7 Crashes in 7 Days

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by pelmet »

I thought this aircraft looked familiar. I took a picture of it in late 2018 on a layover thinking that, although I am hesitant about amateur-builts, this one is tempting. Sadly, a real amateur bought it instead. Read about it here.......

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/07/s ... 6.html?m=0
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by PilotDAR »

With some knowledge of Seawinds, I am untempted about them, and have declined to fly one when asked. This impatient pilot did not learn some important lessons that most of us have. Letting alone the accidents themselves, I can imagine the FAA wanting to chat with him about knowingly flying an unairworthy plane....
---------- ADS -----------
 
pdw
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1619
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:51 am
Location: right base 24 CYSN

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by pdw »

They might chat with him again about their role in a movie idea he’s talking about.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Spandau
Rank 3
Rank 3
Posts: 115
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2008 9:05 am

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by Spandau »

This reminds me of a story about a guy at our airfield who purchased a homebuilt sight unseen based on it having "a big motor" and on the type of GPS that was installed in it. It reminded me of a sixteen-year old kid who bought a car based on it's stereo - and the fact that "it was built by an engineer".

The airplane was the most amateurly built amateur-built I ever saw. The Chinese made altimeter was exactly 900' out, turning off the "Master" killed everything except all of the avionics which had their own, parallel wired avionics master, the belt driven, automotive alternator was turning up about nine-thousand rpm in cruise (which really impressed the manufacturer of the unit who wanted the third one that failed back to examine!) The cooling fan on the alternator failed in overspeed (the blades stretched until they failed, resulting in a small, grenade like explosion inside the cowl), the electric fuel gauges burned up... it was impressive, and it cost him a hell of a lot of money to sort it out after he got it home. Oh, and the guy who painted it was color blind.

The "engineer" worked for CN.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Mach1
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 719
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:04 am

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by Mach1 »

---------- ADS -----------
 
I'm going to knock this up a notch with my spice weasle. Bam!
pelmet
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 7138
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by pelmet »

Spandau wrote: Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:38 am This reminds me of a story about a guy at our airfield who purchased a homebuilt sight unseen based on it having "a big motor" and on the type of GPS that was installed in it. It reminded me of a sixteen-year old kid who bought a car based on it's stereo - and the fact that "it was built by an engineer".

The airplane was the most amateurly built amateur-built I ever saw. The Chinese made altimeter was exactly 900' out, turning off the "Master" killed everything except all of the avionics which had their own, parallel wired avionics master, the belt driven, automotive alternator was turning up about nine-thousand rpm in cruise (which really impressed the manufacturer of the unit who wanted the third one that failed back to examine!) The cooling fan on the alternator failed in overspeed (the blades stretched until they failed, resulting in a small, grenade like explosion inside the cowl), the electric fuel gauges burned up... it was impressive, and it cost him a hell of a lot of money to sort it out after he got it home. Oh, and the guy who painted it was color blind.

The "engineer" worked for CN.
It seems a lot of homebuilders might be very handy in one area but airplanes require a builder to be knowledgeable in a wide range of skills.

I read a lot of homebuilt stuff these days. Mostly but not exclusively due to EAA membership that I got while visiting Oshkosh AirVenture on a nice layover a few years ago. Good magazine.

Anyways, I was just reading this from another publication which I thought was an important point....

Starduster Too Restoration
I’ve included a recent picture of me sitting in the “Range Duster” makings airplane noises!
It’s slowing coming along. I found an issue with the rigging...that was built into it from when Mr.
Al Hooper built it. I’m correcting the issue so now the wings can be rigged correctly and
hopefully I will pick up some speed for my efforts! Each of these Homebuilt planes are
unique...each one probably has deviations from the plans and errors in the build.
It’s our job to
know the design enough to correct any errors we find when it comes time to do a major
restoration as I’m doing on the Range Duster. I could have left alone the issue...but as a
builder of integrity I just could not allow that.
---------- ADS -----------
 
User avatar
PilotDAR
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4053
Joined: Sun Sep 30, 2012 6:46 pm
Location: Near CNJ4 Orillia, Ontario

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by PilotDAR »

I have seen a few truly inspiring amateur built airplanes, and was confident that although the builder was not a professional they certainly were no amateur either. More commonly, I have seen enthusiast built airplanes. That is to say that the builder had their heart in the build, and although lacking some knowledge here and there generally tried to follow an established design. Most commonly, I have seen a lower experienced pilot builder spend years and thousands of hours as an enthusiast building, and less than that dedication to gaining and maintaining piloting skills. Then they get in a non certified airplane, whose handling probably differs from the forgiving handling of the certified plane that they learned to fly in so many years ago, and maybe didn't keep up with anyway. The more sprightly, less benign non certified airplane may be a little less forgiving, just as the lesser skilled and current pilot needs some forgiveness in handling from it.

I opine that some builders build or buy a non certified airplane "to get more airplane for less cost". Maybe, but probably not. Done properly, it should take most lower time pilots additional training to be ready for the possible difference in handling, and the cost of that training could make up the difference to the perceived greater cost of the certified plane.

Flying your non certified plane, and enjoying what is probably greater performance at a lesser operating cost is great if you'll match this "savings" with recent, appropriate training and currency. 'Sounds like the pilot at of the recent Zenith 601 accident was doing the training, and credit to them for this. But the nature of the training, and the skills building needed and possible is unknown to me.

I have myself, offered to "fly a few circuits" with a pilot in their new plane, to realize after the first one or two, that it would be more than a few circuits before they had the minimum competence in that type. Now what do you do? Maybe you didn't make your offer thinking it could turn into a dozen hours of flying. Maybe you don't want to hurt the fellow pilot's feelings about this. Maybe you realize that you're at the limit of your skill mentoring in this type. Our industry is amply able to provide good mentoring and recurrent training in 172's and PA-28's, less so in Cubs and Citabrias, and very thin on the training skill and currency on odd certified types, and most amateur built types.

It is up to the owner of the airplane to recognize their need for comprehensive training on their type, and seek it out from a competent mentor pilot - and pay the fair price for this training. In my opinion, if you, and your insurance company, are not comfortable sending your proposed mentoring pilot solo for a few hours first so they can familiarize themselves with your plane, you may have made the wrong choice. If you, as a mentor pilot, are not prepared to make a sudden unusual attitude recovery or take over to an overshoot from 25 feet off, you really should be taking that airplane solo until you are.

The forgoing is written by a pilot who is now really careful whom, and in what, I'm prepared to mentor....
---------- ADS -----------
 
Posthumane
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 649
Joined: Sat May 09, 2009 6:16 pm

Re: 7 Crashes in 7 Days

Post by Posthumane »

Spandau wrote: Sat Oct 09, 2021 6:38 am the belt driven, automotive alternator was turning up about nine-thousand rpm in cruise (which really impressed the manufacturer of the unit who wanted the third one that failed back to examine!) The cooling fan on the alternator failed in overspeed (the blades stretched until they failed, resulting in a small, grenade like explosion inside the cowl), the electric fuel gauges burned up... it was impressive, and it cost him a hell of a lot of money to sort it out after he got it home.
I find this odd, as automotive alternators can handle significantly more than 9000 rpm. A typical OEM setup (pulley ratio between 2 and 3 and a red line around 5-7k) has the alternator spinning around 18k at redline. 9k in cruise is a bit on the high side but not excessive; it would lead to somewhat faster brush wear but not a massive overspeed failure.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"People who say it cannot be done should not interrupt those who are doing it." -George Bernard Shaw
Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”