This happened yesterday in Guatemala
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Dublin
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sympathies to the videographer, his family, and to the pilot.
I took that ride, twice, in Quincy in 1999. Quite a few skydives under my belt, but had never been in a helicopter before. It was a wild ride, but my impression on both trips was that it was flown to a very exact sequence, which was identical on each flight. It was not a case of the aircraft just being thrown abround the sky. The jump afterwards was an anti-climax.
I do remember wondering how the FAA permitted it, but assumed they must have, as they, and the local cops, were a constant presence on the field. They were very obvious in the policing of other “novelty” jumps, which are a key attraction at the World Freefall Convention. There is potential for diasaster on practically every load in Quincy, whether it’s being sucked through the tail exit of a 727, at 230 kts, or a high-altitude jump by relatively low-time jumpers. Normal rules certainly seemed to be relaxed at this event.
It might be difficult for someone who is not involved in skydiving, or has no experience of large boogies, to comprehend the atmosphere and mentality at such a gathering. It is for most, an opportunity to have as much fun as is humanly possible with aircraft and with each other. Preferably without getting killed. It is unfortunate, but there have been fatalities at most World Freefall Conventions. It is somewhere you need to watch your back, both in the air & on the ground.
Without going into detail, there were places on the flight path of that chopper I would not have stood for any money, or photograph. In hindsight, one could say this was an accident waiting to happen. It looks as if at least 2 people were very unwise that day, and have or will have paid the price. I’m not going to judge either of them.
This incident is going to be analysed by those in full possession of the facts, and presumably actions taken that I would hope never to meet in my career. I would also hope, that if I ever screw up, I won’t be tried and convicted by fellow pilots on the basis of hearsay, nor my name published on the internet without any means of redress. I really hope one of those fellow pilots won’t feel it necessary to try to persuade somebody’s family to sue me for all I have because he is angry at my actions.
:o
I took that ride, twice, in Quincy in 1999. Quite a few skydives under my belt, but had never been in a helicopter before. It was a wild ride, but my impression on both trips was that it was flown to a very exact sequence, which was identical on each flight. It was not a case of the aircraft just being thrown abround the sky. The jump afterwards was an anti-climax.
I do remember wondering how the FAA permitted it, but assumed they must have, as they, and the local cops, were a constant presence on the field. They were very obvious in the policing of other “novelty” jumps, which are a key attraction at the World Freefall Convention. There is potential for diasaster on practically every load in Quincy, whether it’s being sucked through the tail exit of a 727, at 230 kts, or a high-altitude jump by relatively low-time jumpers. Normal rules certainly seemed to be relaxed at this event.
It might be difficult for someone who is not involved in skydiving, or has no experience of large boogies, to comprehend the atmosphere and mentality at such a gathering. It is for most, an opportunity to have as much fun as is humanly possible with aircraft and with each other. Preferably without getting killed. It is unfortunate, but there have been fatalities at most World Freefall Conventions. It is somewhere you need to watch your back, both in the air & on the ground.
Without going into detail, there were places on the flight path of that chopper I would not have stood for any money, or photograph. In hindsight, one could say this was an accident waiting to happen. It looks as if at least 2 people were very unwise that day, and have or will have paid the price. I’m not going to judge either of them.
This incident is going to be analysed by those in full possession of the facts, and presumably actions taken that I would hope never to meet in my career. I would also hope, that if I ever screw up, I won’t be tried and convicted by fellow pilots on the basis of hearsay, nor my name published on the internet without any means of redress. I really hope one of those fellow pilots won’t feel it necessary to try to persuade somebody’s family to sue me for all I have because he is angry at my actions.
:o
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hungry Joe,
I have been waiting for somebody with at least some firsthand info to come up on this thread. Thanks! I got tired listening to tons of mud slinging based on nothing but hearsay.
Anybody,
else out there who can contribute to paint a more objective picture of the happenings? I am not interested in judging the pilot or the photographer, but rather have most learning effect out of this accident.
sp
I have been waiting for somebody with at least some firsthand info to come up on this thread. Thanks! I got tired listening to tons of mud slinging based on nothing but hearsay.
Anybody,
else out there who can contribute to paint a more objective picture of the happenings? I am not interested in judging the pilot or the photographer, but rather have most learning effect out of this accident.
sp
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: mostly in the jungle...
Age: 59
Posts: 502
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi S-P & H. Joe:
I am with you there, about judging the pilot on this specific accident without knowing all the facts.
BUT, it is pretty obvious what happend: a load of skydivers - a thrill-ride to altitude - someone in the way - dead.
If that transport operation would have been accomplished in a different manner, the man on the ground NEVER would have come near enough to any rotorblade ever.
No matter what the very details were or are.
Obviously the pilot did his stunts with the blessing of the FAA, or the legalsystem in the states is getting ridiculous.
As stated on this thread, the pilot violated at least 3 FAR´s. You do not do that without a waiver in front of lawenforcement and FAA personal.
I mentioned here and on other threads, that the interest in such cases should be to learn and avoid for all (as you said S-P....).
Well:
a) You shall not do antics close to the ground if you can not see the necessary area 100% (no hiding places for anyone!!!)
b) Do NEVER bank more than 30 degrees close to the ground - it is civil life now, the war is over!!
c) If your pax need a thrill, they DO NOT NEED IT THAT CLOSE TO THE GROUND, period - whatever they say.
You may be the best, do your personal thrillrides with you alone.
If you carry someone along, back off to a regime that gives you a minimum of maneuvering space "in case".
I hope we will find out the hard facts on this case sometime, to see how close we got with assumptions and hearsay.
But for me some of the fotos give already enough credit to the case (very low + 45 degrees or more bank), the photos being specifically from that machine-pilot combo............
I mentioned, I will not judge the pilot on base of this forum, however he will have to live with the fact and he knows best, HE could have avoided it............no matter his experience, precision, etc. On this occasion, common sense was forgotten somewhere else...
3top
PS: Someone told me once (regarding to street traffic...) when I was learning to drive: YOu always have to drive like everyone else is an idiot on the road - speak: be prepared for the most incredible stupidities in traffic - IT WORKED FOR ME!
I APPLY THE SAME TO AIR TRAFFIC - IT STILL WORKS!!
I am not saying, everyone is an i****, MOST are not, but some ARE......!
I am with you there, about judging the pilot on this specific accident without knowing all the facts.
BUT, it is pretty obvious what happend: a load of skydivers - a thrill-ride to altitude - someone in the way - dead.
If that transport operation would have been accomplished in a different manner, the man on the ground NEVER would have come near enough to any rotorblade ever.
No matter what the very details were or are.
Obviously the pilot did his stunts with the blessing of the FAA, or the legalsystem in the states is getting ridiculous.
As stated on this thread, the pilot violated at least 3 FAR´s. You do not do that without a waiver in front of lawenforcement and FAA personal.
I mentioned here and on other threads, that the interest in such cases should be to learn and avoid for all (as you said S-P....).
Well:
a) You shall not do antics close to the ground if you can not see the necessary area 100% (no hiding places for anyone!!!)
b) Do NEVER bank more than 30 degrees close to the ground - it is civil life now, the war is over!!
c) If your pax need a thrill, they DO NOT NEED IT THAT CLOSE TO THE GROUND, period - whatever they say.
You may be the best, do your personal thrillrides with you alone.
If you carry someone along, back off to a regime that gives you a minimum of maneuvering space "in case".
I hope we will find out the hard facts on this case sometime, to see how close we got with assumptions and hearsay.
But for me some of the fotos give already enough credit to the case (very low + 45 degrees or more bank), the photos being specifically from that machine-pilot combo............
I mentioned, I will not judge the pilot on base of this forum, however he will have to live with the fact and he knows best, HE could have avoided it............no matter his experience, precision, etc. On this occasion, common sense was forgotten somewhere else...
3top
PS: Someone told me once (regarding to street traffic...) when I was learning to drive: YOu always have to drive like everyone else is an idiot on the road - speak: be prepared for the most incredible stupidities in traffic - IT WORKED FOR ME!
I APPLY THE SAME TO AIR TRAFFIC - IT STILL WORKS!!
I am not saying, everyone is an i****, MOST are not, but some ARE......!
Last edited by 3top; 21st Sep 2002 at 03:16.
412 blades V photographer: anyone recall?
About 18 months or so ago there was a rather heated debate concerning a Bell 412 conducting parachute ops at some kind of show. A photographer had gone into a nearby field where the 412 was conducting low flying prior to climbing up to altitude in order to get a great shot, alledgedly with the knowledge of the pilot. During the next run, the blades of the 412 came into contact with the photographer in a low level turn, whilst the photographer was in the field. The photos were not posted, and needless to say, unfortunatley the photographer did not make it. The 412 guy and his 10 or so pax fortunately did. And went on flying the next day.
Despite all the searches I can think of, I have been unable to find the thread, but I am keen to find out what happened here, and what was the inevitable court outcomes?
Any one know?
Despite all the searches I can think of, I have been unable to find the thread, but I am keen to find out what happened here, and what was the inevitable court outcomes?
Any one know?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Chilliwack, BC Canada
Posts: 564
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some info from the NTSB website... www.ntsb.gov
CHI02LA232
On August 2, 2002, at 1952 central daylight time, a Bell 412, N464AC, operated by Air Center Helicopters, Inc., piloted by an airline transport pilot, was taking off from the Rantoul National Aviation Center-Frank Elliot Field Airport (TIP), Rantoul Illinois, with a load of skydivers, when its main rotor struck a photographer on the ground. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The 14 CFR Part 91 business flight was not operating on a flight plan. The pilot and nine passengers were uninjured. The photographer was fatally injured. The local flight was originating at the time of the accident.
The pilot stated in a written statement, "Aircraft was loaded with skydivers by ground crew and area was cleared for takeoff. Ground crew pointed out 4 canopies in vicinity of takeoff area on approach to maintain visual during takeoff. I initiated takeoff while monitoring canopies and began a turn onto taxiway to clear the area when I heard a blade strike. I looked immediately in the direction and saw a person falling down and aborted the takeoff and landed.
A crewmember stated in a written statement, "Earlier today this individual rode with us. After coming back from his skydive he asked me if he could lay on the ground [and] have the helicopter fly by him so he could take a picture. I told him no that was not allowed. He said OK and walked away. This was about one hour before the incident."
A second crewmember stated in a written statement, "At the time of the accident, I had arrived just prior to loading of the last load of skydivers for the day. [Two] crew members were spotting for the takeoff. No obstructions were seen and lift off was given. I was standing in the grass on the runway side of the takeoff. To the runway side of the cornfield. I watched as the 412 did it's takeoff and started its turn inward over the corn field. As the 412 turned a person appeared out of nowhere. I saw the person in a yellow shirt just drop to the knees and fall..."
The TIP automated weather observing system, recorded at 1846, wind from 070 degrees at 9 knots; 10 statue mile surface visibility; broken clouds at 4,300 feet agl, 5,500 feet agl and 6,500 feet agl; temperature of 26 degrees Celsius (C) and dew point of 21 degrees C; altimeter setting of 30.10 inches of mercury. The University of Illinois-Willard Airport, Champaign, Illinois, automated surface observing system located 16 nautical miles north of TIP recorded lightning to the south. The pilot reported that winds were from the north at 15 knots gusting to 20 knots at the time of the accident.
The helicopter was a twin engine, fifteen place helicopter with a single four-bladed main rotor and a tail rotor. The main rotor blades are 46 feet in diameter and 11 feet 5 inches above the helicopter's ground line at design gross weight (dimensions are approximate due to variations in loading and alighting gear deflection).
A witness video recording of the accident and a photo of the photographer's position are included in the docket of this report.
CHI02LA232
On August 2, 2002, at 1952 central daylight time, a Bell 412, N464AC, operated by Air Center Helicopters, Inc., piloted by an airline transport pilot, was taking off from the Rantoul National Aviation Center-Frank Elliot Field Airport (TIP), Rantoul Illinois, with a load of skydivers, when its main rotor struck a photographer on the ground. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at the time of the accident. The 14 CFR Part 91 business flight was not operating on a flight plan. The pilot and nine passengers were uninjured. The photographer was fatally injured. The local flight was originating at the time of the accident.
The pilot stated in a written statement, "Aircraft was loaded with skydivers by ground crew and area was cleared for takeoff. Ground crew pointed out 4 canopies in vicinity of takeoff area on approach to maintain visual during takeoff. I initiated takeoff while monitoring canopies and began a turn onto taxiway to clear the area when I heard a blade strike. I looked immediately in the direction and saw a person falling down and aborted the takeoff and landed.
A crewmember stated in a written statement, "Earlier today this individual rode with us. After coming back from his skydive he asked me if he could lay on the ground [and] have the helicopter fly by him so he could take a picture. I told him no that was not allowed. He said OK and walked away. This was about one hour before the incident."
A second crewmember stated in a written statement, "At the time of the accident, I had arrived just prior to loading of the last load of skydivers for the day. [Two] crew members were spotting for the takeoff. No obstructions were seen and lift off was given. I was standing in the grass on the runway side of the takeoff. To the runway side of the cornfield. I watched as the 412 did it's takeoff and started its turn inward over the corn field. As the 412 turned a person appeared out of nowhere. I saw the person in a yellow shirt just drop to the knees and fall..."
The TIP automated weather observing system, recorded at 1846, wind from 070 degrees at 9 knots; 10 statue mile surface visibility; broken clouds at 4,300 feet agl, 5,500 feet agl and 6,500 feet agl; temperature of 26 degrees Celsius (C) and dew point of 21 degrees C; altimeter setting of 30.10 inches of mercury. The University of Illinois-Willard Airport, Champaign, Illinois, automated surface observing system located 16 nautical miles north of TIP recorded lightning to the south. The pilot reported that winds were from the north at 15 knots gusting to 20 knots at the time of the accident.
The helicopter was a twin engine, fifteen place helicopter with a single four-bladed main rotor and a tail rotor. The main rotor blades are 46 feet in diameter and 11 feet 5 inches above the helicopter's ground line at design gross weight (dimensions are approximate due to variations in loading and alighting gear deflection).
A witness video recording of the accident and a photo of the photographer's position are included in the docket of this report.
Pilot's first name is Rod....who is the owner....as I hear it.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 5,197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What was the inevitable court outcomes?
From what the pilot and two crewmen say, there doesn't seem to be any reason for court proceedings against the pilot, whatever his name is.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heliport:
So a pilot takes a Bell 412 full of skydivers, takes-off and runs with his pitot in the dirt down a quarter of a mile, then does a hairy-ass turn that puts his main rotor blades within five feet of the ground...and people within our industry are cool with that? Never mind that it just so happened that when those MR blades were within five feet of the ground they sliced and diced some poor videographer to death who the pilot "claimed" to not even know was there.
Q: At an altitude of 10 feet, how far do you have to bank a 412 to get the tips of the coned main rotor blades to within five feet of the ground?
Now I'm no lawyer or even an FAA guy, but even I can see a wrongful death lawsuit and at least a couple of FAR violations there.
It is interesting that so many in our industry lay the blame squarely on the decapitated head of the dead videographer while completely absolving the pilot. Of the dead guy it is said, "He got what he deserved"...because he "shouldn't have been there," of course. Yes, it was an airport with all the hazards that entails. But then again, the area was not fenced off or otherwise secured (obviously!), nor was there any signage stating "WARNING! HELICOPTER MAIN ROTOR BLADES COME WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE GROUND IN THIS AREA!!!!"
The unfortunate event gives our industry a serious black eye. It is reprehensible that the FAA who were present condoned this joker's flying, and the fact that it is allowed to continue is inexcusable. Personally, I'm disgusted. If someone on the ground died as a result of my horsing around with a helicopter, I don't know whether I could live with the sorrow and shame.
From what the pilot and two crewmen say, there doesn't seem to be any reason for court proceedings against the pilot, whatever his name is.
Q: At an altitude of 10 feet, how far do you have to bank a 412 to get the tips of the coned main rotor blades to within five feet of the ground?
Now I'm no lawyer or even an FAA guy, but even I can see a wrongful death lawsuit and at least a couple of FAR violations there.
It is interesting that so many in our industry lay the blame squarely on the decapitated head of the dead videographer while completely absolving the pilot. Of the dead guy it is said, "He got what he deserved"...because he "shouldn't have been there," of course. Yes, it was an airport with all the hazards that entails. But then again, the area was not fenced off or otherwise secured (obviously!), nor was there any signage stating "WARNING! HELICOPTER MAIN ROTOR BLADES COME WITHIN FIVE FEET OF THE GROUND IN THIS AREA!!!!"
The unfortunate event gives our industry a serious black eye. It is reprehensible that the FAA who were present condoned this joker's flying, and the fact that it is allowed to continue is inexcusable. Personally, I'm disgusted. If someone on the ground died as a result of my horsing around with a helicopter, I don't know whether I could live with the sorrow and shame.
Last edited by The Rotordog; 18th Dec 2004 at 14:48.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotordog sounds pretty critical from someone who does not admit to being there at the time.
Anytime there is an accident the eye gets blacker, but I dont think one should go so far as assessing guilt if they are not the FAA, or the Courts. If they choose not to involve themselves its probably for a reason.
Anytime there is an accident the eye gets blacker, but I dont think one should go so far as assessing guilt if they are not the FAA, or the Courts. If they choose not to involve themselves its probably for a reason.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B Sousa:
Wow.
True enough, I was not there. I admit it. But I did see the videotape of the 412's "typical" departure at Rantoul, and I did see all kinds of still photographs posted on various skydivers' websites before all were quickly taken down.
And so yes, I am critical, Mr. Sousa. Can you justify performing a maneuver with a helicopter full of passengers which involves a bank so steep and so low to the ground that your rotor blades come within five feet of it? See, me, maybe I'm wierd but I just think that's unforgiveably irresponsible. I think it's "careless and reckless" flying.
Oh, and let's not forget, the videographer "jumped up" out of a cornfield (or soybeans or whatever, I forget which crop it was). Point being, the stalks of the plants were tall enough to hide his body when crouching down. He stood up and was struck by the 412's main rotor. This tells us that not only were the main rotor blades within five feet of the ground, but less than that to the crop! Probably only a couple of feet.
Frankly, I'm astounded that a "pilot" would fly in such a way - whether a person on the ground got killed or not!
And that pretty much sums up my feelings about this incident: I'm astounded. The FAR's do not get suspended merely because all the passengers agree that they can be ignored. I do not know whether the FAA violated this pilot, nor whether any legal action (either criminal or civil) was taken against him. But I do know, as we all do, pilots who've incurred the FAA's wrath for transgressions that were far less serious.
And I'm astounded that any pilot would condone such hot-dogging (with passengers onboard no less!).
Your mileage may vary (it obviously does). But I'll tell you one thing: If this type of flying is tolerable, I'm turning in my certs. And Mr. Sousa, I hope that's not how you fly down in the U.S.V.I. Maybe you've been away from civilization too long. But wait...Air Center has/had a big presence in the U.S.V.I. You don't perhaps work for them, do ya?
Rotordog sounds pretty critical from someone who does not admit to being there at the time.
True enough, I was not there. I admit it. But I did see the videotape of the 412's "typical" departure at Rantoul, and I did see all kinds of still photographs posted on various skydivers' websites before all were quickly taken down.
And so yes, I am critical, Mr. Sousa. Can you justify performing a maneuver with a helicopter full of passengers which involves a bank so steep and so low to the ground that your rotor blades come within five feet of it? See, me, maybe I'm wierd but I just think that's unforgiveably irresponsible. I think it's "careless and reckless" flying.
Oh, and let's not forget, the videographer "jumped up" out of a cornfield (or soybeans or whatever, I forget which crop it was). Point being, the stalks of the plants were tall enough to hide his body when crouching down. He stood up and was struck by the 412's main rotor. This tells us that not only were the main rotor blades within five feet of the ground, but less than that to the crop! Probably only a couple of feet.
Frankly, I'm astounded that a "pilot" would fly in such a way - whether a person on the ground got killed or not!
And that pretty much sums up my feelings about this incident: I'm astounded. The FAR's do not get suspended merely because all the passengers agree that they can be ignored. I do not know whether the FAA violated this pilot, nor whether any legal action (either criminal or civil) was taken against him. But I do know, as we all do, pilots who've incurred the FAA's wrath for transgressions that were far less serious.
And I'm astounded that any pilot would condone such hot-dogging (with passengers onboard no less!).
Your mileage may vary (it obviously does). But I'll tell you one thing: If this type of flying is tolerable, I'm turning in my certs. And Mr. Sousa, I hope that's not how you fly down in the U.S.V.I. Maybe you've been away from civilization too long. But wait...Air Center has/had a big presence in the U.S.V.I. You don't perhaps work for them, do ya?
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rotordog.
Just to let you know ,Yes I do Work for them and other companies . My name is always on my posts, unlike some others. Also I was not there. Im not here to battle with you as to who is right or wrong, just more curious than anything as to why this particular incident raises your hackles. How about a couple accidents in the Grand Canyon over the last couple years (where I also work) in which six and seven people were killed respectively.. I understand (rumor) that at least one of those may be due to someone wearing a Cowboy Hat..
Or is it that you know the owner/pilot involved in this and have some cross to burn.......
Further I dont think I would be setting the scene for this accident if I were not there. I dont think this is an issue of anyone condoning anyones actions. That statement sounds more of something to justify your agressive attitude in this particular case. Still curious why after a couple years the issue comes up with such fire...your most likely closer to this than you admit..
You have brought up some good points to this particular issue, but again the FAA and the Courts ,so far, choose to stay quiet..
As a member of the USPA (www.uspa.org) for over thirty years I can also invite you to any major skydiving meet and you can watch the Caravans, King Airs, Twotters etc as they attempt to beat the Meat Missles to the ground.. Maybe we should start with the industry as a whole for some sensible action.
Just to let you know ,Yes I do Work for them and other companies . My name is always on my posts, unlike some others. Also I was not there. Im not here to battle with you as to who is right or wrong, just more curious than anything as to why this particular incident raises your hackles. How about a couple accidents in the Grand Canyon over the last couple years (where I also work) in which six and seven people were killed respectively.. I understand (rumor) that at least one of those may be due to someone wearing a Cowboy Hat..
Or is it that you know the owner/pilot involved in this and have some cross to burn.......
Further I dont think I would be setting the scene for this accident if I were not there. I dont think this is an issue of anyone condoning anyones actions. That statement sounds more of something to justify your agressive attitude in this particular case. Still curious why after a couple years the issue comes up with such fire...your most likely closer to this than you admit..
You have brought up some good points to this particular issue, but again the FAA and the Courts ,so far, choose to stay quiet..
As a member of the USPA (www.uspa.org) for over thirty years I can also invite you to any major skydiving meet and you can watch the Caravans, King Airs, Twotters etc as they attempt to beat the Meat Missles to the ground.. Maybe we should start with the industry as a whole for some sensible action.
Last edited by B Sousa; 18th Dec 2004 at 15:22.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B Sousa:
Why am I not surprised.
I have no "cross to burn" with this particular pilot. I am a safety zealot and I have many such incidents that I rail against. What is frustrating is the complacent attitude of so many pilots that "accidents happen" with no remorse or recourse.
It was not I who brought the incident up again this time in this thread. But it did rekindle my disgust at it as well as the cavalier attitude that so many pilots have: "Oh well, photographer died. Too bad, he deserved it." I've been in this business for a long, long time. Such "accidents" sicken me. They have all along, and will likely continue to in the future.
The hot-dogging in the canyon accident is well-rumored, yes. If other pilots had first-hand knowledge of it and did nothing, shame on them. Trouble is, that pilot died with everyone else onboard, so we can't go after him anymore. Not so at Rantoul. The hot-dogging there (and other USPA events by the same pilot) is/was well-documented on video and still pictures.
Personally, I do not defend dead or alive pilots who kill people by their hot-dogging actions. And let's face it, if <pilot's name deleted> had not placed his <aircraft type deleted> in such a precarious, arguably unsafe position of extreme bank at <USPA event deleted>, <photographer's name deleted> would not have died. There, is that politically correct for everyone? I know that life is not always fair. Innocent men go to jail, and sometimes the guilty get away with murder. In the overall grand scheme of things, just because somebody is *not* brought up on charges does not mean they have done no wrong.
Let's look at it this way: If a photographer inadvertently walks into the prop of a running-but-parked airplane, you could hardly hold the pilot(s) deliberately responsible. But if a pilot decides to go out and play weed-whacker around the airport with the rotor blades of his helicopter and kills someone, I think it is a different story regardless of whether that someone "should" have been there or not.
Personally, I have no dog in this hunt, as you do Mr. Sousa. If you want to defend your friend, that is your right, I suppose. I just see a needless death, and if I were the family of that unfortunate photographer, I know what kind of legal action I'd be pursuing...until I breathed my last breath.
If what went on at Rantoul is typical of what goes on at all USPA events, I can assure you Mr. Sousa that I will *never* attend one voluntarily.
Just to let you know ,Yes I do Work for them and other companies .
I have no "cross to burn" with this particular pilot. I am a safety zealot and I have many such incidents that I rail against. What is frustrating is the complacent attitude of so many pilots that "accidents happen" with no remorse or recourse.
It was not I who brought the incident up again this time in this thread. But it did rekindle my disgust at it as well as the cavalier attitude that so many pilots have: "Oh well, photographer died. Too bad, he deserved it." I've been in this business for a long, long time. Such "accidents" sicken me. They have all along, and will likely continue to in the future.
The hot-dogging in the canyon accident is well-rumored, yes. If other pilots had first-hand knowledge of it and did nothing, shame on them. Trouble is, that pilot died with everyone else onboard, so we can't go after him anymore. Not so at Rantoul. The hot-dogging there (and other USPA events by the same pilot) is/was well-documented on video and still pictures.
Personally, I do not defend dead or alive pilots who kill people by their hot-dogging actions. And let's face it, if <pilot's name deleted> had not placed his <aircraft type deleted> in such a precarious, arguably unsafe position of extreme bank at <USPA event deleted>, <photographer's name deleted> would not have died. There, is that politically correct for everyone? I know that life is not always fair. Innocent men go to jail, and sometimes the guilty get away with murder. In the overall grand scheme of things, just because somebody is *not* brought up on charges does not mean they have done no wrong.
Let's look at it this way: If a photographer inadvertently walks into the prop of a running-but-parked airplane, you could hardly hold the pilot(s) deliberately responsible. But if a pilot decides to go out and play weed-whacker around the airport with the rotor blades of his helicopter and kills someone, I think it is a different story regardless of whether that someone "should" have been there or not.
Personally, I have no dog in this hunt, as you do Mr. Sousa. If you want to defend your friend, that is your right, I suppose. I just see a needless death, and if I were the family of that unfortunate photographer, I know what kind of legal action I'd be pursuing...until I breathed my last breath.
As a member of the USPA (www.uspa.org) for over thirty years I can also invite you to any major skydiving meet and you can watch the Caravans, King Airs, Twotters etc as they attempt to beat the Meat Missles to the ground..
Bert,
I recall this event and the flap it caused. You have to remember...the head lopping occurred while the aircraft was in flight and not setting on the ground, helideck, or on sloping ground. There was no mechanical failure....no gusts of wind...no walking upslope into the rotor....no AFCS runaway or lurching of the ship......a guy standing on the ground got his noggin removed by a main rotor blade.
This is the only incident I can recall in my 37 years of flying helicopters that an aircraft in controlled flight killed someone on the ground by a Main rotor strike. That makes this event all the more controversial in my view.
Your point about the Grand Canyon is well taken....and we could throw in other accidents where the pilot was out showing his butt and someone died but usually if not invariably the people killed were "inside" the aircraft.
Dorcey Wingo was dragged through the courts when the movie scene pyrotechnics shot him out of the sky and Vic Morrow and the two children were killed. To see the difference in the way that was handled and this event was handled does pose some questions.
It is not so much an argument about "intent" but when one sees pilots losing licenses for busting a TFR and no certificate action in this particular case....it does make one wonder why.
I recall this event and the flap it caused. You have to remember...the head lopping occurred while the aircraft was in flight and not setting on the ground, helideck, or on sloping ground. There was no mechanical failure....no gusts of wind...no walking upslope into the rotor....no AFCS runaway or lurching of the ship......a guy standing on the ground got his noggin removed by a main rotor blade.
This is the only incident I can recall in my 37 years of flying helicopters that an aircraft in controlled flight killed someone on the ground by a Main rotor strike. That makes this event all the more controversial in my view.
Your point about the Grand Canyon is well taken....and we could throw in other accidents where the pilot was out showing his butt and someone died but usually if not invariably the people killed were "inside" the aircraft.
Dorcey Wingo was dragged through the courts when the movie scene pyrotechnics shot him out of the sky and Vic Morrow and the two children were killed. To see the difference in the way that was handled and this event was handled does pose some questions.
It is not so much an argument about "intent" but when one sees pilots losing licenses for busting a TFR and no certificate action in this particular case....it does make one wonder why.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Australia
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seen a video
I have watched a video of the Parachuting event with this 412 flying over grassy fields doing spilt ass turns etc etc to rock music. I've got to say my jaw was on the floor watching such a huge machine being thrown around.
Great to see a machine being put through it's paces, but with punters on board ot the wisest move and the erraticness of the flying, no wonder.
Regards
Loachboy
Great to see a machine being put through it's paces, but with punters on board ot the wisest move and the erraticness of the flying, no wonder.
Regards
Loachboy
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Rotordog, your not getting defense from me, dont offload your ranting my way. I see your also jumping on me for working for the company. You better get a breath of fresh air, Im sure there are things in your logbook that would make a thread or two on this forum.
So as a "Safety Zealot", Im sure if your name were known, you would no doubt be taking fire from some you work with or used too.
Sasless the two incidents were totaly different. Mr Wingo becamer a passenger in his aircraft after the explosion and really had no say as to where he was going to land (as I see it).
As to not knowing of any accidents, Im sure we could find quite a few rotor involved incidents.
Again not being there, but from all the reports and statements the deceased was warned to stay away from that area due to the busy operation. As you say with the FAA jumping on certain things that seem trivial and no action on this incident leads one to believe that there was NO Violation or they had no evidence of one EVEN with a video. There are more Lawyers than Pilots so I can only guess if a Civil Case were to be made, it would have been done before the deceased was buried.
Bottom line , Rotordog is spotless and has never hotdogged an aircraft.....
So as a "Safety Zealot", Im sure if your name were known, you would no doubt be taking fire from some you work with or used too.
Sasless the two incidents were totaly different. Mr Wingo becamer a passenger in his aircraft after the explosion and really had no say as to where he was going to land (as I see it).
As to not knowing of any accidents, Im sure we could find quite a few rotor involved incidents.
Again not being there, but from all the reports and statements the deceased was warned to stay away from that area due to the busy operation. As you say with the FAA jumping on certain things that seem trivial and no action on this incident leads one to believe that there was NO Violation or they had no evidence of one EVEN with a video. There are more Lawyers than Pilots so I can only guess if a Civil Case were to be made, it would have been done before the deceased was buried.
Bottom line , Rotordog is spotless and has never hotdogged an aircraft.....
Sorry for the fart!! I really didnt mean to start another barney.
Actually, thanks for answering the question re court actions following this event. I do find it suprising that there was no action I must say, but thats the accepted culture over there and I'm over here.
I was interested in contrasting this accident with the German EMS B105 whom flew under the bridge, clipped the snow and flipped killing a few (if not all). The German was widely condemned on that thread, the 412 guy supported - and that is where my fascination comes from.
Actually, thanks for answering the question re court actions following this event. I do find it suprising that there was no action I must say, but thats the accepted culture over there and I'm over here.
I was interested in contrasting this accident with the German EMS B105 whom flew under the bridge, clipped the snow and flipped killing a few (if not all). The German was widely condemned on that thread, the 412 guy supported - and that is where my fascination comes from.
The 412 guy was not supported across the board as I recall....much the opposite as I recall. Some felt there was mitigating circumstances but most felt a line had been crossed.
I rate my flying by the stories I can tell at the bar....some funny...some not so funny...but all of some kind I feel free telling. This is not a story I would want to tell on myself or have told on me by someone else.
I rate my flying by the stories I can tell at the bar....some funny...some not so funny...but all of some kind I feel free telling. This is not a story I would want to tell on myself or have told on me by someone else.
Gatvol
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: KLAS/TIST/FAJS/KFAI
Posts: 4,195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sasless, is always the one on the even Keel......Must be mellowing .Ha ha. There are a Million stories out there that folks jump on once in a while and yes this is one that is not supported across the board. Rotordog went out of his way to explain that.
Others come to mind for instance the American Military crew that clipped the wires in Italy killing some a few yeras ago. The outcome did not make everyone happy. Two heavies in a mid Air in India also with heavy loss of life...On and on.. Problem is tragedies will not have happy endings.
In this case there may not be a criminal or civl trail but it certainly will be etched in many peoples memories for LIFE.
Others come to mind for instance the American Military crew that clipped the wires in Italy killing some a few yeras ago. The outcome did not make everyone happy. Two heavies in a mid Air in India also with heavy loss of life...On and on.. Problem is tragedies will not have happy endings.
In this case there may not be a criminal or civl trail but it certainly will be etched in many peoples memories for LIFE.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: San Diego
Age: 70
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
accident at wffc in rantoul, Illinois
The name of the pilot who chopped off the head of a bystander at Rantoul, Illinois in 2002 is ******. Unbelievably, he managed to cleanse all internet stories regarding this incident and is still working..
and you joined today just to get that off your chest? Oh look, his name has vanished
Senior Pilot
and you joined today just to get that off your chest? Oh look, his name has vanished
Senior Pilot