pete_b Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 http://www.fox13now.com/news/kstu-hooper-candy-man-in-paramotor-crashes,0,6491987.story Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Banker! I can not belive that this was allowed to happen! To overfly a croud of 300 children is about the stupidest thing you could do with a paramotor. The pilot should have his kit taken off him and be charged with all possible charges! I hope he never flies again! SW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer_Dave Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 (edited) Speechless. Incidents like this will affect us all. Licensing is on it's way I feel. Edited September 8, 2009 by Guest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dan_p Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 You never realy know for sure unless it was you, but to me........ he made some realy bad decisions! not least the decision to do it in the first place. If he was having difficulties then why on earth did he continue to head towards the crowd? not the most responsive or slow setup to be doing this from either. And is it not completely ilegal to drop anything out of an aircraft unless its water balast, I presume this is the same in the States. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norman Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 It looks as though this large trike (the US call them Powered Paragliders I gather) almost stalled on crossing the power lines then pitched down to recover and set up a large rate of descent. A very foolish move - Poor kids ... sh1t PR. Dropping sweeties would be illegal in the UK without a dispensation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tommcb6016 Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 What an absolute moron! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 it must be allowed over there? otherwise he wouldnt have done it. aeroplanes fly over large crouds, cant there engines fail then? red devils put on a large display i dont knw a great deal about it but seen it on tv and there is thousands there. the other thing is that if these people knew there was a paramotor flyin over head, then the ones that worry why not stop home because of the potential danger people are a bit fast to blame the poor guy, if he is gettin paid then its his job he didnt set out to hurt anyone. but things happen very very rarely but sometimes , it is easy to say what he should have could have done by people on a forum but i would bet money he has a wealth of experience and the options were very limited, anyone would have steered away from the croud if they could, put ya self in the situation and then decide what to do. untill give the people that have accidents a break they dont go around havin accidents to make it licenced do they Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_P Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Agreed Leo, we don't know the facts, and he is being crucified. Not the first time that members of this forum have indulged in uninformed character assassination, and I doubt it will be the last. Funny how the Brit system of fair play and innocent until proven guilty has been exported the world over, and yet there seem to a huge number of folks here who don't seem to agree with it. Incidentally, it was a powered parachute, many of which operate outside the category of aircraft that includes paramotors. They are much heavier, higher powered and faster. Oh, and nearly always steered with the feet. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outkast Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Agreed Leo, we don't know the facts, and he is being crucified. Not the first time that members of this forum have indulged in uninformed character assassination, and I doubt it will be the last.Funny how the Brit system of fair play and innocent until proven guilty has been exported the world over, and yet there seem to a huge number of folks here who don't seem to agree with it. Incidentally, it was a powered parachute, many of which operate outside the category of aircraft that includes paramotors. They are much heavier, higher powered and faster. Oh, and nearly always steered with the feet. Phil Well there are 2 facts we do know, he was flying directly at and over power lines and directly at and over a crowd, something that has been banned at airshows in europe since the fatal crash in germany , both of these carry high risk if something goes wrong as it seems to have done here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 well i cant see it bein ilegal there as it was an organised event. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_P Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Well there are 2 facts we do know, he was flying directly at and over power lines and directly at and over a crowd, something that has been banned at airshows in europe since the fatal crash in germany , both of these carry high risk if something goes wrong as it seems to have done here. Aerobatics involving flying over a crowd, or with the energy of the aircraft directed in such a way as debris would end up in a crowd are certainly banned. Was this pilot doing aeros? Had dispensation to drop items been granted? Was it required in the USA even? Do we know why he was at such a low level over the power lines? Do we know whether it was possible to take avoiding action? Do we in fact know ANY of the circumstances other than the initial plan, and the crash? And here I mean FACTUAL information, not here-say, conjecture or press (dis)information? If you do, I guess you should be over there assisting the FAA with the investigation. If you don't, well I guess that's up to you own consciences. Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outkast Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Well there are 2 facts we do know, he was flying directly at and over power lines and directly at and over a crowd, something that has been banned at airshows in europe since the fatal crash in germany , both of these carry high risk if something goes wrong as it seems to have done here. Aerobatics involving flying over a crowd, or with the energy of the aircraft directed in such a way as debris would end up in a crowd are certainly banned. Was this pilot doing aeros? Had dispensation to drop items been granted? Was it required in the USA even? Do we know why he was at such a low level over the power lines? Do we know whether it was possible to take avoiding action? Do we in fact know ANY of the circumstances other than the initial plan, and the crash? And here I mean FACTUAL information, not here-say, conjecture or press (dis)information? If you do, I guess you should be over there assisting the FAA with the investigation. If you don't, well I guess that's up to you own consciences. Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone. Phil Phil its not a matter of legality, its a matter of common sense, it seems to me a proper risk assessment was not carried out by the pilot, if it was and he still thought he should carry on then I can only say his judgement has to be questioned, if you going to fly over a large body of water you would where a life jacket? , it wont stop you from ditching should your engine quit but will help minimise the outcome should it happen, its all about risk management, from the clip it appears he did not take the route to minimize the risk to both himself and the children, something wich was his responsibility as a pilot. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil_P Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 from the clip it appears he did not take the route to minimize the risk to both himself and the children, something wich was his responsibility as a pilot.Dave Dave, I feel you have made my point for me. You have based a condemnation on a couple of minutes of shaky, blurred video footage, and a few gasps and comments from bystanders. We don't know what risk assessment was carried out, we don't know what if any, reasons there were for appearing to continue to fly towards the crowd even when something was wrong (if indeed it was). As a pilot interested even only in self preservation, I would expect him to avoid a low flight over power cables if it was possible. As a human being, I wouldn't expect him to persist flying towards a crowd of children if avoidable, with a known problem. I don't know ANY of the above. As and when the facts come out and he is revealed to have screwed up big time, THEN go after him with claws out, not before. I haven't noted any venom being directed towards the pilot who tragically lost his life within the last day or so, and there, but for the grace of God, a similar tragedy could well have unfolded. Phil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer_Dave Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Sorry Phil. Forget legalities and permissions completely and go back to Pete's original point. Never trust your engine 100 %. It looked as if the pilot powered up to avoid the power lines (wether he saw them at the last minute or not he should've been looking for the poles, not the lines.) Secondly, he should've had height to glide clear of the lines INCASE of engine failure, AND argueably, height to glide clear of the crowd, mostly children who weren't old enough to be fully aware of the potential danger. Thirdly, it looked a little thermic and margin should've been allowed for sink. One of the shorter videos shows it more clearly. I wont even get into dropping objects wether candy or sponges and crowd pleasing can also bring a rush of blood to a pilots head. Dont mean to shoot you down mate but I see poor planning, poor judgement and over confidence in this incident. Only my opinion though, I'll grant you that. And I'm not perfect myself either, if I'm honest. Which I am. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer_Dave Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 Go to Pete's link and then scroll down to rellated links and watch "man flys into crowd part 2" then tell me it wasn't poor piloting. I withdraw my first post on posibility of slipping drive belt. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 8, 2009 Share Posted September 8, 2009 aha i didnt know he had lost his life , we dont know what the planning was i would think they wouldnt look at things lightly with a crowd so i would think if it was an event then it was a planned one, he wasnt just passing by, so planning would have been done i would think, i cant imagine the organisers taking the safety lightly , had it have gone well it would have been good for the kids Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Farmer_Dave Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 Leoibb Yes his options were very limited, but he got himself there by his own choices. You said "put yourself in his position and then see what you would have done"............ I say "No dont"..... "please dont" I am not always at odds with you or Phil and I always read your posts with genuine interest, but you cannot defend this type of flying. It is a FUNDAMENTAL no no. And yes I did overfly my mate whilst he filmed me not long ago but he was expecting it and he has got the razor sharp reactions of a Taekwondo black belt. Dave Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete_b Posted September 9, 2009 Author Share Posted September 9, 2009 LeoibbYes his options were very limited, but he got himself there by his own choices. You said "put yourself in his position and then see what you would have done"............ I say "No dont"..... "please dont" I am not always at odds with you or Phil and I always read your posts with genuine interest, but you cannot defend this type of flying. It is a FUNDAMENTAL no no. And yes I did overfly my mate whilst he filmed me not long ago but he was expecting it and he has got the razor sharp reactions of a Taekwondo black belt. Dave I will put myself in his position if it was legal to do what he did. I would at the very least fly over the edge of the crowd with my safe emergency landing zone away from them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
norman Posted September 9, 2009 Share Posted September 9, 2009 It is a sad fact of life that every flying machine has its limitations. Paramotors are no exception, they are for balmy mornings and evenings with the excitement of the thermic mid part of the day for a few adventurous individuals with the developed skills available to deal with them. Not a club for heroes but one for 'technicians with training'. High winds (above 10-12 knots) bring problems that a collapsable ripstop nylon wing cannot cope with without sharp and competent handling and then not always successfully. A reserve parachute and a brave but foolish heart are no match for them. If you fly within your personal limitations, which should be well within those of your machine, this remains a safe and thoroughly enjoyable sport. Trite comments or pearls? - you decide. Don't let this poor soul die in vain, when the accident report emerges, let's all learn from his mistakes or misfortunes at whatever point he made or experienced them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.