Admin Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 August 31, 2008 04:02pm Article from: AAP A LIGHT plane carrying two people is believed to have crashed off Queensland's South Stradbroke Island. The plane, believed to be a Russian-built vintage Yak 52 aircraft, was reported missing on a flight from Archerfield airport, west of Brisbane, to an undisclosed destination early this afternoon. Water police were searching around Jumpinpin Bar, between north and south Stradbroke Island, off southeast Queensland, after the plane reportedly went down in the area about 12.30pm (AEST). "We do know a plane was overdue, believed missing," Chris Sullivan from the Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) said. RACQ CareFlight rescue helicopter spokesman Brian Russell said three helicopters and a number of boats were searching the Jumpinpin Bar and surrounding area this afternoon. "We had a call about 12.30pm this afternoon for a light plane that has gone into the water just south of Jumpinpin Bar," Mr Russell said. "We have been searching for three hours but there has been no sighting of any wreckage, as yet." Searchers were due to meet at the Couran Cove resort late this afternoon to formulate another search pattern, he said. It's believed a person on a beach reported seeing the plane crash into the water.
BLA82 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I believe it was the red Yak 52 from Hemples Aviation. This aircraft has been an iconic sight at Archerfield and I hope the pilots are found alive but it is not looking good.
Mick Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Nine news this evening reported that it was a Yak 52 from Hempel's at Archerfield. They also said that part of the propellor had been found?
Guest Mike CMB Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I have flown that aircraft from the back seat on two occasions and so has my brother. He just called to say he saw it on the news. It was a lovely aircraft, I thoroughly enjoyed going for a spin in the back spent a lot of time inverted. It was a little different to taxi with pneumatic brakes. All the instruments where in russian and I used to wear a cloth head set like a cosmonaut. I also remember it doing a beat up of the Boonah strip, had a great sound. I hope whoever was in got out ok. Mike
easyav65 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 Can't believe what happend; I heard the pilot on the radio today saying he is going to do aerobatics in the Bribie area over water.
BLA82 Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 I was just looking at one of the news sites and found this pic of suspected debris from the Yak. The last two pictures are ones I found on the Hemples Aviation website of the actual aircraft. My thoughts are with these guys familys and lets hope some good news is heard soon.
Case Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 and this from the Courier Mail this morning. http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24270407-952,00.html
Guest airsick Posted August 31, 2008 Posted August 31, 2008 My thoughts are with them. I did my flying training with Hempels years and years ago. Barry was a grumpy old bugger at times but he was a good bloke in general and a damn good pilot. He pushed the envelope and some would question his ethics but he was always good to me so I never had an issue with him. Hopefully he turns up somewhere but if he doesn't he will be missed.
BLA82 Posted September 1, 2008 Posted September 1, 2008 My thoughts are with them. I did my flying training with Hempels years and years ago. Barry was a grumpy old bugger at times but he was a good bloke in general and a damn good pilot. He pushed the envelope and some would question his ethics but he was always good to me so I never had an issue with him. Hopefully he turns up somewhere but if he doesn't he will be missed. My thoughts exactly airsick, I was trying to work out a way to word my post without offending and you did it perfect. A dam good pilot with a irreplacable character who will be missed by many
JimG Posted September 25, 2008 Posted September 25, 2008 Just found this and now I'm wondering why J430 was banned/suspended a few weeks ago when now it seems he was onto the truth..... JimG Hempels Aviation grounded - faces liquidation BRISBANE air company Hempels Aviation is facing liquidation following the death of its founder and principal in a joy flight crash three weeks ago. Already at the centre of separate police and safety investigations, the company has flagged to the civil aviation watchdog it may have to close its doors. The 30-year-old company's nightmare run began on August 31, when pilot Barry Hempel was killed with his fare-paying passenger Ian Lovell, 35, in a $492 joy flight. It later emerged that Mr Hempel did not hold the commercial pilot's licence necessary to take fare-paying passengers. Civil Aviation Safety Authority spokesman Peter Gibson yesterday said CASA would be unable to take action against the Hempels pilots and the company once it folded. Hempels Aviation chief pilot Michael Lawrence refused to comment on the company's reasons for closing yesterday. A police investigation will continue as a report is prepared for the coroner. The news of the wind-up came as some relief to Mr Lovell's family. His partner Samantha Hare had bought the joy flight as a gift for Mr Lovell's birthday and claimed she was misled by Hempels. Source: The Courier Mail www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,24397434-3102,00.html
Guest bluechip Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Has anyone ever asked why Barry who used to fly commercial airliners and has nearly 30000 flying hrs held only a ppl licence. And how was Samantha misled, going up in an experimental, ex military aircraft doing aerobatics is the risk you take. Im sure nobody forced Ian into it.
Guest airsick Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Don't quote me but I think he failed his medical. He had an accident (non-flying) a few years back and I think it was related to that.
ahlocks Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 G'day Blue. I did learn why Mr Hemple no longer held ATPL or CPL and there is a fair chance that you are probably aware of why as well. I also reckon that Samantha 'assumed' rather than was misled. But then, misled sounds so much more sensational if one is writing a newspaper story or about to engage in a compensation claim. Cheers!
Guest High Plains Drifter Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Ya gotta wonder - I thought the idea of going for a ride in a warbird was the thrill - the danger, so to speak. If it was ho-hum - i.e. 'safe', who would pay the money ? Methinks the pax was FULLY aware of the risk.
ahlocks Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Yeah, You wouldn't shell out nearly five hundred bucks for twenty minutes of complete and utter boredom would you... Me thinks probably more blissfully ignorant than fully aware though. You know, that sort of thing only happens to other people. They were probably having a marvelous time up until it started to go pear shaped.
Guest bluechip Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 I thought his medical was current? Don't quote me but I think he failed his medical. He had an accident (non-flying) a few years back and I think it was related to that.
Kaz Posted September 29, 2008 Posted September 29, 2008 Maybe they told her they were licenced to conduct the joy flight and held appropriate insurances. Being that they were not licenced, any insurance they had would not apply, therefore she was misled. It doesn't take much imagination to make something one says into something totally different.
Matt Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 Of course the story doesn't expand on why or how she believed she was misled but I'm sure there are legal eagles involved and will identify any breach in regulation and hone in on it as a means to hold the operator accountable - I'd do the same thing. For education, all operators of LIMITED category aircraft are required to inform passengers, fare paying or not, of the risk associated with operating an ex-Military aircraft which was designed to different standards and regulations to civil aircraft. The passenger would have signed a liability release which would have stated the following, the aircraft would have also had this placarded in the cockpit. “WARNING THIS AIRCRAFT IS NOT REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE SAFETY REGULATIONS FOR STANDARD AIRCRAFT. YOU FLY IN THIS AIRCRAFT AT YOUR OWN RISK” It's unlikely that Hempels had passenger liability insurance as this is difficult and expensive to get for these types of aircraft - hence the liability release required to be signed. For me, the question is solely about the pilot in command's licence status. Had this been a "joyflight" and the PIC only had a PPL and it was not a fare paying situation then that's a completely different situation to a fare paying passenger / commercial arrangement. The risks though are the same.
Barefootpilot Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 I have to disagree with the pax knowing the risks. Casa still maintain a set of standards for the adventure flights and it doesn't look like they where maintained. An inflight break up like the one in NSW ok maybe thats a risk you take with ex Mil aircraft but going in because your flying with someone who isn't meant to be doing it thats not right. Everybody can learn something from this event - You may get away with it for a long time but it only takes once for it to all be over! Adam
Guest bluechip Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 Ok, this is my final comment to this thread. I still feel barry was the most experienced to fly this type of aircraft, his cpl was taken from him for what ever reason and inturn was given a ppl, (what a kick in the guts). Ive seen barry on show at " The Festival Of Flight" some years back (in the yak), he was a master. Nervertheless his yak still remains in 20mt of water and there is no intention to recover it as far as I know. So maybe we never will find out what caused the accident. We all know he had an incident with a hanger door but this was cleared and his flying medical(ppl) was current. we all know he shouldnt have been flying the yak that day but can you blame him, it was his passion, he lived to give others what he enjoyed most.
Guest airsick Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 We all know he had an incident with a hanger door but this was cleared and his flying medical was current. I was led to believe he held a PPL medical not a CPL medical. I could be wrong though but this was what I was getting at before.
Guest Flyer40 Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 If it's true that the pilot held a class 2 medical and not a class 1, then it's blatantly obvious how Ian Lovell and Samantha Hare were misled. When you aren't directly affected by a persons death it's easy to feel detached. I find the tone of some of the comments in this thread offensive. The published and publicly available information indicates that at least two people committed a willful violation of the laws that are in place to protect the paying public, leading to a mans death. That behaviour is inexcusable. Having 5 million hours in a log book is no excuse to hold oneself above the law.
motzartmerv Posted September 30, 2008 Posted September 30, 2008 Quote from flyer40 "That behaviour is inexcusable. Having 5 million hours in a log book is no excuse to hold oneself above the law." Exactly..... Quote from bluechip "I know he shouldnt have been flying the yak that day but can you blame him, it was his passion, he lived to give others what he enjoyed most. " The quote from flyers post sums it up perfectly. 1
Recommended Posts