Pilot who buzzed Santa Monica Pier - missing in China crash

[CFR]

Do even a cursory on David Riggs and see what you come up with.

And again to be clear, I am not celebrating nor pleased that he has died. His alleged (and convicted) crimes did not warrant the death sentence. This is more the predictable outcome of a con-man and a cheater. Had he gone into the lake by himself that would be one thing, but he took a life with him; apparently on a test flight after re-assembling his A/C [edited - latest is it was the 3rd flight after re-assembly]. It will be interesting to see the results of any investigation, however I suspect there will be nothing more heard about this - his legacy ends in a lake in China. The sad thing is that China seems to be on the verge of opening up the general aviation sector. One hopes that fact that the aircraft was registered in Canada by an American citizen flying on a Canadian pilot licence because he was prohibited from having one in the US, does not negatively affect legitimate Canadian individuals and business that wish to do business there.

[pelmet]

Wow absolutely astonishing, amazing, unbelievable. . . I’m not talking about the deceased pilot I’m talking about everyone who has posted so far.

Universal condemnation of someone for doing what exactly? What did this pilot do that was wrong, in anyway broke rules, regulations? I’m talking about this specific incident. So far no one has posted anything to indicate he was doing anything that was not sanctioned. In fact it seems clear he was doing exactly what he intended to do and obviously briefed others that he was going to do it.

He was a stunt pilot, hired to do stunt flying. Stunt flying by its very definition has its risks and is performed outside of the normal operation of aircraft. No one pays money to go see airplanes do what they normally do. Normal operations can be seen any day of the week just look up at the sky and follow the contrails or go to your local airport and sit at the end of the runway.

Unless someone can post something specific to this incident that points to the pilot doing something outside of what he was contracted to do then my firm opinion is this is a tragic and equal loss of life of both the pilot and passenger. Stunt pilots die every year doing risky maneuvers we the public sanction it and endorse it by paying the entry fee.

The shear callousness, self-righteousness and ignorance of some on this board is baffling.

How about....good riddance Riggs. You are a thief, con-artist and much more. But why couldn't you have done it alone in a car. Then we could celebrate the end of your nefarious(word of the day) activities.

On behalf of the callous, self-righteous victims.

[iflyforpie]

Wow absolutely astonishing, amazing, unbelievable. . . I’m not talking about the deceased pilot I’m talking about everyone who has posted so far.

Universal condemnation of someone for doing what exactly? What did this pilot do that was wrong, in anyway broke rules, regulations? I’m talking about this specific incident. So far no one has posted anything to indicate he was doing anything that was not sanctioned. In fact it seems clear he was doing exactly what he intended to do and obviously briefed others that he was going to do it.

He was a stunt pilot, hired to do stunt flying. Stunt flying by its very definition has its risks and is performed outside of the normal operation of aircraft. No one pays money to go see airplanes do what they normally do. Normal operations can be seen any day of the week just look up at the sky and follow the contrails or go to your local airport and sit at the end of the runway.

Unless someone can post something specific to this incident that points to the pilot doing something outside of what he was contracted to do then my firm opinion is this is a tragic and equal loss of life of both the pilot and passenger. Stunt pilots die every year doing risky maneuvers we the public sanction it and endorse it by paying the entry fee.

The shear callousness, self-righteousness and ignorance of some on this board is baffling.

Maybe he wasn't acting outside of the regulations when he was flying, but he was certainly there under false pretenses and took an innocent and unsuspecting person with him. I think you will find he did not have the actual qualifications to do what he was contracted to do.

[CFR]

Las Vegas Sun article

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2012/no ... near-boul/

[Colonel Sanders]

I think you guys are a little naive, and need
to get out more and travel the world.

When you leave North America, where every
citizen is guaranteed absolute safety 100%
of the time, and all the corners are rounded ...

Many other countries in the world are what I
call the "wild west". Anything goes. You have
to use your judgement. If you don't have any,
you are in for a world of hurt, as was recently
demonstrated.

The bureaucratic outrage and waggling of wattles
is not particularly relevant, frankly. As I have
observed many times here, airshow pilots have
around a 5% annual fatality rate. This has more
to do with the laws of physics than the laws of
man, which change if you cross an invisible line
on the ground, or wait a while.

Fatalities so far this year:

Fred Cabanas (Mexico)
Roger Stokes (Australia)
Rafael Sanchez and Carlos Manuel Guerrero (Dominican Republic)
Charlie Schwenker (Ohio - Jane Wicker not counted)
Ladislao Tejedor Romero (Spain)
Murat Öztürk (Turkey)
??? (Finowfurt, Germany)
David Riggs (China)

[Rudy]

airshow pilots have
around a 5% annual fatality rate

Seems high. If 1 in 20 airshow pilots crashed and died every year only very disturbed individuals would still be attending airshows.

[CpnCrunch]

airshow pilots have
around a 5% annual fatality rate

Seems high. If 1 in 20 airshow pilots crashed and died every year only very disturbed individuals would still be attending airshows.

Or performing in them

[CFR]

The L-39 in this video is from Rigg's company. Whether or not he was flying is unconfirmed although a recently posted comment indicates it was him.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2MVDY8o7Bs

[Rudy]

airshow pilots have
around a 5% annual fatality rate

Seems high. If 1 in 20 airshow pilots crashed and died every year only very disturbed individuals would still be attending airshows.

Or performing in them

Sounds like a Catch 22

[Colonel Sanders]

Food for thought:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Big_One_(NASCAR)

Some have complained that the sanctioning body, promoters, and media have celebrated the crashes

NASCAR crashes better than anyone else. It's what
the crowd comes to see, IMHO.

I don't think people have changed much over the
years. I understand the Romans liked their Colosseum,
too.

[PilotDAR]

NASCAR crashes better than anyone else. It's what
the crowd comes to see, IMHO.

Perhaps, which is why I don't really qualify as "crowd". Seeing a car very skillfully driven is enjoyable, though for me, only for brief periods of time. Seeing a plane skillfully flown captures my interest for much longer.

But, the minute I read or hear announced "daring" or "death defying" or some such, or the display is obviously focused primarily on risk, flying fast, or unusually close to other objects, rather than demonstration of flying skill, or aircraft capability, I'm walking away disinterested.

I am much more likely to enjoy the skillful demonstrations of aircraft to be seen at the Farnborough or Paris airshows, where companies are trying to sell their aircraft's capabilities with caution and safety, rather than the "watch me" of the "other type" of airshow. Give me demos of water bomber pickups, and helicopter winch rescues all day long, forget the inverted passes down the runway with the wing walk victim tied to the kill stick.

That's not to say that there aren't bad things and crashes at the commercial airshows, and some very skillful and well disciplined flying at the "other" airshows. but my personal preference is not to contribute to the "death defying" crowd - I think there is too much dis service to the image of aviation with that, and I would rather see aviation made to look good....

[CFR]

NASCAR crashes better than anyone else. It's what
the crowd comes to see, IMHO.

Perhaps, which is why I don't really qualify as "crowd". Seeing a car very skillfully driven is enjoyable, though for me, only for brief periods of time. Seeing a plane skillfully flown captures my interest for much longer.

But, the minute I read or hear announced "daring" or "death defying" or some such, or the display is obviously focused primarily on risk, flying fast, or unusually close to other objects, rather than demonstration of flying skill, or aircraft capability, I'm walking away disinterested.

I am much more likely to enjoy the skillful demonstrations of aircraft to be seen at the Farnborough or Paris airshows, where companies are trying to sell their aircraft's capabilities with caution and safety, rather than the "watch me" of the "other type" of airshow. Give me demos of water bomber pickups, and helicopter winch rescues all day long, forget the inverted passes down the runway with the wing walk victim tied to the kill stick.

That's not to say that there aren't bad things and crashes at the commercial airshows, and some very skillful and well disciplined flying at the "other" airshows. but my personal preference is not to contribute to the "death defying" crowd - I think there is too much dis service to the image of aviation with that, and I would rather see aviation made to look good....

Where does this fall? - (Riggs in China in 2010) http://www.chinaairraces.com/

I know what I think ...

[PilotDAR]

To each their own, and I try to respect other's choices, but I would not pay to see it....

[Colonel Sanders]

commercial airshows

Not sure why a crash at a trade airshow is
any more virtuous than any other kind of
crash ... lots of bad stuff has happened at
trade airshows in France over the years:

1999 Sukhoi
1989 MiG
1988 Airbus
1977 A-10
1973 Tupolev
1965 B-58

Not sure many people here are old enough
to remember it, but two of the three F-20
prototypes either crashed at trade shows,
or preparing for them, both fatal. One of
them occurred in Canada, and a friend of
mine was the TSB investigator. You would
be surprised as to what the cause of the
accident was.

[CFR]

commercial airshows

Not sure why a crash at a trade airshow is
any more virtuous than any other kind of
crash ... lots of bad stuff has happened at
trade airshows in France over the years:

1999 Sukhoi
1989 MiG
1988 Airbus
1977 A-10
1973 Tupolev
1965 B-58

Not sure many people here are old enough
to remember it, but two of the three F-20
prototypes either crashed at trade shows,
or preparing for them, both fatal. One of
them occurred in Canada, and a friend of
mine was the TSB investigator. You would
be surprised as to what the cause of the
accident was.

Both crashes (the Korean one is on youtube) were officially attributed to GLOK. Is there more to it?

[Colonel Sanders]

Both were G-loc but the one in Canada
(this is going back a few decades) was
attributed to undisclosed medication and
also to the particular maneuver: negative G
followed by a boatload of positive G. All
serious civilian contest and airshow pilots
know about that problem, but perhaps he
didn't get the memo.

Reminds me a bit of Ian Groom, who was
killed by Viagra. Or maybe it was Cialis. He
was trying to keep up with a hot asian wife
half his age, I guess, and who knew that it
decreased your G tolerance? Ian flew the
crap out of a Sukhoi, hit the water after
50 continuous snap rolls or something like
that.

[av8ts]

I was on the ramp watching when that one crashed at Goose Bay. Still remember it 25 years later.

[pelmet]

Reminds me a bit of Ian Groom, who was
killed by Viagra. Or maybe it was Cialis. He
was trying to keep up with a hot asian wife
half his age, I guess, and who knew that it
decreased your G tolerance?

Is the decreased G-tolerance while the Viagra is directly affecting you or later on?

[Blakey]

One hopes that fact that the aircraft was registered in Canada by an American citizen flying on a Canadian pilot licence because he was prohibited from having one in the US, does not negatively affect legitimate Canadian individuals and business that wish to do business there.

A pilot from one country registering his aircraft in a neighbouring country in order to escape regulatory oppression in his own country? Sounds terrible! Surely this is would never be done by one of us!

[Beefitarian]

... who knew that it
decreased your G tolerance?

Is the decreased G-tolerance while the Viagra is directly affecting you or later on?

No, I've never been to med school so I'm just sharing things I've read.

I suspect the effects are somewhat medium to long term. Viagra was developed as a blood pressure medication, the other thing was actually a side effect that became the more popular/common use.

[CFR]

Not a doctor either, just a long term patient on prescription meds (thankfully ended!!!!) who took an interest in how things work. The 1/2 life for drugs determines how long it takes for the concentration in your system to reduce by 1/2. For Viagra it is 4 hours (this is not always an absolute). Generally you must wait five 1/2 lifes for the drug to be eliminated so for Viagra that is 20 hours. It's also prescription medication so it should be discussed with your doctor before use and flying. I can't find a current standard but the FAA recommendation in 2009 was 6 hours "Viagra to Throttle". Having said all that, Beef is correct that some meds while supposedly eliminated, can have longer lasting effects than anticipated.

Now for the non scientific supposition, maybe when pulling "G"'s there is less blood available to go to the brain as it is busy elsewhere?

I'm personally still at the stage where Viagra is not required as doing aerobatics gives me everything I need!

[Finn47]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-24171994

Rescuers recovered the body of David Riggs from Caihu lake in Shenyang city, Liaoning province, on Friday.

A Chinese translator, also aboard the aircraft which crashed on Tuesday, was rescued but later died in hospital, Xinhua news agency says.

Officials say Mr Riggs was practising stunts for a local air show.

Teams from Sweden, France and Lithuania were also scheduled to perform at the show in Faku county, Xinhua says.

[Beefitarian]

Does anyone know how often this has been done on tricycle gear?

Maybe the reason he was doing it is because most pilots would not try it. I presume he had done it before. I would think you'd know it could be done prior to offering it for public display.

[PilotDAR]

I wonder the same thing Beef...

During a PPRuNe discussion some years back, I gave this a lot of thought - were I to be foolish enough to try it in a tricycle, how would I try it?

Because I'm bored, sitting in a German hotel room tonight, I gave this more thought.....

We know that taildraggers have been seen doing this with success (perhaps the failures are not so well broadcast). I did watch a C180 skiplane do this by accident, but that's another tale.... Anyway, it is evident that the "landing" on the water surface is done as a wheel landing. I expect that there is some drag on the mainwheels at contact with the water. That could pitch a taildragger nose down. With the long arm between the mainwheels and elevator, there's lots of pitch control effectiveness there to hold the tail in the pitch attitude desired. If you don't quite get the pitch right, and the nose goes down a bit more, but this is not much of a problem, unless you get the prop into the water. So, wheels touch, a bit of drag increase at the wheels, plane pitches down, competent (yet daring) pilot checks back a bit on the controls, and there you are.... Steady on...

Now, I think about any tricycle plane.... the pilot is really skilled, and gets the mains on, a bit of drag, nose pitches down, and that nose wheel is really close to the water. Coupled with the lesser arm between the further aft mains and the elevator, the pilot will have to use more elevator, and any control overshoot will result in more pitch control excursion. If the nosewheel touches the water at all, it will make its own drag rise, and this will pull the nose in - fast! Can enough elevator be applied quickly enough to overcome this? I am pessimistic.

But! Most every photo I could find on Google of Lancairs, Cirrus, Piper Cherokee, and Cessna tricycle appears to show that in cruise flight, the nosewheel actually hangs lower than the mains - extended flaps would make that worse. So, if you were going to contact the water on wheels for the purpose of water skiing, you'd do it at a somewhat faster speed than landing speed - more like cruise speed, at which that nosewheel is hanging down further than the mains. That can't end well....

So, if someone is aware of successful waterskiing in a tricycle, my curiosity compels me to ask for a picture!

[iflyforpie]

I was always told that you had to have the brakes on in order to waterski. If you think about hydroplaning on a runway or wet road, it is usually with the wheels locked up. The reason being is that the tire spinning up will create more drag (like a windmilling propeller), suck the bow wave under instead of riding up onto it, as well as presenting a static vs dynamic coefficient of friction.

I'm not sure if that is the case, maybe someone who has actually done that can chime in.

The only plane I know of with brakes on the nose gear is the 727... and most were removed to get rid of maintenance headaches, and removing 200lbs from the nose allows for about a ton more payload.