Fatal ICON A5 crash

RudyP said:
I think I have corrected you on this before. It isn't correct.

The SR22 and SR22T parachutes are identical. The difference is between G3 and G5 parachutes which went from 55 ft diameter to 65 ft enabling the 3600 lb gross weight (again same for SR22 and SR22T)
Click to expand...

Here are the facts. https://cirrusaircraft.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/CAPS_Guide.pdf

Among the changes are:
- The G5/6 parachute has a larger diameter of 65 ft (19.8 m), compared to the 55 ft (16.7 m) diameter for ealier models.
- The G5/6 CAPS rocket size is larger.
- The G5/6 rocket incorporates an electronic ignition. Earlier models did not.
- The line cutter fuses have been delayed to 10 seconds, allowing more time for the larger parachute to inflate.
- The demonstrated parameters for the G5/6 were calculated from G5 parachute drop tests simulating a 3600 pound airplane.
- The demonstrated altitude loss for the G5/6 is 561 feet from straight and level, and 1081 feet from a spin. Down from earlier models.
- The G5/6 parachute descend at a slower rate than the 3400 pound parachute.
 
"was seen maneuvering low-level at cruising speeds seconds before the accident".

Well there you have it.
Fun, yes. Dangerous, yes.
Please let's not start the scud running argument.....again.

I say we ask John Wayne Jones. Surely he worked for ICON and flew for a few thousand hours there.

Sorry.. not trying to stir the pot. Just had a lot of coffee! :stirpot:
 
There was a time when I thought it should be easy to avoid trying to fly up a canyon. Many years ago, that illusion was shattered on a CAP exercise sortie between Redding and Mount Shasta, on which I found out how easy it is to enter the wrong branch of a canyon when you're down in it. Fortunately I have a firm rule to always turn around while I still have room if I'm not SURE that the area ahead is wide enough to turn around in. That's why I'm still here to tell the tale today.
 
'A5 Maneuvering Low-Level Prior to Crash'

The ICON A5 that crashed on Monday morning killing two company employees, including the highly-respected aerodynamics engineer and test pilot Jon Karkow, was seen maneuvering low-level at cruising speeds seconds before the accident. Peter Knudson, public affairs officer with the NTSB, told AVweb that a witness saw the aircraft flying 30-50 feet above the water.

The plane then turned into a cove, applied full power, pitched up and rolled to the left. The aircraft went out of the witness’ line of sight shortly before impact with the terrain.

Read more at:

https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/A5-Maneuvering-at-Low-Altitude-Prior-to-Crash-228982-1.html
 
I think this MAY have been the cove, this is a guess, I wish someone would post actual coordinates,
these peaks here are 500ft above the water on each side, the wide part of the cove is 500ft shore to shore and 300ft further back.

upload_2017-5-11_16-58-8.png
eye level in this view is 1500MSL. about 1000 AGL
 
TexDeuce said:
'A5 Maneuvering Low-Level Prior to Crash'

The ICON A5 that crashed on Monday morning killing two company employees, including the highly-respected aerodynamics engineer and test pilot Jon Karkow, was seen maneuvering low-level at cruising speeds seconds before the accident. Peter Knudson, public affairs officer with the NTSB, told AVweb that a witness saw the aircraft flying 30-50 feet above the water.

The plane then turned into a cove, applied full power, pitched up and rolled to the left. The aircraft went out of the witness’ line of sight shortly before impact with the terrain.

Read more at:

https://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/A5-Maneuvering-at-Low-Altitude-Prior-to-Crash-228982-1.html
Click to expand...
Sounds like a stall, but of course that's not possible in an icon.
 
With the engine pointing backwards on that thing would you use left rudder instead of right if you were to put the throttle to the firewall at slow speed
 
Salty said:
Sounds like a stall, but of course that's not possible in an icon.
Click to expand...
Any plane can stall. Based on people that have flown the plane it seems to be damn hard to make stall into a spin and almost impossible under normal conditions. Anything can happen but buzzing around making tight turns at cruising speed 30 feet above the water doesn't give much room for error.
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
With the engine pointing backwards on that thing would you use left rudder instead of right if you were to put the throttle to the firewall at slow speed
Click to expand...

On the one hand, this is true.

On the other hand, my Sky Arrow with a very similar setup has virtually no right-turning tendency in the climb.

I think it's due to the thrust line being so close to the center-of-gravity, giving it a much shorter arm to work with.

Curious as to whether anyone here who's flown an Icon can comment?

In any case, you're right that a left roll due to power application seems very unlikely.
 
Why are you guys speculating? If it stalled, it WILL be in the telemetry. It's being analyzed now. And without an eye witness, there is no other way.

Seems totally pointless. You guys don't even know where it crashed to within several miles. The south end of Lake Berryessa is much larger than you seem to think. Box canyon? There are lots of "coves" around there that don't qualify, including one that has A DAM at the end. Yet that seems to be driving the assumptions.

It's a speculation built on several other layers of speculation.
 
MAKG1 said:
Why are you guys speculating? If it stalled, it WILL be in the telemetry. It's being analyzed now. And without an eye witness, there is no other way.

Seems totally pointless. You guys don't even know where it crashed to within several miles. The south end of Lake Berryessa is much larger than you seem to think. Box canyon? There are lots of "coves" around there that don't qualify, including one that has A DAM at the end. Yet that seems to be driving the assumptions.

It's a speculation built on several other layers of speculation.
Click to expand...

Actually I watched a zoom out from a helicopter on video. We have the location here as a group correct to maybe 1000 ft.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
MAKG1 said:
Why are you guys speculating? If it stalled, it WILL be in the telemetry. It's being analyzed now. And without an eye witness, there is no other way.

Seems totally pointless. You guys don't even know where it crashed to within several miles. The south end of Lake Berryessa is much larger than you seem to think. Box canyon? There are lots of "coves" around there that don't qualify, including one that has A DAM at the end. Yet that seems to be driving the assumptions.

It's a speculation built on several other layers of speculation.
Click to expand...

It is human nature to speculate, and last time I checked it goes on in every aviation forum or airport hangar I have ever been in.

Also, I have learned a lot from "speculation" including scenarios that have been discussed that were very informative and maybe will be life saving at some point. I think everyone with half a brain understands it is speculation at this point.
 
TexDeuce said:
It is human nature to speculate, and last time I checked it goes on in every aviation forum or airport hangar I have ever been in.

Also, I have learned a lot from "speculation" including scenarios that have been discussed that were very informative and maybe will be life saving at some point. I think everyone with half a brain understands it is speculation at this point.
Click to expand...

No, not every aviation forum or airport hangar. Only in those locations where the utterly clueless hang out. It is considered to be very, very poor form to discuss a pilot's "fatal error" in a public location without convincing evidence. It is JUST like accusing someone of a crime. You had better be DAMN sure. No "facts" in this thread qualify. Now, try to imagine what happens if the families of the deceased pilots happen to find this PUBLIC thread. Several self-absorbed armchair investigators with no actual information nor expertise have concluded that these pilots killed themselves with a student pilot error.

It may be human nature to speculate and gossip, but that doesn't make it any less ugly. Just because "everyone else" (who doesn't have a clue either) is doing it doesn't make it right. Have some class.

If you want to "learn" from an accident, study an old one where the information is actually known. Otherwise, you are studying your own fears and assuming they are reality. That's not competent risk management.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
No, not every aviation forum or airport hangar. Only in those locations where the utterly clueless hang out. It is considered to be very, very poor form to discuss a pilot's "fatal error" in a public location without convincing evidence. It is JUST like accusing someone of a crime. You had better be DAMN sure. No "facts" in this thread qualify.

It may be human nature to speculate and gossip, but that doesn't make it any less ugly. Just because "everyone else" (who doesn't have a clue either) is doing it doesn't make it right.

If you want to "learn" from it, study an old accident where the information is actually known. Otherwise, you are studying your own fears and assuming they are reality. That's not competent risk management.
Click to expand...
Bovine scat

Any conversation beyond "did you hear about the icOn that crashed" is speculation, and it's going to happen anywhere there are two pilots.

You even speculated when you said it will be in the telemetry. In fact, my "sounds like a stall" is less speculation than your "it WILL be in the telemetry".
 
Salty said:
Bovine scat

Any conversation beyond "did you hear about the icOn that crashed" is speculation, and it's going to happen anywhere there are two pilots.

You even speculated when you said it will be in the telemetry. In fact, my "sounds like a stall" is less speculation than your "it WILL be in the telemetry".
Click to expand...

No, that's not speculation. That there is telemetry being studied comes from the NTSB spokesperson.

And no, not every pilot is a crass as you claim. Perhaps present company excluded.

You have NO CLUE what happened. Do not speculate in public about what stupid pilot trick might have been played. There might have been none at all.
 
MAKG1 said:
No, not every aviation forum or airport hangar. Only in those locations where the utterly clueless hang out. It is considered to be very, very poor form to discuss a pilot's "fatal error" in a public location without convincing evidence. It is JUST like accusing someone of a crime. You had better be DAMN sure. No "facts" in this thread qualify. Now, try to imagine what happens if the families of the deceased pilots happen to find this PUBLIC thread. Several self-absorbed armchair investigators with no actual information nor expertise have concluded that these pilots killed themselves with a student pilot error.

It may be human nature to speculate and gossip, but that doesn't make it any less ugly. Just because "everyone else" (who doesn't have a clue either) is doing it doesn't make it right. Have some class.

If you want to "learn" from an accident, study an old one where the information is actually known. Otherwise, you are studying your own fears and assuming they are reality. That's not competent risk management.
Click to expand...

Just lol at this overly dramatic post.

I appreciate the concern from El Capitan of the Speculation Brigade. Every hangar and damn near every pilot I have been around has speculated on local or national incidents. Speculation basically being any discussion on what happened. And anyone with half a brain understands it is speculation.

Spare us the drama.
 
TexDeuce said:
Just lol at this overly dramatic post.

I appreciate the concern from El Capitan of the Speculation Brigade. Every hangar and damn near every pilot I have been around has speculated on local or national incidents. Speculation basically being any discussion on what happened. And anyone with half a brain understands it is speculation.

Spare us the drama.
Click to expand...
TAKE IT IN PRIVATE.

How would you like someone discussing YOUR death by speculating what mistakes you might have made, without the slightest clue.

These guys have families, you know. It's quite clear you don't give the slightest damn about anyone else's feelings, but try to keep control of yourself. This is in public.
 
MAKG1 said:
TAKE IT IN PRIVATE.

How would you like someone discussing YOUR death by speculating what mistakes you might have made, without the slightest clue.
Click to expand...

I'd have zero problem with it. I'd hope something was learned and that it wasn't considered a joke.

I wouldn't do it in presence of family out of tact. But this is a pilot community.

Just keep speculation separate from fact and maybe someone learns something that saves their life one day just by giving an accident some thought.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Curious... for any marketing and PR guys reading this... what would an appropriate response from the company be at this point? I know their FB page had a summary condolences note a few days ago, but their main website doesn't appear to say anything and their FB hasn't seen any recent updates.. 3 days on for a company to be quiet seems strange

NOW... if this were my company I would be trying hard to stay ahead of this... careful not to blame the pilots nor the design, and instead focusing on the core safety aspects of the plane and that these accidents were during test flights and this data is used to make the production plane safer... etc.

I'm not a marketing person (I work in data sciences) but I feel like for all the news articles that are out there talking about this crash it would be in these guys' interests to get ahead of this somehow (get an updated press statement out there, do an interview or two, etc. etc.)
 
gsengle said:
I'd have zero problem with it. I'd hope something was learned and that it wasn't considered a joke.

I wouldn't do it in presence of family out of tact. But this is a pilot community.

Just keep speculation separate from fact and maybe someone learns something that saves their life one day just by giving an accident some thought.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
No one is going to learn a damn thing talking about things that DIDN'T happen.

If that were really your motivation, you would be studying NTSB reports, not news items. Don't rationalize.
 
MAKG1 said:
TAKE IT IN PRIVATE.

How would you like someone discussing YOUR death by speculating what mistakes you might have made, without the slightest clue.

These guys have families, you know. It's quite clear you don't give the slightest damn about anyone else's feelings, but try to keep control of yourself. This is in public.
Click to expand...

Your overly dramatic posts are bordering hysterical at this point. If I end up going down in a ball of flames I hope it is speculated on and discussed until the cows come home. I don't care. Hopefully someone learns something from the discussion and best case they save their own life by reading something of importance. People die in this business. Many have, and many more will. Always tragic and sad, but it is reality. And the accidents will continue being discussed. Which is a good thing.

Again, anyone with half a brain could understand this is speculation. You have good and noble intentions, of that there is no doubt. However, your crusade to end any discussion or speculation of accidents is not rational or reality.
 
Last edited:
MAKG1 said:
No one is going to learn a damn thing talking about things that DIDN'T happen.

If that were really your motivation, you would be studying NTSB reports, not news items. Don't rationalize.
Click to expand...

"No one is going to learn a damn thing talking about things that DIDN'T happen."

This is flat out false. Some of the best discussions I have ever read were accident threads with loads of great safety info shared by various posters. Scenarios brought up that you don't think about much but you file in the back of your head and might have to use on a rainy day.
 
MAKG1 said:
No one is going to learn a damn thing talking about things that DIDN'T happen.

If that were really your motivation, you would be studying NTSB reports, not news items. Don't rationalize.
Click to expand...

It's exceedingly simplistic to say that only NTSB reports can teach. Thought experiment, aka speculation, kicking something around, all the things that could have happened, is extremely valuable.

So sit down, you don't know me, you don't know my experience, you don't know my training and you most certainly don't know how many NTSB reports I've read.

Telling me I'm rationalizing is patronizing and no way to make friends and influence people.

ps no one is forcing your participation

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I noticed concerning this crash, that there is someone posting in the same over the top way regarding speculation, etc., etc. in nearly every forum where the icon 5 is mentioned. I've only seen that in one other instance, when the ICON U-5 tried its first flying sub trick in Florida. Someone else said it was ICON personnel, working to kill the threads within aviation communities. From the look of these, I tend to agree. They all run the same set of bullet points.
 
MAKG1 said:
No one is going to learn a damn thing talking about things that DIDN'T happen.
Click to expand...

A major premise of the EAA/IMC Club is to discuss "what ifs?" The meeting I went to last Saturday was about an IFR flight from Oshkosh to Michigan. The premise was a high wing aircraft taking off before a line of T-Storms and losing fuel rapidly. All of this was made up and the actual basis of the scenario was Cirrus losing a fuel cap taking off from Oshkosh before a line of T-Storms. The actual aircraft RTB'd, found the cap, fefuled and left uneventfully.

So while speculation about a fatal accident in a public forum may not be appropriate, I learned a lot from something that didn't happen, including the many choices when something doesn't go according to plan.

Cheers
 
Jack Hobson said:
I noticed concerning this crash, that there is someone posting in the same over the top way regarding speculation, etc., etc. in nearly every forum where the icon 5 is mentioned. I've only seen that in one other instance, when the ICON U-5 tried its first flying sub trick in Florida. Someone else said it was ICON personnel, working to kill the threads within aviation communities. From the look of these, I tend to agree. They all run the same set of bullet points.
Click to expand...
If you are talking about @MAKG1, I'll assure you that he is a long time poster here, and always makes the same argument about speculation, no matter the airplane type. I will say that speculation is natural, but sometimes we forget that we are not in a hangar talking only with our friends. Or maybe some don't care that their posts are public and searchable, as your post demonstrates. Welcome to POA.
 
MAKG1 said:
TAKE IT IN PRIVATE.

How would you like someone discussing YOUR death by speculating what mistakes you might have made, without the slightest clue.

These guys have families, you know. It's quite clear you don't give the slightest damn about anyone else's feelings, but try to keep control of yourself. This is in public.
Click to expand...

Ya know, this new age touch feely stuff really has to stop.

Look, I don't care about feelings, nor does gravity, physics, or blunt force trauma, this isn't "feelings of America" it's "pilots of America" if their family comes into a aviation board looking up the accident, they'd be a fool to expect anything other than aviation related discussion about it, this type of discussion on this type of site is to be expected by anyone.

Second, It's a public accident, it's already made the papers


Now here's the deal, everyone here is discussing things which could be done in a similar situation to PREVENT this type of accident, even if some aspects don't don't directly apply to this accident, we've so far discussed low level wire surveys, box canyons, stalls, and a few other saftey aspects.

If this PUBLIC DISCUSSION saves one person, or even prevents a "oh chit that as close" it's WELLLLLLLL worth any "hurt feeling".

As to those survived, I'd hope they might find solace in knowing something was learned from this and maybe someone might be spared their grief from those hard taught lessons.
 
Last edited:
Speculation, brainstorming, and discussion are where we can learn a lot and become better pilots for it. And perhaps we can "remember" something we read in a book/did in training a long time ago or haven't had come up again maybe ever. The accident threads are absolutely some of the most informative threads on this website.

Yes sometimes the discussion branches out but often the discussion is educational. Including going over possible scenarios of what happened.

This forum is a tremendous resource. This is a forum with a lot of pilots with a lot of varied experience giving input. This is incredibly educational and can make us all better aviators.

You have to be blind to have not taken away some very good advice from some of these accident threads. I know I have. Including topics and possible critical errors I already "know" not to do but reading it again absolutely helps keep it in my mind in case that situation arises when I am flying.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top