104chocks

""The aircraft is a Beech twin-engine built in 1966 and has been registered to Richard Maclean of Burnside, South Australia, since 2006."" That's what it says

maybe but Indonesia does manage to earn plenty of money itself. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Indonesia

Two news photos on the link below show less than happy crew being frisked and questioned. http://tinyurl.com/l3x7b88

Memorial service for the gyro pilot Mr Wilkinson - a good tribute and well covered by the local rag http://www.southcoastregister.com.au/story/2180599/ken-wilkinson-farewelled-by-hundreds/?cs=12

""The death has occurred of an overseas tourist whilst on a TIF. (If I were a coroner that would be raising a few question marks for a start) The school involved ADVERTISED "Scenic TIFs". (The plot thickens) A coroner WILL get involved. I'm willing to bet someone will get sued."" All good points - this double fatal gyrocopter accident is of interest outside of Australia - I understand the passenger was from Singapore - the Singapore embassy will have an eye on the progress of the investigation and any subsequent liability issues. CASA will be under some scrutiny from home and abroad and will likely be leaning on ASRA to raise standards.

Do we have any official feedback from ATSB / CASA re the recent Kinglake VIC gyrocopter double fatal - pilot and passenger - scenic flight or TIF. Any resulting rule changes.

The Illawarra rag has some mention of the ASRA team and a photo of them at work on site http://www.illawarramercury.com.au/story/2156470/weather-possible-factor-in-fatal-nowra-crash/?cs=300

""No more speculating needed as to the cause, onboard gopro with last 10 mins of flite, confirmed findings."" Sounds like its a done deal. Have you had the results of the other areas of the investigation - could these have some bearing on this gyro accident as well , for example - toxicology, autopsy, metallurgy, etc etc. The Coroner's report will bring these and other lines of thought into consideration too. Here is a link to a recent Coroners report ( PDF ) for a fatal gyrocoptr accident - 33 pages with input from CASA, ATSB, State Police, ASRA and Health n Safety - it's an interesting read and raises some concern over which agency was the lead investigator too. http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/217795/cif-beresford-sj-20131205.pdf Regards Steve

The gyro was designed by Advanced Kinetics. Their website has gone, out of business. The gyro appears to incorporate a trike hull. By using The Way Back Machine we can see website as it was http://web.archive.org/web/20130506123956/http://gyroz.com.au/ Facts can be hard to come by - how many were ever built, completed and registered ? I know of two ( G-511 and G-611 ) but have heard suggestions of maybe half a dozen or so. The Coroners report may cover some of this background.

From the image published here, it would appear to be G-511 an Advanced Kinetics Gyroz. http://www.southcoastregister.com.au/story/2153065/video-man-killed-in-gyrocopter-crash/?cs=203#slide=1

The Queensland Coroner published a report in December 2013 into a fatal gyrocopter ground accident that took place in March 2011. The report is comprehensive and well worth a read as it covers numerous safety issues. The report raises concerns relating to training, documentation, flight instruction, mustering operations and the relationship between CASA, ASRA, ATSB, local Police and Health and Safety officers and who was going to investigate this accident. A PDF of the Coroners report can be accessed via http://www.courts.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/217795/cif-beresford-sj-20131205.pdf Steve

Hi I *think* the gyro in question may have been a Auto-Gyro MT-03 G2347 - that's the type shown on the Yarra Valley Flightsports FB page https://www.facebook.com/YarraValleyFlightsports Auto-Gyro have delivered over 1050 examples of the MT-03/MTOsport series - ie it is not a homebuilt one off. Steve

""Any additional info................ We had a recent gyro incident here in the North ( not sure if RAA rego)....... From what I've heard the two seat Magni type with two on board (914) failed to maintain altitude in a mountainous area due to possible severe down air, and ended up in the trees, with the pilot breaking a leg. Required rescue by authorities. Machine written off, pilot experienced"" If registered it will be with ASRA, but some bypass this and operate unregistered. Gyro accident data only makes it into the public domain via news reports, these can be very brief and less than accurate. ASRA prefer to publish no public summary info. If any one can basic details for the incident mentioned above, ie date and location or provide a news link then I'll add it to the Blog http://gyrocopteraccidentsinaustralia.blogspot.co.uk/ The Blog listing is certainly less than complete. Regards Steve

Hi Jim, Your comments were at the start of my post as this was the part of this thread I was replying to. You ask about shortcomings of this aircraft - the major one being it was not airworthy 3.3 There were no records that would indicate a test flight program had been properly performed or completed. As a consequence the gyrocopter could not be considered airworthy...................... An aircraft that could not be considered airworthy should remain on the ground, it is by definition not fit to fly. Few UFO's have been built but several have had fatal accidents. Regards Steve

""The report doesn't attribute blame to the aircraft."" The report identifies shortcomings with the gyro, not airworthy, the licence of the PIC in terms of instructing, and failure to comply with CAA rules considered airworthy Here are the conclusions from the report 3. Conclusions 3.1 The possibility of any pre-existing airframe or engine defect that could have contributed to the accident was eliminated as far as practicable by the safety investigation. 3.2 The carriage of a container of sand in the nose of the aircraft invalidated the Flight Permit. 3.3 There were no records that would indicate a test flight program had been properly performed or completed. As a consequence the gyrocopter could not be considered airworthy and a passenger should not have been carried until 10 hours of test flying had been completed and recorded. 3.4 The pilot in command was type rated on the type of aircraft but not as an instructor. The flight therefore, should not have been conducted for the purpose of flight instruction. 3.5 The owner suffered a recent TIA and had a heart-related medical history. This history increased the likelihood of the owner suffering an incapacitating medical event such as another heart attack or TIA. 3.6 A handling error by the owner probably resulted in a bunt-over/PPO from which the gyrocopter could not be recovered. The handling error could have been caused by the owner suffering a medical event. 3.7 The bunt-over/PPO would have resulted in the gyrocopter’s rotor disc being subjected to zero or negative G, directly contributing to departure from controlled flight. 3.8 The aircraft’s impact with the ground was not survivable. 3.9 It is considered that if Civil Aviation Rules had been complied with, the accident would not have occurred. Steve