Crashes in the News - Thread

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

TrikeTrash

Active Member
Joined
Feb 8, 2014
Messages
38
Location
Kingston, TN (12TN)
You need to watch the video directly, my copy is not that good. As I type; the posted video is the fourth frame down. I no longer have a Facebook account so I can't contact the author or the person who shared it. To me there looks to be a pitch change after the "black objects", but again this video could and very well might be, an internet hoax.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,452
Location
US
To me, the biggest question is the provenance/legitimacy of the video. Is it legit? Today anyone can edit a video, introduce anything they want, and re-introduce it to the crowd. A "make-your-own-Zapruder-film", and then swatting down the bogus flick would become a near impossibility once it made the rounds.

We don't know the pre-briefed "limit line" for the fighters during their pass (i.e. where the P-63 was supposed to roll out), but based on the tracks of he preceding fighters, it wasn't far from the path of the B-17. If the P-63 hit something significant in the few seconds prior to completing his turn, it would seem possible that the distraction (startle response, assessment of what had happened, possible structural or control damage, etc) might slightly change his back pressure, maybe widen his turn.

Given the location of the P-63's engine, actual damage to the engine and immediate engine stoppage from bird or small drone strike seems a very remote possibility.

The sudden appearance of this new bit of information is cause for skepticism.
 
Last edited:

D Hillberg

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 23, 2010
Messages
1,870
Location
very low low low earth orbit
Pitch as in attitude.
Other videos show little pitch change, Altitude of P - 63 and other aircraft pretty much the same.
Videos with no scale or other reference [other aircraft or ground landmarks etc,] not as reliable ...
Camera tracking and angles can also cause issues in perspective .
If a drone was there I'll wait for the marks and pieces to show up.
 
Joined
Sep 30, 2020
Messages
34

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
2,270
Location
Seattle, WA

Stolch

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2022
Messages
76
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,452
Location
US
From the article:

Of the 56 fatals, 39 were in amateur-built aircraft and EAA said the increase mirrors the increase in general aviation activity as the COVID pandemic eased.
So, at first glance, there's no reason to think that the fatal accident rate has increased.

The headline could have been: "Despite post-pandemic uptick in flying, no increase in fatal accident rate seen.... EAA congratulates their membership for their apparent diligence in getting their proficiency back after an unprecedented 2 year slowdown in flight activity. Good job!"

But, that wouldn't accomplish the goal.
 
Last edited:

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
2,270
Location
Seattle, WA
From the article:


So, at first glance, there's no reason to think that the fatal accident rate has increased.

The headline could have been: "Despite post-pandemic uptick in flying, no increase in fatal accidents noted.... EAA congratulates their membership for their apparent diligence in getting their proficiency back after an unprecedented 2 year slowdown in flight activity. Good job!"

But, that wouldn't accomplish the goal.
EAA has a gentleman's agreement with the FAA...as long as fatalities are kept within certain limits, the FAA will minimize its impact to the experimental community. The FY 2022 numbers exceeded the limit, hence the EAA and the FAA are concerned.

This stemmed from the big drop in homebuilt registrations in 2010-2013 due to the re-registration process. The number of registered homebuilt dropped by about a quarter, and random variation saw an increased number of accidents. This made the computed homebuilt accident rate skyrocket, although, of course. The FAA demanded action, and a Safety Summit was held in 2015 to address the issue. Here's one of my charts from that summit, illustrating the issue.
safety summit.JPG
Again, the issue was artificial, driven mostly by the reduction in size of the official homebuilt fleet.

I'm not sure, but I believe the "gentleman's agreement" came out of this safety summit. If you look at the "Fatal E-AB Accidents" column in the above, you'll see how the accidents widely vary year-to-year. Last year's high number is probably just a normal statistical variation, coupled with the increased activity in the GA fleet as pandemic limitations eased.

The annual FAA Activity Survey has not yet been released, we'll see if it reflects increasing flight hours by Experimentals.

Understand, too, that the EAA is on the hook for *all* Experimental aircraft accidents...not just homebuilts. A P-63 rams a B-17 at an airshow, and that gets tallied against EAA's limit. Ditto the recent Caravan crash in Washington state, or an accident at an air race. Experimental LSAs are included, too.

Ron Wanttaja
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,452
Location
US
Ron, thanks.
The annual FAA Activity Survey has not yet been released, we'll see if it reflects increasing flight hours by Experimentals.
It seems like the responsible thing to do at this point is to at least wait for the annual FAA survey to see if we have good news (EAB flying hours are up!) or bad news (fatal accident rate is up).
Everything hinges on the denominator.
 
Top