Another crash at KRNO

DesertNomad

DesertNomad

Pattern Altitude
Joined
Jul 5, 2013
Messages
2,464
Location
Northern NV
Display Name
Display name:
DesertNomad
The second crash in two weeks.

Possibly a PA-28R-201T (Turbo Arrow), N821ET, based in Albuquerque.

Taking off on 25 with wind 260 @ 12G29 on an IFR flight plan.

He reported a problem just after takeoff and ended up inverted in long-term parking (about 1/2 mile north of the "7" number). They are reporting 3 people killed.

Happened about 18:12 this evening.
 
Last edited:
AIRCRAFT CRASHED OFF THE END OF THE RUNWAY INTO A PARKING LOT, THE 3 PERSONS ON BOARD WERE FATALLY INJURED, RENO, NV
 
Whole new meaning to long term parking :(

RIP
 
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/search?q=N821ET

From the article:
Ed was always there. Generous, big heart, 400-pound rugby player, great athlete. Everybody loved Ed," he said.

so, 400lbs, plus the pilot plus the woman who they caught out on bounty?

That's a lot of weight there, wonder if Ed and the woman were in the back seat and caused a CG issue.
 
Not a fan of bounty hunters. It's a State loophole. This one is one such example of why. Who is gonna make the fugitive whole while in the custody of this citizen? If the state had crashed the airplane, the family would be whole. But with this bush league stuff, the woman got sentenced to death against her will without due process and the government gets to walk under what I would describe as a Pontius Pilatus doctrine.

Taking people into custody shouldn't be viewed so flippantly. You don't automatically become cattle because the state wishes to apprehend you but doesn't want to endure the cost. So much for first world legal system. Complete tragedy and another loss for our supposed legal moral high ground.
 
hindsight2020 said:
Not a fan of bounty hunters. It's a State loophole. This one is one such example of why. Who is gonna make the fugitive whole while in the custody of this citizen? If the state had crashed the airplane, the family would be whole. But with this bush league stuff, the woman got sentenced to death against her will without due process and the government gets to walk under what I would describe as a Pontius Pilatus doctrine.

Taking people into custody shouldn't be viewed so flippantly. You don't automatically become cattle because the state wishes to apprehend you but doesn't want to endure the cost. So much for first world legal system. Complete tragedy and another loss for our supposed legal moral high ground.
Click to expand...

:yawn:
 
hindsight2020 said:
Not a fan of bounty hunters. It's a State loophole. This one is one such example of why. Who is gonna make the fugitive whole while in the custody of this citizen? If the state had crashed the airplane, the family would be whole. But with this bush league stuff, the woman got sentenced to death against her will without due process and the government gets to walk under what I would describe as a Pontius Pilatus doctrine.

Taking people into custody shouldn't be viewed so flippantly. You don't automatically become cattle because the state wishes to apprehend you but doesn't want to endure the cost. So much for first world legal system. Complete tragedy and another loss for our supposed legal moral high ground.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt if the State crashed the airplane the family would be whole. States write themselves out of liability for all sorts of things all the time.

The family gets to hire an attorney and fight an entire office of them, paid for by their own taxes, to even have an attempt at being whole.

In this case, they can go after the pilot's estates N top of everything else.

You'd never be allowed to do that to a government pilot's family. Even if found to be grossly negligent, the taxpayers would be footing the bill for the settlement.

Right or wrong, they have more options for named defendants if it's not government transporting the prisoner.
 
midcap said:
http://www.kathrynsreport.com/search?q=N821ET

From the article:
Ed was always there. Generous, big heart, 400-pound rugby player, great athlete. Everybody loved Ed," he said.

so, 400lbs, plus the pilot plus the woman who they caught out on bounty?

That's a lot of weight there, wonder if Ed and the woman were in the back seat and caused a CG issue.
Click to expand...

Can a 400lbs guy even get into the back seat of an arrow?
 
hindsight2020 said:
Not a fan of bounty hunters. It's a State loophole. This one is one such example of why. Who is gonna make the fugitive whole while in the custody of this citizen? If the state had crashed the airplane, the family would be whole. But with this bush league stuff, the woman got sentenced to death against her will without due process and the government gets to walk under what I would describe as a Pontius Pilatus doctrine.

Taking people into custody shouldn't be viewed so flippantly. You don't automatically become cattle because the state wishes to apprehend you but doesn't want to endure the cost. So much for first world legal system. Complete tragedy and another loss for our supposed legal moral high ground.
Click to expand...

Or....you could just not skip out on bond...but that's none of my business (I need a Kermit the Frog meme).
 
FlySince9 said:
Can a 400lbs guy even get into the back seat of an arrow?
Click to expand...

Maybe he didn't. W&B would be a lot more favorable if he did. Still a LOT of weight in an Arrow between the three of them.
 
Pilawt said:
If he was in the front, was there room for full travel of the yoke?
Click to expand...

Good question, with the front seat all the way back I would think so. But 400 lbs is a lot of real estate. Don't know. Presumably he was in the airplane for the trip up. The seats do fold forward, so he could probably take the back. Maybe he did.

But what about on the return trip? Where do you put the detainee? Up front with access to the controls? Even handcuffed someone could wreak havoc. Which means either he was up front and she was in back, or they were both in the rear seats. 500+ lbs in the back could cause rearward CG issues. Then again 600 in the front would have issues too.

In the end we won't know what happened until the report comes out.
 
This accident could have been avoided altogether. All the "alleged suspect" had to do was not commit a crime, or at least not skip out on bail. Simple enough.

But then again, some people have to blame others for their own problems.
 
Zeldman said:
This accident could have been avoided altogether. All the "alleged suspect" had to do was not commit a crime, or at least not skip out on bail. Simple enough.

But then again, some people have to blame others for their own problems.
Click to expand...

Some anyone who commits a crime, no matter how minor and skips bail should reasonably foresee the possibility of dying in a plane crash and hence deserve it? Seems a trifle harsh to me, though I admit my sympathy goes down as the level of crime committed goes up.
 
Kristin said:
Some anyone who commits a crime, no matter how minor and skips bail should reasonably foresee the possibility of dying in a plane crash and hence deserve it? Seems a trifle harsh to me, though I admit my sympathy goes down as the level of crime committed goes up.
Click to expand...

Agreed.

For that matter, is it wise to transport an evading suspected criminal in a four seat GA aircraft to begin with?
 
I was looking at the POH of the plane in the crash and on the CG table, and I am not sure how they would arrange all that weight for the plane to fly safely.
 
Sac Arrow said:
Agreed.

For that matter, is it wise to transport an evading suspected criminal in a four seat GA aircraft to begin with?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't want to transport a prisoner in any plane where they could possibly reach the controls at a critical moment.
 
Kristin said:
I wouldn't want to transport a prisoner in any plane where they could possibly reach the controls at a critical moment.
Click to expand...

Agree. No way I would have a passenger that didn't want to be there. They wouldn't even need to reach the controls to cause a real problem in the air.
 
denverpilot said:
Handcuffs?
Click to expand...

If they're in the back by themselves, they could probably just unfasten their seat-belt and move their hands under their legs so they're now cuffed in the front. Then they could mess with the controls with their cuffed hands. Or they could just kick at the controls.
 
MassPilot said:
If they're in the back by themselves, they could probably just unfasten their seat-belt and move their hands under their legs so they're now cuffed in the front. Then they could mess with the controls with their cuffed hands. Or they could just kick at the controls.
Click to expand...

Leg shackles? ;)
 
Kristin said:
Some anyone who commits a crime, no matter how minor and skips bail should reasonably foresee the possibility of dying in a plane crash and hence deserve it? Seems a trifle harsh to me, though I admit my sympathy goes down as the level of crime committed goes up.
Click to expand...

You're right, it's much better to drive them several,hundred mikes in the backseat of a car. Have you looked at the highway accident data recently?
 
Kristin said:
I wouldn't want to transport a prisoner in any plane where they could possibly reach the controls at a critical moment.
Click to expand...

I have done it several times. Its called, restraints. The hands and feet are restrained, to the seat if I have to.

P.S. Can't drive a prisoner in about 90% of Alaska, flying is still the quickest way.
 
Last edited:
Kristin said:
Some anyone who commits a crime, no matter how minor and skips bail should reasonably foresee the possibility of dying in a plane crash and hence deserve it? Seems a trifle harsh to me, though I admit my sympathy goes down as the level of crime committed goes up.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you read into my statement anywhere that I said that person deserved to die for committing a crime and/or jumping bail. Nope, after a reread I still don't see it.

But, read slowly, slower, slower still, and see how I said that this particular accident could have been avoided if the "alleged suspect" had not committed a crime or jumped bail.
 
Zeldman said:
I don't see how you read into my statement anywhere that I said that person deserved to die for committing a crime and/or jumping bail. Nope, after a reread I still don't see it.

But, read slowly, slower, slower still, and see how I said that this particular accident could have been avoided if the "alleged suspect" had not committed a crime or jumped bail.
Click to expand...
Don't be silly. You actually expect someone to read and comprehend your post.
 
None of the names matching that pilot were even commercial pilots. The whole operation sounds pretty shaky. Most likely the bounty hunter, being dead now, is probably judgement proof.
 
Zeldman said:
No. Never did anywhere in my original post.

It is only implied in your world, I guess.
Click to expand...

And mine! There is a philosophical and legal concept called foreseeability. It has to do with the remoteness of the event to the action. You statement implied that she deserved what she got. However, the foreseeable fruits of a crime certainly extend to arrest, incarceration, etc. But unless she committed a capital crime, for which she probably wouldn't have gotten bail, death is not foreseeable as a result. It is certainly not foreseeable for jumping bail that one might be stuck in a small airplane flown by who knows? Now if she interfered with the controls, then she got what she deserved, but we don't know that.

I also have my doubts that this was a charter flight, so unless the bail bondsman owed or leased the plane, it may have been an illegal charter.
 
The wages of sin is death, and we all will die sooner or later for our sins.

They also could have been killed in a car or even a train. Does that mean no transportation should have been used at all?

You are putting words into my statement that just are not there.

Not lowering myself to your world.

Finished

(because I have enough respect for the rules of conduct to not take this to the spin zone mentality)
 
Kristin said:
And mine! There is a philosophical and legal concept called foreseeability. It has to do with the remoteness of the event to the action. You statement implied that she deserved what she got. However, the foreseeable fruits of a crime certainly extend to arrest, incarceration, etc. But unless she committed a capital crime, for which she probably wouldn't have gotten bail, death is not foreseeable as a result. It is certainly not foreseeable for jumping bail that one might be stuck in a small airplane flown by who knows? Now if she interfered with the controls, then she got what she deserved, but we don't know that.

I also have my doubts that this was a charter flight, so unless the bail bondsman owed or leased the plane, it may have been an illegal charter.
Click to expand...
Legal schmegal, Gus McRae knows what Zeldman meant. You ride with an outlaw, you die with an outlaw!
 
Zeldman said:
The wages of sin is death, and we all will die sooner or later for our sins.
Click to expand...

Sin or not, however such is defined, we will all surely die. Or was your point to preach a bit of gospel to us heathens?

They also could have been killed in a car or even a train. Does that mean no transportation should have been used at all?
Click to expand...

Would you still blame her death on her sin if she had been killed in a car crash?
 
Old Thread: Hello . There have been no replies in this thread for 365 days.
Content in this thread may no longer be relevant.
Perhaps it would be better to start a new thread instead.
Back
Top