Fatal ICON A5 crash

Palmpilot said:
Apparently there is such a thing as a 172 on floats. Not sure how much in the way of safety statistics are available though.

http://www.wipaire.com/myaircraft/cessna/172/
Click to expand...

As far as I know, there were factory 172 float planes too. There are also 150s on floats.

So back to my previous statement, compare apples to apples. The 172 needs to be on floats to have a more accurate comparison.
 
Insurance data does not support the concept that amphibs are 'safer' than land-planes.
 
RudyP said:
This argument is funny to watch. I can see both sides but some of you seem to be talking past each other. Your post sums up one side of it and the following would sum up TexDeuce's argument:
"If Bob Hoover were to fly each plane in the exact same manner (presumably in the manner that the C172 is typically operated, since you couldn't operate the C172 in the full envelope of the Icon) , in which plane would he have lived longer?"

Sure, its a hypothetical and some of you will say "but they won't be flown in the same manner" and that's fine but that isn't the point TexDeuce is making. He's just saying the hardware itself (not talking about the pilot) has more intrinsic safety elements than other types. That's it.

* of course that presumes that some major design flaw does not come to light but so far there is no evidence of such.

BTW- I don't really have a point of view on this debate, just trying to clarify it for others.
Click to expand...

^^^^^^ I couldn't have said it better myself. You get it. Good post.

James - I really don't need to respond as you are arguing against points I am not making so there is not much to be said on that. I don't disagree with what you are saying but it is a tangent not relevant to the point I am making. The seperate point being "intended use" and the "marketing". In which I agree with the points you are making. Nothing you said has been off base other than it not addressing the point I am making.

However, you are assuming everyone that owns one will use it as a jet ski (they might). But probably not all. This entire premise I am arguing assumes the plane is flown in the same way. So compared to a Cessna we would compare it to flying an A5 like you would the Cessna. No rule says you have to do water landings in it.
 
Last edited:
TexDeuce said:
If someone said they wanted the safest two seat cruising plane that they could find to fly as safe as possible in low risk flight, how could you tell them anything but the A5? Again, this assumes they will be the same trained pilot and behave in the same manner no matter the airplane.
Click to expand...

Remember what was the exact question that TexDeuce answered to him self wih A5?
Well, my answer to same question is C172 or PA28. Nothing to do with amphibian mission.


(For god's sake, yes, both have 4 seats. Please: A. Remove the back seats. B. Label them "INOP" or C. Dont use them if you dont want or need it. )
 
weilke said:
Insurance data does not support the concept that amphibs are 'safer' than land-planes.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone with a little seaplane time would argue that point! :)

In just the time that this thread has been running its course I can think of one amphibian incident where the plane got flipped due to forgetting to put the wheels up. That's probably a good part of the reason why amphibious airplanes are hard to insure, as James already alluded to.
 
mondtster said:
I don't think anyone with a little seaplane time would argue that point! :)

In just the time that this thread has been running its course I can think of one amphibian incident where the plane got flipped due to forgetting to put the wheels up. That's probably a good part of the reason why amphibious airplanes are hard to insure, as James already alluded to.
Click to expand...

Some of the flying boats are tolerant to leaving the gear down. Still, it's a plane, not a boat. Flotsam, logs, boats all this other stuff on the water along with bad weather while tied down on the dock all claim floatplanes. The idea that 'you have all those lakes as emergency landing sites' addresses a very uncommon cause for aircraft accidents.
History has also shown that for every stall or spin resistant design, there is a pilot capable of finding the niche in the envelope where that is not true.
 
TexDeuce said:
^^^^^^ I couldn't have said it better myself. You get it. Good post.

James - I really don't need to respond as you are arguing against points I am not making so there is not much to be said on that. I don't disagree with what you are saying but it is a tangent not relevant to the point I am making. The seperate point being "intended use" and the "marketing". In which I agree with the points you are making. Nothing you said has been off base other than it not addressing the point I am making.

However, you are assuming everyone that owns one will use it as a jet ski (they might). But probably not all. This entire premise I am arguing assumes the plane is flown in the same way. So compared to a Cessna we would compare it to flying an A5 like you would the Cessna. No rule says you have to do water landings in it.
Click to expand...

Agreed, kinda ;)

I wish insurance thought like you, even if in promise to never go on water, even if based on the time of year all the water is froze, if my skywagon has its amphibs on my rates are WAAAAAY more, and that ain't some AOPA insurance ether.

And unlike my skywagon, that A5 is, and always will be, a amphib.

Most of the places amphibs/float planes get in trouble most of those saftey features don't mean jack.

But I do get your point, air work wise it's probably quite safe, sadly though most accidents are takeoff and landing, and take off and landing in a amphib is probably the most risky airframe for take offs and landings.
 
So with all this doom and gloom, this is a good point to add, amphib flying is BY FAR the most fun you can have in a airplane, like it's not even a debate, amphibs are 1 part freedom and 1 part aviation, if you ever get the chance to fly a amphib, or even straight floats, it will ruin the rest of aviation for you as it blows everything else away!!
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    175.9 KB · Views: 62
Still can't legally land on public water here on CO because our legislature is made up of morons. Yay. 49 out of 50 States allow it, and we get to continue to look like idiots until the next legislative session where rational people get to try again.
 
James331 said:
So with all this doom and gloom, this is a good point to add, amphib flying is BY FAR the most fun you can have in a airplane, like it's not even a debate, amphibs are 1 part freedom and 1 part aviation, if you ever get the chance to fly a amphib, or even straight floats, it will ruin the rest of aviation for you as it blows everything else away!!
Click to expand...

How the hell do you fly it sitting out there on the float?! ;)
 
coloradobluesky said:
I thought Colorado has a reservoir where it was legal to land a Seaplane on down by Rocky Ford, east of Pueblo on Lake Meredith. I know they had a fly in there May 20, 2017.

https://hangar.aopa.org/events/item/50/247
Click to expand...

Private lake. The organizers are pretty much purposely taunting the stupid State legislature by holding it there. Or more marketing-esque: "Showing [the idiots] it can be done safely."

They're having to land the aircraft at an airport and have the State invasive species boating inspections done, so it's pretty much an amphibious only event right now. No true float-only aircraft.
 
Is anyone else unable to get on Icon's website? After some point yesterday afternoon I wasn't able to get on their website anymore... I've been periodically checking to see if they would have any updates or news
 
Tantalum said:
Is anyone else unable to get on Icon's website? After some point yesterday afternoon I wasn't able to get on their website anymore... I've been periodically checking to see if they would have any updates or news
Click to expand...
Must be user error.

Works for me.
 
Many of ICON's promotional videos glorify very low-level flight with steep banked maneuvering over and near trees and rock formations. From a safety cultural perspective, it doesn't seem too far fetched that the this accident may have occurred as a result. Sounds like time for Safety Culture Assessment and a SMS program before starting more deliveries.
 
Pilotgil said:
Many of ICON's promotional videos glorify very low-level flight with steep banked maneuvering over and near trees and rock formations. From a safety cultural perspective, it doesn't seem too far fetched that the this accident may have occurred as a result. Sounds like time for Safety Culture Assessment and a SMS program before starting more deliveries.
Click to expand...

Do a YouTube search for Searey videos. You'll see more of the same low-level flying. As long as they are no hazard to other, I could care less.
 
Having run professional flight departments, I actually care. This was the Chief Test Pilot and the Chief Engineer, not Icon #2756 flown by some yahoo with 200 hours TT and cash to burn. It matters - especially to those left behind like spouses, kids, and the bad PR.
 
Pilotgil said:
Having run professional flight departments, I actually care. This was the Chief Test Pilot and the Chief Engineer, not Icon #2756 flown by some yahoo with 200 hours TT and cash to burn. It matters - especially to those left behind like spouses, kids, and the bad PR.
Click to expand...

So....if it was a 200hr PPL with money, it would matter less? matter less to said spouse and kids?
 
James331 said:
So....if it was a 200hr PPL with money, it would matter less? matter less to said spouse and kids?
Click to expand...

No, but if these two can't get it right, the carnage among their targeted 200 hour pilots might be considerable.
 
It appears the bottom line is - even experienced Pilots can make stupid mistakes..
 
ElPaso Pilot said:
No, but if these two can't get it right, the carnage among their targeted 200 hour pilots might be considerable.
Click to expand...

Even high time pilots make bad choices from time to time, usually they get away with it, sometimes they dont
 
James331 said:
Even high time pilots make bad choices from time to time, usually they get away with it, sometimes they dont
Click to expand...

A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations which require the use of his superior skill.

Frank Borman

Cheers
 
I did some hiking on a trail starting just on the downside of the dam at Berryessa, one ridgeline away from the accident site last week. I saw an Icon buzzing overhead. High overhead.
 
Pilotgil said:
Having run professional flight departments, I actually care. This was the Chief Test Pilot and the Chief Engineer, not Icon #2756 flown by some yahoo with 200 hours TT and cash to burn. It matters - especially to those left behind like spouses, kids, and the bad PR.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to come across as being crass about the loss of life. My point is there are a lot of experienced pilots out there doing similar things in similar aircraft. What they do with their aircraft is their business, as long as they are not a hazard to others.
 
Pilotgil said:
Many of ICON's promotional videos glorify very low-level flight with steep banked maneuvering over and near trees and rock formations. From a safety cultural perspective, it doesn't seem too far fetched that the this accident may have occurred as a result. Sounds like time for Safety Culture Assessment and a SMS program before starting more deliveries.
Click to expand...
The thing is, activities that are fun are not necessarily safe. Often, as the fun scale goes up, the safe scale goes down. When selling vehicles like the ICON and other fun machines, the marketer treads a fine line between attracting people who want the thrill, vs the safety factor. This extends to marketing for many other adventure activities.
 
Everskyward said:
The thing is, activities that are fun are not necessarily safe. Often, as the fun scale goes up, the safe scale goes down. When selling vehicles like the ICON and other fun machines, the marketer treads a fine line between attracting people who want the thrill, vs the safety factor. This extends to marketing for many other adventure activities.
Click to expand...

Not to mention that I believe some of the flying is done the way it is to put perspective in the photos and videos used for marketing. I'd be willing to bet that at least some of the same people complaining about how Icon's photos and videos glorify low level contact flying would whine about the "lame" brochures and videos if they were shot against a big blue sky void of things in the background.

I quickly perused Cessna's photos on their website and found some similarities. Yet nobody is complaining about how Cessna is marketing the Caravan.
 
X3 Skier said:


A superior pilot uses his superior judgment to avoid situations which require the use of his superior skill.

Frank Borman

Cheers
Click to expand...

I always thought this one was more eerie and a better warning, considering... if we are going with astronaut/pilot quotes.

“Death is the handmaiden of the pilot. Sometimes it comes by accident, sometimes by an act of God.”
- Albert Scott Crossfield

Or more interestingly, in an interview a day before the flight...

"I want to go in the air, not a bathtub."

But his real last words on the planet were...

"Atlanta, this is Seven Nine X-ray. I'd like to deviate south, weather."
 
Final report was released yesterday.

Nauga,
reading and heeding
 
I wonder that once the pilot realized he flew into that canyon how much water he had left in front of him to sit it down rather than attempting the turn or if he was too far in when he realized it.
 
Shepherd said:
I see what you did there.
But you need the sound track
Click to expand...

One of my prize Oshkosh acquisitions is a mint condition first edition hardcover of that book I found in the Flymarket about a quarter century ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top