Vortex Air Beech 1900 incident at KI
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Norfolk Island
Posts: 4
Vortex Air Beech 1900 incident at KI
Reports from operators on the ground at King Island: Vortex Air's Beech 1900 (VH-VSO) was reversed into by a truck while pilots were meant to be guiding the driver. Unfortunatley they were taking sefies instead. Structural damage caused to the wing. Hopefully they got some good shots of the impact?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 502
If true, several issues at play here possibly.
why did the truck driver reverse towards the plane without guidance?
were they told not to?
Were they not told not to?
Presumably, it was to back up towards the baggage door, which is on the rear left of the plane. The wing should be visible out the driver’s window/mirror.
the canard-thing though is aft of the baggage door and in the trucks left, harder to see.
was it the canard thing that was damaged and not the wing?
why did the truck driver reverse towards the plane without guidance?
were they told not to?
Were they not told not to?
Presumably, it was to back up towards the baggage door, which is on the rear left of the plane. The wing should be visible out the driver’s window/mirror.
the canard-thing though is aft of the baggage door and in the trucks left, harder to see.
was it the canard thing that was damaged and not the wing?
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 2
CaptVelocity, I'm not sure of the point of your post but it's probably worth fact checking before shooting off rumours. You see many selfies of Vortex pilots getting around? It was a forklift which reversed into the wingtip as the driver wasn't watching where he was going. Vortex have COVID procedures in place which prevents pilots from interacting with ground crews and the onus is on the ground handlers to safely operate vehicles and provide the lookout for the drivers, the whole point being to limit the possibility of spread to a COVID free island.
With the state of the industry at the moment, it's sad to see cheap shots being thrown around still. You'd hope that everyone would be trying to help each other out rather than pulling others down. Having an aircraft damaged is costly to the operator and the customer, no one wins here.
With the state of the industry at the moment, it's sad to see cheap shots being thrown around still. You'd hope that everyone would be trying to help each other out rather than pulling others down. Having an aircraft damaged is costly to the operator and the customer, no one wins here.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 33
Originally Posted by Car RAMROD
If true, several issues at play here possibly.
why did the truck driver reverse towards the plane without guidance?
were they told not to?
Were they not told not to?
Presumably, it was to back up towards the baggage door, which is on the rear left of the plane. The wing should be visible out the driver’s window/mirror.
the canard-thing though is aft of the baggage door and in the trucks left, harder to see.
was it the canard thing that was damaged and not the wing?
why did the truck driver reverse towards the plane without guidance?
were they told not to?
Were they not told not to?
Presumably, it was to back up towards the baggage door, which is on the rear left of the plane. The wing should be visible out the driver’s window/mirror.
the canard-thing though is aft of the baggage door and in the trucks left, harder to see.
was it the canard thing that was damaged and not the wing?
For aviation people a "canard wing" is a lifting device 'forward' of the mainplane not aft of it...
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: Perth
Age: 39
Posts: 89
With the state of the industry at the moment, it's sad to see cheap shots being thrown around still.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 502
Originally Posted by TBM-Legend
For aviation people a "canard wing" is a lifting device 'forward' of the mainplane not aft of it...
I had forgotten the proper term; despite having flown the thing once before.
The “fugly thing” would also be good to reference it, but I like far-canard more. From this day forth I shall deem it the far-canard!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: Norfolk Island
Posts: 4
Originally Posted by marshfly
With the state of the industry at the moment, it's sad to see cheap shots being thrown around still. You'd hope that everyone would be trying to help each other out rather than pulling others down. Having an aircraft damaged is costly to the operator and the customer, no one wins here.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
Originally Posted by marshfly
You'd hope that everyone would be trying to help each other out rather than pulling others down.
Other threads in this forum would suggest not.
Join Date: Jul 2020
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1
Isn’t that the second damaged wingtip on the Vortex 1900s?
as well as a suspicious “rock strike” on a prop in Bairnsdale that had it parked down there without a prop for a while.
May need to overhaul the SOPs before there is a serious incident.
as well as a suspicious “rock strike” on a prop in Bairnsdale that had it parked down there without a prop for a while.
May need to overhaul the SOPs before there is a serious incident.
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 57
