As for not talking to the media, I can imagine your remarks here on Pprune might be picked up by them anyway.

"Professional pilots agree that…. {insert wacky theory here}…"

Be careful what you type too.

Arnold E, there is nothing "Fragile" about LSA or RAA aircraft under loaded conditions when airborn.

I too have seen three wrecked RAA type aircraft (sportstars) and in each case they were mishandled either on the ground or landing.

These aircraft have much less tolerance to mishandling on the ground in my opinion. That is the source of trouble. They have short little gear legs that require you to land flattish and they are light and respond quickly to gusts and crosswinds, so you need to be on your toes. The Sportstar also runs out of aileron a little too quickly at low speed as well, hence gravel rash on the wingtips and ailerons.

A Sportstar is in no way comparable to a Tecnam, completely different breeds, chalk and cheese really.

I don't think short gear legs contributed to this crash although you could say it also ran out of aileron.

Folks,
Firstly, matters Aero Commander, they are a special case, due the wing structure and the aerodynamics, if you note the several accidents in Australia, the wings have failed in downward bending, not related to G load.

Re. G loads in general, and the structural strengths referred to, these are static loads, not dynamic, and structural strength with "rolling G" reduce the G tolerance by something like 30%. In addition, the design standard for LSA ( and, as far as I know, JAR/VLA) does not include gust loading situations.

In short, your aeroplane may not be a strong as you think it is, regardless of the certification basis.

Tootle pip!!

Maybe a good start would be to stop printing articles in "Sports Pilot" (the RAAus mag) with the theme "I flew into clouds and it was alright, I didn't die" I.e the article "Banana Canyon" and a few others.

Good to see I wasn't the only one disturbed about that article.

I do wonder if old mate got a bung for flying in cloud?

Well 42 years in Aviation and 20 years working in media I think I'm in a position to comment. While this accident is a very sad event all accidents are. There will always be accidents and there will always be news bulletins. You can chose to not talk to the media if you wish, but then you are probably the same people who complain when the media get their facts wrong like calling every aircraft accident a "Cessna." You can't have it both ways. There's nothing wrong with talking to the media as long as you're talking facts and not b_ _t. I post very rarely. I'm not say they get everything right but it annoys the hell out of me when people say "don't talk to the media" and then sit at home watching the news and reading the newspaper..... Hypocrites! Like I said.... YOU CANT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS. Of course none of you have ever watched a 6pm news bulletin have you! Condolences to the families of these poor gentlemen.

Missed the potty that time Don..., I think you'll find the complaint was of being misquoted, statements edited so as to have another meaning or emphasis altogether.:ugh: On this occasion at least, the reports seemed to get the basics pretty much straight from the outset.

As for getting things wrong, just a little googling would avoid many of the clangers we see on a regular basis. I find it rather difficult to take any "news" or conclusions seriously if the basic facts are obviously wrong, picky I know but that's how it is.

I remember going to work that morning, and I would have pushed a Bonanza back into the hanger. Weather has been rubbish here in the last couple of weeks. Not a time to be flying a Light Sport aircraft

'spinex' I think yr reply to the 'Don' sums it up well to his perhaps somewhat misguided although well meaning beliefs/POV here.
I think it's pretty common knowledge that the journo profession isn't that well trusted especially when to comes to aviation matters, also they don't fair well in any top trusted professions lists either. There's a reason or reasons for that am sure which the scope of this thread shouldn't be used to 'investigate' for want of a better word:-)
When sensationalism is involved then the 'story' the true stroy can & usually does get distorted, human nature I guess to 'win'.

Hope they get to the bottom of this sad event & soon.



Wmk2

Now I can only assume you're setting out to be ironic, given the legendary status of the Bo for dispatching poorly skilled, or over-ambitious, pilots. The Cirrus these days attracts the same criticism. The reality of course is that both are very fine aircraft. If you're a VFR pilot in weather such as you're describing, push them all back in hangar: Bonanza, Cirrus and Tecnam. Your focus on the aircraft type remains irrational.

Tecnam
 

Poor lady pilot (RA) has had bad luck with both lilydale's and coldstream's Tecnams letting her down. They have both required salvaging over recent times due to system failures,the most recent being at ytdn. Fortunately both her and her husband have walked away,,,,

Lots of talk here about wings that should or should not have come off.
The rules of life for crap weather are:

1. If you are not trained and current to perform a task in an aircraft eg instrument flying,

then don't :=

2. If the aircraft is not certified and correctly instrumented and serviceable for the task of crap weather including icing,

then don't :=

3. If you, on the day are not fully fit and up to the task,

then don't :=

If you cross any of the above, then there is a fair chance you don't get a chance to back peddle and fly another day

Two bobs worth from a bloke who has lost friends in contraptions from hang gliders to supersonic jets and things in between :( and nearly been cleaned up a few times myself...

Donwoody, you're in the media? You can't spell, your grammar is garbage and your sentence structure is crap. You don't post very often? You need to post less :ok:

Jack, that makes him highly qualified to be a journo, going by a lot of the badly-spelt, poorly-structured, and outright disconnected sentences, that I've seen written on news sites in recent times. I reckon half of todays journos failed English in their TEE, and they must have got their job through family connections. :(
I won't even go into how they can't even get basic descriptions of aircraft, vehicles, equipment, or machinery, right. They have vast amounts of referral sites and forums to gain the knowledge promptly so they can write with an acceptable degree of descriptive accuracy, I'm convinced they're just too lazy to do it.
Of course, the "shock", "horror", "screaming in fear", "perverted" and other important "key" words, designed to suck in the readership, are always ready to hand. :)

"Jack Ranga",

Rather than pick on the rather coherent "Donwoody", perhaps you may instead direct your spelling and grammatical wrath towards "yr right"?

And possibly a few others of your choosing?

But as always, please be aware of what may be perceived by some others as simply attempted bullying...

And that's never a good look. :{

Stones and glasshouses.
 

Engage auto drift.

Spelt, also known as dinkel wheat

I wish I had a dollar for every missed word, spelling mistake and badly constructed sentence that I write – if I could get the same deal from Pprune posted errors, I'd never work again. Alas.

Drift off.

Looking at the photographs of this accident is distressing and I would like to know the what, why and how of it. We can't prevent this one now; but I wonder, had the 'old' version Crash Comic been around, could that have been instrumental is preventing this one. The ASD at this time of year would carry the Fog, Ice and VFR into IMC stories larded with dire warnings and do's and don'ts. Perhaps not a silver bullet, but perhaps enough to encourage the 'let's sit this one out' mind set.

Another 'interesting' thought bubble, worth sharing is that it has been many years since I've seen a series of cold fronts, followed by the hard, flat, winter Westerly winds we have experienced lately. Fronts were, years ago a regular monster, 'we' routinely ran the gauntlet and 'learned' to deal with the beast. As said it's been many years since I've seen a 'proper' front and it occurs to me that there must be a generation of pilots now with a great deal of experience dealing with the sloppy, slushy mess associated with 'troughs'; who have never had a dance with the lovely Ana or, her sister Kata. You can meet them both, on line – HERE -

My sincere condolences to the families and friends.

Stay safe you lot....

Ummm, Gerry, as a 'supposed' member of the press this person should know better when it comes to grammar & spelling etc. yr right is just taking the p!ss (it's not hard to work that out).

When it comes to bullying, none of my post constitutes that. It's a wonder that anybody learns anything today when criticism is taken as bullying :ugh:

Now now 'JR' you carnt be hipacritical all the time their buddy, ya gotta stop be a skool yard bully :E:E

This forum is like a children's playground, the rules are on the fence but does anybody really read them? Nope 'cause we are humans we are designed to be naughty, 'JR' is just an Eg & by all accounts (the playground police, the Mods) me too:E

I've not flown anything lighter than a C150 that was underpowered especially on a hot blustery day so am wondering just for the debate factor what these Tecnams etc are like when it comes to getting in say some serious downdrafts at low level.


Wmk2

Kharon - As English is the language of constant refinement, and the language which also observes numerous acceptable variations in form, spelling, and other "rules"; I therefore wish to rest my case, as explained below, M'lud. :)

Spelled vs. spelt - Grammarist

(P.S. - Thanks for the superb cold front analysis webpage link) :ok:

Wally - One can feasibly contend that any aircraft that falls into the RA category, and which is strictly limited to the mass of metal/composites thereby contained in the airframe, is going to be fragile at best, and unable to cope with extreme conditions.
Those aircraft known to be "bulletproof" are never found in RA categories.

Then there's the blokes who just don't understand, via a dutiful study of meteorological conditions, when it's time to push the aircraft back into the hangar. If there's one category where this is particularly applicable, it has to be the RA category of aircraft.

I think these people have an innate belief that once in the air, they're above what the mere mortals on the ground have to put up with, in regard to weather extremes and weather violence.
Anyone with proper understanding of weather factors in aviation understands that's not so - particularly with the vast number of aviation accident records, that outline particularly adverse weather as a major factor in the accident.

I am of the firm opinion, that with the apparent increase in RA serious incidents, that increased easy access to the RA reports on the reasons behind the accidents, would greatly assist in increased education of RA pilots, and a possible reduction in the numbers of RA accidents.
As it stands now, the number of RA accidents that are just shrugged off, or the results of the investigation report, merely buried in some inaccessible section of RA-Aus files, seems to be counter-intuitive.