Okay guys,
the actual altitude was/is 11200 ft, temp was based on my own overflight of the site 3 weeks ago. Temp hardly changes around the year. I don't know how much temp changes over the day, that's why I stated 10-15 C.
Blender, there would be fields that are bigger than a soccer field, but you have to go down into a narrow valley like chute to land and then there is no go-around (...nor would you ever get out of there with the same load).
This is on the top of a volcano (non-active).
Anyway the plan was not to land on any of the fields but directly on one of the ridges around the crater where TV/Radio/Phone has a lot of antennas.
HOGE-performance is a must to approach/land, especially as there was hardly any wind that day.
The owner of the "incident" (actually the 206 is scrap metal, luckily only light injuries to the pilot) was sampling our EC120 two days ago, and will probably go for a new one. I warned him about the performance difference of the EC120 versus 206 at these altitudes, but he generally doesn't go there, so it seems the EC will fit his user profile just perfect. (I know the 206 beats the EC hands down up there....)
He was flying with his 2 sons who are both low time private pilots.
They basically confirmed my suspisions: 4 persons on board, average 175 lb + 60 gallons of fuel.
They indicated that the wreck is at around 10000ft, but from their discription "it" started to happen at the antennas (11200 ft).
The pilot was an "experienced" veteran - so experienced he never bothered to check performance-charts in the POH.....
As mentioned I was asked to possibly fly insurance personal to the site. The EC-performance-chart for HOGE gives me roughly 300kg over emptyweight - fuel-pilot-cargo/pax for the same conditions - so it would be one pax only, little fuel job.
Still I would check that with an HOGE in free air if the flight ever comes through.
In this case complacency killed the cat!
Thanks for all your inputs!
3top
