottom of this investigation soon, not knowing is worse than knowing:-(*

This sounds too much like the Stinson fiasco (it crashed only a few km west of M'bah). Locals reported the plane dangerously low, trying to get over the mountains. It never made it's scheduled stop at Lismore, yet the search effort was mostly hundreds of miles south.

(1937 Airlines of Australia Stinson crash - Wikipedia)

 

Some decisions mystify me.

 

 

[fly_tornado]

multiple witnesses + overtime

 

 

[M61A1]

multiple witnesses + overtime

Or someone who's done a course and has a checklist to work through.

 

 

[boleropilot]

This sounds too much like the Stinson fiasco (it crashed only a few km west of M'bah). Locals reported the plane dangerously low, trying to get over the mountains. It never made it's scheduled stop at Lismore, yet the search effort was mostly hundreds of miles south.(1937 Airlines of Australia Stinson crash - Wikipedia)

Some decisions mystify me.

yeah Wally the Stinson crash was an amazing story - anyone who hasn't read the story should get a copy of the book titled Green Mountains and Cullenbenbong, by Bernard O'Reilly

 

he was the legendary character who visited a family member the day after the Stinson went missing and was told it had flown over the property on track for Lismore, flying very low under the cloudbase (no navigation aids in 1937)

 

as Wally stated, there were numerous sightings (from people who knew the aircraft commonly flew down the coast in bad weather conditions) but Bernard knew they were all false

 

he rode his horse to a high spot where he could see the track the aircraft would have taken - on the last ridge (of 3) he saw a burnt tree and decided to investigate, sending his horse home due to the rough terrain - the rest of the story is incredible, Bernard finding the wreckage after a herculean effort that was then extended even further before he finally managed to notify the authorities of the location of the crash-site and then leading a rescue party back to the survivors

 

if you are ever in Beaudesert make sure you visit the Historical Museum - it has a Stinson Room with an amazing collection of memorabilia of the event

 

they even have the bashed and blackened stainless steel flask that Proud used to bring water from a nearby creek to Binstead, who had a badly broken leg - I've held that flask in my hands and was truly touched to hold that incredible object...

 

after visiting the museum you can take a short drive to the lovely little church and cemetery where Bernard is buried - do what I did and take along a few flowers...

 

btw there's a full-size Stinson replica at Green Mountains (Lamington National Park) but last time I saw it there was a huge amount of degradation to it - hope they sorted that out, it was sad to see

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Previous discussion of this crash:

 

Riddle of the Stinson

 

 

[Cosmick]

I have the DVD staring Jack Thompson

 

 

[boleropilot]

wow I'd forgotten all about that...never did manage to arrange the trip due to - wait for it - the cost of public liability insurance - who wooda thunk...

 

 

[kasper]

RAAus email tonight:

 

 

 

Notification of Fatal Accident 25 May 2017

 

RAAus is saddened to advise our community of the death of RAAus member Mr Ian Sinnott. Mr Sinnott died in an accident near Murwillumbah on 16 May 2017 while piloting a recently purchased amateur built Monnett Sonerai registered as 19-3971.

 

The aircraft collided with elevated ground in an area of very dense terrain.The aircraft wreckage was not fully contained in one location and while conditions on the date of the accident were observed as ideal, search efforts were later impeded by poor weather conditions making it difficult to continue the search for debris. At this time not all aircraft components have been located. We will be seeking the assistance of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau in Canberra. RAAus will continue to work with authorities on the investigation and will advise members again once we have more information. The investigation is ongoing and will take some time.

 

It is timely to remind members of some important requirements of the RAAus licensing and registration system.

 

Sometimes as part of an accident investigation related local and general safety issues become apparent. During the course of our investigation into this accident RAAus has been provided with some historic information from locals who were also witnesses to this accident. In recent times numerous sightings of aircraft operating at low level and conducting aerobatic operations have been observed. Members are reminded that aerobatic activity is not appropriate under RAAus registration. Members are also reminded that when operating any aircraft with limited type experience a period of familiarisation is recommended. Please refer to RAAP 1 -Type Training. Furthermore RAAus would like to remind members of our recent Safety Enews, which can be accessed here and specifically the section concerning RAAus investigations.

 

RAAus would like to acknowledge the relationship between NSW Police and RAAus. A formal Memorandum of Understanding is in place that sets out respective responsibilities and communication lines, ensuring investigation processes run smoothly.

 

Our thoughts remain with Mr Sinnott’s family and friends and our community of aviators.

 

CEO [email protected]

 

 

 

General Enquiries [email protected]

 

 

 

Pilot and Student Enquiries [email protected]

 

 

 

Aircraft Enquiries [email protected]

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Very interesting information from RAAus. They are constrained from giving direct information because of the coroners enquiry but have managed to put a fair bit of info between the lines.

 

 

[ave8rr]

This Sonerai started out as a mid wing version and was converted to low wing. I read that RAAus are seeking the assistance of the ATSB. I wonder if this may be to check for welding or metal fatigue or similar?

 

The wing may not have had the "S" mods carried out to the spars. Time will tell.

 

 

[M61A1]

Let's hope we can all learn something from this most unfortunate event-:(

Something along the line....."If you must bend the rules, you must execute the performance flawlessly ", comes to mind.

We should all know that already.

 

 

[Bernie Knight]

Again, very sad to hear of this accident. My thoughts are with family and friends.

 

I saw the initial advertisement for this aircraft and the photos appeared to show a very good build and finish - from photos only.

 

Having sat in a Soneria I found you do literally wear the aircraft.

 

Just reading back the many posts above, there appears that the pilot may have tried to reach open ground after a failure. The eye witness did not report any aerobatics, but rather a turn after engine failure?

 

I'm wondering why the focus of Rec Aus to its membership was 'a warning to its members regarding aerobatics?'

 

Again, time will tell, but an eye witnesses with aviation experience will be a good start point I'd think for any investigation.

 

RIP

 

 

[Jaba-who]

Again, very sad to hear of this accident. My thoughts are with family and friends.---snip ---

 

I'm wondering why the focus of Rec Aus to its membership was 'a warning to its members regarding aerobatics?'

 

----snip ----

 

RIP

 

RAAus email-----snip ---

 

It is timely to remind members of some important requirements of the RAAus licensing and registration system.

 

Sometimes as part of an accident investigation related local and general safety issues become apparent. During the course of our investigation into this accident RAAus has been provided with some historic information from locals who were also witnesses to this accident. In recent times numerous sightings of aircraft operating at low level and conducting aerobatic operations have been observed. Members are reminded that aerobatic activity is not appropriate under RAAus registration. --- snip. ---

Seems to me they are saying what they are obliged to say if people are breaking the rules. They are not saying the pilot in question was doing aeros but ( given he has only had the aircraft a short time ) rather there have been reports that lots of people are doing aeros for a fairly long period of time. There is no statement that the aeros are being done in RAAus aircraft but the inference is there.

 

Seems to me it's warning that if you are an RAAus aircraft owner (in that area Particularly) and if you are one of the people doing aeros then stop it. Further inference is, we or casa are going to be watching that area now.

 

 

[facthunter]

Most will read the performance of aeros as being part of this problem as a result of that statement being associated with it. IF it's not part of the situation some damage is done to someone's reputation which is more than unfortunate. We are always fast to think it's the pilot's fault, unfortunately it happens all the time. Nev

 

 

[M61A1]

Most will read the performance of aeros as being part of this problem as a result of that statement being associated with it. IF it's not part of the situation some damage is done to someone's reputation which is more than unfortunate. We are always fast to think it's the pilot's fault, unfortunately it happens all the time. Nev

Unfortunately, it is well proven (in most countries) that around 83% of the time, it is the pilot's fault. Probably why it happens "all the time"

 

 

[facthunter]

Depends on how the situations are interpreted M6.. Bad instruments ( the early instrument panels are not ideal The 3 handed Altimeter is a death trap) poorly maintained aircraft with degraded performance, weather fog icing, carrying defects. Confusion with radio directions, fatigue, poor training etc play a part. A serious event is usually a result of many factors in combination, rarely one single factor. Pilot's are often dead and unable to give their side of the deal and the operator and regulators will try to blame the pilot too for obvious reasons which might reflect on their performance . Look at the way the FAA tried to present evidence Sully did the wrong thing and could have made it to the airport without any engines. The nearly got away with it too till their process was exposed and shown to be falsified. Nev

 

 

[boleropilot]

I'm going to have my camera turned on for every flight from now on - infer from that what you will

 

as far as illegal aerobatics are concerned (and I'm not suggesting that happened in this case, but there's a possibility it did) I for one have seen a few cases of this

 

some were conducted by very competent and experienced pilots in aircraft that may well have been structurally capable (but probably not for inverted flight, which entails certain mechanical mods)

 

of course I am assuming a few seconds of positive g inverted flight is not going to cause an engine stoppage - not that I am likely to ever find out !

 

let's face it - the standard wire braced Drifter is rated at something like +6 / -4gs, so I am confident I would be OK if I were turned almost upside down by a very strong thermal (pity I didn't have the camera on for that one)

 

some were conducted by pilots who definitely did not have the required experience and the fact that they did so if full view of others is another scary factor...

 

with the RAA email releasing certain factors concerning the accident there is more writing on the wall but we're still not where we want to be in relation to The Facts - hopefully we will be some time soon

 

once again, RIP Ian - instruments in the green and tailwinds for you from now on

 

BP

 

 

[Methusala]

Without wishing to pre-empt any factual findings down the track I am moved to point to my thread,"Does your aircraft fit your flying style?". We know that the test pilot of the 1st 707 rolled it. This does not give other pilots carte blanc to do the same. In relation to the event that started this thread, I am pro the RaAAus warning its members. There has been a lot of comment that this pilot at least was thinking about aerobatics when he bought the plane. The simple truth is that if every possible precaution is not followed you can come to grief. What do you want the organisation responsible for rec flying to say? It is often said in these posts that we want safety related outcomes to emerge following catastrophes. This is a well moderated message. Don

 

 

[boleropilot]

Don - skydiving and paragliding experience + many years flying through the trees in choppers with the doors removed for better visibility (Army Aviation) = the Drifter is top of my list.

 

Price wise, it's within my budget, which is at the very bottom of the 'money to spend' factor.

 

The fact that I consider myself a 'fair weather pilot' is fine - having been turned almost upside down whilst flying on a hot summer day (see post above) I now tend to avoid 'big thermal' days....not fun

 

The fact that it happened at 2,000 feet was something to be grateful for - I try not to think about what may have happened if I were on short final.....

 

I'm not sure how other RAA aircraft would have handled the invisible monster I flew into, but I also realise that the very low MAUW of the Drifter probably contributed to the degree of 'instability' that occurred

 

If the numbered ping pong balls fell 'the right way' for me I'd probably buy a Vixen A32 - the last thing I would want to own is a fast, slippery little high-powered beasty that would easily get ahead of me

 

BP

 

 

[djpacro]

Without wishing to pre-empt any factual findings down the track.... There has been a lot of comment that this pilot at least was thinking about aerobatics when he bought the plane. The simple truth is that if every possible precaution is not followed you can come to grief. What do you want the organisation responsible for rec flying to say? It is often said in these posts that we want safety related outcomes to emerge following catastrophes. ....

Agreed. Interesting that I saw the ad and took a slight interest in it myself because of "aerobatics". Not interested in an RAA aircraft as I am only interested in aerobatics so my Plan B (post CASA medical if it comes to that) would be to get my flying "fix" in the USA. (refer the Sport Pilot provisions for aerobatics)

 

..... as far as illegal aerobatics are concerned (and I'm not suggesting that happened in this case ....I for one have seen a few cases of this...

Quite a few - some personally seen, some on YouTube and others I've been told about. For those that I have observed personally I've never felt obliged to counsel the pilot regarding safety - his choice to operate illegally, I haven't yet seen anything directly hazardous to an individual (other than promoting illegal ops perhaps to others).

 

..... some were conducted by very competent and experienced pilots in aircraft that may well have been structurally capable ...

Competent - tick.Structurally capable - tick - being an aeronautical engineer I take a keen interest in this. I've flown aerobatics in a number of aircraft approved for aerobatics but for much less than the usual 6 G - Beagle Pup is only certified semi-aerobatic at 4.5G, Airtourer T-6 at its max gross weight is approved for aerobatics at 4.5G, Citabria is aerobatic at 5G, some models of Auster (who knows what the approved G is?), that homebuilt aeroplane I built which was approved for aerobatics purely on evidence of safe history of operation in the USA ...

Handling qualities - demonstrated capable - tick

 

Spinning - no unrecoverable spin modes and the recovery technique is known - tick

 

(hope I haven't forgotten anything - can't edit the post later)

 

.... (but probably not for inverted flight, which entails certain mechanical mods)of course I am assuming a few seconds of positive g inverted flight is not going to cause an engine stoppage ...

May very well cause an engine stoppage, similar situation with a Cessna Aerobat, for example ....

[Phil Perry]

Dutchroll would possibly label me a 'Pussy' here but following 16 hours of instruction in aerobatics, I very nearly blacked myself out flying a Pitts S1. This is another aircraft that you sort of 'Wear'

 

But it has capabilities a little beyond that of the human ability to withstand high 'G' forces. I am, actually very glad, that I didn't 'overdo' things a bit more, otherwise you'd have one less idiot posting on this forum.

 

I WAS,. . .very lucky that day that I didn't lose conciousness. . ... . .( so was the bloke who owned the aircraft ! )

 

I've found that, getting older, my 'G' tolerance has reduced markedly. . . young man's game now. . .

 

 

[djpacro]

From the UK CAA's Safety Sense Leaflet on Aerobatics: "A person’s tolerance to ‘g’ tends to increase with exposure and reduce with age." So the cure is to increase your exposure as you get older. I find aerobatics relaxing and still enjoy wringing a Pitts out to its limits.

 

 

[facthunter]

Negative "G" is more likely to be damaging. Your sitting position makes a difference and if you have a pressured G suit to stop the blood draining from your head which makes you black out. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

The CEO of RAAus has seen fit to mention illegal aerobatics in a letter about this one crash. That to me says that RAAus has decided that the accident was caused by illegal flying. But then they are not saying what the cause was. I consider this very poor comment by the CEO. Either RAAus has decided that it was caused by illegal activity, or it has not so decided, they seem to be wanting to have it both ways. If they want to curb illegal activity they should say so. Not put it in a comment letter about a crash which could have been caused by other than illegality.

 

 

[turboplanner]

The CEO of RAAus has seen fit to mention illegal aerobatics in a letter about this one crash. That to me says that RAAus has decided that the accident was caused by illegal flying. But then they are not saying what the cause was. I consider this very poor comment by the CEO. Either RAAus has decided that it was caused by illegal activity, or it has not so decided, they seem to be wanting to have it both ways. If they want to curb illegal activity they should say so. Not put it in a comment letter about a crash which could have been caused by other than illegality.

The RAA is not doing anything of the sort.

On this site, we have covered over and over again the process of investigation of RA accidents, which is by necessity through the State Police > Coroner channel.

 

We have carefully pointed out that the public (and that includes RAA) does not have access to the contents which make up Police Briefs, nor the information supplied by the Coroner.

 

RAA may be called in by Police to provide expert knowledge, but they do not have the right to publish what they provide to Police.

 

The ONLY way to get final information on a crash cause, (other than what may be included in the Coroner's report, is if ATSB decide to investigate, in lieu of the State process, and there are protocols where even there RAA couldn't comment on any direct information, supplied to ATSB. If I was asked to provide evidence to ATSB, it's likely that I would be cautioned that the condition was that I would not release ANY detail of that evidence to anyone other than ATSB.

 

So so use forum-creep of suppositions and the opinions of a number of regulars to suggest that RAA has decided this accident was caused by illegal flying is wrong.

 

They did specify what they found out from witnesses about people conducting aerobatics in that area, in the hope, I suppose that all RA flyers will realise that illegal aerobatics in RA aircraft have some serious technical reasons for being so, regardless of the hoped-for structure of the aircraft, and the hoped-for invincibility of some pilots.

 

I've criticised RAA many times, but they deserve credit for trying to stamp out unsafe practices with broad-based warnings.

 

Often after a fatal crash, there are new pilots who decide that given their limited hours compared to a pilot who crashed, what hope is there for a safe sport, and they leave RA flying. I personally know at least a dozen of these.

 

Broad-based warnings help them to zero in on the cause; perhaps where someone has been killed by low flying into power lines; and know, that provided they don't engage in that activity they will not be a similar statistic.