YouTuber under FAA Investigation for seemingly deliberate crash...

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Toobuilder

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Jan 19, 2010
Messages
5,355
Location
Mojave, Ca
ive never met the guy, havent watched any of his videos, and apparently a lot of people on here hate him. if he wasnt good at photography/video stuff, you probably wouldnt be able to see it/ judge. Glad he had a parachute. looks like something hes probably done before-that seems good. Good choice while flying over mountains. Those mountains looked like they were all over the place, and really hard. The plane wasnt hundreds of thousands of dollars-and You lose altitude really fast when Your mill isnt spinning. With all those instruments and no electric start(?), he probably figured his options pretty quick. So he made a decision while he had time to decide. After what he landed in, that looks to vindicate his choice for jumping. Or he just did it to piss everyone off? Either way, he seems to have succeeded. Would like to hear what the FAA figure out.
By your own admission you have not seen the video in question so from that perspective it probably looks harsh and one sided. I invite you to actually watch the video and you will not doubt come to the conclusion that this was a staged event.

To your other comments, I can tell you that he had PLENTY of better options than jumping. I own this same year, make, and model of Taylorcraft and I have flown over these same mountains many times. This airplane has a touchdown speed of about 40 MPH. 40 into a creekbed strapped inside a steel cage is far more appealing than a chute on a hillside into brush. Beter for the pilot health and better for the possible recovery of the airplane. And yes, the glide ratio of a T-cart (even with the prop windmilling) is pretty impressive. He had PLENTY of time to establish a safe landing zone and attempt a restart for the several minutes he had left in the air.

Instead, he simply jumped. Because that was his plan all along.

Wonder if the FAA recovers the cockpit camera data cards from him? Did it show him fiddling with the curiously jury rigged fuel selector zip tied to the cabin wall (suppose theres a 337 on file for that mod?)? Did it show him messing with the ignition switch in an "attempt to restart" (or kill) the engine?

"Hate" is a strong term - one I dont use lightly. This is not enough of a transgression to garner hate as far as I'm concerned, but he needs to be held accountable for his actions - just like everyone else should. Im the last guy to play the "Environmental" card, but he did dump the airplane into a protected California Condor sanctuary (personally, dont care one bit if they all die tomorrow) and in this day and age that means there is a good likelyhood that there will be further restictions than exist today. I do not like my flying freedoms restricted, and this jackass is not helping the image of GA.

And finally, no, its not an expensive airplane, but they dont make Pre war T-carts anymore. If it had been a Cirrus OTOH - who cares? You can get a new one at the Cirrus store.
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
706
Location
Maryland, USA
ive never met the guy, havent watched any of his videos, and apparently a lot of people on here hate him. if he wasnt good at photography/video stuff, you probably wouldnt be able to see it/ judge. Glad he had a parachute. looks like something hes probably done before-that seems good. Good choice while flying over mountains. Those mountains looked like they were all over the place, and really hard. The plane wasnt hundreds of thousands of dollars-and You lose altitude really fast when Your mill isnt spinning. With all those instruments and no electric start(?), he probably figured his options pretty quick. So he made a decision while he had time to decide. After what he landed in, that looks to vindicate his choice for jumping. Or he just did it to piss everyone off? Either way, he seems to have succeeded. Would like to hear what the FAA figure out.
So let me get this right....

You see no issue that despite NOT doing what any sensible pilot should have least attempted to do, that he could have endangered people/property below? You see no issue with the fact that has the potential to blow back negatively in some way/shape/form on all of us law-abiding folk?

There is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE to operate any vehicle at the expense of safe & sound operating procedures & limitations. Period.

Overzealous & ill-informed lawmakers tend to pass obstructive regulations based on the acts of dumb people.

I've seen it many times during my years in the military that when one person decided to play stupid games and got caught, we all won stupid prizes as a result.

May I present Prosecution Exhibit 1:

Exhibit 2:

I'm not one to lash out, but if you honestly want to think he made appropriate choices in this video of something that stunningly seems to indicate that this was anything other than an actual emergency and purely intentional, make sure you avoid me when it comes time for your BFR, provided you are a rated pilot.
 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
16,130
Location
Memphis, TN
He probably had it hooked to his camera. His delicate ears would not dare fly without ANR. Bose in a T craft. That’s fake right away. Let’s say he probably had a hand held. My point is he didn’t break any rules going stealth. Makes a good point of premeditation picking type of plane for a stunt.
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
706
Location
Maryland, USA
He probably had it hooked to his camera. His delicate ears would not dare fly without ANR. Bose in a T craft. That’s fake right away. Let’s say he probably had a hand held. My point is he didn’t break any rules going stealth. Makes a good point of premeditation picking type of plane for a stunt.
Removing those cameras from the crash site alone and the edited nature of what he broadcasted on YouTube is evidence tampering / obstruction of justice...and that's just for starters. Just the opinion of this XP / Safety Officer...
 

Marc Zeitlin

Exalted Grand Poobah
Joined
Dec 11, 2015
Messages
1,058
Location
Tehachapi, CA
...Squawking not required in D,E, and G...
Relatively minor nit here - _IF_ there's a transponder installed on the aircraft, _THEN_ it must be operating when in all controlled airspace, which "D" and "E" are, per 14 CFR Part 91.215(c). It's the "or in all controlled airspace" clause... Since he was almost certainly in Class "E" airspace, given the altitude and location, _IF_ there was a transponder installed, it needed to be on and squawking.

If the argument is that he was "stealth" by turning off radio and transponder, then at least the transponder part of it (assuming equipped) was not legal.
 

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
16,130
Location
Memphis, TN
It’s a ‘40 T craft. If it’s stock, it has no electrical system. Transponder not required. There are some out there with them, but the five Ts I have been around, no radio no transponder. Same with Champs and J3s. That is why you own one, simplicity.
 

Bigshu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2020
Messages
640
Dam , if I ever get my project finished and by some chance lose power , think I'm just gonna choose to die in the wreckage and pray like hell no one is videoing it . Wonder if he's vaccinated ? That's where I'd start the investigation .
Loss of engine power isn't super rare. Most actual aviators just land the aircraft, even off airport, and don't die in any wreckage. Video or not, there's no reason to jump out of a plane for publicity (if you're the pilot that is).
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
706
Location
Maryland, USA
Loss of engine power isn't super rare. Most actual aviators just land the aircraft, even off airport, and don't die in any wreckage. Video or not, there's no reason to jump out of a plane for publicity (if you're the pilot that is).
The great Mike Arnold's "How it's Made" AR-5 video started with him and his buddies out in the field recovering his aircraft....after a power loss at low altitude. The narrator went on to explain exactly what had happened. (Great composite construction video too)

 

Bigshu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2020
Messages
640
It’s sad he needs the attention. He placed 9 in snowboarding at the Sochi Olympics. He does other daredevil stuff. He just doesn’t have a name. Looking at his YouTube channel, he is only getting friend numbers for views. The only big one he had was about a person disaster. Everyone wants to make a living on YouTube. Famous for being famous.

I’m sure the person he bought the plane from is not happy. Who would think someone would destroy an airplane for the fun of it? Cheap plane is for, fun. A Cheap airplane sold by a 90 year old who has owned it for years thinks it’s being passed on to like minds. That is what happened to the other T destroyed. I knew that airplane. Walked under the wing many a time. It was still in his name when it was destroyed; because that kid destroyed it day one. Old friend is liquidating his stuff. He has a lot of stuff. He never expected that.
That really is sad. To think you loved and cared for an aircraft, then it just gets demolished by the next owner, for the vanity of recognition on social media. Humanity circling the drain....
 

cblink.007

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
706
Location
Maryland, USA
The fact that he hiked to the wreckage and removed all the GoPro's.
Rumours that he has already hired a helicopter, and gone up and removed the wreckage.
Here is some food for thought for what the State of California will likely look at:


Federal Law is a tad more harsh with respect to the matter:

 

Bigshu

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 7, 2020
Messages
640
Here's the response to my contact with Ridge wallets:


"Hi Pat,
We appreciate you bringing this to our attention. We sponsor a great deal of creators and unfortunately do not always see their videos before they are posted. Since becoming aware of this incident, we have requested that The Ridge be removed from his video. Please let us know if you have any other questions and we would be happy to help!"
 

ragflyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
369
Sorry Ron W. to drag you ...but you are the one who knows. What % of engine out landings result in fatalities?
Obviously the actual number is lower as many (successful) engine out landings go unreported.
 

ragflyer

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2007
Messages
369
Overzealous & ill-informed lawmakers tend to pass obstructive regulations based on the acts of dumb people.
We hear this often but is there actual precedent specifically in the field of experimental category regulation or general aviation that a rule was changed and became generally onerous because of the dumb act by someone ?
 

Hot Wings

Grumpy Cynic
HBA Supporter
Log Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
8,126
Location
Rocky Mountains
This all could have been avoided if his harness had snagged on the way out and left him dangling on the outside.
You'd probably like the result of a YouTube search using 'trevor jacob alternate ending'.
Wonder where the parts ended up? I could use a Shinn wheel for a straight axle...........and maybe the oil pressure gauge in the reverse reading tach.
 

Lois

Active Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
25
I could use a Shinn wheel for a straight axle...........and maybe the oil pressure gauge in the reverse reading tach.
Reverse reading? It's those "weird" accessory cases with generator and starter pads that read "backwards." :)
 

Lois

Active Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2022
Messages
25
Is there actual precedent... that a rule was changed and became generally onerous because of the dumb act by someone ?
In the modern world people are generally experts at one thing.

Which is a good thing if you are a neurosurgeon, a cabinetmaker, or an orthodontist.

Politicians are experts at getting elected. Some bureaucrats are experts at building little kingdoms within agencies, others at working their way up the food chain. Knowing nothing about subject matter they make decisions based on their own self interests.

The laws and rules they write aren't too bright in general. The ones lobbyists write for them are more technically sound, but also totally in line with their employer's interests.

Just the opinion of SGOTI.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top