VIDEO (aftermath): 2 YouTubers Wrecked their Airplane during OFF-Airport Landing

[challenger_nami]

@photofly
Can you elaborate with reason why you believe this “ is a really mean-spirited and petty thread“?

Seems pretty obvious. Everyone is saying his GF crashed, with zero evidence. No matter who was at the controls, it was his responsibility to maintain airspeed, which he admits he failed at doing. Perhaps the stall warning wasn't working?

Stall Warning not working is not a good/valid excuse for a pilot to stall and crash the airplane. Like you said, it was his responsibility to maintain airspeed.

PLUS, not every GA airplane has a stall warning system.
Even Some commercially operated Beavers do not have stall warning systems.
I don’t know if an experimental aircraft should have an stall warning system.

For the sake of discussion let’s say his airplane did have a stall warning system which was not working at the time of accident.

Stall warning systems don’t usually stop working mid flight. It probably was not working and he missed it in walk-around or ignored it.

Everyone is saying his GF crashed, with zero evidence.

There is plenty of circumstantial evidence provided by the pilot and his girlfriend pointing to the hypothesis that his Girlfriend was flying shortly before crashing.

Is there a video of the whole thing? I am pretty sure there is/was.
A YouTuber of their caliber don’t let anything go down not recorded.


.

[AuxBatOn]

Stall Warning not working is not a good/valid excuse for a pilot to stall and crash the airplane. Like you said, it was his responsibility to maintain airspeed.

PLUS, not every GA airplane has a stall warning system. I don’t know if kitfox does or doesn’t. For the sake of discussion let’s say his airplane did have a stall warning system which was not working at the time of accident.

Stall warning systems don’t usually stop working mid flight. It probably was not working and he missed it in walk-around or ignored it.

There are airworthiness standards associated with stall warning. If the natural stall warning cues are too subtle, an artificial stall warning system must be installed (stick shaker, horn, etc).

[challenger_nami]

Stall Warning not working is not a good/valid excuse for a pilot to stall and crash the airplane. Like you said, it was his responsibility to maintain airspeed.

PLUS, not every GA airplane has a stall warning system. I don’t know if kitfox does or doesn’t. For the sake of discussion let’s say his airplane did have a stall warning system which was not working at the time of accident.

Stall warning systems don’t usually stop working mid flight. It probably was not working and he missed it in walk-around or ignored it.

There are airworthiness standards associated with stall warning. If the natural stall warning cues are too subtle, an artificial stall warning system must be installed (stick shaker, horn, etc).

So you are saying, by the airworthiness standards, every aircraft in the sky should have an artificial stall warning system?

And you say , by airworthiness standards, the EXPERIMENTAL Aircraft in question here is definitely required to have an artificial stall warning?
Maybe even a stick shaker, why not???


.

[PilotDAR]

AuxBat speaks of the standards for certified airplanes. If a person would like to experiment with airplanes which do not have an artificial stall warning system, that is within the freedoms of our society. However, experimenters cannot be assured the standardized behaviour of certified planes - by the very nature of experimentation. I have flown some airplanes in a non certified configuration, where the first indication of a stall entry was an incipient spin, so an artificial stall warning to precede this would have been great!

Happily, most amateur built airplanes are not experimental, they are amateur built from established designs, which might specify an artificial stall warning system, because the designer of the amateur built did the experimentation for the amateur builder, which is also a freedom of our society.

Thus, every certified, and most amateur builts, have progressed beyond being experimental in Canada, and the systems required for suitably safe flight have been designed in. A very wise amateur built airplane designer would consider compliance with the design requirements too. Why wouldn't they?

[challenger_nami]

Seems like this thread is drifting away.

@pilotDAR, I am fully aware of the Airworthiness Standards for certified Aircraft which @AuxBat is referring to. I think AuxBat is not aware that those Airworthiness Standards do not cover the experimental aircraft which was the case in context here.

having a functioning artificial stall warning device with Warning Light, Horn, and EVEN the stick shaker for a small GA aircraft (if feasible) would be awesome... the more the better for those who miss all the other stall warning signs.

@PilotDAR ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION: why wouldn’t they? it all comes down to cost, and some people( if not most), would cut any corner to save some money.

That is why as Transportation Safety Board indicated recently, there are numerous Grandfathered Beavers in commercial operation that do NOT have a stall warning system ... even though these beavers are CERTIFIED (NOT EXPERIMENTAL) and COMMERCIALLY OPERATED aircraft to carry passengers ... can you @PilotDAR and @AuxBat believe that?




.

[Castorero]

"edit"

[AuxBatOn]

Seems like this thread is drifting away.

@pilotDAR, I am fully aware of the Airworthiness Standards for certified Aircraft which @AuxBat is referring to. I think AuxBat is not aware that the Airworthiness Standards do not cover the experimental aircraft which was the case in context here.

having a functioning artificial stall warning device with Warning Light, Horn, and EVEN the stick shaker for a small GA aircraft (if feasible) would be awesome... the more the better for those who miss all the other stall warning signs.

@PilotDAR ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION: why wouldn’t they? it all comes down to cost, and some people( if not most), would cut any corner to save some money.

That is why as Transportation Safety Board indicated recently, there are numerous Grandfathered Beavers in commercial operation that do NOT have a stall warning system ... even though these beavers are CERTIFIED (NOT EXPERIMENTAL) and COMMERCIALLY OPERATED aircraft to carry passengers ... can you @PilotDAR and @AuxBat believe that?




.

Having conducted flight test for certification of aircraft, I am well aware of what is applicable to what.

[Castorero]

having a functioning artificial stall warning device with Warning Light, Horn, and EVEN the stick shaker for a small GA aircraft (if feasible) would be awesome... the more the better for those who miss all the other stall warning signs.

That is why as Transportation Safety Board indicated recently, there are numerous Grandfathered Beavers in commercial operation that do NOT have a stall warning system ... even though these beavers are CERTIFIED (NOT EXPERIMENTAL) and COMMERCIALLY OPERATED aircraft to carry passengers ... can you believe that?

While I am in favor of upgrading the -2 with a stall warning, I doubt very much that having one would have prevented the fatal outcomes that I am familiar with.
Given the environments that the -2 navigates in, and where most of those accidents have taken place, close to the ground or water, taking off or landing, by the time the horn goes off, the horse is out of the barn.
And do you really think that those pilots needed a stall warning to tell them that they were in trouble?
And did nothing to try and recover?

You know what I can't believe ?

I can't believe that TC , the TSB , and others, howl at the moon after these accidents pointing to the lack of a stall horn and other insignificants, yet describe in detail the crushing forces of the engine and forward movement of the cargo upon the occupants, with the failure of the seat mounts and everything attached to the floor, and do nothing about it..., for fifty years!

But that is a topic for another thread and a different time, I think...

[AuxBatOn]

having a functioning artificial stall warning device with Warning Light, Horn, and EVEN the stick shaker for a small GA aircraft (if feasible) would be awesome... the more the better for those who miss all the other stall warning signs.

That is why as Transportation Safety Board indicated recently, there are numerous Grandfathered Beavers in commercial operation that do NOT have a stall warning system ... even though these beavers are CERTIFIED (NOT EXPERIMENTAL) and COMMERCIALLY OPERATED aircraft to carry passengers ... can you believe that?

While I am in favor of upgrading the -2 with a stall warning, I doubt very much that having one would have prevented the fatal outcomes that I am familiar with.
Given the environments that the -2 navigates in, and where most of those accidents have taken place, close to the ground or water, taking off or landing, by the time the horn goes off, the horse is out of the barn.
And do you really think that those pilots needed a stall warning to tell them that they were in trouble?
And did nothing to try and recover?

You know what I can't believe ?

I can't believe that TC , the TSB , and others, howl at the moon after these accidents pointing to the lack of a stall horn and other insignificants, yet describe in detail the crushing forces of the engine and forward movement of the cargo upon the occupants, with the failure of the seat mounts and everything attached to the floor, and do nothing about it..., for fifty years!

But that is a topic for another thread and a different time, I think...

A stall warning would have broken that chain of events, before better seat mounts and cargo compartments would have been required. By the airworthiness standard, stall warning needs to occur at least 5 kts before stall as one of the criteria. If you can detect conditions leading to a stall, you can avoid it.

Having flown the Beaver a couple of times (on wheels), I thought the stall warning was absolutely imperceptible.

[Castorero]

AuxBatOn, I agree with you in principle, yes, especially if you are operating with enough altitude to recover.

Most fatal -2 accidents have occurred too close to the ground to fully recover from a stall and especially because the aggravating factor is usually a turn with not enough speed to start with. I don't know how one can recover from that death trap.
All Beaver pilots are aware of this, yet every year our numbers are thinned out by this flytrap.
Shit happens to the best of us sometimes, no matter what.

I have had the misfortune of going to a crash site close to home, to find one injured survivor who had been at the very back of the airplane, while the other four people succumbed to compression injuries from the cargo and the failure of the floor attachments.

This was a low speed accident in slow rising terrain, with an attempted turn at the last minute.
The cabin and fuselage, inverted, but intact.

Even if there had been a stall warning, his choices had diminished to near zero.

But if the cargo and the seats had stayed put to some degree, at least two more people would be here today.

[AuxBatOn]

AuxBatOn, I agree with you in principle, yes, especially if you are operating with enough altitude to recover.

There is no need to recover if you don’t stall. That’s the purpose of a stall warning: warn you of a potential stall, before it happens...

[Castorero]

This is a circular discussion, I am afraid.

A Beaver at near max gross, landing or taking off from a lake or having to do a 180 because of weather or terrain will stall in a turn and roll, unless it is carrying a ridiculous amount of speed, which is usually not the case in those situations.
If you have to make a turn to avoid trees, or a rock wall, and are too heavy, or your climb rate is poor, and are close to terra firma, you are screwed.
So, we try and avoid finding ourselves in such predicaments in the first place, but like I said, sometimes shit happens...and it happens while the stall horn is blaring...n'est pas?

[AuxBatOn]

This is a circular discussion, I am afraid.

A Beaver at near max gross, landing or taking off from a lake or having to do a 180 because of weather or terrain will stall in a turn and roll, unless it is carrying a ridiculous amount of speed, which is usually not the case in those situations.
If you have to make a turn to avoid trees, or a rock wall, and are too heavy, or your climb rate is poor, and are close to terra firma, you are screwed.
So, we try and avoid finding ourselves in such predicaments in the first place, but like I said, sometimes shit happens...and it happens while the stall horn is blaring...n'est pas?

Then why would you even put yourself in a situation where you can’t get out of!? This is pure idiocy. If your margin is so thin than a 30 deg bank turn puts you over the edge....

This isn’t in the “shit happens” category. It is in the criminal negligence category.

[Castorero]

I certainly would not go that far.
My "shit happens" comment was simply to underscore that bad things will happen to good people.

All those pilots that have died in the typical accident scenario that I pointed out, did not leave the dock with suicide in mind or even less with criminal intent in mind, and I will bet dollars to doughnuts that the overwhelming majority were good pilots too.

The statistics speak for themselves, unfortunately.

Perhaps we have a different perspective here, mine is crawling along valley bottoms and mountain passes with no weather briefings along the way or at destination, yours is up at altitude.
We live in different worlds, that is all.

[iflyforpie]

Mine is crawling along valley bottoms and and mountain passes on the way to destination.

Doing the type of flying that when some pilots from Turtle Airways came for a flight, their mouths were left agape.

I never needed more than 30 degrees of bank.

If you need more than 30 degrees of bank... even for an avoidance maneuver or a 180... you’ve done something terribly wrong.

Even in a high performance aircraft I can only slow to 140 knots with flaps out to safely maneuver going into the same types of places were the IFR safe altitudes are over 15,000 feet in some cases.. never needed to crank and bank.

[jakeandelwood]

I agree, the whole post is just clickbait and contains no value.

I agree, the whole post is just clickbait and contains no value.

@Heliian:
When you say “Whole post is just clickbait”, are you referring to:

The original post on this thread in avcanada by me,
OR
are you referring to the pilot in question’s YouTube post?

who is doing the clickbating?

.

The YouTube is the clickbait. Since these types of flyers have multiple cameras going everytime they go out for a joyride it's suspect that nothing was shown of the accident sequence.

Rwgardless, the insurance rates just went up.

yes, interesting how this popular youtuber "forgot" to have the camera going on this particular flight

[valleyboy]

I wonder what is going to happen to all those You_Tubers out there once YouTube moves over to a full subscription service. I assume that their revenues will slowly disappear unless they get direct sponsorship from vendors.

I bit the bullet and went to youtube prime and am liking it. I know they are forcing people to do this because they have just upped the ads to a painful level. With prime including youtube music and no ads when watching on firestick or smart TV it's great. If watching on a PC you have the option to block ads but the winds of change are blowing and it will be interesting to see if you tubers stick around or move off to some other parallel service. I'm thinking the day of the million dollar youtuber is drawing to an end.