Draco crash on takeoff 16 Sept 2019

Zeldman said:
That really caught my attention. Always ask the tower. Worse thing they can do is laugh at you.
Click to expand...
thats not the worst thing, i am pretty sure thats a regular thing whenever i call them up :p
 
Hmm. What does a guy do with an experimental exhibition class airplane after he retires it from exhibitions?
 
Stewartb said:
Hmm. What does a guy do with an experimental exhibition class airplane after he retires it from exhibitions?
Click to expand...

Finds a 501(c)(3) to which to donate it to, and take a tax write-off?
 
flhrci said:
Don't know but I am sure we, err, the insurance will pay for a brand new plane for him. No sympathy other than no one got hurt. Probably has sponsors to pay for it also.
Click to expand...

Insurance will pay for a brand new plane for him? Really?
I didn't know you could "Buy a brand new airplane like that"
They may pay him the value of it but he would have to build another one himself....
 
They probably had an "agreed value" on the plane and will write him a check.
 
Frankly I'm surprised it was insured at all. It's hard enough to find insurance for some common proven airplanes much less a creation like this. I guess with enough money someone will take the gamble and now they will take the loss.
 
pigpenracing said:
It is a one off airplane... There is no value to compare it to.
The 'Agreed" value is what you and the insurance company decide it will be insured for.
Click to expand...


I have some boats that are very low in production with no “book” value. I call the insurance and give them a value and get a price based on that value. When I totaled one of them I got the price that I gave them because that’s what I was paying for.
 
Did anyone go find the reported weather & winds at the time of the accident? Yeah, not cool the plane is lost, sad way to go.
 
sourdough44 said:
Did anyone go find the reported weather & winds at the time of the accident? Yeah, not cool the plane is lost, sad way to go.
Click to expand...

I got this info from another forum: 161655Z 22024G38KT.
 
MtnMarcus said:
I got this info from another forum: 161655Z 22024G38KT.
Click to expand...

And I believe he was on runway 26. Crosswind component was pretty huge.
870103e345890fa98303eb5ef893be3b.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
Stewartb said:
All he needed was to keep it on the ground until the leeward wing was responsive.
Click to expand...

Yep there was no need to pop the flaps for a short takeoff in those conditions but I suspect he may have been influenced/affected by the whole 'cult-of-airplane' display thing he had going with Draco. Maybe had a hard time shutting down the display mentality.
 
Stewartb said:
Wreck a million and a half dollar airplane, crawl out, what's the first thing you do? Make a selfie movie, apparently. That's the last thing I'd think of.
Click to expand...
If you're a YouTube celebrity, that's exactly what you do. And you make it just over ten minutes for maximum monetization.

Oh, and as to admitting fault, what he did was make a very plausible case for how the crash was caused by negligence, which is the opposite of being intentional. It's essentially a ten-minute dissertation on why insurance should cover the loss....
 
Peter Anderson said:
And I believe he was on runway 26. Crosswind component was pretty huge.
870103e345890fa98303eb5ef893be3b.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Click to expand...

That's a sporty crosswind and a no for me. For crosswind calculations I do them in my head when about to take off if I need to. I subtract the wind direction from the runway heading and use the following multipliers to get my x wind component. For (in degrees) 15 I use 0.25 for 30 I use 0.5 for 45 I use 0.7 for 60 I use 0.9. It may be off a few knots but it's close enough.
 
Stewartb said:
Wreck a million and a half dollar airplane, crawl out, what's the first thing you do? Make a selfie movie, apparently. That's the last thing I'd think of.
Click to expand...

Mike’s no dummy. As evidenced by this thread and countless other discussions throughout social media, he’s already monetizing the incident.
 
Lindberg said:
If you're a YouTube celebrity, that's exactly what you do. And you make it just over ten minutes for maximum monetization.

Oh, and as to admitting fault, what he did was make a very plausible case for how the crash was caused by negligence, which is the opposite of being intentional. It's essentially a ten-minute dissertation on why insurance should cover the loss....
Click to expand...
Your cynicism doesn't fit in this case. The Pateys are very energetic, very driven, and yet very humble.
 
Of course he is monetizing... but in this case, he is monetizing in an extremely classy way to the betterment of all pilots. How many leaders in any field whether it be politics, universities, corporations, sports and yes even social media "influencers" such as Mike actually take 100% of the blame?

I think anyone inside and outside of the flying industry should take a pause and reflect on the fact that this man is taking 100% responsibility for his failure and he wants us all who fly to learn from his near tragedy. I'll take this as a win/win... no one got hurt, and we are all reminded in a very public way, in real time, that pushing limits is stupid.

His stock went way up in my book. Imagine if we had 100 Mikes in Congress? Pinch me.
 
PaulS said:
That's a sporty crosswind and a no for me. For crosswind calculations I do them in my head when about to take off if I need to. I subtract the wind direction from the runway heading and use the following multipliers to get my x wind component. For (in degrees) 15 I use 0.25 for 30 I use 0.5 for 45 I use 0.7 for 60 I use 0.9. It may be off a few knots but it's close enough.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the post....Pretty darn close if interpolating. This is what it's all about. Sharing the knowledge!
 
Lindberg said:
If you're a YouTube celebrity, that's exactly what you do. And you make it just over ten minutes for maximum monetization.

Oh, and as to admitting fault, what he did was make a very plausible case for how the crash was caused by negligence, which is the opposite of being intentional. It's essentially a ten-minute dissertation on why insurance should cover the loss....
Click to expand...
In the video did you notice how he was able to keep the camera/mic into the wind? :D
 
Kenny Phillips said:
All events of that type are ground loops. It can be even be done in a tricycle gear plane.
Click to expand...
Watch it again. Only one wing was flying. It started flying when the flaps came down (a classic short field technique) and the upwind wing wanted to fly. That's a stall-spin. It is NOT a classic ground loop. Without the addition of flaps he likely had adequate rudder to keep it straight. The flaps changed the AOA and that set up the outcome. I fly a slat wing Cub with big long double slotted flaps. Crosswinds are the enemy. When in doubt, leave the flaps up. It's not a secret.

I'm tired of this thread. Y'all have at it.
 
Fiveslide said:
What funny? Truly asking, did I miss a joke in the video or here?
Click to expand...
The post above mine linked the video for like the 6th time in the thread. Must be a new record! And yeah he did it to be funny as well.
 
RoscoeT said:
Yep there was no need to pop the flaps for a short takeoff in those conditions but I suspect he may have been influenced/affected by the whole 'cult-of-airplane' display thing he had going with Draco. Maybe had a hard time shutting down the display mentality.
Click to expand...

How much time do you have in turbine wilgas?
 
simtech said:
The post above mine linked the video for like the 6th time in the thread. Must be a new record! And yeah he did it to be funny as well.
Click to expand...

Arrr, that went over me head.
 
Couple thoughts. The Patey's seem like good really hardworking people that have done well by themselves as a result of their hard work. I doubt the video monetization is worth all that much in the big scheme of things so that idea is silly. Now I do agree that the video is a good idea for several other reasons some mentioned above but additionally he already has demonstrated the mindset the FAA is looking for in these types of situations.

I do find it refreshing when people own up to their mistakes. He screwed up. It happens. Thankfully this time nobody was hurt. Learn from it and do better next time. All of us but maybe a few here in this thread are human.
 
James331 said:
How much time do you have in turbine wilgas?
Click to expand...

None, but curious about your expertise on how this airplane would benefit from being popped off the ground at min. airspeed in strong x-wind/gusty conditions. I've flown lots of different tailwheel (including STOL planes) with flaps, and curious how the laws of physics make exceptions for this airplane.
 
RoscoeT said:
None, but curious about your expertise on how this airplane would benefit from being popped off the ground at min. airspeed in strong x-wind/gusty conditions. I've flown lots of different tailwheel (including STOL planes) with flaps, and curious how the laws of physics make exceptions for this airplane.
Click to expand...

Seeing I have no time in that very unique aircraft I’m not in a position to say.

Why don’t you email the pilot and ask him?
 
RoscoeT said:
Not in the Draco cult, don't care.
Click to expand...

Nor am I, however it’s sad when one pilot with zero clue about a VERY specialized aircraft try’s to say how the pilot who was in a crash should have flown his own airplane which he also built and competed and won in.
 
James331 said:
Nor am I, however it’s sad when one pilot with zero clue about a VERY specialized aircraft try’s to say how the pilot who was in a crash should have flown his own airplane which he also built and competed and won in.
Click to expand...

He competed in and won high x-wind take off competitions?? :rolleyes:
 
Stewartb said:
Watch it again. Only one wing was flying. It started flying when the flaps came down (a classic short field technique) and the upwind wing wanted to fly. That's a stall-spin. It is NOT a classic ground loop. Without the addition of flaps he likely had adequate rudder to keep it straight. The flaps changed the AOA and that set up the outcome. I fly a slat wing Cub with big long double slotted flaps. Crosswinds are the enemy. When in doubt, leave the flaps up. It's not a secret.

I'm tired of this thread. Y'all have at it.
Click to expand...

I concur. Additionally, i would say the application of flaps pretty much blanked out his elevator and added unnecessary drag, killing whatever lift the downwind wing was producing...

Hey, it's an experimental airplane without a comprehensive test flight program. He's been busy keeping up with the show schedules and having fun with it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top