Trevor Jacob "staged" plane crash

[piperasleep]

Guess the remote control in this was very effective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbgYB-d ... atsargent1

Or this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm5YPhb ... =Discovery

Seems to me this yutz is a legitimate target of criticism, but "This kind of sh*t warrants a number of years in prison, substantial fines and of course loss of any aeronautical privileges FOR LIFE." seems a little strong.

I don’t know about prison time, but revoking his airmen privileges for life seems fair if it is proven that the crash was staged. Behaviour like this impacts negatively general aviation, making it look as an unsafe and risky activity (statements such as “I never fly with a parachute” will give negative ideas to the general public). Lots of GA airports are fighting closure and videos like this could give leverage to the general public to maintain the idea that GA aircraft crash and they don’t want them around their neighborhoods.

This video also diminishes how an airmen would deal with this situation. A pilot would never consider jumping as the first option, and that’s something that every pilot learns before getting their PPL.

When a pilot receives his license, his privileges are to operate the aircraft to the utmost safety, including in the unfortunate situation of an engine failure. Jumping 1 minute after the engine stops and trimming down the aircraft so it crashes close and fast isn’t the safest way to deal with this situation.

Stagged or not, I can’t believe the disrespect that this guy showed towards his friend by including his ashes and memories to a possibly stagged video+sponsored video. It’s just distasteful

[mmm..bacon]

Who TF is Trevor Jacob? Is he one of those people who's famous for being famous?

Seems, to me, that there were several potential landing sites in view from his altitude...

[photofly]

When a pilot receives his license, his privileges are to operate the aircraft to the utmost safety, including in the unfortunate situation of an engine failure....

I don't see that in CAR401, but I concede I could have missed it. It takes a lot to revoke someone's licence for good, and it's generally only done for "iincompetence", which has a specific meaning that someone is unable to obey the regulations, not that they chose not to on one or more occasions.

ehaviour like this impacts negatively general aviation, making it look as an unsafe and risky activity (statements such as “I never fly with a parachute” will give negative ideas to the general public). Lots of GA airports are fighting closure and videos like this could give leverage to the general public to maintain the idea that GA aircraft crash and they don’t want them around their neighborhoods.

Again, I don't see that there's an offence under the Aeronautics Act of "bringing General Aviation into disrepute", or "diminishing the idea of the safety of small planes in the eyes of the uninformed", or any other the other things you take issue with.

It seems like not enough of a big deal to send someone to prison for, that's all.

[Bede]

I don't see that in CAR401, but I concede I could have missed it. It takes a lot to revoke someone's licence for good, and it's generally only done for "iincompetence", which has a specific meaning that someone is unable to obey the regulations, not that they chose not to on one or more occasions.

Usually it's because it's "not in the public interest." https://decisions.tatc.gc.ca/tatc/tatc/ ... 8/index.do

I know of no cases where a CAD has been cancelled for incompetence.

[Bede]

Steady.

How do you feel about people who crash cars and trucks to make videos and movies? Any idea how many vehicles get intentionally wrecked, crashed, destroyed, detonated for each new Bond movie?

Haven’t you enjoyed Top Gear flinging old cars and caravans down mountainsides and into quarries?

Never watched Mythbusters destroy vehicles?

What’s the difference? Why all the hate just because it had wings?

Part of the reason is that in a movie, everyone understands the fiction. In this case, he tells people that this actually happened. It's like if a Bond film sold itself as a documentary.

This is the second dumbest thing that I've heard of in aviation. The dumbest was when a guy in Fort Good Hope (if I recall) video taped (with a Sony HandiCam) a low level fly-by by a buddy in a C207. The tire impacted the camera which destroyed the future YouTuber's skull.

[photofly]

I don't see that in CAR401, but I concede I could have missed it. It takes a lot to revoke someone's licence for good, and it's generally only done for "iincompetence", which has a specific meaning that someone is unable to obey the regulations, not that they chose not to on one or more occasions.

Usually it's because it's "not in the public interest." https://decisions.tatc.gc.ca/tatc/tatc/ ... 8/index.do

Yes, that's a poster child for having a licence cancelled, and it's waaaaay beyond what the person who made this video did. Unless there's a pattern of deliberately crashing airplanes? I suppose "in the public interest" is easier to make stick, because it's a subjective decision of the minister's.

I know of no cases where a CAD has been cancelled for incompetence.

Here's a suspension on the basis of incompetence:
https://decisions.tatc.gc.ca/tatc/tatc/ ... 1/index.do

Part of the reason is that in a movie, everyone understands the fiction. In this case, he tells people that this actually happened. It's like if a Bond film sold itself as a documentary.

That's a great analogy, but you can't deny there are plenty of more stupid things on youtube.

[AirFrame]

That's a great analogy, but you can't deny there are plenty of more stupid things on youtube.

Hell, there are more stupid things here on AvCanada... Look in the COVID forum.

Nobody is denying he's a royal *sshat for wrecking a perfectly good airplane. All we're debating is how severe the punishment should be, and in reality, since nobody was actually hurt in the process the penalty will probably be light... He got lucky. Fines for damages, recovery, etc., loss of pilot's certificate, and slap on the wrist and it'll be over.

[photofly]

Is it actually a regulatory infraction deliberately to crash an airplane in Canada?

[172_Captain]

Is it actually a regulatory infraction deliberately to crash an airplane in Canada?

Gross negligence, reckless endangerment are a couple that come to mind. Letting a plane ghost fly through the sky to crash into the hillside where it could have hit any number of hikers or campers is incomprehensibly stupid.

[photofly]

Is it actually a regulatory infraction deliberately to crash an airplane in Canada?

Gross negligence, reckless endangerment are a couple that come to mind. Letting a plane ghost fly through the sky to crash into the hillside where it could have hit any number of hikers or campers is incomprehensibly stupid.

There's section 320.13 of the criminal code:

320.13 (1) Everyone commits an offence who operates a conveyance in a manner that, having regard to all of the circumstances, is dangerous to the public.

But that's about endangering people; if you take adequate precautions to be sure the public is not endangered, then that statute doesn't stop you crashing a plane at all.

Any other guesses? I'm pretty sure that if you want to crash your own plane, on your own property, and can do it without endangering anyone, you're free to go ahead. I guess there could be some environmental infraction about releasing fuel or oil into the environment. It doesn't sound like the quantity of fuel in a Cub would be considered a big deal though.

[ALPApolicy]

Here is Dr Grande's assessment of Trevor.

[linecrew]

Guess the remote control in this was very effective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cbgYB-d ... atsargent1

Or this?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pm5YPhb ... =Discovery

Seems to me this yutz is a legitimate target of criticism, but "This kind of sh*t warrants a number of years in prison, substantial fines and of course loss of any aeronautical privileges FOR LIFE." seems a little strong.

...oy.

[airway]

This video is obviously a hoax, and this guy is a totally reckless and an idiot for doing it.

I'm just trying to wrap my head around how he could think this was a reasonable thing to do.

Did he know how much controversy, derision, and likely some enforcement from the FAA he would get? Maybe he factored that all in, in order to get more hits, more publicity, and money.

How much is he going to make from all the hits on this video (I'm embarrassed that my hit will be included), the apology video that I'm sure will be next, and all the other people that are going to subscribe to him now just to see what other stupid things he does.

Does anyone know roughly a average "influencer" like this guy makes from YouTube?




.

[Flight94]

This video is obviously a hoax, and this guy is a totally reckless and an idiot for doing it.

I'm just trying to wrap my head around how he could think this was a reasonable thing to do.

Did he know how much controversy, derision, and likely some enforcement from the FAA he would get? Maybe he factored that all in, in order to get more hits, more publicity, and money.

How much is he going to make from all the hits on this video (I'm embarrassed that my hit will be included), the apology video that I'm sure will be next, and all the other people that are going to subscribe to him now just to see what other stupid things he does.

Does anyone know roughly a average "influencer" like this guy makes from YouTube?




.

https://www.noxinfluencer.com/youtube/c ... ThI2G7F4_g

About $2k/month. He's not getting rich off YT by any means.

[Skykiwi]

My FO showed this latest video to me and I felt it was a stunt.

"My FO"??? The people you fly with do not belong to you. The First Officer I was flying with...

[Cessna 180]

He's going to probably enjoy life in prison. I'm not sure what the minimum sentences are, but there's a variety of state and federal charges he will probably be convicted of if they prove this was a hoax.

1) Reckless endangerment
2) Fraud (insurance)
3) EPA and State environmental regulations
4) 14 CFR § 91.13 - Careless or reckless operation
5) False report
6) Other 14 CFR violations

not to mention the millions in damages the courts will probably award to the state and to the insurer.

What an idiot.

[photofly]

It’s funny how small airplanes arouse such passions in people. Both the anti-airplane people (“a small plane flew over my house once and I knew I was going to die!!!!”) and the pro crowd have that in common.

[Bede]

"My FO"??? The people you fly with do not belong to you. The First Officer I was flying with...

Heaven forbid he were to discuss his doctor....

[photofly]

Different power dynamic. Compare “my valet” with “my probation officer”.

[redlaser]

No mention of a flight plan or an ELT on the aircraf to alert search and rescue, especially since he made his way back to the damaged aircraft, he could have retrieved the ELT, no attempt was made to restart the engine, I agree with others who say the guy is an idiot.