Roy Halladay's Icon A5 down off of Tampa Coast

[GRG55]

It always amazes me when GA “startups” find someone to invest/fund their venture.

How many have been successful? How many have failed? How can investors find those odds to be in their favor?

Seems they are attracted more by the glamour of the idea than any rational economics. Similar to the glamour of building an electric car in a defunct GM plant in California.

The latest generation of the former seem to be infested recently with law-of-physics-defying flying manpod drone proponents.

 

[Bill]

Seems they are attracted more by the glamour of the idea than any rational economics. Similar to the glamour of building an electric car in a defunct GM plant in California.

Yup. there's a lot of very wealthy people in the world, some wealthy enough that dabbling in a small aircraft company is no different than a regular Joe betting a few bucks on the horses.

 

[FlySince9]

Too soon to blame the airplane

It won't matter one way or the other... those who want one will buy one....those who don't, won't... those on the fence, will get off...

 

[wsuffa]

It's not like their attitude on the purchase contracts did them many favors. At best, it left a bad taste in the mouths of potential buyers, at worst it makes it appear they knew that there was above average risk. Neither is good for sales effort.

 

[CC268]

Maybe you should hang up your log book and call it quits. I seem to recall you have saying this before a few times. Just an observation

Oh cut the ********. If you paid attention to anything else you’d see I have done everything I can to make myself the best pilot I can be including full aerobatic training and now instrument training (which I am right in the middle of).

Oh and by the way I have a friend and fellow hangar neighbor who was involved in a very ****ty wreck at Deer Valley and is currently in a Traumatic Brain Injury Specialty hospital learning how to talk again. I’m flying between 8-12 hours a week right now. I don’t see that stopping me do you? I could keep going but out of respect for this thread I will stop here.

Sorry but that was a stupid response.

 

[JB1842]

Seems they are attracted more by the glamour of the idea than any rational economics. Similar to the glamour of building an electric car in a defunct GM plant in California.

Big difference. The car company is receiving billions in tax money and credits. I bet there would be a lot more successful airplane startups if they got the same deal.

 

[wayne]

Not being an ahole, just curious, but what thoughts do you have that makes you think they are finished?

I think it's a combination of things. This is the 2nd fatal crash, 3 crashes total, of 20 planes. So, 10% of the fleet has had fatal crashes? Yeah, yeah, math of small numbers, but that's the "spin" (pun not intended). They just had a 50% increase in price. Those things are going to be off-putting to investors, creditors and buyers. Not an immediate death sentence, but in a risky business that's not a good position to be in. I seriously doubt they are closing their doors this week, but wouldn't be surprised if they throw in the towel in less than a year.

 

[TexDeuce]

If it turns out it is all pilot error, why should Icon the company take the hit? It turns out the prior fatality was a bad miscalculation in a canyon not having enough room to maneuver.

On paper the Icon A5 is one of the safest airplanes ever made. If it turns out the plane isn't at fault it still will be one of the safest planes ever made.

There are plenty of planes I deem dangerous enough and give you less room for error. The Icon isn't one of them as far as we know.

It seems to be the way the plane is being flown, buzzing around low altitude that inherently is a much riskier proposition.

 

[Clark1961]

If it turns out it is all pilot error, why should Icon the company take the hit? It turns out the prior fatality was a bad miscalculation in a canyon not having enough room to maneuver.

On paper the Icon A5 is one of the safest airplanes ever made. If it turns out the plane isn't at fault it still will be one of the safest planes ever made.

There are plenty of planes I deem dangerous enough and give you less room for error. The Icon isn't one of them as far as we know.

It seems to be the way the plane is being flown, buzzing around low altitude that inherently is a much riskier proposition.

Now look at it as a business. Are they meeting all operating costs with cash flow? Are they providing a return on investment to their shareholders? Are sales going to take a hit from the negative publicity because their first customer died in the aircraft. Are their costs going to increase because of the latest fatal crash (think lawsuit here)?

It’s not about good plane/bad plane here, it’s about whether it’s a viable business.

 

[steingar]

Cirrus started their marketing to folks who didn't fly. "Look, it has a parachute, what could possibly go wrong?" Cirri crashed like crazy, they're dangerous and difficult to insure. To its credit, the company changed its culture and training, and now Cirri are no worse and perhaps a bit better than everyone else. The chute has had saves.
Icon is hitting this admittedly early. But it could wind up being the exact same thing, change culture and training. The only problem for Icon is it was designed to be a water toy, not serious transportation (unlike Cirrus). I don't know how many people are going to want to buy a water toy that isn't any fun.

 

[busa2r]

Authorities said there were no calls for help beforehand and that Halladay was the only one on board the aircraft.

Witnesses to Tuesday's crash described the plane flying low.

"From my house to the top of the trees, (the plane) went past a little ways over the trees, hung a left and then tilted to the left into the water," Michael Lennon said.

Leslie Southard said smoke was coming from the engine.

 

[Badger]

Does anyone know if the "customer" version (not test planes) has downloadable data available such as AoA, speed, bank, G, engine info, etc.?

 

[Velocity173]

Like Clark said, I wouldn't be surprised if a lawsuit was in the future for Icon. Cirrus can take a 16.4 million hit. Not sure Icon can.

https://www.m0a.com/cirrus-law-suit/

 

[Tantalum]

The key differences being that both companies were already a) well-established, and b) profitable at the times of both respective high-profile fatals.

Yes, and weren't/aren't marketing their planes as low flying toys that anyone with 20 hrs can enjoy

We see wrecked Fords, Chevy's, etc on the side of the road all the time.

The marketing is different. When you see a wrecked Mustang driven by a 16 year old it's different.. that's basically what Icon is doing, marketing inherently risky behavior in toys to extremely low time pilots

If it turns out it is all pilot error, why should Icon the company take the hit?

Because they encourage aeronautical behavior and decision making that is basically contrary to all standard aviation golden rules

change culture

Yes. Ditch the wannabe fighter pilot thing for unskilled novices

 

[deonb]

Like Clark said, I wouldn't be surprised if a lawsuit was in the future for Icon. Cirrus can take a 16.4 million hit. Not sure Icon can.

https://www.m0a.com/cirrus-law-suit/

Ugh. Very frustrating that a judge will rule against Cirrus for a VFR into IMC crash.

 

[MD11Pilot]

Not being an ahole, just curious, but what thoughts do you have that makes you think they are finished?

Just my opinion. Raising the costs by 50%, the onerous sales agreement they came up with in the last year or so, two fatal crashes and a company that is not wisely marketed (I just saw a statement that they are raising the price because they now know the true production costs????, again my opinion. A new airplane type that is at best a niche of a small niche market needs most everything to go their way but more importantly they need a wise business type to run them or give them advice. There are many people that have great ideas but don't have the practicality of wisdom of marketing behind them. The "dreams" don't make money when faced with reality.
I wish them the best.

 

[RyanB]

https://www.yahoo.com/sports/plane-roy-halladay-flying-jet-ski-wings-234327786.html

 

[Skid]

Adding to the speculation above...I heard rumor around the airport today (the tampa Icon training center) he was doing aggressive maneuvers and loops. Not sure of the validity of it but apparently there are pictures.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

This fast and low over water gives me the bumblebees.
The potential to become trapped upside down in a cabin filling with water might beat in flight fire as my top flying fear.

Note: "heebeejeebees" auto corrected to "bumblebees". Here forward the expression will be "gives me the bumblebees." Please assimilate.

 

[Clark1961]

This fast and low over water gives me the bumblebees.
The potential to become trapped upside down in a cabin filling with water might beat in flight fire as my top flying fear.

Note: "heebeejeebees" auto corrected to "bumblebees". Here forward the expression will be "gives me the bumblebees." Please assimilate.

Would you really rather have bumblebees than heebeejeebees? Note that choosing bumblebees will leave you with welts while the heebeejeebees can be treated with ethanol.

 

[CC268]

This fast and low over water gives me the bumblebees.
The potential to become trapped upside down in a cabin filling with water might beat in flight fire as my top flying fear.

Note: "heebeejeebees" auto corrected to "bumblebees". Here forward the expression will be "gives me the bumblebees." Please assimilate.

I agree, drowning is my worst fear, that would be a horrible way to go.

 

[wanttaja]

Cirrus started their marketing to folks who didn't fly. "Look, it has a parachute, what could possibly go wrong?" Cirri crashed like crazy, they're dangerous and difficult to insure. To its credit, the company changed its culture and training, and now Cirri are no worse and perhaps a bit better than everyone else.

Indeed.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[weilke]

Adding to the speculation above...I heard rumor around the airport today (the tampa Icon training center) he was doing aggressive maneuvers and loops. Not sure of the validity of it but apparently there are pictures.

Well, icon implies that aerobatics is ok as long as you use a 'soft deck' of 300ft :-o

 

[weilke]

Like Clark said, I wouldn't be surprised if a lawsuit was in the future for Icon. Cirrus can take a 16.4 million hit. Not sure Icon can.

https://www.m0a.com/cirrus-law-suit/

Cirrus never took that 16 mil hit. The MN supreme Court decided that you can't blame your math teacher if you suck at calculus. The suit was based on a product liability claim related to the instruction the pilot received, not the plane itself. The court in the end held that instruction is covered by a form of instructional immunity as the ability of a student to comprehend is not the teachers responsibility.

 

[Ravioli]

Note: "heebeejeebees" auto corrected to "bumblebees". Here forward the expression will be "gives me the bumblebees." Please assimilate.

I thought you said your hangar had wasps... now you've got bumblebees and wasps?

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

I thought you said your hangar had wasps... now you've got bumblebees and wasps?

Man I went full on Carl Weathers in Predator on the wasps in that hanger. My son was helping me measure the hangar and he got stung by 2 of them.
These were not the nice mud wasps that don't bother you either. These were the red ones that are programmed to engage any and all living things.
I exacted revenge like a mofo. Even some of the planes in the nearby hangars curled up and rolled on their backs. If you want a wasp free hangar, I know a whole row that has been annihilated.

 

[James331]

If it turns out it is all pilot error, why should Icon the company take the hit? It turns out the prior fatality was a bad miscalculation in a canyon not having enough room to maneuver.....

Well there is ths

Seeing how his only seaplane ticket has "sport" attached to it, I'd wager he got all his SES instruction at icon, so the same company that is advertising their aircraft flying low, also trained the guy who later talked about the thrill of flying super low "like a fighter" seems like all the info he got about Seaplanes was from the same folks who sell this aircraft as a low level flying toy, combine that with his own statements about flying low and how the company like to advertise....


Also any aircraft that lands on water will never be near the safest aircraft built, by the very dynamic nature of water flying (let alone amphib ops) there will always be more danger then with land based aircraft.

 

[exncsurfer]

How many hours till you're 'experienced', I keep seeing references to 20 hour pilots in these posts. This article says he had over 800 hours:

"Halladay said in an interview last March that he had accrued about 800 hours in the air since he threw his last pitch in 2013. He had received his instrument rating and multi-engine rating. He was working toward a commercial rating."

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports...phia-phillies-toronto-blue-jays-20171107.html

 

[Velocity173]

Cirrus never took that 16 mil hit. The MN supreme Court decided that you can't blame your math teacher if you suck at calculus. The suit was based on a product liability claim related to the instruction the pilot received, not the plane itself. The court in the end held that instruction is covered by a form of instructional immunity as the ability of a student to comprehend is not the teachers responsibility.

Oh yeah, that was later overturned. I agree with Clark though that a lawsuit is on the way. If not this accident one of the past accidents. Problem I see for ICON is the aircraft is being marketed in a way that some would say is contrary to safe operating practices. I mean, guidelines to fly at less than 100 ft safely???

 

[wayne]

I mean, guidelines to fly at less than 100 ft safely???

Well, 100' over a runway isn't terribly unsafe; a lake is a runway for an Icon. Until you run out of water in a box canyon like the prior fatal Icon crash. And maybe that way you can stay under the power lines going over the lake.

 

[Half Fast]

On paper the Icon A5 is one of the safest airplanes ever made. If it turns out the plane isn't at fault it still will be one of the safest planes ever made.
.
.
.
It seems to be the way the plane is being flown, buzzing around low altitude that inherently is a much riskier proposition.

You have to take the whole picture in, though, including their marketing.

Icon is like a handgun manufacturer that produces a well-designed, well-made handgun with modern safety features, then sells it with advertising that touts the thrill of playing Russian roulette.

 

[F01LA]

This fast and low over water gives me the bumblebees.

Is it really that dangerous in a seaplane? I thought they were made for that. Speculation, but based on the extensive damage I see in the photos, I doubt this is a simple matter of flying fast and low over water.

Granted this is the Daily Mail, but headlines like "Recipe for disaster" don't exactly bode well for the company. It seems like he was using it the way it was marketed, and died:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5062213/Roy-Halladay-fly-Icon-A5-crash.html

 

[Velocity173]

Well, 100' over a runway isn't terribly unsafe; a lake is a runway for an Icon. Until you run out of water in a box canyon like the prior fatal Icon crash. And maybe that way you can stay under the power lines going over the lake.

Yeah but 100 ft over glassy water with little reference for altitude is dicey. Spent many hours at 130 kts and less than 100 ft in the Army. Even with two pilots, thousands of hours and specialized training, it's a challenging environment that has resulted in many accidents. Difference is, we had to be there so the risk vs reward analysis made sense. Not sure why Icon is marketing this type of flying as acceptable risk.

 

[wayne]

Yeah but 100 ft over glassy water with little reference for altitude is dicey. Spent many hours at 130 kts and less than 100 ft in the Army. Even with two pilots, thousands of hours and specialized training, it's a challenging environment that has resulted in many accidents. Difference is, we had to be there so the risk vs reward analysis that made sense. Not sure why Icon is marketing this type of flying as acceptable risk.

Absolutely. The conditions mean a lot. Flying low over a lake with some wind to help see your height above the surface on a bright clear day is complete different from hazy and no wind with a glass like surface on the water.

Then there is the flying. Nice and smooth and looking around, or yankin' & bankin'. The former, not so bad, the later.....not so much on the recovery altitude if one goofs up.

 

[James331]

How many hours till you're 'experienced', I keep seeing references to 20 hour pilots in these posts. This article says he had over 800 hours:

"Halladay said in an interview last March that he had accrued about 800 hours in the air since he threw his last pitch in 2013. He had received his instrument rating and multi-engine rating. He was working toward a commercial rating."

http://www.philly.com/philly/sports...phia-phillies-toronto-blue-jays-20171107.html

TT is one thing

Seaplane and amphib time and also backcountry is a whole nother ball of wax

Is it really that dangerous in a seaplane? I thought they were made for that. Speculation, but based on the extensive damage I see in the photos, I doubt this is a simple matter of flying fast and low over water.

Granted this is the Daily Mail, but headlines like "Recipe for disaster" don't exactly bode well for the company. It seems like he was using it the way it was marketed, and died:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5062213/Roy-Halladay-fly-Icon-A5-crash.html

Depends on what you know about that body of water, how dark the water is, whats underneath the surface, aerial survey for any wire or lines, deadheads, lighting conditions like flat light, where you are going to dock, beach or anchor and conditions for that, then the legal aspect of who controls that water way, etc etc

There is a reason seaplane insurance is what it is, and a reason amphib insurance is high enough some folks just take the risk, heck my last policy didn't even have a open pilot provision only named pilots, and even with the best pilot in the best plane there can be issues you may not be able to avoid (al la a dead head) till you're right on top of it.

Marketing a seaplane, especially a amphib, as a low time pilot toy, and having in house CFIs, who of course are not going to rock the marketing narrative boat, that's asking for trouble.


Stuff like this, not exactly problems land planes have.

Not many get marked like this, now add a overcast sky or darker water

And it'll do this to a thick heavy boat hull, imagine what it'll do to a light seaplane hull

Now add reefs and rocks, other boat traffic, gulls, tides, currents and everything else, mix in a little "safest plane in the world" and "fighter pilot" "super easy to fly" marketing to it

 

[zaitcev]

Seeing how his only seaplane ticket has "sport" attached to it, I'd wager he got all his SES instruction at icon, ...

I don't understand one thing: isn't ASES supposed to be a rating, not endorsement - no matter if "sport"? I always thought it was a legal peer to ASEL/G, and I had to pass a checkride for that. It was on my bucket list, but if it's merely an endorsement, I'm not as interested.

 

[wanttaja]

Is it really that dangerous in a seaplane? I thought they were made for that.

The problem is margins. If you're at 500 feet, two seconds of inattention probably doesn't matter. If you're at 25 feet, it probably does. Similarly, if an aircraft problem occurs...more time to analyze it and prepare if you're 30 seconds from water impact than 3 seconds.

And if you're going to fly at 100 feet, probably might as well remove the BRS.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[ktup-flyer]

A5s have flight data recorders iirc. Will that data be released?

 

[SkyDog58]

I don't understand one thing: isn't ASES supposed to be a rating, not endorsement - no matter if "sport"? I always thought it was a legal peer to ASEL/G, and I had to pass a checkride for that. It was on my bucket list, but if it's merely an endorsement, I'm not as interested.

Recall that a Private Pilot can exercise Sport Pilot privileges. Once a Sport Pilot has his certificate, all add ons are just endorsements not an additional rating as with a private. The limitation is that it must be a LSA seaplane. He would have not been eligible to fly a non sport seaplane unless he got an actual ASES rating.

 

[Skyrys62]

Man I went full on Carl Weathers in Predator on the wasps in that hanger. My son was helping me measure the hangar and he got stung by 2 of them.
These were not the nice mud wasps that don't bother you either. These were the red ones that are programmed to engage any and all living things.
I exacted revenge like a mofo. Even some of the planes in the nearby hangars curled up and rolled on their backs. If you want a wasp free hangar, I know a whole row that has been annihilated.

Did any of the wasps yell?: Billy! Get to the choppa!