Dan Gryder Lockheed Electra Crash

1RTK1 said:
He isn't doing anything negative,
Click to expand...

I disagree. For one, he stirs the pot over perceived issues with GA for the public, with whom a lot of know nothing about GA for context of his criticisms. All you have to do is look at comments on his videos to see that. For another, he appears to breaks rules himself (like appearing to fly with a non-IR pilot in IMC without a clearance), again for the public to see and in turn giving GA a bad look...
 
Once pilots get in that social media circle, boy, do they talk up 'safety' and try to 'Out Safety' each other. How times are a changin', the old sayin' "Hold My Beer, Watch This" is being replaced by: "I'm Safer Then You, Watch This".

...Oh no..., no one is 'Safer' then me :rockon:
 
1RTK1 said:
Seems the only person I have heard saying that was another utuber that seems to have a hard on for him and wants to promote himself.
Not that I know who is lying, BUT DG story is polar opposite.
Click to expand...
Actually the NTSB and the state police said it. Did you miss that? Oh, and Dan himself bragged about it, in a video he's since removed. The NTSB also found that pilot error (by Dan) was the cause of the 150 crash on the cornfield, and he refused to cooperate in that investigation. He has a long history of obstruction.
 
1RTK1 said:
… He isn't doing anything negative, he does bring to light accidents and possible causes which GA should avoid….
Click to expand...
This is where we can agree to disagree.

There’s enough public records available on Gryder for me to determine I don’t need whatever it is he’s shilling at any point in time.
 
Last edited:
1RTK1 said:
Well I doubt he has enough followers or will every have enough followers to make anything off of his channel
Click to expand...
YouTube creator here: Couple things to keep in mind. One about Dan and one general.

About Dan: He deletes many/most of his videos after their initial surge. So the various sites that look at his channel don't really have a way to get a handle on his view counts. As a result, they are likely undershooting his actual viewship.

General: A useful rule of thumb is that creators make 70% or so of their revenue from sponsorships, not from youtube ads. Dan has had at least one major sponsorship before losing the respect of many in aviation. With 100K subs making a couple of videos a month he should have been making enough to pay for his aviation habit and then some. He wouldn't be getting rich, but he'd easily be making enough to justify the effort.
 
Last edited:
1RTK1 said:
Seems the only person I have heard saying that was another utuber that seems to have a hard on for him and wants to promote himself.
Not that I know who is lying, BUT DG story is polar opposite.
Click to expand...
Dan himself has made at least two videos showing items that he removed from crash sites. Of course, they've since been deleted.
Sierra1 said:
Gryder grydering.

Did he try to steal a part from the accident also?
Click to expand...
I saw in a couple of places that the local folks at the airport "cleaned up the airplane and moved it to a hangar" as soon as possible. It's not clear whether the NTSB got there first or not, and/or whether they approved that though.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Not quite all…somebody on BeechTalk pasted a D.G. Facebook post…
Click to expand...
"I am once again pretty disappointed with a non CFI, non MEI, part 121 FO YouTuber that never checked out in a BE-18 or an L12A.
FACT: The L12A will climb 400 fpm with full flaps extended, and the tailwheel doesn’t need to be locked for takeoff or landing. Tailwheel lock is a work load reliever for long taxiways where no turns are required. I never locked a tailwheel for any BE-18 takeoff or landing and this has zero to do with what happened. We typically don’t lock tailwheel for any L12A operation, but some do, just personal preference."

I would like to look into this statement more and see what other pilots on type have to say and what they do.
 
woxof said:
I would like to look into this statement more and see what other pilots on type have to say and what they do.
Click to expand...
It was posted by someone with extensive BE-18 time who said it was grossly incorrect for that airplane both based on experience and POH contradiction, and that statement was mirrored by several others with substantial experience.

But let us know what you find when you look into it.
 
Last edited:
MauleSkinner said:
It was posted by someone with extensive BE-18 time who said it was grossly incorrect for that airplane both based on experience and POH contradiction, and that statement was mirrored by several others with substantial experience.

But let us know what you find when you look into it.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but Dan, who was involved when his DC-3, a C-150, and his friend's Lockheed were crunched knows far more about any of those things than other experts or the POH..
 
Does anyone else think Dan is smiling at the hospital not cuz he's alive...but cuz he's got content to show the sycophants.
 
woxof said:
"I am once again pretty disappointed with a non CFI, non MEI, part 121 FO YouTuber that never checked out in a BE-18 or an L12A.
FACT: The L12A will climb 400 fpm with full flaps extended, and the tailwheel doesn’t need to be locked for takeoff or landing. Tailwheel lock is a work load reliever for long taxiways where no turns are required. I never locked a tailwheel for any BE-18 takeoff or landing and this has zero to do with what happened. We typically don’t lock tailwheel for any L12A operation, but some do, just personal preference."

I would like to look into this statement more and see what other pilots on type have to say and what they do.
Click to expand...
Is the red text something Gryder said about someone else, or something someone else said about Gryder?

FWIW, Gryder does have CFI and MEI. So it sounds like he's talking about someone else?
Lindberg said:
Yep, concealing evidence from the NTSB again.


I wonder what's in his logbook about the previous instruction he provided in this aircraft.
Click to expand...
When it comes to Gryder, always download/screenshot/etc... He deletes 90% of what he posts, including whatever this was. Unless he has me blocked on Facebook because I did get into it with him once a long time ago on a subject in which he did not know what he was talking about but sure thought he did.
kyleb said:
Yeah, but Dan, who was involved when his DC-3, a C-150, and his friend's Lockheed were crunched knows far more about any of those things than other experts or the POH..
Click to expand...
Wait... His DC-3 got crunched? I missed that. What happened?
 
Don't let him fool you..... Jennifer Homendy pulled him out of that plane and beat the crap out of him!
1719062870204.png
 
I dont mind DG. Sure, he's a bit of a blow-hard, but his analysis is thought provoking. I see value in disagreeing with or doubting so-called "experts" and doing my own research to confirm or disprove their claims. If everyone in the echo chamber nods in agreement, we dont learn anything nor do we uncover the deliberate obfuscation perpetrated by big government or big business. If you accept everything at face value, you're often misled for someone's benefit other than your own.
 
moparrob66 said:
I dont mind DG. Sure, he's a bit of a blow-hard, but his analysis is thought provoking. I see value in disagreeing with or doubting so-called "experts" and doing my own research to confirm or disprove their claims. If everyone in the echo chamber nods in agreement, we dont learn anything nor do we uncover the deliberate obfuscation perpetrated by big government or big business. If you accept everything at face value, you're often misled for someone's benefit other than your own.
Click to expand...
Can’t that be done without pretending like everyone else in stupid for not seeing it your way?
 
moparrob66 said:
I see value in disagreeing with or doubting so-called "experts" and doing my own research to confirm or disprove their claims.
Click to expand...
We have experts for a reason. Not many of us are actually equipped to do our own primary research. What most people seem to consider "doing their own research" is scrolling through YouTube until they find a crackpot who supports their own preconceptions.

"Doing your own research" here would involve interviewing those involved, examining the wreckage directly, performing teardowns and metallurgical testing. Is that realistic?
 
1RTK1 said:
Not a fan boy by any means, just sick of the pile sh$t on mentality of to many people......
Click to expand...

Are you aware Gryder’s personal history? I don’t care for him in general based on publicly available information in the form of restraining orders, criminal activity, civil lawsuits, and judgements against him.

One of any of the above is excusable. Multiples in multiple categories is a trend. If only he could apply the AQP concept to his life choices, I’d probably have a better opinion of him. As for what, if any, positive influence he has, it’s like the white speck on top of a pile of chicken crap. It’s still crap.
 
Whenever I hear "doing your own research" I immediately jump to conspiracy theorist.

Disagreeing with everything the NTSB does or says and thinking you can do better with little more than speculation and a banjo is a little anti-authority no? By the shear volume of incidents he's been a part of is proof he's more of a hazard.
 
moparrob66 said:
I dont mind DG. Sure, he's a bit of a blow-hard, but his analysis is thought provoking. I see value in disagreeing with or doubting so-called "experts" and doing my own research to confirm or disprove their claims. If everyone in the echo chamber nods in agreement, we dont learn anything nor do we uncover the deliberate obfuscation perpetrated by big government or big business. If you accept everything at face value, you're often misled for someone's benefit other than your own.
Click to expand...
<sigh>

Some folks consider Alex Jones’ analysis to be thought provoking as well.
 
Yes, Gryder calls out Lockheed for needlessly requiring locking the tailwheel for takeoff and landing. They just did not have the proper skills to safely fly their airplane.

Gryder calls out Beechcraft for needlessly requiring locking their tailwheel for takeoff and landing. They just do not have the proper skills to fly their airplane.

The general population of pilots flying Electra's or Beech 18's who just might not be as perfect tailwheel pilots as Gryder, should ignore the POH, and fly unlocked, as that is an un needed feature.

Those manufacturers may have found that the only way they could meet safe performance standards of the day with designs that were prone to ground loop, was adding a locking feature to the tailwheel, as many other designs have, before and after.

Gryder also pronounces that if the tailwheel had been locked, that would not have changed the outcome in this "event". The tailwheel was on the ground before the turn began, how could being locked fail to reduce the turning rate? They may have even remained on the runway, or ended in the shallow ditch.

This seems to me a perfect example of why we should NOT follow Gryders advice, especially if it is different from the POH.

My previous post on this thread, I considered that the strut rebuild on the right side may have compromised the right brake, and Gryder might have had no effect on the outcome, but the unlocked tailwheel issue changed my mind on that.

He is, of course, certain that he is still right, and a locked tailwheel would not have helped,oring the
 
Does Gryder withhold evidence from himself now too? Has he not seen the video of his own crash where the tailwheel goes bezerk?
 
geezer said:
Yes, Gryder calls out Lockheed for needlessly requiring locking the tailwheel for takeoff and landing. They just did not have the proper skills to safely fly their airplane.

Gryder calls out Beechcraft for needlessly requiring locking their tailwheel for takeoff and landing. They just do not have the proper skills to fly their airplane.

The general population of pilots flying Electra's or Beech 18's who just might not be as perfect tailwheel pilots as Gryder, should ignore the POH, and fly unlocked, as that is an un needed feature.

Those manufacturers may have found that the only way they could meet safe performance standards of the day with designs that were prone to ground loop, was adding a locking feature to the tailwheel, as many other designs have, before and after.

Gryder also pronounces that if the tailwheel had been locked, that would not have changed the outcome in this "event". The tailwheel was on the ground before the turn began, how could being locked fail to reduce the turning rate? They may have even remained on the runway, or ended in the shallow ditch.

This seems to me a perfect example of why we should NOT follow Gryders advice, especially if it is different from the POH.

My previous post on this thread, I considered that the strut rebuild on the right side may have compromised the right brake, and Gryder might have had no effect on the outcome, but the unlocked tailwheel issue changed my mind on that.

He is, of course, certain that he is still right, and a locked tailwheel would not have helped,oring the
Click to expand...
My prediction is that the NTSB determines probable cause to be the instructor's decision to initiate a turn off the runway at too high of a speed, combined with the instructor's failure to ensure the tailwheel was locked, as recommended by the manufacturer.

Gryder will of course proclaim that this is all b******* and the NTSB is railroading him like they do every time he's involved in an accident. His acolytes will lap this up, neglecting to observe that most pilots don't get railroaded by the NTSB every time they're involved in an accident, because most pilots aren't regularly involved in accidents.
 
On beech 18's the tail wheel retracts, so if it doesn't trail something is gonna break when you go gear up. Not sure if the Electra does or not.
 
Mikey52 said:
On beech 18's the tail wheel retracts, so if it doesn't trail something is gonna break when you go gear up. Not sure if the Electra does or not.
Click to expand...
The Lockheed 10 and 12 tailwheels does not retract.
 
Last edited:
I wouldnt say I'm a fan of Alex Jones nor Dan Gryder. Theyre both trying to make money by presenting their analysis of current events. Sometimes they exaggerate, sometimes even defame, like many talking heads in all sorts of media. They raise questions I cant immediately answer or never pondered, so I learn more about the topic theyre discussing. I spent enough time as a Cop to know that just because a government agency put it into a report, it isnt necessarily true or factual without an agenda driving it. Does that make me a conspiracy theorist?

I've found that folks fond of applying that label get unduly upset with anyone who questions something they agree with. Its usually a term of mudslingers or yellow journalists, so I avoid using it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top