Great Oakley fatal accident
 

This morning (saturday).

Man dies in light aircraft crash

The 60-year-old pilot of a light aircraft died when the plane crash-landed into an airfield in Essex.

The East of England Ambulance Service was called to the scene off Harwich Road, Great Oakley.

An ambulance spokesperson said the man, who was the sole occupant of the single-seater aircraft, was pronounced dead at the scene on Saturday morning.

Police officers were also called to the scene, and the incident is now being investigated.

A few more details in this report:
Harwich and Manningtree Standard)

Does anyone have more information about this (ex.type)? I've heard it on the frequency while talking to Southend yesterday... Very sad!!

The aircraft concerned was a Taylor Monoplane, which understand to have been registered G-CEKB.

A sad loss
G-APDK

Phil Space. Whenever there is an incident you are there with all the details mate. Today you named the pilot who died a few days ago and his name was not in the public domian, big no-no mate.

I see above you have Googled the details for this one, is that all you do sit around waiting for something to happen so you 'can be the first' with the details........ :mad:

Good point BRL.

I have just started a thread about 'tin kickers' on R&N.

Its a worry about who is attracted to PPrune - particularly as the media increases its profile.

BRL...

It would have been more polite if you had pm'd me instead of having a go here.

Perhaps you can let me know who I named that was not in the public domain?

I don't sit around waiting for something to happen but as a broadcast journalist of 35 years experience yes I am on top of what is happening and often being paid for it.The rule (or protocol) with any fatal accident is that once next of kin are informed then it is ok to reveal the details. :ok:

Journalists are often privy to information they sit on but at what point do you suggest the details come out? I suspect I have hit a nerve here involving someone you know.

My name on here pretty much reveals what I do for a living:ok:

If the rule on pprune is that we do not comment on any accident then fair enough I will post elsewhere.

I hope you apply the rule to everyone:rolleyes:

As someone who has flown little aeroplanes across the world over three decades please feel free to say whatever you want if I pile in one day:hmm:

Yes that's fine, but a) this is an internet forum, not a newspaper, and you're not being paid to write here (so you don't have to :ok:), and b) your post above from the 29th did not add anything to the discussion--although it did manage to screw up the page layout on my screen :hmm:

Also if you take note of Barkly1992's post above yours, you may happen to know what you are writing about (assuming you cover aviation as a journalist) but many others will not and will end up misquoting or misusing anything you've posted here with the best of intentions.

This is someone else's playground, so their toys, their rules. AFAIK they're not asking you to write here, much less paying you for it, so don't feel obliged to come out with any "details" at all (especially of, frankly, such low value as a G-INFO query). I hope this answers your question.

I don't understand what's going on here. If Phil Space DID post details that aren't in the public domain, that's one thing. However, if, as he says, he didn't....why all the fuss and aggro? Is this due to other stuff he's posted? Am I missing something due to not being on here that much this days? Otherwise, what's wrong with someone posting details in a post where people are clearly fishing for details? It's what we do all the time. Isn't it? Please can someone explain this to me.

He posted the dead pilots name and details before it came out in public on another thread.

What I posted was not the dead pilots name but the registered owner of the aircraft. This was already in the public domain and what is more I posted after the dead pilots details had been released to the press.

At no point did I say he was the pilot.

However I admit that the press will often use this tactic to let the reader draw their own conclusions.

I can assure you BRL that the next of kin were informed pronto of the accident.

I am not a journo that just does aviation accidents and in fact most of the stuff I do is TV and radio outside the UK.

I appreciate that every time an accident happens it affects quite a few people on here at the pilots home field.

However the moment we run away from the reality that accidents happen and the names and facts are public we are heading for a bury the head in the sand scenario:ok:

Phil Space,

Your disingenuous response does you no credit.

What you actually posted was this:

Nowhere did you say "this is not necessarily the pilot", or "this is just the registered owner".

The obvious intention was to name the deceased. At the time your post was made I could find no on-line news source indicating that the name had been made public - indeed from today's Harwich and Manningtree standard:

Just because the family has been informed does not mean that you can publish the name.

I find your unseemly haste to "be the first" to publish chapter and verse on accident victims quite distasteful.

I also find your attempts to justify your actions when you are clearly in the wrong to be rather pathetic.

Any accident will attract comment, speculation and debate. That is PPRuNe's raison d'etre and lifeblood. However, such incidents can be discussed with respect for those affected, living and dead - and that includes not releasing privileged information simply for the "satisfaction" of being seen as the first to do so.

You seem to have a track record in overstepping the mark.

Please refrain from doing so.

SD

You will notice that Annex 13 accident reports never mention any names, and that in no way detracts from the investigation or from its goal of accident prevention. That is the ethos shared by most people who read and contribute to this site, as aviators interested in learning from those occurrences.

While I personally do not care whether you name every dead man, his dog, and his plane, I would consider doing that as mere social gossip with no aviation relevance whatsoever (and perhaps a bit sensationalist).

Somehow I feel I really shouldn't have to spell this out, btw. :hmm:

You can bury your head in the sand as much as you like but the internet will
always win.

Daily updates on global accidents are available here

Aviation Safety Network > ASN Aviation Safety WikiBase > Year index > 2009

Hence you will see what I posted was in the public domain.

If you want to introduce a rule where we are not allowed to post air accident info then fair enough BRL I'll post elsewhere.

However the info posted on the Air France thread on the Rumours and News is a lot more distressing and concerns a hell of a lot more people:ok:

Phil Space, winning the race to be the first with the sordid details is NOT what PPRuNe stands for.

It may be the be-all and end-all of YOUR existence, but we do not want, need or wish to be associated with the level of "journalism" that you seem to pride yourself on.

Standards can be upheld by an individual or organisation despite the depths to which others sink.

PPRuNe has its standards, and we are not "burying our heads in the sand" by living up to them.

SD

I hate this "already in the public domain" claptrap. Bleedin' ambulance chasers.

As for the "next of kin, fair game" comment this makes me sick. A few years back I had to tell someone that their spouse had been killed. Before we managed to tell the deceased's parents the filth from the media were banging on the door. This chap nearly got his head pummelled when he responded to our "go away" with a "if it's a matter of money...."

I fail to see how that sort of behaviour can be called journalism and question whether the public actually demand this type of news or are we merely told by the media that we want it?