Icon A5.. another crash Jul 27

Watched the video twice.

1) Can anyone get a sense as to whether the takeoff was made into the wind?*

2) It seems all the pilot needed to do was to stay in “ground” effect for a while to let the airspeed build.

3) Anyone know the recommended takeoff flap setting for an A5?


*Of course, aerodynamically once clear of the water the wind makes no difference.
 
FastEddieB said:
*Of course, aerodynamically once clear of the water the wind makes no difference.
Click to expand...


Not as far as stalling, but it makes a difference in how much distance the plane traverses, which could be the difference between hitting or missing the trees. It looked to me like he banked to try to miss the trees and stalled, then clipped a tree.
 
So... how many of these have been made.... and how many have been totaled in crashes?

Which will happen first - company goes bankrupt, or insurance refuses to write any new coverage? ;)
 
GRG55 said:
Yes. And one of those incredibly modern, efficient, gee-whiz Rotax engines too.
And personally, I'd trade it for an extra 80 or more "old technology" Lycoming hp on that thing.
Click to expand...
This was an obvious stall crash though not a power failure thing
 
So the cause of the crash is pretty clear. So what do we blame? The salesman? One off fluke and bad luck.. or an established history of flying this plane at the edge of its envelope at low altitude
 
I blame gravity. And Columbus, and capitalism. We need more rules to keep people (other than us) from effing up. And more agencies to administer 'em. . .

Where would we be without DOE, DHS, DNI, DOE - we'd have none of their fantastic, seminal, and important contributions. . .

Rant complete - I guess I don't blame the airplane, unless it has some weird airfoil with vicious stall characteristics. Nice looking airplane, or usually, unless you've used it as a chain saw. . .
 
I could be wrong here but it might have been lucky to hit that tree when he did. That plane was stalled and was gonna hit the water hard. I think the tree killed some of that energy before he hit. Either way it looks like he had plenty of space to make that take off roll longer if the beginning of the video is any indication.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Very much reminded me of this -- same effect of a tree line, which a less experienced pilot didn't anticipate:

 
Let'sgoflying! said:
sheeet, is that thing easy to get out of when upside-down??
Click to expand...
Yes. Much easier than my airplane actually. It has blow-out window panels that are wider than my shoulders. It's necessary because it has a tip-up canopy, which may be impossible to open if one flips it in a shallow water.
 
jesse said:
That’s not how airplanes and winds work.
Click to expand...
Actually... flying into the wind makes your climb steeper against the ground objects, such as trees, than flying with the wind [1]. Of course, there's no difference against the moving air.

[1] As long as you're climbing, of course. If you are not gaining altitude, flying into the wind merely postpones the inevitable.
 
Dave Theisen said:
“Rare amphibious airplane”. I guess they are getting rarer at the rate they are crashing them. :)
Click to expand...
Nope, not yet. Working against the current sales rate, idiot pilots need to crash 50 A5 per year for them to become rarer. Mere 5 crashes ain't doing squat for that.
 
Water looks to have some chop to it from the wind, so near the treeline some random swirling could be expected.
Also, glad they hit in the water because it appears they went down hard enough for worse injuries if it had been on pavement or rocks.
 
zaitcev said:
Actually... flying into the wind makes your climb steeper against the ground objects, such as trees, than flying with the wind [1]. Of course, there's no difference against the moving air.
Click to expand...

Of course. And I think Half Fast referenced this upthread. The movement of the body of air in which the plane is flying has all sorts of effects on its movement relative to the ground. Climb angle is one such. And it’s the reason ground reference maneuvers are such an early part of training.

But...

Unit74 said:
Flying just above vs1 and turning into a tailwind?
Click to expand...

That statement (question?) sure seemed to imply “turning into a tailwind” at a slow speed could result in a stall that might otherwise not have occurred. The proverbial “downwind turn” fallacy. If Unit74 meant something else he should probably clarify.
 
Last edited:
Salty said:
Someone dumb enough to buy one, but smart enough to try to get rid of it?
Click to expand...


True!

But when I see “salesmen” I don’t usually equate it with “owner” though I guess it could be. I have sold my own cars a few times but I’m not a car salesman.

But it’s possible.

Wish there were a voice recorder. “Watch how little takeoff distance this thing needs, and how fast she climbs!”
 
Half Fast said:
Looked like it clipped a tree?
Click to expand...
That's what the witnesses are saying.
What I do see: barndoor flaps—too much? Full aileron deflection for crosswind. Gusty winds. Why not point it into the wind, from as far away from shore as possible? Clipping the tree was incidental; that thing was already stalled.
 
https://nbc25news.com/news/local/plane-crashes-on-lake-in-isabella-county

"The plane was piloted by 54-year-old Tyrone Finch from Tennessee and his passenger 62-year-old Patrick Jarman from Deerfield Township.

Finch, who was the owner of the plane, was transported to a local hospital with non-life-threatening injuries.

Jarman was flown by Areomed helicopter to Grand Rapids and was listed in serious condition."
 
frfly172 said:
Looks like more training is needed, people assume because it’s light sport it’s easy to fly.
Click to expand...
An erroneous assumption that far too many high time pilots have made.
Tantalum said:
But it has an AoA?!?!?!?!
Click to expand...
Which is a very useful tool but even AOA doesn't prevent a pilot from making a panic yank.
Ryanb said:
Looks just like a small lake to me.
Click to expand...
Looks big enough if the proper technique is used.
Half Fast said:
What difference would the surface below you make to stall speeds?
Click to expand...
None.
GRG55 said:
It's not unusual to get up on the step that way if you are restricted for space. But I would have thought most seaplane pilots would want to climb out over the water to the highest degree possible?
Click to expand...
I learned step turns and using them to increase speed when I did my seaplane training. And staying above water is a good idea unless doing so would take you towards rising terrain or tall trees. Sometimes an early turnout is called for.
GRG55 said:
Yes. And one of those incredibly modern, efficient, gee-whiz Rotax engines too.
And personally, I'd trade it for an extra 80 or more "old technology" Lycoming hp on that thing.
Click to expand...
I don't think the engine was a factor.
Salty said:
I hope nobody’s around with a camera if I screw up that bad.
Click to expand...
In this day and age, you are probably more likely to end up on video than not.
Half Fast said:
Yeah, but you would think an Icon salesman would be better trained and not take dumb chances with a customer on board. Frankly, I think Icon’s problems are cultural.
Click to expand...
I think it was the current owner of the plane and not an Icon salesman. I agree though with the cultural issue, especially the way it is marketed.
dans2992 said:
So... how many of these have been made.... and how many have been totaled in crashes?

Which will happen first - company goes bankrupt, or insurance refuses to write any new coverage? ;)
Click to expand...
I believe 100 have been delivered and if memory serves me correctly, this is makes at least 5 losses.
 
Yikes. An Icon was parked just next to me camping at Osh last week. Cool guy. He sold Icons and mentioned he had flown 500 feet across Lake Michigan to get there. I wonder if he was the one.
 
mr_happyland said:
Yikes. An Icon was parked just next to me camping at Osh last week. Cool guy. He sold Icons and mentioned he had flown 500 feet across Lake Michigan to get there. I wonder if he was the one.
Click to expand...
500 feet is a long way in an lsa
 
SkyDog58 said:
I believe 100 have been delivered and if memory serves me correctly, this is makes at least 5 losses.
Click to expand...
That's about right. I see 102 in the online registry, with another five on the "Deregister" list.

Believe five is the number of accidents as well. From what I've seen, though, none of the accidents have had mechanical causes. At least two have involved stalling at low altitude, which might lead to questions about stall characteristics. The Icon received an exemption to the Light Sport weight limit specifically because of supposed stall-resistant features.

Several have involved operation on or near water, and the accident rate for amphibian aircraft is higher. IIRC, one of the Icon accidents was the classic landing-on-water-with-the-gear-down.

In my opinion, we're not seeing a problem with the aircraft. Perhaps with training, and, as others have mentioned, with marketing, but the aircraft itself doesn't seem to be at fault.

Ron Wanttaja
 
That was a pretty mild stall. Not sure you could build a plane that could do any better.

You can’t make them climb while stalling though. Or survive hitting a tree.

*before the pedants see this, yes, technically it is possible to climb while stalled, but not for long, and not a departure stall in a low powered aircraft.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top