Person jumps from aircraft landing at RDU

Way too many unknowns. It is no surprise that we haven’t heard from the surviving pilot. At this point I’m sure investigators are still trying to determine if this was an accident, a suicide, or a crime. Just sad to see a 23 year old have his life cut short.
 
There's a very real possibility that the remaining pilot succumbed to his own biases and pressures when he chose to use the word "jumped". Maybe it didn't occur to him in the moment that the dude fell by accident. In other words, he may not have any more idea than any of us do what the victim's intent was. And isn't the flight deck closed off from the rest of the plane, e.g. he may not have had visibility into the developing situation?
 
MFE said:
There's a very real possibility that the remaining pilot succumbed to his own biases and pressures when he chose to use the word "jumped". Maybe it didn't occur to him in the moment that the dude fell by accident. In other words, he may not have any more idea than any of us do what the victim's intent was. And isn't the flight deck closed off from the rest of the plane, e.g. he may not have had visibility into the developing situation?
Click to expand...
No idea if the guy was looking but the ramp is easily viewed from the cockpit.
 
There are two accidents/incidents. One is an airplane makes a hard landing, loses its gear, then makes an emergency landing. The other is a required crew member ends up on the ground 20 miles away from the airport. Too bad we couldn’t have separated the two events into two different discussions.
 
MFE said:
There's a very real possibility that the remaining pilot succumbed to his own biases and pressures when he chose to use the word "jumped". Maybe it didn't occur to him in the moment that the dude fell by accident. In other words, he may not have any more idea than any of us do what the victim's intent was. And isn't the flight deck closed off from the rest of the plane, e.g. he may not have had visibility into the developing situation?
Click to expand...

They’re about 10 mins from (an emergency) landing. Guy gets up out of his seat and there’s no conversation? “Where are you going?”
“I’m going to take a look at the back.”

Or “I’m outta here.” Or nothing at all (and you can draw assumptions from that). And of course, there was the initial report that said he was trying to make it into a lake.

Even if there was zero conversation, the guy just silently unclipped and walked out the back, there is a lot of inference that can be made and own biases and pressures are allowable. This doesn’t have to be some nebulous mystery.
 
How would the pilot come up with the lake thing unless the jumper said something to reference it?

what are the odds there were any communications once the jumper got out of his seat? Is there any equipment in that craft that would allow continued comms once he walked away from the flight deck?
 
My read - The pilot knows something he doesn't want to say and made up a bad lie.

Reading between the lines, I believe they planned together for the copilot to get up and go look at the gear. The copilot was holding on, the ramp opened, and the copilot fell out. But the pilot doesn't want to be excoriated for what happened on his airplane.
 
bflynn said:
My read - The pilot knows something he doesn't want to say and made up a bad lie.

Reading between the lines, I believe they planned together for the copilot to get up and go look at the gear. The copilot was holding on, the ramp opened, and the copilot fell out. But the pilot doesn't want to be excoriated for what happened on his airplane.
Click to expand...


Plausible but boring. Wild speculation is more fun.
 
bflynn said:
My read - The pilot knows something he doesn't want to say and made up a bad lie.

Reading between the lines, I believe they planned together for the copilot to get up and go look at the gear. The copilot was holding on, the ramp opened, and the copilot fell out. But the pilot doesn't want to be excoriated for what happened on his airplane.
Click to expand...
Bingo
 
bflynn said:
My read - The pilot knows something he doesn't want to say and made up a bad lie.

Reading between the lines, I believe they planned together for the copilot to get up and go look at the gear. The copilot was holding on, the ramp opened, and the copilot fell out. But the pilot doesn't want to be excoriated for what happened on his airplane.
Click to expand...
And that totally reduces the chance of him being named in the lawsuit to, say, 100%.
 
Juan Brown has chimed in on this accident on his blancolirio blog:



I disagree with Juan’s theory that the co-pilot was trying to view the right main from the ramp. It appears from Juan’s video that to see the right main from the ramp, one would need to be half way down the ramp and just about “hanging in the breeze”. I think a more plausible explanation is that the co-pilot was trying to view the right main from the door located in the right side of the aircraft, just aft of the cockpit. I’m told by friends who have flown the CASA that, although difficult, this door can be forced open in flight far enough to view the right main gear.

For the sake of discussion, let's just say that the co-pilot was pushing hard on the right forward door to take a peek at the right main. Trying to be helpful, the pilot (captain) puts the plane into a left forward slip, disrupting the air flow down the right side of the fuselage. Meanwhile, the co-pilot, pushing the door against the force of the air flow finds himself catapulting out the door when the air flow is disrupted. Speculation, but certainly possible ... I think.

At this time, I don’t buy the suicide theory.

Does anyone on this forum know whether or not the pilot has made a statement to the FAA/NTSB, or has “lawyered up” and is not speaking?
 
Whole lotta spectaculation going on here. Think I’ll wait for some more facts. Early in any criminal investigation I was in, until you have all the evidence (or as much as possible), you ain’t got much. Horrible way to go. Wouldn’t be my choice to voluntarily check out. Just my opinion. Your mileage may vary.
 
What is the likelihood of a CASA having a cockpit voice recorder?
 
bflynn said:
My read - The pilot knows something he doesn't want to say and made up a bad lie.

Reading between the lines, I believe they planned together for the copilot to get up and go look at the gear. The copilot was holding on, the ramp opened, and the copilot fell out. But the pilot doesn't want to be excoriated for what happened on his airplane.
Click to expand...

That sounds plausible. But it doesn't sound logical. Even if the two pilots agreed that one of them going back to look was a good plan, it would have been smart for them to also agree to do a little CYA about it as well. Along the lines of "Well, he wanted to check, and I didn't want him to, but he just got up and went back." It's not like the remaining guy at the controls could stop flying and try to stop him.

An no matter how you slice it, it seems clear to me that the guy that went back did so out of his own choice. That brings me back to believing he was checking on the gear. Innocent/honorable unless proven otherwise.
 
How easy would it be for the pilot flying to watch what’s going on, in the back? Isn’t it possible that the pilot might not have seen the copilot as he exited? Maybe not even discover for a while that he’s no longer on board?
 
Capngrog said:
I think a more plausible explanation is that the co-pilot was trying to view the right main from the door located in the right side of the aircraft, just aft of the cockpit.
Click to expand...

The main problem with the door theory is that all doors were closed when the aircraft landed. Since doors are manually operated, the pilot would have had to leave the controls to shut it. OTOH the ramp is controlled from the cockpit.
 
NoHeat said:
How easy would it be for the pilot flying to watch what’s going on, in the back? Isn’t it possible that the pilot might not have seen the copilot as he exited? Maybe not even discover for a while that he’s no longer on board?
Click to expand...
Likely has a mirror installed. I’ve flown the Casa among other types doing that contract work. I’ve flown out of Raeford too.
Usually we have a mirror and it becomes part of your scan when someone is back there.
 
NoHeat said:
How easy would it be for the pilot flying to watch what’s going on, in the back? Isn’t it possible that the pilot might not have seen the copilot as he exited? Maybe not even discover for a while that he’s no longer on board?
Click to expand...
Then where do “jumped for the lake” come from?
 
Salty said:
Then where do “jumped for the lake” come from?
Click to expand...

That’s what I keep getting hung up on. It could be an artifact of the game of operator that’s been going on, but if that turns out to be a real quote from the surviving pilot, things are a lot more complicated.
 
Ed Haywood said:
The main problem with the door theory is that all doors were closed when the aircraft landed. Since doors are manually operated, the pilot would have had to leave the controls to shut it. OTOH the ramp is controlled from the cockpit.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that from the overhead view of the accident airplane, the forward right door appears to be shut; however, the door could be shut and not latched, having been blown shut by the air flow along the fuselage. Note that from the bottom photo below, the latch appears to have been rotated downward into the unlatched position. Of course even if verified in the unlatched position, it is also possible that the pilot (captain) exited the airplane from that door and closed it without latching it.

My theory is based on speculation, but I guess I'm sticking to it because I just can't see a rational human being trying to view the right main gear from the ramp, when the right crew door was available. To view the gear from the ramp would require being about half way down the short ramp, a most precarious position.
View attachment 109459

upload_2022-8-6_15-41-29.png

I still can't buy the suicide theory at this point.
 
My upper photo, which showed the normally latched right side crew door, was somehow lost. Back to the "alien theory" posited early in this thread?
Or more likely, my incompetence with this computer stuff.
 
Flying Keys said:
That’s what I keep getting hung up on. It could be an artifact of the game of operator that’s been going on, but if that turns out to be a real quote from the surviving pilot, things are a lot more complicated.
Click to expand...

What if, and I am speculating here, what if the person that "jumped for the lake" did so because they wanted to say they were not the one that damaged the airplane. That they were never on the plane. And the pilot left in the plane said OK, he would take the hit because he was on more solid ground.

This could be a plan agreed on by both of them and when it went wrong...well there is only one person left to tell the story.
 
jallen0 said:
What if, and I am speculating here, what if the person that "jumped for the lake" did so because they wanted to say they were not the one that damaged the airplane. That they were never on the plane. And the pilot left in the plane said OK, he would take the hit because he was on more solid ground.

This could be a plan agreed on by both of them and when it went wrong...well there is only one person left to tell the story.
Click to expand...
Zero chance, gonna think.
 
jallen0 said:
What if, and I am speculating here, what if the person that "jumped for the lake" did so because they wanted to say they were not the one that damaged the airplane. That they were never on the plane. And the pilot left in the plane said OK, he would take the hit because he was on more solid ground.
Click to expand...

There is no way anyone on that plane thought a jump from that altitude would be survivable. Lake or no lake.
 
I’m still stuck on how (and what part of) the right MLG separated from the airframe.

Loosing a wheel on the first sortie after mx changed the tire is way different that a lot of other things that could have happened.
 
Capngrog said:
Yes, that's the point, and it would be obvious to most sentient human beings.
Unless, per my speculation in Post #218 above ...
Click to expand...
As a former .mil aviator and and having done a ramp ride or two, my only question is around thought process that results in not donning the harness as I approach the ramp. Sure, I can put my hand on the top half that opens inward and that’s relatively safe in a non-turbulent environment, but to take a gander at the MLG safely, I can only envision being on my belly just to alleviate line of sight problems while mitigating risk to me.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Think big!

View attachment 109472
Click to expand...

c130-png.109472


Back in the 1960s, Lockheed actually built a flying radio-controlled model of a C-130 seaplane. It was not on floats as shown above, but was more of a "flying boat", with primary flotation being provided by the hull (fuselage) itself. While a student at Georgia Tech, I was at the low speed wind tunnel facility one day while they performing flutter tests on a scaled-down L-1011 wing. I wandered into a back room and was blown away by the sight of the 20 ft. wingspan, 4 engine flying model of a C-130 float plane. I was told by one of the staff that flight testing of the model was done on Lake Lanier, just north of Atlanta and that Lockheed had decided to abandon the study. A few years ago, I found mention of this model in the excellent book, ""HERK" Hero of the Skies".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top