Seneca V Crash
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is some news - The Insurance company / loss adjustors have not let this matter die, as Mr Weaver and (Im told) his associate PK, seemed to hope. They are working hard with the authorities to establish the truth and the latest is that an eye witness has confirmed that the pilot was named "Mark" but from photographs of the person Weaver named as the pilot could not positively identify the photographs as the same "Mark" as Weaver claimed was in the aircraft. Which seems to tie up with the person (who Weaver claimed was the pilot) saying he did not know Weaver.
All I know for certain is that Weaver should have been flying the aircraft to satisfy the insurance, he has admitted being in the aircraft, he has also admitted that he knew he was not qualified for the flight.
Even I doubt that Robert is silly enough to consider identity theft.
Oh dear, its looking more iffy by the day. I do wonder if this one is going to need a Judge and Jury to sort out?
All I know for certain is that Weaver should have been flying the aircraft to satisfy the insurance, he has admitted being in the aircraft, he has also admitted that he knew he was not qualified for the flight.
Even I doubt that Robert is silly enough to consider identity theft.
Oh dear, its looking more iffy by the day. I do wonder if this one is going to need a Judge and Jury to sort out?
Last edited by goldeneaglepilot; 3rd Dec 2011 at 07:12.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Wayne Manor
Posts: 1,517
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1. Insurance companies don't like paying out.
2. insurance companies will find any reason they can not to pay out.
3. if they do and they even get a sniff of being defrauded, they will act.
there's a saying that springs to mind.. something about chickens and roosting
2. insurance companies will find any reason they can not to pay out.
3. if they do and they even get a sniff of being defrauded, they will act.
there's a saying that springs to mind.. something about chickens and roosting
Danish accident report concludes that
It says that the planned flight was to have been 4:10, yet they were reporting fuel shortage after only 3 hours and engine stopped after less than 4 hours. Now, I can understand why the wind slowed them, but why did it take away from their endurance? Answers on a postcard?
quote courtesy of google translation
The Board is of the opinion that in the flight plan was not taken sufficient account of the headwind information that was available.
quote courtesy of google translation
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan dare
With over 2500 hrs on Seneca Fives alone I can say there is no excuse to run out of fuel on that aircraft other than grosse miscalculation of winds.
The DDMP is so accurate it will tell you literally to the minute when both engines will stop.
What will reduce that time? Incorrect leaning but even incorrect leaning will still give them a reduced time to dry tanks.
Conclusion bad piloting as simple as that.
Do you have a copy in English?
Pace
With over 2500 hrs on Seneca Fives alone I can say there is no excuse to run out of fuel on that aircraft other than grosse miscalculation of winds.
The DDMP is so accurate it will tell you literally to the minute when both engines will stop.
What will reduce that time? Incorrect leaning but even incorrect leaning will still give them a reduced time to dry tanks.
Conclusion bad piloting as simple as that.
Do you have a copy in English?
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 17th Jan 2012 at 17:49.
Copy the URL for the pdf into Google Translate. It does a pretty good job of translating. Make sure you select Danish though. Google identified it as Swedish, which wasn't anywhere near as successful a translation.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1105 to 1603 is 5 hrs minus 2 minutes which indicates correct to dry tanks.
4 hrs is the maximum safe flight time at 70% pwr with reserves from memory 29 inch man 2400 rpm!
His estimated flight time was 4 hrs 10 mins on the limit with reserves
Looks like they took the still air time for the route and totally ignored any headwind component or long range cruise setting.
Thanks for transilation assistance
Pace
4 hrs is the maximum safe flight time at 70% pwr with reserves from memory 29 inch man 2400 rpm!
His estimated flight time was 4 hrs 10 mins on the limit with reserves
Looks like they took the still air time for the route and totally ignored any headwind component or long range cruise setting.
Thanks for transilation assistance
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 17th Jan 2012 at 20:06.
It looks to me that even if they had set a LRC power setting it was still iffy given the winds at departure time. Even worse if the forecast *increasing* winds were taken into account.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Copy the URL for the pdf into Google Translate. It does a pretty good job of translating. Make sure you select Danish though. Google identified it as Swedish, which wasn't anywhere near as successful a translation.
AustralianMade
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Out in the weather!
Age: 54
Posts: 917
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Swedish dialect spoken in southern Sweden is very similar to Danish. - Indeed that part of Sweden was once part of Denmark.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mark denied any knowledge of Weaver or being on the flight. Its sad for Rob that he stopped at hotel North the night before the flight, with the "passenger" who was described as a loud brash american.
From the feedback coming in from two eye witnesses to Weavers "passenger" on the flight its very probable that Robert Firth was indeed the man with Weaver in the Seneca when it crashed.
Well done Rob - your web site is a great source of information - keep up the good work. I guess you thought the Seneca issues had died a death. Like all of your issues they are still very active.
At least its a name the authorities can now try to eliminate from their enquiries.
From the feedback coming in from two eye witnesses to Weavers "passenger" on the flight its very probable that Robert Firth was indeed the man with Weaver in the Seneca when it crashed.
Well done Rob - your web site is a great source of information - keep up the good work. I guess you thought the Seneca issues had died a death. Like all of your issues they are still very active.
At least its a name the authorities can now try to eliminate from their enquiries.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Hval - Weaver has been educating him, no tin foil hat. Its now a tin foil posing pouch!!! Protect the brains.... It's not clear in the video as the stockings, pouch and high heels are all obscured along with the .45 Magnum.
I did find a short video clip of some of young Roberts other members of staff in what I thought was a company promo video
I did find a short video clip of some of young Roberts other members of staff in what I thought was a company promo video
Last edited by goldeneaglepilot; 27th Mar 2012 at 19:11.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Texas and UK
Age: 66
Posts: 2,886
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Update
You may remember Weavers words (hgfcpilot) in post 4 on this thread:
Well young Robert Weaver did his best to hide the truth about this accident. The truth is now out. When the flight plan was filed it clearly listed Weaver as the Captain. Now we all know that Weaver could not legally be the captain on that flight, the route required an instrument rating applicable to the aircraft type. Weaver (at that time) only held a single engine instrument rating.
Weaver also claimed he had 60 crossings experience at that time. Now the insurers based the premium and the cover on his claims to be the pilot and his claimed experience. Legally he could not have been in command for ANY of the claimed crossings if they were in a multiengine aircraft. Perhaps his claim for the number of crossings includes the number of times he has flown the route as a passenger in a commercial airliner?
I copy below the part of the message that was transmitted to the search and rescue crews while on route to offer Weaver assistance – it was sent from Gander to the Greenland authorities and the information was from the flight plan filed by Weaver:
Now that clearly lists the captain as Weaver and the operator as Skyferry.
Weaver put forward strong arguments that the incident was not reportable to the FAA and NTSB, others on here argued that was the not the case. Having spoken to the FAA
They are of the view that it WAS reportable.
Of course Weaver did not want that as it would make it difficult to get reasonably priced insurance for similar flights in the future.
The accident was due to dry tanks, Weaver forgot the winds and ignored the forecast. He simply ran out of fuel due to very poor planning. The flight could not be done by him legally yet he filed as the captain.
The aircraft cost $150000 for the damage to be repaired and the owner was without his aircraft for nearly a year.
The FAA and NTSB have now got a copy of the documentation with respect to this flight. They are investigating and all I will say is the person that I spoke to last night was not impressed with Weaver... He mentioned various offences that he thought may come into this.
I also mentioned to them about an N-Reg Twin Otter that Weaver flew in the UK and how he told the story of ending up with ice in IFR conditions and frightened himself. When he later flew the aircraft with a very experienced pilot he received a serious dressing down when he had no checklist for the aircraft and told the experienced pilot things that clearly demonstrated that he had no idea of how the deice systems worked.
Weaver may claim to have an accident free history, but that is not the case.
I would finally like to add that I was not a crew member or PIC on that Seneca V, and anyone who states otherwise risks a court hearing.
Well young Robert Weaver did his best to hide the truth about this accident. The truth is now out. When the flight plan was filed it clearly listed Weaver as the Captain. Now we all know that Weaver could not legally be the captain on that flight, the route required an instrument rating applicable to the aircraft type. Weaver (at that time) only held a single engine instrument rating.
Weaver also claimed he had 60 crossings experience at that time. Now the insurers based the premium and the cover on his claims to be the pilot and his claimed experience. Legally he could not have been in command for ANY of the claimed crossings if they were in a multiengine aircraft. Perhaps his claim for the number of crossings includes the number of times he has flown the route as a passenger in a commercial airliner?
I copy below the part of the message that was transmitted to the search and rescue crews while on route to offer Weaver assistance – it was sent from Gander to the Greenland authorities and the information was from the flight plan filed by Weaver:
SPL RECEIVED FROM CZQXZQZX: SPL-N344SE-CYYR-BGBW-E/0530 P/002 R/E S/PM J/LV D/01 006 C/YELLOW A/WHITE BLUE C/WEAVER OPR/SKY FERRY
Now that clearly lists the captain as Weaver and the operator as Skyferry.
Weaver put forward strong arguments that the incident was not reportable to the FAA and NTSB, others on here argued that was the not the case. Having spoken to the FAA
They are of the view that it WAS reportable.
Of course Weaver did not want that as it would make it difficult to get reasonably priced insurance for similar flights in the future.
The accident was due to dry tanks, Weaver forgot the winds and ignored the forecast. He simply ran out of fuel due to very poor planning. The flight could not be done by him legally yet he filed as the captain.
The aircraft cost $150000 for the damage to be repaired and the owner was without his aircraft for nearly a year.
The FAA and NTSB have now got a copy of the documentation with respect to this flight. They are investigating and all I will say is the person that I spoke to last night was not impressed with Weaver... He mentioned various offences that he thought may come into this.
I also mentioned to them about an N-Reg Twin Otter that Weaver flew in the UK and how he told the story of ending up with ice in IFR conditions and frightened himself. When he later flew the aircraft with a very experienced pilot he received a serious dressing down when he had no checklist for the aircraft and told the experienced pilot things that clearly demonstrated that he had no idea of how the deice systems worked.
Weaver may claim to have an accident free history, but that is not the case.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As there would have been quite a hefty insurance claim on this avoidable accident I am sure the Insurance company have thoroughly looked into who was flying, their licences, medicals etc.
I have over 2500 hrs on Seneca Vs and hence feel qualified to comment.
The aircraft is fitted with a very accurate DDMP which monitors many things including fuel to dry tanks.
The Unit is very accurate and will literally tell you to the minute when you are going to run dry.
If the Aircraft was NOT tanked then the only reason to run out of fuel is bad planning, especially regarding winds and flying without correct reserves.
Ie an incompetent pilot without any doubt who was flying on wishful thinking!
If I had been the owner of that beautiful aircraft I would be livid.
I am sure the insurance will have found out any discrepancies on claimed qualifications and currency and reality. They usually do especially with a lot of money at stake!
Pace
I have over 2500 hrs on Seneca Vs and hence feel qualified to comment.
The aircraft is fitted with a very accurate DDMP which monitors many things including fuel to dry tanks.
The Unit is very accurate and will literally tell you to the minute when you are going to run dry.
If the Aircraft was NOT tanked then the only reason to run out of fuel is bad planning, especially regarding winds and flying without correct reserves.
Ie an incompetent pilot without any doubt who was flying on wishful thinking!
If I had been the owner of that beautiful aircraft I would be livid.
I am sure the insurance will have found out any discrepancies on claimed qualifications and currency and reality. They usually do especially with a lot of money at stake!
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 12th May 2012 at 12:53.
