5 dead in an RV-10?

mikeinbama said:
Mainly, I'm just bothered that this thread was looking like it would be thought provoking and informative, then someone walks in and takes a dump on "people here"..... You know what I mean? I swear I really try to stay positive.
Click to expand...

I second that.

Seems in very poor taste to try to twist every tragedy into an argument for or against a particular stance on an issue.

When one is tempted to do so, one should really consider starting a separate thread on that topic.

IMHO, of course.
 
Thinking about their family at this time. That early 20's risk taking could have gotten a few of us too.

Here was the local METAR near the time of the accident...

SP 16/09/2015 07:40->
SPECI KAMG 160740Z AUTO 06004KT 10SM BKN021 BKN041 22/19
A3021 RMK AO2 T02220194=
 
Last edited:
Seems like stupid non-pilot tricks.
 
I hate to even mention this, because I hate over regulation and more Big Brother over sight, but it seems in this digital age there could be some checks a balances for certification/currency. I'm not sure of the implementation, but we already have the database for certificates, seems it shouldn't be too difficult for a CFI to be able to go online and sign off on a BFR in that same database.

I don't know how well a check system could work, since you obviously don't need a certificate to own a plane, but it sure seems likely that you would. (Obviously LLCs would be even harder to monitor). You would have to assume an RV10 owner would want insurance (granted not required, but I doubt he had this in his garage at home, so wouldn't the airport want to see proof of insurance?) You would think the insurance company would visit this database to confirm the listed pilots were in fact certified and current before issuing a policy.

I guess my point is it seems the tools are generally already available to the public/FBO/Insurance to do a check and balance on us pilots with little to no additional oversight (with the exception of the BFR example I gave) or intrusion that could certainly prevent tragedies like this.

Edit: FWIW, I'm 36, can certainly appreciate a night on the town with some 20 somethings, but would never dream of a trip to the airport at 2:30am. :nono: so lets not stereotype either.
 
Last edited:
mikeinbama said:
I agree with some of this Brad, there are people that turn a blind eye, but the assertion was people here would condone the actions of the actors in the two mentioned accidents, I haven't seen that in four years here, if I have missed it, show me. I think your last sentence is hyperbole, yes, I have seen some of that, but not "many" folks and not "any" thread.....and with the lack of information, I don't think you can say this was the inevitable result of such actions. Just my .02. Mainly, I'm just bothered that this thread was looking like it would be thought provoking and informative, then someone walks in and takes a dump on "people here"..... You know what I mean? I swear I really try to stay positive.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 110%. I know of no thread where POA members condone people flying without a pilot's license, proper training, and proper medicals to support the level of flying they are doing.
 
Gsxrpilot said:
I might be one that you're referring to??? When others here tell me I should ALWAYS use flaps on takeoff or landing, or the debates about LOP operations, and whether my Mooney can be landed on grass or not... I'm the first one to say "mind your own darn business!" But seriously, flying without a certificate, BFR, IFR currency, and carrying passengers? I haven't seen anyone on these forums defending that type of behavior.
Click to expand...

Exactly.


What disappoints me more about this thread is the lack of respect and condolenses for the 5 people lost their lives. At this point we don't know the cause or complete circumstances of the accident.
 
FastEddieB said:
I second that.

Seems in very poor taste to try to twist every tragedy into an argument for or against a particular stance on an issue.

When one is tempted to do so, one should really consider starting a separate thread on that topic.

IMHO, of course.
Click to expand...

+3. :yes:
 
Last edited:
Brad Z said:
I doubt you'll find anyone condoning those actions, but plenty of folks willing to take a blind eye at suck actions. I'm sure that if the RV-10 driver build and flew that plane on a regular basis without a certificate, somebody would have figured that out somewhere along the way. If they're like many of the folks here that squawk "mind your own darn business!" on any thread mentioning a pilot being observed doing some thing unsafe, they'd just keep their mouth shut keep walking.

...and this accident is the inevitable result.
Click to expand...
Ok, I'm not defending flying well over gross, out of CG limits, under the influence, launching into legal VFR over unlit landscape, or whatever may turn out to be the cause of this accident (and, at this point we have absolutely no clue).

But, to claim that a deficiency in paperwork inevitably results in a smoking hole is beyond absurd.

Condolences to the families involved.
 
The real tragedy here is the wife who is now wondering if she is going to be able to feed her family when the lawyers are through.
 
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Ok, I'm not defending flying well over gross, out of CG limits, under the influence, launching into legal VFR over unlit landscape, or whatever may turn out to be the cause of this accident (and, at this point we have absolutely no clue).

But, to claim that a deficiency in paperwork inevitably results in a smoking hole is beyond absurd.

Condolences to the families involved.
Click to expand...

No license= "Deficiency in paperwork"............ :rolleyes2:

Geico266 said:
What disappoints me more about this thread is the lack of respect and condolenses for the 5 people lost their lives. At this point we don't know the cause or complete circumstances of the accident.
Click to expand...

I think we can start with "non certificated pilot carrying passengers", the rest will follow.
 
Last edited:
ifly4fun said:
I hate to even mention this, because I hate over regulation and more Big Brother over sight, but it seems in this digital age there could be some checks a balances for certification/currency. I'm not sure of the implementation, but we already have the database for certificates, seems it shouldn't be too difficult for a CFI to be able to go online and sign off on a BFR in that same database.

I don't know how well a check system could work, since you obviously don't need a certificate to own a plane, but it sure seems likely that you would. (Obviously LLCs would be even harder to monitor). You would have to assume an RV10 owner would want insurance (granted not required, but I doubt he had this in his garage at home, so wouldn't the airport want to see proof of insurance?) You would think the insurance company would visit this database to confirm the listed pilots were in fact certified and current before issuing a policy.

I guess my point is it seems the tools are generally already available to the public/FBO/Insurance to do a check and balance on us pilots with little to no additional oversight (with the exception of the BFR example I gave) or intrusion that could certainly prevent tragedies like this.

Edit: FWIW, I'm 36, can certainly appreciate a night on the town with some 20 somethings, but would never dream of a trip to the airport at 2:30am. :nono: so lets not stereotype either.
Click to expand...
.

We don't know the cause of this. This could just have easily been a joy ride in a car and people died it happens it is sad but news flash life is dangerous and people who don't follow rules are not going to follow rules just because you make more. For all we know this was a failure in a part that may have been installed 5 years prior or bad fuel or who knows.

Although you might be on to something. maybe if we chipped everyone say in the forehead or the right hand and then put a device in the plane so it wouldn't start unless all their information was up to date in the Government and insurance databases oh and since you couldn't buy or sell without the chip they wouldn't be able to get gas either. Problem solved. :yikes:


Praying for the families as a father of an 18 and 22 year old I can't imagine getting that phone call.
 
DFH65 said:
.
Praying for the families as a father of an 18 and 22 year old I can't imagine getting that phone call.
Click to expand...

I've been the IIC (Investigator in Charge) on several airplane accidents. Go out to a crash site right after the event happens, look over the carnage and begin trying to piece together what happened that led up to this event. Then, met with the surviving family members to gather more information. It's never easy.
 
RotorAndWing said:
Training does, standards do. The paper at least proves the training and standards were met.
Click to expand...

So ratings, hours, training, and certifications are never pencil whipped? :rolleyes:

I'm not arguing against certification and training at all, but paper is not the defining safety feature of a pilot.
 
Geico266 said:
What disappoints me more about this thread is the lack of respect and condolenses for the 5 people lost their lives. At this point we don't know the cause or complete circumstances of the accident.
Click to expand...

DFH65 said:
. We don't know the cause of this.
Click to expand...

Holy double standards, Batman? Since when have we censored ourselves from discussing accidents and the possibilities of what might have happened? Or is it because it's an homebuilt and we know they can do no wrong? If y'all want to go to a forum where you can talk about RVs that never crash, there's VAF.

For the record, I don't think the fact that it's an RV has anything to do with this accident, and I have seen any disrespectful words for the passengers. As for the pilot, regardless of his certificate status, it's practically a statement of fact that he screwed up big time.
 
Geico266 said:
So ratings, hours, training, and certifications are never pencil whipped? :rolleyes:

I'm not arguing against certification and training at all, but paper is not the defining safety feature of a pilot.
Click to expand...

Flying without it is certainly a defining indicator of lack of integrity, which is a critical component in the safety chain.
 
On FB page...

"The Blueberry Barn
September 10 at 10:40am ·
Please remember that the store will be closed for vacation from September 14-September 23. I will reopen on Thursday, September 24."
 
Brad Z said:
Flying without it is certainly a defining indicator of lack of integrity, which is a critical component in the safety chain.
Click to expand...

Brad....there are air vehicles out there that do not require paper....you knew that though. :goofy:
 
There are a lot of people who think both a 'license' and a 'certificate' are permissive in nature. Because they are issued by an authority, they take on the aura or imprimatur of special privilege. The FAA doesn't help matters when they use words like 'exercising the privileges of his certificate'.

A license or certificate is not an authorization to do something, it's half of the contract with those who build, maintain, and manage the facilities that you are using. For example, anyone of any age can hop on a tractor and drive it around a farm. They can even use it on public highways for short periods without license when over a certain age(state dependent). Boats are operated without license, jet skis, dune buggies, ATVs, and of course ultralights are all used regularly by people without a 'license' or 'certificate'.

This guy apparently broke that contract by carrying pax without the required certificate, or endorsement. The certificate is an agreement that one will abide by the rules and regs of the collective(society). Sadly, this guy broke that covenant and tragedy resulted. It's easy to slide into the mind-set that he didn't have 'permission' to be there. But the reality is he or anyone doesn't need permission to be there, but they need to fulfill the contract obligations of a regulated society, and that is where things broke down. If he had been in an UL, since it was dark he still would be breaking the contract, but for a completely different reason. Also, no one would really care, because a UL can't carry four other people.

I didn't come here to start, or open the debate, but I hope this is my last word on the subject. I'm all for everyone playing by the existing rules and regs. It keeps the carnage to an acceptable level. What worries me is that the feds mind-set of 'permission' will encroach and regulation will follow due to one person like this letting the horses out of the barn, and the FAA will come in with some pretty big automatic doors, spring loaded locks, and a full time monitor to see that no horse ever escapes the barn again.

There it is. Have at it. Tear it up, and spit it out. Do your best.
 
Lets all take a step back. I am sure none of us mean any disrespect to those killed or their families. I also believe that most, if not all agree that we shouldn't and dont condone illegal flying. It has come up a lot lately that we all need to be more civil in our disagreements. R&W, my apologies, I should have used more tact in my response to you.
 
mikeinbama said:
Lets all take a step back. I am sure none of us mean any disrespect to those killed or their families. I also believe that most, if not all agree that we shouldn't and dont condone illegal flying. It has come up a lot lately that we all need to be more civil in our disagreements. R&W, my apologies, I should have used more tact in my response to you.
Click to expand...

MIke, I don't think you are at fault here. In fact, I think you've got the roles reversed. We were set on this course by post #14. Someone with a more than usual vested interest in a point of view that they just can't control.
 
no worries....the guys are all over it.:yikes::goofy:

showposter.jpg
 
txflyer said:
Odd ..

Why was a 38 year old farmer flying a bunch of 23 and 24 year old kids at 2:30AM?

Why did his wife report him missing days before? Bizarre.
Click to expand...


Agreed on your thoughts....

Wait till the tox reports are out.....

But....

Unless the kids were forced into that plane against their will this will be nothing more then young kids not using their best judgement and it killed them all...

My guess is alcohol will be involved...:idea:

Now throw in possible relationships with the guys/ girl and all bets are off on what happened to lead up to this fatal flight...:sad::sad:
 
docmirror said:
I didn't come here to start, or open the debate, but I hope this is my last word on the subject. I'm all for everyone playing by the existing rules and regs. It keeps the carnage to an acceptable level. What worries me is that the feds mind-set of 'permission' will encroach and regulation will follow due to one person like this letting the horses out of the barn, and the FAA will come in with some pretty big automatic doors, spring loaded locks, and a full time monitor to see that no horse ever escapes the barn again.
Click to expand...

I won't debate what a certificate is or does, because it doesn't really matter. I just wanted to point out that it's Congress, not Feds, who codified the requirement for a pilot certificate into law. The Feds (i.e. FAA) implement and enforce Congress's directive. Even if the FAA administrator,--heck even if the President-- wanted to do away with pilot certificates, they could not do so with a law passed in Congress.
 
Checkout_my_Six said:
Yup....but legal. :yikes::goofy:
Click to expand...

How do you figure that? The definition of a Part 103 ultralight is that it has a single occupant. There is a waiver for hang gliding and paragliding instruction, but other than that you need a license to carry a second occupant.
 
FormerHangie said:
How do you figure that? The definition of a Part 103 ultralight is that it has a single occupant. There is a waiver for hang gliding and paragliding instruction, but other than that you need a license to carry a second occupant.
Click to expand...

they don't make a 5 seater? :yikes::goofy:
 
I think most all of us view the FAA with the Goldilocks dilemma. Is it too hard, too soft or just right? In my mind, it depends on which FAR we are talking about. I can see the need for more oversight in some areas and less in others while it seems to be perfect in some. I will not go into great detail here on which FARs I feel fit into each category. What I will say is that I doubt if anyone on here believes this accident or any of a similar nature were truly caused by insufficient regulation or oversight. You simply cannot put enough controls in place to ensure some candidate for the Darwin awards does not go out and engage in some personal thinning of the gene pool.
 
Brad Z said:
My point is that there are some things that are worth minding your own business, but major safety issues? If it is true that he had no certificate, I doubt this was the first time he's flown illegally, and I doubt it's the first time he's brought passengers...and I doubt he's done all this without anyone noticing.
Click to expand...

How would anyone know that he didn't have a certificate?

He obviously knew how to fly, although perhaps not how to do a weight and balance computation when putting 5 people in a small airplane.


ifly4fun said:
...but it seems in this digital age there could be some checks a balances for certification/currency. ...
Click to expand...

You are assuming a home builder scoflaw would also purchase insurance on his home built airplane. Not necessarily the case.

So ask the question - when should such a check occur? Prior to every flight? Before buying gas? On entering the airport? What about mogas airplanes based in someone's backyard? Who are they going to show credentials to?

Yes, there are electronic databases. But there's no system driven event point that you could tie a check into.
 
N801BH said:
Unless the kids were forced into that plane against their will this will be nothing more then young kids not using their best judgement and it killed them all...
Click to expand...

I put the blame on the pilot, not the kids. How many times have your passengers asked to see your pilot's certificate? Not many people even know what one looks like.

My point is that the owner of the RV-10 represented himself as a pilot and the kids (reasonably) assumed that meant he was FAA certified and competent. This all goes out the window if the kids knew the pilot was drinking, but so far that is just a guess based on the time of day.

Before anyone starts calling for more regulations/"checks" etc.. remember these types of accidents are extremely rare. Flying at night, no pilot's certificate, overloaded on people and possibly booze... there are no common sense rules the FAA could implement to have stopped this guy.
 
Last edited:
Wouldn't this Administration and the media just consider this guy an "Undocumented Pilot"? :dunno:
 
I think that paper does make people safer and I'll tell you why. Those of us with licenses put a lot of time, effort, and money into getting those licenses and I, for one, value my license. I value my pilots license and now I value my mechanics license. I don't want to put those licenses at risk so, when I'm thinking of doing something that might be a little shady, I have a little voice on my shoulder says "do you really want to put your license at risk?" This fellow had no license, he had nothing to put at risk, in his eyes. Of course, he was putting everything at risk.
 
So ask the question - when should such a check occur? Prior to every flight? Before buying gas? On entering the airport? What about mogas airplanes based in someone's backyard? Who are they going to show credentials to?

Yes, there are electronic databases. But there's no system driven event point that you could tie a check into.
Click to expand...

Theres no way to check 100% of the time, but some checks would certainly be better than 0% of the time. My airport required proof of insurance to keep my plane there, seems that would be a good starting point. If the Airport confirms valid insurance, and insurance confirms valid named pilots, and this is done annually during lease renewal, it would certainly get closer to the top half vs the bottom have with little to no intrusion to how most of us already operate. Another non-intrusive method could be tied to registration, just like your car.

Does this prevent the farmer who builds an RV in his barn and has a grass strip? no.. no different than it prevents the same farmer from growing weed or running a still. But it definitely makes it more difficult, and might make a passenger think twice about why their pilot has to operate an airplane out of a barn and back 40 vs an airport.
 
ifly4fun said:
Theres no way to check 100% of the time, but some checks would certainly be better than 0% of the time. My airport required proof of insurance to keep my plane there, seems that would be a good starting point. If the Airport confirms valid insurance, and insurance confirms valid named pilots, and this is done annually during lease renewal, it would certainly get closer to the top half vs the bottom have with little to no intrusion to how most of us already operate. Another non-intrusive method could be tied to registration, just like your car.

Does this prevent the farmer who builds an RV in his barn and has a grass strip? no.. no different than it prevents the same farmer from growing weed or running a still. But it definitely makes it more difficult, and might make a passenger think twice about why their pilot has to operate an airplane out of a barn and back 40 vs an airport.
Click to expand...

I don't think its reasonable to expect an airport manager to track down the currency status of every pilot and airworthiness status every plane, but I think the aviation community has the responsibility to "See something, say something" when it comes to egregious violations by other operators.

If Greg "Climbnsink" weren't banned, he'd already be here to accuse me of pulling out the playbook for Hitler's Youth (forgive the inadvertent Godwin of this thread). But if GA ever hopes to improve it's safety record, we need to look at safety from a system perspective.

Other people's lack of safety effects all of us--- through negative public opinion, insurance costs, increased regulatory burden, and ultimately, our lives.

If I am aware of an other pilot conducting egregiously unsafe operations, I'm going to report them, and I hope you do the same. Sometimes a "come to jesus" meeting at the FSDO is all it takes to get folks back on the straight and narrow; no enforcement action, no 709 ride, and no repercussions against the complainant.

If you don't feel comfortable reporting it to the FSDO, contact the airport manager or a FAAST representative. Chances are you aren't the only person to see something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top