Taylorcraft down California

There’s no FAA/NTSB preliminary report, right? The links way up page weren’t FAA or NTSB.

I read somewhere the crash sequence was an RC (maybe I read it here). Too much attention for this yahoo.
 
Possum said:
From YouTube comments:

The N number of the 1940 Taylorcraft is blurred on video shots of the rudder. Based on the video I have determined that he departed from Lompoc (KLPC). He took off on RW 7. Based on the position of the sun it was between 0930 and 1030 local (1730Z) in the morning. At 2:30 into video he is just NE of Los Alamos, north of the 101. If he was headed to Mammoth (KMMH) this ain't the right direction. At 2:39 he is west of Zaca Lake entering the San Rafael Wilderness Area. Engine failure occurs just south of Water Canyon Campground. Crash site location is 34°48'49.40"N 119°57'36.85"W. The plane crashed approx 1 mile from the bail out point which happened to be directly over Bald Mountain Canyon. Bald Mountain Canyon is the only soft, flat and traveled area along the entire route across this particular mountain range, that said it still would not be ideal for an off airport landing. Survivability would not be a guarantee. As a parachute landing site it is ideal which begs the question as to why he landed on the hill near the plane. He landed 1200ft west of the crash site on the ridgeline overlooking the wreckage. All of this information was gained using Google Earth.
Click to expand...

Hey Possum, how many miles by your estimates, would the crash zone be from his takeoff point? I’m curious, if it were 50 or more miles, he’d have to have an ELT on board. In that case, if it were me…or any other conscious pilot, Id want to find the ELT and make sure it was functioning if not damaged from the crash. They are pretty resilient. Can’t wait to see the results of this investigation.
 
C-1 PILOT said:
Hey Possum, how many miles by your estimates, would the crash zone be from his takeoff point? I’m curious, if it were 50 or more miles, he’d have to have an ELT on board. In that case, if it were me…or any other conscious pilot, Id want to find the ELT and make sure it was functioning if not damaged from the crash. They are pretty resilient. Can’t wait to see the results of this investigation.
Click to expand...
Is an ELT required in an airplane that was certified without an electrical system?
 
OneCharlieTango said:
Is an ELT required in an airplane that was certified without an electrical system?
Click to expand...

IIRC, ELt's are not required if the airplane stays within 50 miles of its point of takeoff OR if the airplane is a single seater. I suspect the person who brought up the 50 mile issue was looking at that angle.
 
kyleb said:
IIRC, ELt's are not required if the airplane stays within 50 miles of its point of takeoff OR if the airplane is a single seater. I suspect the person who brought up the 50 mile issue was looking at that angle.
Click to expand...
Most relevant bits...
91.207
(f) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to -

(3) Aircraft while engaged in training operations conducted entirely within a 50-nautical mile radius of the airport from which such local flight operations began;

(6) Aircraft while engaged in flight operations incident to the aerial application of chemicals and other substances for agricultural purposes;

(9) Aircraft equipped to carry not more than one person.

(10) An aircraft during any period for which the transmitter has been temporarily removed for inspection, repair, modification, or replacement, subject to the following:

(i) No person may operate the aircraft unless the aircraft records contain an entry which includes the date of initial removal, the make, model, serial number, and reason for removing the transmitter, and a placard located in view of the pilot to show “ELT not installed.”

(ii) No person may operate the aircraft more than 90 days after the ELT is initially removed from the aircraft;
 
OneCharlieTango said:
Is an ELT required in an airplane that was certified without an electrical system?
Click to expand...

What would having or not having an electrical system have to do with an ELT? They are battery powered. You might be thinking about transponder and ADS-B requirements.
 
kyleb said:
IIRC, ELt's are not required if the airplane stays within 50 miles of its point of takeoff OR if the airplane is a single seater. I suspect the person who brought up the 50 mile issue was looking at that angle.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are correct. That’s what I was thinking and it appears Possum did the math.
 
C-1 PILOT said:
Hey Possum, how many miles by your estimates, would the crash zone be from his takeoff point? I’m curious, if it were 50 or more miles, he’d have to have an ELT on board. In that case, if it were me…or any other conscious pilot, Id want to find the ELT and make sure it was functioning if not damaged from the crash. They are pretty resilient. Can’t wait to see the re
C-1 PILOT said:
Hey Possum, how many miles by your estimates, would the crash zone be from his takeoff point? I’m curious, if it were 50 or more miles, he’d have to have an ELT on board. In that case, if it were me…or any other conscious pilot, Id want to find the ELT and make sure it was functioning if not damaged from the crash. They are pretty resilient. Can’t wait to see the results of this investigation.
Click to expand...

Actually, I did a cut and paste from a comment on the YouTube video. Sorry, I did not do the calculations.
Click to expand...
 
Tools said:
Well... rigs run like 6 grand, I’d carry it out. And I’d gather my go pros. And I would probably take my time walking out as it’s like a free vacation.

And I might even destroy a plane like that just for kicks (providing it was a goner anyway).

Just don’t think I’d go around bragging about it! Geesh...

It’s like my deer hunting buds. Plant deer plots. Extravagant deer blinds. Perfect guns, ammo, equipment. Heated trigger finger guards... Cameras to figure out their routines. And brag about what sportsmen they are. Great way to get deer meat, just not an amazing feat. IMHO.

That plane did less damage than a band of teenagers on dirt bikes do in 15 minutes. Destroying a plane like that is no worse than neglecting one into obscurity.

He’s a simpleton looking for recognition. It offends our sensibilities.

Let’s face it, it’s the who, not the what.
Click to expand...

I love The Who, and after watching many YooToob videos, I said years ago “I won’t get fooled again.” This time was no different. ;)
 
I'm pretty sure Youtube's terms of service prohibit posting criminal activity... sure would be a shame if he was unable to monetize all those views because people reported the video.
 
Ed Haywood said:
That is some great aerial camera and formation work. I assume pre-CGI. Loved the dummy sliding down the cable.
Click to expand...
Not a dummy; the highest paid stuntman ever.

In 1993, Crane performed the dangerous-looking [LOL] aerial transfer for the film Cliffhanger, for which he earned an entry in the Guinness Book of World Records for being part of the most expensive stunt ever performed. It cost $1 million to have Simon Crane descending on a rope between two planes at an altitude of 4,572 m (15,000 ft).
Click to expand...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Crane
 
Reading the thread, the obvious point which is lost in the weeds is if the FAA doesn't go after this guy with everything, there are a lot of taildraggers at risk for other YouTube fictions! Not to mention the general public, our insurance, our good will in the public eyes. . . and the safety culture they have worked hard to create is gone for a GoPro video and a few bucks.
 
skyking3286 said:
Reading the thread, the obvious point which is lost in the weeds is if the FAA doesn't go after this guy with everything, there are a lot of taildraggers at risk for other YouTube fictions! Not to mention the general public, our insurance, our good will in the public eyes. . . and the safety culture they have worked hard to create is gone for a GoPro video and a few bucks.
Click to expand...
Good point. This is the obvious progression from the "whistlin diesel" guy who destroyed a tcraft about a year ago for the yootoobs. Ironically that guy plays an idiot persona on his channel but had enough sense not to actually fly the plane.
 
Tools said:
...He will get a lot of clicks. A lot of people will buy into it. His goal will likely be met...
Click to expand...

Yea I don't think so. His "goal" seems to be to get the girl who dumped him back. Not gonna happen pal.
 
Silvaire said:
Yea I don't think so. His "goal" seems to be to get the girl who dumped him back. Not gonna happen pal.
Click to expand...

I'm starting to warm up to the guy. If you are going down, go big. Crashed a plane to win a gal? Way to commit!
 
Done right, you could come out ahead on the $650/hr shooting thing.

Yeah, let's try the semi-auto Barrett. After that, can we try the full-auto AR?
 
Dave Anderson said:
Maybe we shouldn’t rag on him so much. He’s a life coach after all.
Click to expand...
Flight training, skydiving, wilderness survival, and aircraft recovery/salvage. And that's just the first hour! But wait, there's more!

Nauga,
who is not calling anyone a butt weight
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top