Intentional plane crash?
I’m most surprised that “Ridge Wallet” have sponsored the video and I presume their customers think it’s “cool” and “far out” to crash an old plane.
Says a lot about the company that they’ve paid him for this.
Says a lot about the company that they’ve paid him for this.
Last edited by kghjfg; 30th Dec 2021 at 00:03.
I hope they make a bloody good example of him and what constitutes unacceptable/ reckless conduct by a pilot in command. Loss of license privileges at the very least with a hefty fine for clear up.
I think losing Ridge Wallet sponsorship will be low priority on his list of worries now the FAA are getting their teeth in to him.
I hope they make a bloody good example of him and what constitutes unacceptable/ reckless conduct by a pilot in command. Loss of license privileges at the very least with a hefty fine for clear up.
I hope they make a bloody good example of him and what constitutes unacceptable/ reckless conduct by a pilot in command. Loss of license privileges at the very least with a hefty fine for clear up.
They’re not distancing themselves from it at all.
Like I said “it’s cool” to their customers.
They must think it’s good PR for them.
As has been reported elsewhere, the FAA will do nothing, they’re not fussed.
If there is no insurance claim (Was he paid enough by ridgewallet to cover the cost of the aircraft) then he’s fine.
Not based wholly on Twitter though, as can be seen above there is a precedent for this sort of thing.
The problem they have is that he didn’t say he did it deliberately. There’s no law against not being a very good pilot, or making bad decisions in an emergency situation.
He’ll milk any court case to get more exposure for Ridge Wallet who sponsored it.
FAA can’t really touch it, they know it’ll go away quietly if they don’t touch it.
5 minutes of a few pilots saying it’s sad he’s wrecked an old plane. That’s all that happens.
What will Ridge Wallet sponsor him to do next, that’s the big question issue.
Will he wreck an old car maybe? What will get more outrage than this, this has clearly failed so far. Unless the FAA act, then it will make the national news, and him and his sponsors win.
Sadly, it’s probably best if the FAA do nothing.
Which is what a lot of people are saying is exactly what they will do.
That's encouraging. I think it is a valid concern that if he gets away with a slap on the wrist there will probably be copy-cat attention seekers out there that would give it a go, given the tendency for ideas to take off (sorry) in the Youtube/social media arena.
Who’s said he’s lost their sponsorship?
They’re not distancing themselves from it at all.
Like I said “it’s cool” to their customers.
They must think it’s good PR for them.
As has been reported elsewhere, the FAA will do nothing, they’re not fussed.
If there is no insurance claim (Was he paid enough by ridgewallet to cover the cost of the aircraft) then he’s fine.
They’re not distancing themselves from it at all.
Like I said “it’s cool” to their customers.
They must think it’s good PR for them.
As has been reported elsewhere, the FAA will do nothing, they’re not fussed.
If there is no insurance claim (Was he paid enough by ridgewallet to cover the cost of the aircraft) then he’s fine.
And also as pointed out, so long has he doesn't make an insurance claim the fool will walk away from this with a bunch of advertising revenue off the stupid video.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,620
Received 294 Likes
on
162 Posts
Excellent! 
He's (Trevor Jacob) a snowboarder who competed in the 2014 Olympics, has had a few too many concussions I think.
https://traumaticbraininjury.net/201...5-concussions/
Taylorcraft BL-65 aircraft reg N29508 registered to Laura L Smith
https://traumaticbraininjury.net/201...5-concussions/
Taylorcraft BL-65 aircraft reg N29508 registered to Laura L Smith
Mr Jabob bought the aircraft from Ms Smith just before the incident. People who looked up the registration as the video came out had Ms Smith's name returned as it took a week or so to update the register.
So he had a servicable aircraft, but bought and flew this one over the mountains.
Smoking gun IMHO.
If indeed this was not staged it seems to me incredible - that is, beyond the bounds of credibility that;
One would transit hills at such an enormously unnecessary altitude
Pump the yoke in that extraordinary manner that has no purpose known to an aviator (but maybe looks impressive on youtube)
Wear a skydiver's parachute
Not attempt to restart the engine
Not attempt to glide clear (from said enormous altitude)
Not attempt a forced landing in the many washes and meadows available
Have the "presence of mind" to bale out and play with a selfie-stick but not take water.
Freefall for so long
Not parachute from great altitude to a safe low-level landing area
Deliberately parachute into an inaccessible poison-oak infested mountainside crash-site instead of the above, with the addded risk of arriving at a bush-fire from the crashed aorcraft.
A truly staggering performance!
One would transit hills at such an enormously unnecessary altitude
Pump the yoke in that extraordinary manner that has no purpose known to an aviator (but maybe looks impressive on youtube)
Wear a skydiver's parachute
Not attempt to restart the engine
Not attempt to glide clear (from said enormous altitude)
Not attempt a forced landing in the many washes and meadows available
Have the "presence of mind" to bale out and play with a selfie-stick but not take water.
Freefall for so long
Not parachute from great altitude to a safe low-level landing area
Deliberately parachute into an inaccessible poison-oak infested mountainside crash-site instead of the above, with the addded risk of arriving at a bush-fire from the crashed aorcraft.
A truly staggering performance!
Apart from it being in the USA, where anything is possible, this is almost certainly staged. The relevant questions are not whether it was fake, more so whether it was legal. Main questions are, is the pilot qualified, is the aircraft registered and maintained appropriately, was permission sought for the act, was the act performed over private property with the owners consent, what risk was there to non-participating public persons and property. At the end of the day it just comes down to was the aircraft operated in an unsafe manner whilst in flight.
The other guy that was doing donuts in his own paddock might not be the full six pack, but he did nothing wrong. No intention to get airborne, was just operating a motor vehicle to its destruction on his own land. If he drove it onto a public road or someone else property that's another matter, like with the guy that drove his plane to the local pub in WA.
The other guy that was doing donuts in his own paddock might not be the full six pack, but he did nothing wrong. No intention to get airborne, was just operating a motor vehicle to its destruction on his own land. If he drove it onto a public road or someone else property that's another matter, like with the guy that drove his plane to the local pub in WA.
But .. the most damning evidence, and who knows if the FAA have seen this ... are the two fire extinguishers in his trouser legs ... some eagle-eyed still framer managed to spot a few frames where you can clearly see the outlines of a pair of fire extinguishers, one in the bottom of each trouser leg ...
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...plot_thickens/
https://www.reddit.com/r/aviation/co...plot_thickens/