McRae Crash & Fatal Accident Inquiry

[MountainBear]

I think even more damning than the report is the family's reaction to it. This was no "accident but was voluntary manslaughter, pure and simple. The outright denial of that fact even when faced with uncontroverted video evidence is shameful. The solicitor's comments are ridiculous.

He (Mr McRae) undertook significant manoeuvring at low level and the helicopter seems to have encountered significant g-loading as a result, to the evident enjoyment of his passengers.

Everyone loves the manic right up into the brains go splat and leave a greasy streak on the metal. Then there is useless hand wringing about the vagaries of fate. This was a criminal act and the fact that the family cannot deal with that is not just damning, it's disgusting.

[Tankertrashnav]

As I recall, Hill's lack of a current licence invalidated his insurance, which left the families of the passengers having to sue his estate to get what compensation they could. This left them, and Hill's family, in straitened circumstances, entirely unnecessarily. As 757 driver has said there could be a similar result here.

[OvertHawk]

Flshbngwallp.

I too had a similar conversation with someone who knew and flew with CM on occasion and he made exactly the same point (so close to the same point, in fact, that we might be talking about the same person?) i.e that he did not fly like he drove. I wanted to think that that was true and, in fact, made a positive effort to bear those comments in mind after the accident. However, there seems little doubt that there was a significant amount of wazzing going on and that, in the absence of any evidence of an aircraft fault, he ran out of space, time, ideas and talent all in the same place.

Hellimutt

You're quite right - you are entitled to your opinion. It is, however, my opinion that your's is a little harsh.

OH

[fisbangwollop]

Hellimut

I hope those 3 RIP but as for CM, I hope he rots in hell!

After a comment like that Hellimut if and when you get it wrong and don't walk away from it maybe I will greet you the same way......and that may be soon if you fly around with your head up your arse that you give the impression you do.....

[Tarman]

The Fatal Accident Inquiry heard the evidence and the Judge made his decision based upon the facts presented to him.
It appears quite clear that a lot of rules were broken and it was an avoidable accident.

That said, there can be no doubt that Colin did not intend to cause harm to anyone including himself.

We are all entitled to an opinion but frankly Helimutt you should hang your head in shame for posting those comments.

Tarman

[foxmead]

As expressed in this thread everyone is entitled to their opinion, however i find it totally irresponsible to take a young child for a flight without apparently the permission or knowledge of his parents. (CM young sons friend) This was recorded by the High Sheriff. In addition the high speed manouvers at LL in a wooded area would also be questionable.

[Flying Lawyer]

Helimutt

You are entitled to your opinion, as you say, but I winced when I read your final comment.

It appears that he was to blame for the loss of life, but he didn't intend to kill them.

[4468]

If I may just make a point of order, in this utterly tragic and absolutely needless loss of life:

Peter Watson is an exceptionally talented solicitor advocate. Probably one of the best in that country. He has extensive knowledge of aviation, having acted in the highest profile cases it is possible to imagine. Presumably, this is what brought him to the attention of the McCrae family?

His, presumably selectively quoted, words are accurate (as always) He did not say Mr McCrae did not cause the crash, simply that his lack of a licence did not cause it.

[MountainBear]

@4468

The McRae family's solicitor, Peter Watson, added: "Although Colin's licence was out-of-date, this played no contributory factor whatsoever to the accident."

Is what the paper quoted him as saying. Now even assuming his words were taken out of context it doesn't change the fact that on the face of it; it's a lie.

The fact is that his lack of a license was a contributing factor. After all, the very purpose of a license is to ascertain the KSA of the applicant for said license. If the solicitor had said that the license played no causal factor he would have been in correct in a strictly physical sense. But that is not what the solicitor is quoted as saying. He said it played no contributory role. As is plain as day, a factor can contribute without causing as the plain evidence in this crash indicates.

Good bloke

I think you have a different definition of "good" than I do. A good person in my book doesn't toy with someone's elses life, especially without their permission. I've all for daring and risk taking and if he had just killed himself my reaction to this incident would have been very different. But what he did was commit a crime. Committing crimes that involve the death of innocent third parties is not what a good person does.

While the report is damning what is equally damning is the way that so many "good" people try to justify away his criminal activity. Unlike other posters I do not wish that he rots in hell because I wish that on no one. But the behavior of the pilot was not the behavior of a good person by any reasonable definition of good. Good people do not act recklessly with the lives of others. Not in my book they don't.

[[email protected]]

Mountain Bear - you are setting up camp on the moral high-ground here - are you saying you have never driven too fast with passengers in your car, never taken a chance at an intersection or on a marginal overtake, never flown too low with others on board, risked a marginal met decision???? Honestly???

I do not condone what McRae did, in fact I was one of the first to criticise but the fact is that life in general is risky and aviation in particular even more so, it is that risk that makes it appealing to human beings. Why do you think people join the military to fly - it isn't to spend 30 years flying straight and level!

The difference between taking a risk and committing a 'crime' is a very narrow one and depends on how much margin for error you have allowed - McRae didn't allow enough and paid for it - sadly, so did other people.

[fisbangwollop]

While you all pontificate and prognosticate can I remind you that the official line from the CAA was..."An Air Accidents Investigation Branch (AAIB) report into the tragedy found no cause could be positively determined."



As you know to assume in aviation makes asses of you and me!!

[talkpedlar]

And David Prophet..

..another racing driver who took four inncents to early graves... low-time PPL.. often seen carrying out cavalier flying displays in the immediate vacinity of his BMW garage.. perished with his 4 pax trying to lift-off from Silverstone in dense fog. Shocking, criminal and unforgiveable. I felt the explosion from the impact and the heat from the flames even though I could see nothing at all. TP

[Avitor]

Based on evidence, the judge came to the conclusion the crash was "Avoidable" That says it all as far as I am concerned.

[fisbangwollop]

AVITAR...

Based on evidence, the judge came to the conclusion the crash was "Avoidable"

Yes but that judge had no aviation background and that was only a "Fatal Accident Enquiry"" something unusual to Scotland and never held in England, it was NOT an AAIB investigation, I think I will be happy to listen to the professionals and go by their findings which once again stated...no cause could be positively determined." ....yes we can speculate all we like and it MAY have been a fact that the way the helo was flown in the last stages of it's flight contributed to the accident but one can never say for certain that is the case. !!!

[ShyTorque]

A professional pilot took out a rally car, loaded it with passengers, including a child whose parents had no inkling he was going along for the ride. While demonstrably driving the car to it's limits and his own, and then beyond, the pilot lost control in a wooded valley, killing all of them.

The investigation proved he held no valid driving licence and therefore had no insurance. Evidence of the way the car was driven was there on video from inside the car and also from external recorded sources.

Was the pilot guilty of death by dangerous driving, and of other offences?

A hypothetical situation, but what is the difference, if any?

[Hughes500]

SoCal

Just because his type rating had expired so what, it has nothing to do with if he can operate the helicopter safely. IF you hold an FAA licence you don't do type ratings and have a biannual check ride. So if he flew under your system that would make him legal. Or if we take your view that he is unsafe as his type rating had lapsed by 110 days or 15 months since he had had a check ride that would by definition make all FAA pilots unsafe

[FSXPilot]

You are just plain wrong. His lack of a valid licence might not have affected his ability to fly the aircraft but it certainly showed a complete disregard for the rules that are in force. This to my mind is a dangerous trait in a pilot. Rules are their to stop you doing stupid ****. Unless you are flying regularly and have need to bend the rules (military pilots for instance where life and limb are at stake for real) then doing anything bar flying correctly and you are a cock end of story.
Like most ppls I don't suppose he had much follow on training or oversight of his flying. All very sad for the other people who are now dead due to his behaviour and for everyone concerned's families.

[Digital flight deck]

FSXPilot, I agree, I would add that the one holding the controls and making the decisions, be they licensed or not, are carrying out conscious and deliberate actions and should be accountable accordingly.

Fisbangwollop, your views and attitudes astound me.

[toptobottom]

FSX: Rules are their (sic) to stop you doing stupid sh*t

What tosh! Rules don't stop you doing anything, that's why we have prisons - to house all the people who got caught not being stopped by the rules

The fact that CM had neither a current licence nor type rating (and not for the first time) may ignite the disdain of many rotorheads and may reflect a poor attitude/laziness/forgetfulness, whatever, regarding compliance but was probably immaterial when assessing his technical ability to fly safely. I have no doubt that within his limits, CM was a competent and conscientious pilot who maybe ‘threw it about’ when he was on his own and experimenting with his and his machine’s capabilities. As crab says, we’ve all done a bit of that, right? Didn’t I read somewhere that CM was filmed doing a full A check prior to the short and fatal flight back? Didn't I read that a couple of his chums had commented on how his flying style didn't match his driving? CM believed he would retain control during any manouvre he initiated. Notwithstanding a technical problem, he was wrong. Once again an ego (sound familiar?) over-ruled ability and common sense, leading him to take risks that he simply should not have even contemplated, particularly given his innocent and trusting pax (read ‘audience’). He obviously didn’t intended killing his son, or his friend and his friend’s son, but with an ego at full pressure and the adrenalin flowing, it seems he simply couldn’t prevent himself from showing off and flying beyond limits. Holding a current type rating and licence would have made no difference.

[Ready2Fly]

Some people accept more risk than they can carry.

Of those, some do it without realising (pushing the aircraft's envelope and/or their own) and some might even do it deliberately.

If they then run out of luck, the outcome may be (and often is) fatal.