Monday, May 13, 2013

Hezarfen Pitts S2B Pilot Murat Öztürk: Top Air, Turkey

Mosquito pilot cleared after inquiry into Ravenel Bridge scare

Live5News.com | Charleston, SC | News, Weather, Sports 

A pilot spraying for mosquitoes near the Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge has been cleared of any wrongdoing after drivers called 911 saying they feared his aircraft might hit the span. 

The Federal Aviation Administration said it reviewed the flight of pilot Tommy Phillips of Williamsburg Air Service and determined there was no evidence that aviation regulations were violated.

As a result of its inquiry, the FAA said changes were made to the route flown for the mosquito-spraying to help alleviate public concerns. The new route has been flown once without public complaint, the agency said in an email.

When contacted by phone Monday, Phillips said he wasn't doing anything wrong during the flight so there was no need to make changes. The owner of Williamsburg Air, Guy McClary, said the FAA told the company to do the “neighborly thing” when it sprayed.

“In other words, do the best you can,” McClary said.

He said the company was flying legally April 17 when it was spraying for mosquitoes on Drum Island next to the bridge.

Cathy Critser of Summerville was among those who dialed 911 when she saw the plane and its direction of travel.

“I think it caught a lot of people off guard,” she said.

Critser said the plane's proximity to the bridge made her nervous because the Boston bombings happened two days before. She said drivers were stopping on the bridge because of the aircraft.

She suggested that officials place signs on the bridge to let people know when mosquito spraying is happening.

Critser said she trusts the FAA, but the results of its inquiry don't change how she felt at the time of the incident. Phillips called Critser to say he was very sorry for scaring her, she said.

Gary Paddock of Mount Pleasant said he also called 911 on April 17 because of the plane's proximity to the bridge.

“If the result is that the sprayer will fly a different and safer route, then I think that we got done what was needed,” he said.

Williamsburg Air was conducting a standard flight near the bridge for the Charleston County Mosquito Control Division, the county said at the time of the incident. The pilot was operating within established guidelines that enable the plane to fly low to treat mosquito larvae, the county said.

http://www.postandcourier.com

Gates Learjet 35A, N22MS: Accident occurred May 13, 2013 in McMinnville, Oregon

NTSB Identification: WPR13LA227
 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Monday, May 13, 2013 in McMinnville, OR
Aircraft: GATES LEARJET CORP. 35A, registration: N22MS
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On May 13, 2013, about 1245 Pacific daylight time, a Gates Learjet 35A, N22MS, overran the runway during landing at McMinnville Municipal Airport, McMinnville, Oregon. The airplane was registered to Evergreen Equity, Inc., and operated by Evergreen International Aviation, Inc., under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, as a post-maintenance repositioning flight. The airline transport pilot, commercial rated copilot, and passenger were not injured. The airplane sustained substantial damage to both wings, the forward fuselage, and the pressure vessel during the accident sequence. The cross-country flight departed Grand Junction Regional Airport, Grand Junction, Colorado, about 1145 mountain daylight time, with a planned destination of McMinnville. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed at McMinnville, and an instrument flight rules flight plan had been filed.

The NTSB investigator traveled in support of this investigation, and performed an examination of the engine and airframe subsequent to recovery.

The airplane had just undergone a flight management system (FMS) upgrade at a maintenance facility in Grand Junction, and this was both its first flight, and its home base return flight, following the upgrade.

The pilot reported that the flight and landing approach were uneventful. As the airplane touched down on runway 22, the pilot deployed the spoilers, and then pulled the power levers to the thrust reverser detent position; however, the deploy indicators did not illuminate. He then recycled the thrust levers back into the detent, but again the reversers did not deploy. Both the pilot and copilot attempted to troubleshoot as the airplane continued along the runway. The pilot then applied pressure to the foot pedal brakes, but did not feel a response; the copilot also attempted, but reported that the pedals felt loose and the airplane did not slow down. As the airplane approached the threshold, the pilot engaged the steering lock switch, and attempted to steer the nose wheel, but the airplane did not respond. Just prior to reaching the runway end, he activated the emergency braking lever; however, the airplane rolled off the runway end, through a set of instrument landing system antennas, and down an embankment.

Subsequent examination revealed that the mounting screws for both the left and right main landing gear squat switches were loose, such that the switches had backed away from their mounting pads.



 McMINNVILLE, Oregon — A small jet airplane has run off the end of the runway at the McMinnville Municipal Airport.
McMinnville Fire Department Division Chief Debbie McDermott says the Evergreen International Aviation, Inc., Lear jet was unable to stop and ended up in a ditch at the end of the runway Monday afternoon.

McDermott says all three people aboard were able to get out unhurt, and there appeared to be little damage.

A receptionist at Evergreen said no one was available to comment.


http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N22MS

Rans S6S, N388KB: Accident occurred May 04, 2013 in Suffolk, Virginia

NTSB Identification: ERA13FA227
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, May 04, 2013 in Suffolk, VA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 05/08/2014
Aircraft: NEWGENT, BARRY S6S, registration: N388KB
Injuries: 2 Fatal.

NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot, who was the owner/builder of the accident airplane, flew his airplane with a group of three other airplanes of the same make and model to a fly-in event located about 115 nautical miles from their home airport. The flight made two intermediate stops during the trip due to adverse weather, and, each time, witnesses reported observing the accident pilot having difficulty controlling the airplane at low speed and while landing. The other airplanes landed without incident. When one of the other pilots in the group asked the accident pilot about his difficulty during the previous two landings, the accident pilot stated that he was having difficulty controlling the airplane with a passenger onboard and that the additional weight was "throwing him off." The pilots subsequently took off. 

The weather conditions at the final destination airport included wind aligned within 20 degrees of the runway heading at 11 knots, gusting to 19 knots. One of the pilots chose to land on the airport's 5,000-foot-long paved runway and did so without incident. The accident pilot and two of the other pilots chose to land on a 2,000-foot-long auxiliary turf runway in use exclusively for the fly-in event. Due to space constraints, pilots were advised to avoid overflying areas with aircraft and personnel, which required a traffic pattern that was closer than customary to the auxiliary runway. The other two pilots landed their airplanes without incident; however, the accident pilot made two aborted approaches. Witnesses reported that, during the two aborted approaches, the airplane appeared to enter an aerodynamic stall as it turned onto the final approach to the runway. During the third and final attempted landing, the airplane appeared to enter a stall while turning from the downwind to the base leg of the traffic pattern and subsequently entered a spin and descended into terrain.

The pilot's logbook showed that he had not logged the required number of takeoffs and landings for carrying passengers before departing on the morning of the accident flight. In addition, the pilot had not logged the completion of a flight review in nearly 5 years. Witness observations of the pilot's flying performance on the day of the accident indicate that he also was not proficient in the airplane's operation, particularly with a passenger aboard. The pilot missed several opportunities to avoid or mitigate the outcome of the accident. He could have taken additional recurrent flight training offered to him before and on the day of the accident flight. Additionally, upon recognizing his difficulties with the initial two diversionary landings, the pilot could have chosen to perform some additional practice with a flight instructor who was traveling with the group, or return home, rather than continuing the flight to the more demanding environment of a fly-in event. Further, upon recognizing his difficulties while unsuccessfully attempting to land the airplane twice with the nontraditional, constrained traffic pattern offered by the auxiliary turf runway, the pilot could have chosen to land on the longer, paved runway.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:

The pilot's failure to maintain airspeed while turning from the downwind to the base leg of the traffic pattern, which resulted in a subsequent aerodynamic stall, spin, and impact with terrain. Contributing to the accident were the pilot's lack of currency and proficiency in controlling the airplane and his decisions to forego recurrent training and to land on the nontraditional runway.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On May 4, 2013, about 1300 eastern daylight time, an experimental light sport S6S, N388KB, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain during an uncontrolled descent near Suffolk Executive Airport (SFQ), Suffolk, Virginia. The private pilot and passenger were fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, which departed Williamsburg-Jamestown Airport (JGG), Williamsburg, Virginia about 1230. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to an acquaintance of the pilot, who was also a light sport airplane flight instructor, he had known the pilot for several years preceding the accident, and had sold the pilot the kit from which he constructed the accident airplane. After the pilot completed construction of his airplane in 2008, the flight instructor flew with him several times. In flying the airplane, the pilot complained that the airplane was "too responsive" compared to the Cessna 172 he was accustomed to flying previously. The pilot subsequently flew the airplane seldom, though the flight instructor was not aware of what the pilot's specific currency level was.

About 2 weeks prior to the accident flight, the pilot advised the flight instructor that he would like to join him and the group of other pilots who planned to fly their similar make/model airplanes from their home base at Cambridge-Dorchester Airport (CGE), Cambridge, Maryland, to SFQ for the fly-in event held there annually. The flight instructor urged the pilot to perform some local currency flights prior to the trip, and offered dual instruction in order to practice takeoffs and landing; however, the pilot did not fly with the flight instructor between that time and the day of the accident. On the morning of the accident, the group of pilots delayed their departure due to the adverse weather conditions prevailing at SFQ. The flight instructor again suggested that he and the accident pilot take the opportunity to practice some takeoffs and landings while visual meteorological conditions prevailed at their home airport. The accident pilot again declined the offer.

The group, including the accident pilot, subsequently departed CGE, and after encountering deteriorating weather conditions, landed at Campbell Field (9VG), Weirwood, Virginia to allow conditions to improve. After landing, the accident pilot advised the flight instructor that he had landed "hard." The pilot subsequently inspected the airplane, and after finding no damage, elected to continue the flight with the group.


The flight subsequently departed 9VG, and after again encountering adverse weather, the group diverted to JGG. A lineman at JGG recalled watching as the flight arrived at the airport. He described that following the first airplane in the group's successful landing, the accident airplane aborted its landing attempt and initiated a go around. The third and fourth airplanes of the group then landed without incident. The lineman described the accident airplane's second approach to the runway as "very erratic," and that the airplane was banking at an angle of about 30 degrees to the right and left and "porpoising" as it landed. Following the landing, the airplane taxied to the ramp where the lineman serviced each of the airplanes with fuel. The accident airplane's left fuel tank was subsequently "topped off" with 5.7 gallons of fuel.

The flight instructor described the wind conditions at JGG about the time of their arrival as "variable and gusty," and another pilot in the group described the wind as "challenging" and that it, "kept you busy." One of the other pilots in the group spoke with the accident pilot regarding his difficulty during the previous two landings. The accident pilot stated that he was having difficulty controlling the airplane with the passenger aboard and that the additional weight was, "throwing him off." After eating lunch, the group departed for SFQ.

An airport advisory service was operating at SFQ, and the three volunteers who staffed the service observed and interacted with the flight via radio as it approached the airport. According to the volunteers, the flight leader initially requested to perform a low pass down the active runway 4. After completing the low pass, one of the airplanes landed on the runway, while the pilots of the remaining airplanes requested to land on an auxiliary turf runway. The first airplane landed uneventfully, but as the accident airplane approached the runway, it entered an aerodynamic stall during the turn from the base leg of the traffic pattern to the final leg of the traffic pattern. The airplane then appeared to recover from the stall and aborted the landing, while the last airplane landed uneventfully.

As the accident airplane approached the runway for a second time, it again appeared to stall during the base-to-final turn. The airplane again recovered from the stall, aborted the landing, and continued in the traffic pattern. During a third traffic pattern circuit, and while turning from the downwind leg to the base leg, the airplane appeared to stall and subsequently entered a spin. The volunteers lost sight of the airplane as it descended behind trees, and immediately began contacting emergency personnel and coordinating a response to the accident.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION 

The pilot was the owner and builder of the airplane. Review of the airplane's airworthiness and maintenance records revealed that a special airworthiness certificate and operating limitations as an operating experimental light sport airplane were issued by the FAA on January 28, 2008. According to the maintenance log entry on that date, the next condition inspection of the airplane was due in January 2009. Three subsequent maintenance entries were made between June 2010 and April 2012, detailing replacement of the engine oil and oil filter, replacement of the fuel lines, synchronization of the carburetors, and adjustment of the throttle cables. No other entries were found, nor did any of the entries detail the completion of any condition inspections.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot, age 73, held a private pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single engine land. The pilot's most recent FAA third-class medical certificate was issued on June 17, 2008 with the limitation, "Holder shall wear glasses which correct for near and distant vision while exercising the privileges of his airman certificate."

Review of the pilot's personal flight log showed flight hours logged between the time he began his initial flight training in 1991 and April 2012. During that period the pilot logged 231 total hours of flight experience. Of that time, 185 hours were logged flying almost exclusively Cessna 152, Cessna 172, and Grumman AA5B airplanes, all of which occurred between 1991 and 2002. The pilot subsequently logged 2.2 hours of dual instruction in the accident airplane make model in 2003, and 2.5 hours of dual instruction in 2008. Following the 2008 flight, a flight instructor endorsed the pilot's logbook for satisfactory completion of a flight review. No subsequent endorsements were contained within the log.

Beginning in October 2008, the pilot made numerous flights in the accident airplane after completing its construction. During the remainder of that year the pilot logged 9 total flight hours, all of which were in the accident airplane. In the subsequent years leading to the accident flight, the pilot logged the following flight hours annually: 2009, 18 hours; 2010, 0 hours; 2011, 14.5 hours; 2012, 13 hours. All of the hours logged were in the accident airplane, and included both solo and dual instruction received flight hours. The final log entry was dated April 29, 2012, and no subsequent flight hour entries were recorded.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

The weather conditions reported at SFQ, at 1255, included winds from 050 degrees magnetic at 11 knots, gusting to 19 knots, an overcast ceiling at 1,200 feet, 10 statute miles visibility, a temperature of 14 degrees C, a dew point of 12 degrees C, and an altimeter setting of 30.00 inches of mercury.

AIRPORT INFORMATION

SFQ was located at an elevation of 70 feet, and had two intersecting runways oriented in a 4/22 and 7/25 configuration. Runway 4 was 5,009 feet-long by 100 feet-wide and was equipped with a 4-light precision approach path indicator. A fly-in event was being held at the airport over the weekend that the accident occurred, and a suggested arrival procedure was published by the event organizers. A NOTAM in effect at the time of the accident closed runway 7/25, but an auxiliary grass runway paralleling the paved runway was available for use by, "ultralights, antiques, and gliders." According to one of the event organizers, the runway was comprised of two cut lengths of grass, classified "groom" and "fairway." The groom was the center of the runway area and was 2,010 feet-long by 90 feet-wide, while the encompassing fairway area was 20 feet wider than the groom area on the left and right side.

The published ultralight arrival procedure warned pilots that when landing on grass runway 7, they should maintain a base traffic pattern leg that was close enough to the runway threshold as to avoid overflying aircraft that would be parked on a perpendicular, closed runway. The threshold of the grass runway was located nearly coincident with the suggested base leg flight path.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The wreckage came to rest in a vacant field. The forward portion of the airplane including the engine, firewall, and instrument panel, were displaced aft and were severely crushed. The wings and empennage remained relatively intact with minor impact-related damage. Control continuity was confirmed from the flight control surfaces to each of the primary flight controls. The elevator control tube was separated from its forward attach point consistent with impact, and there was a significant disruption of floor structure directly above the fracture. The flaps appeared retracted and the flap handle was displaced from the flaps retracted position between the first and second detent. The electrically actuated elevator trim tab was deflected slightly trailing edge down.

An undetermined quantity of 100LL fuel was present in both fuel tanks. A sample of fuel appeared blue, and absent of debris or water. There was also a strong smell of fuel at the scene, and there was evidence of fuel spillage in the vicinity of the engine. Baggage recovered from the aft baggage area was weighed on the morning following the accident, and found to have a total weight of 60 pounds. The emergency locator transmitter, which was installed under the pilot's seat, was crushed, and non-functional. First responders reported that both the pilot and the passenger were wearing seat belts and shoulder harnesses. The restraints displayed cuts consistent with post-accident extraction.

One of the three composite propeller blades was separated from the propeller hub at its root. The outer 2/3 of the second blade had separated from the inner portion at a fracture that was oriented roughly 45 degrees to the leading edge. The third blade remained intact and was relatively undamaged.

The engine was subsequently separated from the airframe for examination. Rotation of the crankshaft via the remaining proportion of the propeller confirmed continuity of the drivetrain to the rear accessory section. Compression was confirmed on each of the four cylinders, and oil and fuel were observed flowing from their respective pumps and lines. The top four spark plugs were removed and their electrodes displayed normal wear and were light brown in color. The right carburetor bowl was removed and was found to be punctured, consistent with damage impact, and was absent of fuel. The left carburetor bowl contained 100LL fuel that was blue and absent of water. A small amount of sediment was observed in the bottom of the bowl. The coarse oil screen and oil filter elements were examined, and were found to be absent of any metallic debris. The oil was light brown and displayed little opacity.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

An autopsy was performed on the pilot by the Commonwealth of Virginia, Office of the Chief Medical Examiner, Norfolk, Virginia. The stated cause of death was, "multiple blunt force trauma." The medical examiner also performed an autopsy on the passenger. The combined post-mortem weight of the pilot and the passenger was 436 pounds.

The FAA's Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, performed toxicological testing on the pilot. No carbon monoxide or ethanol were detected in the samples submitted. Unquantified amounts of Cetirizine and Metoprolol were detected in samples of the pilot's blood and urine. An unquantified amount of Naproxen, and 46.5 micrograms per milliliter of Salicylate were detected in samples of the pilot's urine.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Weight and Balance

The pilot operating handbook (POH) recovered from the wreckage showed that the airplane had an empty weight of 645 pounds. Given pilot and passenger's combined weight of 436 pounds, and baggage of 60 pounds, the airplane had a zero fuel weight of 1,141 pounds. The airplane's calculated zero fuel center of gravity was 66.5 inches aft of the datum. With both of the airplane's fuel tanks filled to capacity, the airplane's calculated gross weight was 1,249 pounds, with a center of gravity 67 inches aft of the datum.

The listed maximum takeoff weight of the airplane was 1,200 pounds, and the acceptable center of gravity range was between 62.5 and 73 inches aft of the datum.

Pilot Operating Handbook Excerpt

The POH recovered from the wreckage had several pages with text that appeared to have been highlighted with a marker. One such section of text was the section detailing the stall characteristics of the airplane. The handbook stated, "[Stalls have a warning buffet] due to the turbulent air from the wing root flowing over the elevator. The stall occurs with a definite break. [Rudder may be needed to hold the wings level.] Recovery is quick with the release of back pressure. Turning, accelerated power on and power off stalls all demonstrate the slight buffet and quick recovery." The bracketed sections of the quote above appeared highlighted in the text of the recovered POH.


 http://registry.faa.gov/N388KB

NTSB Identification: ERA13FA227
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, May 04, 2013 in Suffolk, VA
Aircraft: NEWGENT, BARRY S6S, registration: N388KB
Injuries: 2 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On May 4, 2013, about 1300 eastern daylight time, an experimental amateur-built Rans S6S, N388KB, was substantially damaged when it collided with terrain during an uncontrolled descent near Suffolk Executive Airport (SFQ), Suffolk, Virginia. The private pilot and passenger were fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed for the flight, which departed Williamsburg-Jamestown Airport (JGG), Williamsburg, Virginia about 1230. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to several friends of the pilot, the group planned to fly their four amateur-built Rans airplanes from their home base at Cambridge-Dorchester Airport (CGE), Cambridge, Maryland to SFQ for the fly-in event held there annually. The group departed CGE on the morning of the accident flight and after encountering deteriorating weather conditions, landed at Campbell Field Airport (9VG), Weirwood, Virginia to allow conditions to improve. The flight subsequently departed 9VG, and after again encountering weather, the group diverted to JGG. After eating lunch and fueling their airplanes, the group departed for SFQ.

An advisory control tower was operating at SFQ, and the three volunteers who staffed the tower observed and interacted with the flight as they approached the airport. According to the volunteers, the flight initially requested to perform a low pass down the active runway 4. After completing the low pass, one of the airplanes landed on the runway, while the remaining airplanes requested to land on an auxiliary turf runway. The first airplane of the flight landed uneventfully, but as the accident airplane approached the runway, it entered an aerodynamic stall during the turn from the base leg of the traffic pattern to the final leg of the traffic pattern. The airplane then appeared to recover from the stall and aborted the landing, while the trailing airplane in the flight landed uneventfully.

As the accident airplane approached the runway for a second time, it again appeared to stall during the base-to-final turn. The airplane again recovered from the stall, aborted the landing, and continued in the traffic pattern. During the third traffic pattern circuit, and while turning from the downwind leg to the base leg, the airplane appeared to stall; however, the airplane did not recover and subsequently entered a spin. The controllers lost sight of the airplane as it descended from their view behind trees, and immediately began contacting emergency personnel and coordinating a response to the accident.
=============


Wings stand off to one side. The propeller lies in a carton. But the main part of Carl Kesselring's pet project is clearly recognizable as an airplane in progress.

"I don't have fear of getting in an airplane," he said, standing in a hangar in Suburban Airport in Laurel surrounded by tools, parts and the remains of a bird's nest that fell through a hole in the roof. "I have confidence in my ability to make it work properly."

Kesselring's daring hobby is increasingly shared by other enthusiasts as the number of amateur-built airplanes grows every year, according to the Experimental Aircraft Association.

But such airplanes also make up a disproportionate share of general aviation accidents, including ones that end in fatalities — raising safety concerns. The Federal Aviation Administration is reviewing recommendations by the National Transportation Safety Board that call for more pilot training and safety improvements for amateur-built planes.

The NTSB recommendations stem from a study that found more than 10 percent of accidents involving amateur-built planes take place during the initial flight.

This month, pilot Barry Newgent, 73, of Davidsonville and his son Thomas Newgent, 51, of Westminster, died when their plane went down in a field in Suffolk, Va. The Newgents were going to the Virginia Regional Festival of Flight when their Rans S6S, built from a kit, crashed for unknown reasons. The accident remains under investigation

A friend said the elder Newgent had built the two-seater, single-engine plane with a wingspan of about 32 feet in his garage in Davidsonville, then moved it to an airport in Cambridge.

Kesselring, 73, a retired IBM field engineer from Riverdale who manages Suburban Airport, is president of the Experimental Aircraft Association's chapter based at College Park Airport. He said enthusiasts are motivated to build their own airplanes for various reasons, including the desire to trim out-of-pocket costs of buying a plane, the enjoyment of a hands-on education and the satisfaction of personal achievement.

For an investment of about $35,000 and his sweat equity, Kesselring said, one day he would have a kit-built plane worth $90,000 whose parts — minus the engine, sold separately — arrived in a box.

"It's a challenge. It'll be nice to say I got into an airplane and I built it," he said.

As for safety concerns, he said: "Let's see, how many people got killed in cars this weekend? Do you have a fear of getting in your car?"

According to the Experimental Aircraft Association, which has 177,000 members nationwide and nearly 2,000 in Maryland, the number of amateur-built aircraft grows by more than 1,000 each year, with some 33,000 currently registered across the country.

The NTSB, in a study released last year, said amateur-built aircraft make up nearly 10 percent of general aviation planes in the U.S. But in 2011, they accounted for about 15 percent of all general aviation accidents — and slightly more than 20 percent of fatal accidents.

Of the 224 accidents involving amateur-built aircraft that year, 54 were fatal accidents, killing 67 people, the study said.

The FAA review of the NTSB recommendations for bolstering safety is underway, and the Experimental Aircraft Association has begun to address recommendations made by federal regulators to the organization as well.

Dick Knapinski, a communications adviser for the Experimental Aircraft Association, said the organization provides webinars, workshops, technical help, advisers, safety information and other assistance. He said inspections of amateur-built crafts are rigorous.

Because each amateur-built plane is different — whether from kit or plans — it gets its own inspection by the FAA or by an inspector approved by the FAA before being certified airworthy.

Passengers can be carried only after more than 25 hours of test flights. The planes are subject to annual reinspections. Manufactured planes such as Cessnas, which don't have the variations that amateur-built planes have, also are FAA-certified.

Pilots of amateur-built planes must be licensed under the same standards as other pilots, according to the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association, a Frederick-based organization, some of whose members fly amateur-built planes.

Builders of these planes say the risk is obvious and serves as motivation to put meticulous work into their aircraft. They say they invest thousands of hours and dollars to follow in the footsteps of the Wright brothers.

The 1,450 hours of labor Kesselring has devoted represents a dream that dates back to his childhood in West Virginia, where he was "building airplanes since I was knee-high to a duck — model planes."

Once his plane is built, he and his wife hope to build a home in Lusby, close enough to Chesapeake Ranch Airport that "I'm going to walk out my back door and into my hangar."

Mark Gosselin, 60, president of another Experimental Aircraft Association chapter in Maryland, at the Frederick Municipal Airport, said he spent countless hours on research learning about parts, performance and more before laying out money for a kit and engine.

"There are also inherent dangers. You do everything you possibly can to eliminate those risks," he said.

Singer and actor John Denver is perhaps the most notable fatality from an experimental aircraft crash. He died in October 1997 when his home-built, single-engine two-seater crashed into Monterey Bay in California. Denver was a member of the Experimental Aircraft Association and received its Freedom of Flight Award in 1993.

Barry Newgent had been a member of the aircraft organization for 20 years.

Gosselin said after learning of the Newgents' crash, "You wonder what actually happened and how it could be prevented."

A facilities director for a school in Potomac, Gosselin said he built his plane for the education, the sense of accomplishment and the joy of flying. It took six years; he completed it in 2002 and estimates he has spent $60,000 so far — much less than the cost of a new, manufactured small plane.

"You know what the consequences are if you don't do it right. You can't just pull over and check the oil," he said.

Patrick Dean of Clarksville knows this all too well. He's one of the NTSB's accident statistics, and he still doesn't know why his plane crashed during its maiden flight in January 2008.

Less than a minute and a half after take-off, his plane veered to the left during ascent, then dove to the ground near Laurel, its parachute snared in treetops as drivers on the Baltimore-Washington Parkway stopped and pried him out of the cockpit. He suffered bruises, a broken nose and nerve damage that left him with minor losses in senses of smell and taste.

He said reading about the Newgents' fatal crash was heartbreaking. He thought about the disbelief they probably felt, and that the pilot's final act may have been to avoid hurting anyone else — just as Dean considered before he came down.

The computer engineer remains amazed he walked away from the wreckage of what only minutes earlier had been an airborne investment of about $55,000 and more than 2,000 hours of sweat equity.

Since then, he has continued to pilot Cessnas — but not home-built aircraft.

"After that experience, I definitely wouldn't build another one," he said. "I'd rather spend the time I have left on this earth with my son than building another airplane."

But the father of a 10-year-old knows others will follow their wild blue yonder dreams.

After his crash, he said, another amateur builder bought the wreckage to salvage the engine.

Story and Photos:  http://www.baltimoresun.com

Piper PA-34-200, Philair Flight Center Inc., N44589: Accident occurred March 16, 2001 in Palm Coast, Florida

NTSB Identification: MIA01FA102.
The docket is stored in the Docket Management System (DMS). Please contact Records Management Division
Accident occurred Friday, March 16, 2001 in PALM COAST, FL
Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/06/2002
Aircraft: Piper PA-34-200, registration: N44589
Injuries: 3 Serious.

NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

A witness, driving westbound, just east of the accident site, reported seeing the aircraft about 5 feet above the trees and heading south, southwest. According to the witness the airplane struck the trees on the east side of a four-lane road, then the median area between the south and northbound lanes. A post impact fire ensued. The pilot/passenger stated that on the downwind leg to runway 24, he observed the pilot-in-command/instructor "...turn the right engine fuel selector to the 'OFF' position," as they turned to "long final, very far from the runway." The flying pilot in the right front seat (second pilot), reduced power on the engines to start a descent, but did not realized he had an engine failure. The pilot/passenger further said, "...he could see the right engine fuel selector in the off position," and the airplane started to "lose" airspeed. He noted the stall warning light coming on, and he said, "...watch the speed...watch the speed." He heard the PIC say to the second pilot, "...he's right, watch the speed." After a few seconds they realized that the airplane was descending "faster" than it was supposed to and the PIC started to shout "Speed...Speed." The PIC took control of the airplane in an attempt to recover from the descent, but the airplane impacted the trees and road. Due to the degree of injury to all three occupants, none were able to talk with investigators; however, the PIC's wife revealed to the NTSB investigator-in-charge that her husband told her there were "...no mechanical problems with the airframe or engines." Examination of the wreckage confirmed that the right engine fuel selector was in the "OFF" position in the cockpit and at the wing selector valve. The right propeller was found in the "feathered" position. No visual pre-impact discrepancies were noted on the airframe, flight controls or engines. An FAA inspector stated that the FAA has determined that the pilot that was seated in the left front seat at the time of the accident was the pilot-in-command/instructor.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
the second pilot's failure to maintain Vmc during a single engine approach resulting in a loss of control in flight and subsequent collision with objects and terrain during an uncontrolled descent. Contributing to the accident was the PIC turning the right engine fuel selector to the off position to simulate an engine failure, and the PIC's inadequate supervision of the second pilot. 


 HISTORY 0F FLIGHT 


 On March 16, 2001, about 1510 eastern standard time, a Piper PA-34-200, N44589, operated and registered to PhilAir Inc., operating as a Title 14 CFR Part 91 instructional flight, impacted with trees and caught fire while the airplane was on base-to-final approach to runway 24 at the Bunnell-Flagler County Airport (X47), near Palm Coast, Florida. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed. No flight plan was filed. The airplane was destroyed. The commercial rated-pilot-in-command (PIC)/instructor, the commercial rated-second pilot, and commercial rated-pilot/passenger reported serious injuries. The flight had departed from Daytona Beach International Airport, Florida, at 1330.

The purpose of this flight was to be a company standardization check ride for two newly hired multi-engine instructor pilots. The check ride was to be administered by the PIC, acting as the check pilot, was also the owner of the company and airplane. The PIC was in the left seat at the time of the accident, the second pilot was in the right seat, and taking the check ride. The pilot/passenger was in the right middle seat and was observing.

The airplane was seen by witnesses flying low above the trees, when it pitched nose low, struck trees, and impacted on a four-lane road. A witness, driving westbound on route 100, just east of the accident site, reported seeing the aircraft about 5 feet above the trees and heading south, southwest. According to the witness the airplane struck the trees on the east side of a four-lane road and then the median area between the south and northbound lanes.

The pilot/passenger stated that on the downwind leg to runway 24, he observed the pilot-in-command "...turn the right engine fuel selector to the 'OFF' position." He stated that the engine started to "sputter" as they turned to "long final, very far from the runway." He reported that the right front seat pilot, reduced power on the engines to start a descent. He did not "...believe he [second pilot] realized he had an engine failure. He could see the right engine fuel selector in the "off position," and the airplane started to "lose" airspeed. He noted the stall warning light coming on, and he said, "...watch the speed...watch the speed." He heard the PIC say to the second pilot, "...he's right, watch the speed." After a few seconds they realized that the airplane was descending "faster" than it was supposed to and the PIC started to shout "Speed...Speed." He believed at this point the PIC took control of the airplane in attempt to "recover from the descent." He further said that there was no verbal exchange for change of flight controls; he saw the tops of the trees, and the power line, which he said they did not hit. He remembered impacting the road, then remembered smoke and heat.

The right seat pilot reportedly exited from the right front door of the aircraft. The pilot/passenger, and PIC reportedly exited the aircraft from the left side rear door.

Due to the degree of injury to all three occupants, none were able to talk with investigators; however, the PIC's wife told the NTSB investigator-in-charge (IIC) that her husband told her there were "...no mechanical problems" with the airframe or engines.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot-in command/instructor, age 33, held an FAA commercial pilot certificate, with airplane single/multi-engine land, airplane instrument, last issued on May 18, 1997, when the airplane multi-engine instructor rating was added. In addition, the pilot held an FAA certified flight instructor certificate (CFI), with airplane single/multi-engine land. The PIC held an FAA class 1 medical certificate issued on March 7, 2000, with the limitations the "Holder shall wear corrective lenses." He received a biennial flight review, as required by 14 CFR Part 61, on March 20, 2000. As per the entries in his company flight records, he had accumulated a total of 7,000 total flight hours, 2,000 total single engine flight hours, 5,000 total multi-engine flight hours and 5,000 hours in this make and model aircraft. In addition, the records showed that he had a total of 6,000 total CFI flight hours.

The second pilot, age 24, held an FAA commercial pilot certificate, with airplane single/multi-engine land, airplane instrument, last issued on January 29, 2001, when the airplane multi-engine instructor rating was added. In addition, the pilot held an FAA certified flight instructor certificate (CFI), with airplane single/multi-engine land, and instrument airplane. He held an FAA class 1 medical certificate issued on March 1, 2000, with no limitations. The second pilot received a biennial flight review, as required by 14 CFR Part 61, on January 29, 2001. As per the entries in his company flight records, he had accumulated a total of 500 total flight hours, 430 total single engine flight hours, 80 total multi-engine flight hours and 25 hours in this make and model aircraft. In addition, the records showed that he had a total of 230 total CFI flight hours

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The airplane was a Piper Aircraft Inc; model PA-34-200, serial number 34-7450213, manufactured in 1974. At the time of the accident the airplane had accumulated 13,220.4 total flight hours. A 100-hour inspection was performed on the airplane February 18, 2001, 74.8 hours before the accident. The airplane was equipped with two Lycoming IO-360-C1E6, 200 horsepower engines.

According to the engine logbooks, on March 17, 2000, the left engine, underwent a major overhaul, and was reinstalled on N44589. At the time of the accident the left engine had a total time of 7,492.7 hours. The date of major overhaul on the right engine was not obtained, but at the last annual inspection 2,306.7 hours had elapsed since the major overhaul. At the time of the accident 785.1 hours had accumulated since the annual inspection, and the total number of hours on the right engine at the time of the accident was about 5,695.8 (See the copies of the engine logbooks, an attachment to this report).

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

The recorded weather at the Daytona Beach International Airport, Florida, located about 18 nautical miles southeast of the accident site, at 1456 was; lowest cloud condition, few at 2,500 feet; visibility 10 statute miles; winds from 260 degrees at 10 knots; temperature 78 degrees F; dew point 70 degrees F; altimeter 29.91 inHg; and the calculated density altitude was 1,358 feet.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The aircraft struck several trees on the east side of Seminole Woods Parkway, a four-lane road, running north and south, causing a flash fire that partially burned some trees at the initial tree strike location. The accident site was located about 0.93 statute mile northeast of runway 24, at Bunnell-Flagler County Airport. The airplane came to rest on the northbound lane of Seminole Woods Parkway. The nose of the wreckage was heading easterly about 056 degrees, which was about 180 degrees opposite the direction of travel. One diagonal slash cut pine tree limb was located on the ground along with other broken limbs. The accident occurred during the hours of daylight about 29 degrees, 28 minutes north, and 081 degrees, 12 minutes west.

The main wreckage and engines were removed from the crash site, and examined at a hangar at the Bunnell-Flagler County Airport. Examination of the wreckage confirmed that the right engine fuel selector was in the "OFF" position in the cockpit and at the wing selector valve. The left fuel selector handle and valve were found in the "ON" position. The right engine and propeller were separated from the airframe by impact forces and post-impact fire. The right propeller remained attached to the crankshaft-mounting flange and was found in the "feathered" position. No visual pre-impact discrepancies were noted on the airframe, flight controls or engines. Postimpact fire destroyed a large portion of both wings, the main cabin, instruments, flight controls, aft fuselage and empennage. The right and left wing fuel tanks were breached during the impact sequence.

The left wing remained attached to the main fuselage and displayed aft bending of the main spar and the forward and aft wing attachments. The entire span of the left wing displayed post-impact fire damage. The left engine mounts were fractured, separating the engine from the nacelle mounting location. The left wing leading edge displayed compression damage directly in front of the aileron/flap juncture. Damage in this location compressed the leading edge aft to the main spar and deformed the main spar in an aft direction. The outboard and inboard left wing fuel tanks were breached; displayed fire damage, and did not contain any fuel. The left flap remained attached to the trailing edge of the wing at the hinges. The left flap and the flap control mechanism were found in the retracted position. The left aileron remained attached to the wing at the outboard mounting hinge. The left aileron balance weight remained attached to the outboard end of the aileron. The aileron displayed some fire damage and buckling along the entire span. The aileron flight control cables remained attached at the bellcrank. The aileron bellcrank mounting structure was found deformed in an inboard direction. Aileron flight control cable continuity was established from the left bellcrank to the flight control column in the main cabin. The left main landing gear was found with impact damage and was determined to have been in an extended position at the time of the accident.

The right wing remained attached to the main fuselage at the main spar and aft wing attachment. The main spar and aft wing attachment fitting displayed aft bending. Impact forces and postimpact fire destroyed the forward wing attachment fitting. The right wing was found deformed by impact damage and partially burned. The right engine mount was fractured in the accident sequence, separating the engine from the nacelle mounting location. The leading edge of the right wing displayed compression damage and upward bending outboard of the flap aileron juncture. The leading edge of the wing was burned away, aft to the main spar, from outboard of the engine nacelle to the wing root. The right aileron was separated from the wing and partially consumed by fire. The right aileron bellcrank remained attached to the aileron flight control cables and a fragment of the wing structure. Aileron flight control cable continuity was confirmed from the bellcrank to the flight control column in the main cabin. Fragments of the right flap remained attached at the flap hinges. The remaining portions of the right flap were consumed by fire. The right main landing gear was found with impact and fire damage. The main gear was found in the extended position. Both the inboard and outboard fuel tanks were breached and burned during the accident sequence. No fuel was found in the right wing fuel tank.

The aft fuselage remained partially intact and was burned away from the forward fuselage aft of the rear seating positions. Impact damage and fire damage to the tail cone area partially separated the vertical stabilizer and stabilator from the aft fuselage. The aft fuselage and empennage initially remained attached to the main fuselage by the stabilator and rudder flight control cables. Stabilator and rudder flight control cable continuity were established from the empennage to the flight control column and rudder pedal torque tube in the main cabin. The rudder trim actuator was found in a neutral position. The stabilator trim actuator was found in a position mid-way between neutral and full nose up.

The stabilator displayed some buckling across the entire span and burn through fire damage at the attachment hinge locations. The vertical stabilizer and rudder displayed burn through and melting across the lower portions of both components.

All of the cockpit instruments and controls were destroyed. The engine controls in the cockpit were fire damaged; the control levers were destroyed. The engine control cable ends were located, at the cable ends, only the clevis, shaft and sleeves remained. The exposed length of shaft of each available cable was measured (six cables, position unknown). The exposed shaft on the cables routed to the left nacelle all measured 0 inches, 0.8 inches, and 1.1 inches. The exposed shaft on the cables routed to the right nacelle all measured 0 inches.

Three-axis flight control cable continuity was traced and confirmed. The landing gear was determined to be extended. The wing flaps were found retracted.

An examination of the seats that were occupied revealed, that the left front seat was reduced to frame components by fire. The frame was deformed aft and left and was detached from rails. Lap and shoulder harness belt webbing was burned away. The right front seat was reduced to frame components by fire. The frame was broken, deformed aft and left. The lap and shoulder harness belt webbing was burned away. The right middle seat was reduced to frame components by fire. The frame was deformed aft and left and was still attached to floor. The lap belt webbing was burned away.

The left engine and propeller had separated from the airframe at impact. The propeller remained attached to the crankshaft-mounting flange. Crankshaft and camshaft continuity were established during hand rotation of the crankshaft. Aft accessory gear continuity and valve operation continuity on all cylinders were established during rotation. Compression to all four cylinders was established. All engine accessories displayed post-impact fire damage. Fire damage to the left and right magnetos precluded spark testing of these components. All eight spark plugs appeared gray-brown in color at the electrodes. The fuel servo, fuel screen was removed and found to be clean and free of debris. The engine driven fuel pump was found fractured at the mounting flange and fire damaged. No visual discrepancies were noted during the examination

The left propeller showed signs of rotation, one blade exhibited slight forward and aft bending near the tip and abrasion. The opposite blade was bent aft near the hub and also showed signs of abrasion. Examination of the left engine propeller revealed that the propeller remained attached at the engine crankshaft flange. The crankshaft was bent from impact, and the propeller was removed to facilitate further examination. One propeller blade exhibited slight aft and forward bending near the tip, and abrasion. The opposite blade was bent aft, inboard near the hub, and also showed signs of abrasion. The propeller governor was found intact; the control was in high rpm position. The governor unit was removed and the drive was intact, the unit rotated freely by hand, pumping action was noted.

The left engine had separated from the airframe structure, and the mounts were off at the firewall. The engine core appeared relatively intact, but displayed significant exposure to ground fire. The fuel system lines and hoses were heat damaged and destroyed. Damage to the engine components precluded any viability of engine test run consideration. The engine was placed on a lift hoist and accessed on all sides for inspection. All of the components were removed for examination. The engine was rotated and continuity of the crankshaft, camshaft, valve train, and accessory drives was established. Each cylinder produced compression while the engine was rotated. A lighted bore scope was used to inspect the top end components. No discrepancies were revealed. At the conclusion of the left engine examination no discrepancies were found.

Examination of the right engine revealed that the propeller remained attached at the engine crankshaft flange. Both propeller blades were in the feather position. One propeller blade exhibited slight aft bending near the tip. The opposite blade was fire damaged; blade material was melted at the tip. The propeller governor was found intact; the control was in feather position. The governor unit was removed and the drive was intact, the unit rotated freely by hand, pumping action was noted.

The right engine had separated with the firewall away from the airframe nacelle structure. The engine core appeared relatively intact, but displayed exposure to ground fire. The fuel system lines and hoses were heat damaged and destroyed. Damage to the engine components precluded any viability of engine test run consideration. The engine was placed on a lift hoist and accessed on all sides for inspection. All of the components were removed for examination. The engine was rotated and continuity of the crankshaft, camshaft, valve train, and accessory drives was established. Each cylinder produced compression while the engine was rotated. A lighted bore scope was used to inspect the top end components. No pre-impact anomalies were revealed. At the conclusion of the right engine examination no discrepancies were found.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

The pilot-in-command/instructor was initially taken from the crash site to Jacksonville Memorial Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida. On March 17, 2001, he was moved to Shands Burn Center, Gainesville, Florida.

The second pilot was taken to Shands Burn Center, Gainesville, Florida, directly from the accident site on March 16, 2001.

The pilot/passenger was initially taken from the crash site to Jacksonville Memorial Hospital, Jacksonville, Florida, on March 16, 2001, where he remained until released.

There was no toxicology testing conducted on any of the occupants due to their medical treatment.

TEST AND RESEARCH

An FAA inspector stated that the FAA has determined that the pilot that was seated in the left front seat at the time of the accident was the pilot-in-command/instructor.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

The airplane was released to Mr. Gregory Humil Director of Maintenance, PhilAir Flight Center, on March 19, 2001.



Matt Cole is shown near his plane Trinidad at the Guthrie-Edmond Regional Airport. A 2001 crash altered Cole's career path. He is now a flight instructor at the airport.



 Matt Cole stands next to the runway at Guthrie-Edmond Regional Airport watching a Cessna float toward the pavement. One of his student pilots is completing an aviation tradition — the first solo.

It might be hard to believe Cole, now a flight instructor, is anywhere near an airport. Twelve years ago, flying nearly took his life. 

When he strapped himself into a Piper Seneca on March 16, 2001, Cole's career was about to take off. He'd rounded up nearly enough flight hours to start sending his resume to the airlines. In the meantime, he'd take a job as a flight instructor in Palm Coast, Fla.

On this day his future would end up taking a turn that most people could never imagine.

The day's mission was a “standardization flight,” a session for Cole's supervisor to show the new hire how the company wanted him to teach student pilots. Along with a third instructor onboard, the Seneca took off from Daytona Beach International Airport. It would not return.

As Cole set up his approach for the aircraft's final landing, his supervisor cut off the fuel supply to one of the aircraft's two engines. While multi-engine pilots are required to be skilled at landing with only one engine, cutting off the fuel can be a risky decision.

“Once the engine's been turned off, there's no turning it back on. There's no going around for another try,” Cole said.

Cole didn't catch the instructor's move in time. The aircraft was losing airspeed and altitude quickly. Without the power of the second engine, they couldn't climb.

Inside the cockpit, reality was starting to set in.

“At one point I saw a brick wall whiz by the window.” Cole remembers. “That's when I knew we weren't going to make it.”

According to the NTSB's post-accident report, a witness saw the struggling aircraft clip the trees next to a highway and crash into the median. One of the Seneca's fuel tanks had been punctured, and the wreckage became an inferno.

All three men escaped the aircraft, but Cole was engulfed in flames. A passing motorist used his shirt to put out the fire on the pilot.

Two months later, Cole awoke from a medically induced coma to a different reality. He'd suffered third-degree burns to more than half his body. The fire had taken his ears and lips, and his hands had been disfigured.

Over the next 10 years, Cole would endure surgery after surgery to salvage his body, including the amputation of an arm.

“I couldn't do anything,” Cole said. “For years I couldn't even take a shower by myself.”

Cole returned to his parents' Los Angeles home while he learned how to live again.

In 2003, Cole's dad decided the family needed a change of pace, and they moved to Edmond.

By 2009, Matt Cole had begun toying with the idea of getting back in a plane.

“I wanted to fly again,” he said. “After the accident, every doctor I talked to told me about something else I would never be able to do again. But I wanted to fly. I missed it.”

After hearing about Cole's yearning to get back in the sky, a friend offered to give him the chance.

Only eight years after he'd nearly died in a fiery plane crash, Cole was in the air again. His first flight was in an aircraft type that he knew well — the Piper Seneca.

Soon, Cole became determined to earn back his licenses and ratings.

“Of course I was scared at first,” Cole said, “but the more I flew, the better I got at it. I started to realize that I could do this.”

With the help of the FAA, Cole earned all of the ratings that he had previously held. In 2012, Cole was hired as a flight instructor by Crabtree Aircraft Co. in Guthrie.

Today he introduces people to the exciting world of aviation, giving them guidance on the importance of flying safely.

“It sounds crazy, but I think that the accident has made me a better pilot and a better instructor.” he says. “I teach my students to expect the unexpected, and to always be calm and ready if there's an emergency.”

Back in Guthrie, as the Cessna's tires squeak onto the runway, Cole cracks a smile. He's ready for a time-honored instructor's tradition — cutting the shirttail off his newly soloed students.


Will Eifert is conversion and reporting analytics specialist for OPUBCO.


Story:  http://newsok.com


Waldo Lake seaplane and powerboat ban passes House

Waldo Lake will likely be free of gas-powered motors, including seaplanes, this summer.

The Oregon House this morning approved Senate Bill 602, which bans all gas-powered motors on both boats and seaplanes from the Lane County waterway, on a 37-20 vote. The bill allows boats powered by electric motors, if they stay under a 10 mph speed limit.

Three Republicans joined every present Democrat in voting for SB 602, which now heads to Gov. John Kitzhaber’s desk. The governor has previously expressed support for the bill.

In practice, SB 602 would directly impact seaplanes, which can now use the waterway, while fortifying the current state Marine Board ban on gas-powered motorboats, first adopted in 2010.

Usage of the isolated, exceptionally clear body of water in the Cascade Range has been the subject of hot debate for years, and many familiar arguments resurfaced in this morning’s House floor debate.

Rep. Paul Holvey, a Eugene Democrat, said that the lake is “unique” and should be granted protections against potential pollution.

Waldo Lake “is the third most pure lake in the world,” he said. “Let’s not take the risk of it moving down that list.”

Motorboat and seaplane enthusiasts can use many other Oregon waterways, SB 602 proponents said.

Rep. Bruce Hanna, a Roseburg Republican, criticized the blanket nature of the ban, which he said completely excludes one group of users and grants a favor to those “who want it all for themselves.”

By allowing electric motors on boats, Hanna said lawmakers were being exclusionary.

“So what we’re saying is, if you have the wherewithal to switch your boat from gas to electric, now you get to use Waldo Lake,” he said.


Source:  http://www.registerguard.com

Hangar 24 air show details released: Redlands Municipal Airport (KREI), California

Hangar 24 has released the details of its air show/beer festival/concert/food truck festival it’s calling the Hangar 24 AirFest and 5th Anniversary Celebration.

The 13-hour event will see multiple activities meshing to celebrate the fifth birthday of Hangar 24 Craft Brewery, a Redlands-based brewer.

The event will feature aerial acrobats, vintage warplanes, nighttime fireworks shot from aircraft, food trucks, a kids zone, live musical acts and 35 different beers, including special archival beers, all brewed by Hangar 24.

Held at the Redlands Municipal Airport on Saturday, May 18, from 9 a.m. to 10 p.m., tickets are $5 presale and available online at Brown Paper Tickets and at the brewery tasting room, 1710 Sessums Drive, Redlands, across the street from the airport. At the door, tickets will be $8. Children 12 and under will get in free.

A limited number of VIP tickets are available through Brown Paper Tickets for $150 each, which will include VIP parking, food and beer served in an exclusive tent, as well as “front row” seating of the air show.

“This is, by far, the largest event we have ever put on,” said Hangar 24 owner/master brewer Ben Cook. “Our goal with the event is five-fold: to celebrate our anniversary, to promote the city of Redlands as a great destination, to promote the airport and aviation in general, to create a fun community event and to raise money for the charities.”

All proceeds go to benefit the newly formed Hangar 24 Charities, whose mission is “to help preserve our Southern California orange groves,” as well as The Redlands Conservancy.

For the main entertainment, the event will go back and forth between aerial acts and musical acts. The aerial acrobats will include:

Bob Carlton’s Super Salto jet sailplane in spectacular daytime performances, as well as an awesome nighttime fireworks show shot from his sailplane

Jon Melby, performing freestyle maneuvers in a modern, high performance biplane

Vicky Benzing, piloting her German-built, single-seat Extra 300S in amazing acrobatic maneuvers

Kent Pietsch, executing an amazing landing on a moving RV

Gregory “Wired” Colyer, performing high-performance aerobatic maneuvers in his T-33 “Ace Maker”

Clay Lacy’s Lear Jet aerobatics

Vintage warplanes will be provided by Palm Springs Air Museum

For more information, go to hangar24brewery.com or call 909-389-1400.

Source:  http://www.pe.com

Boeing Corp. concerned about new airport tenant: Gary/Chicago International (KGYY), Indiana

The Gary/Chicago International Airport authority took a big step on Monday towards landing a new corporate jet operation for its airport, contingent on resolving potential conflicts with its most prestigious tenant.

By two 7-0 votes, the authority board at its regular meeting approved lease agreements with East Lake Management & Development Corp., one for an existing hangar and the other for a ground lease for a hangar the company wants to build.

However, Boeing Corp., which houses its corporate jet fleet at the airport, has safety and security concerns about the East Lake Management & Development hangar being located so close to theirs, according to Al Stanley, an airport consultant who has been involved in negotiations with both companies.

Specifically, Stanley said Boeing is concerned about mixing their large aircraft with the smaller aircraft that would be using aprons and taxiway areas in common once the East Lake Management & Development hangar is up and running. Boeing's aircraft are jetliners outfitted as flying offices that can whisk Boeing executives and staff anywhere in the world.

"We want to make sure everyone is happy and can live together," said Gary airport authority board member Cornell Collins before the vote was taken at the airport administration building.

Boeing is also involved in ongoing negotiations for a new lease at the Gary airport, with its previous hangar lease having expired in April. It is now operating there on month-to-month hold-over provisions in the previous lease, Stanley said.

Under its deal, East Lake Management & Development will pay the airport authority combined lease fees of $71,932 per year.  It will also manage the airport's 60 hangars for small aircraft for a 20 percent slice of revenues.

The airport also should earn additional revenue from landing and parking fees from planes using the East Lake Management & Development hangar.


Source:  http://www.nwitimes.com

Baltic Aviation Academy: Ready for Take-off with a Job

 
 Published on May 13, 2013

For more information about this offer, click here: http://www.balticaa.com/en/aviation-t.... Do not miss this chance!

Benefis Mercy Flight gets faster, safer jet: Holman Aviation at Great Falls International Airport (KGTF), Montana

Written by PETER JOHNSON, Great Falls Tribune 

Benefis Hospitals administrators and Mercy Flight crew members proudly unveiled a new Cessna Citation Mustang medical jet Monday at the Holman Aviation hangar at Great Falls International Airport.

Who wouldn’t be tickled at acquiring a new vehicle that flies faster and higher, with better fuel mileage and enhanced, and safer, navigation features?

Benefis is leasing the new medical jet -- a replacement for an aging twin-engine turboprop King Air B200 – from Oregon-based Aero Air, which also is providing the four pilots to Benefis under a contract.

The gleaming red and white jet was custom-configured for Benefis. After extensive pilot training, a Mercy Flight pilot and medical crew flew it on its first mission on May 1. A pediatric patient was flown to Spokane.

“We wanted a jet that would offer faster transport times for our most critical patients and give our pilots and crew the latest technology for flying over Montana’s rugged terrain,” Benefis Health System CEO John Goodnow said. “The Mustang delivers on both.”

Benefis officials said the Cessna Mustang is the first dedicated medical jet in Montana and can fly 22 percent faster than Mercy’s Flight’s previous plane and burn 30 percent less fuel during long-distance transports, such as critical care flights to Spokane, Seattle, Salt Lake City and Denver.

Pilot Lee McCafferty said most of the plane’s just 60 hours of flying time has been done by his crew during training and early medical missions.

“Flying a new aircraft with brand new technology is going to help us be safer and get our mission done more quickly and efficiently,” he said.

The jet is equipped with “synthetic vision” technology, which offers the pilot one screen showing a 3-D image of the terrain, air traffic and obstacles similar to what a pilot might see on a clear day. That will improve flying conditions at night, or during cloudy, rainy or snowy conditions when flying is permitted but vision is reduced.

“It will help us get around and see what’s going on better in bad weather,” McCafferty said.

The plane’s advanced avionics allow pilots to get information more quickly about weather and flight crews to communicate more quickly about medical conditions, he said. The plane can go higher than its predecessor, up to 41,000 feet, allowing it to get above turbulent winds and crowded urban area flying patterns. That can make flying smoother and the computer also drives the engine at optimal efficiency, he said.

Officials said the jet can fly about 400 mph, or about 100 mph faster than the turboprop. That can save 20 minutes or so on a flight to Spokane and more time on longer flights, they said.

Inside the small jet, chief Mercy Flight nurse Scott Schandleson demonstrated how a patient stretcher is attached to a medical base that contains oxygen, an air compression and power. A special arc fits above the patient’s legs and monitors and IVs are hung from the arc. The medical crew, which usually include a flight nurse and paramedic and sometimes a respiratory therapist, are seated around the patient.

Later this year Benefis will replace Mercy Flight’s single-engine helicopter with the latest twin-engine Eurocopter EC 135 under a contract with Metro Aviation of Shreveport, La.

The Benefis Mercy Flight team flew 927 missions in 2012 and has transported more than 300 patients so far this year. Roughly half are by helicopter and half by plane.

“When every minute counts, the whir of helicopter rotor or the sight of navigation lights in the night sky are a great comfort,” said Benefis Hospitals President Laura Goldhahn. “The new jet will give hundreds of critically ill patients across Montana access to life-saving medical treatment each year, including accident victims, new moms and babies and many others.”

“The ability of this Cessna Mustang medical jet to fly higher and fly safer with more advanced avionics were key points in our decision to bring a medical jet to Montana,” she said.

It even turned out that the new jet can operate less expensively with better fuel mileage than its turbo prop predecessor, she added.

Story and Photo:  http://www.greatfallstribune.com

Nigeria: Our case against private jet owners, by federal government

By TOPE ADEBOBOYE  

Recently, tongues wagged among some Nigerians when the federal government, through the Ministry of Aviation, unveiled the revised National Civil Aviation Policy in Abuja. Some took umbrage at certain provisions in the policy, saying they were targeted at specific individuals.

Particularly worrisome to some is the provision in the new policy barring owners of private jets from using their aircraft to ferry their friends and associates, as well as the clause that pilots of private jets must always declare their manifest.

Not a few have raised issues with Part 7 of the 10-part new aviation policy. The part deals with General Aviation (GA) and provides for measures to generate definite policies, develop regulatory framework and adequate infrastructure to support it. The part equally focuses on the need to control and monitor all non-scheduled flights operations – including helicopter operations (offshore and onshore) in Nigeria as well as the operation of foreign non-scheduled flights and flying schools.

To some, certain operators of private jets whose political views are opposed to those of some powerful interests in the ruling party, might be the target of the law.

But the agencies saddled with aviation operations in the country say the restrictions placed on the use of private jets are borne out of the need to stem the abuse of private jets in the country as well as for security reasons.

In an interview with the reporter, General Manager, Public Communications, Federal Airports Authority of Nigeria (FAAN) and coordinating manager of information and communications for aviation parastatals, Mr. Yakubu Dati, said it had become imperative for the federal government to take some actions on the abuse of private jets that had been going on in the country for long.

Dati informed that some owners of private jets could easily use their aircraft to convey some illegal items to the country if certain regulations were not instituted and enforced. In his words, it would be easy for illegal consignments, including cash and personalities that might constitute security threat to the country, to be airlifted in and out of the country in private jets if certain processes and procedures were not put in place.

“The security agencies have disclosed to us that many individuals that had been declared wanted in the country by some security outfits had been smuggled out of the country in private jets, even as some unwanted persons sneaked into the country without check as many private jets take off from private facilities at the airports,” Dati asserted.

According to Dati, what government intended to do was to monitor the operations of unscheduled flights and the manifests of these flights because of the security situation in the country.

He also noted that many private jets were no longer operating their aircraft as private jets, disclosing that many of them had turned their planes into commercial uses. He informed that charter services by private jets have become a lucrative business in the country, noting that 80 per cent of private jets with private licence were carrying out commercial operations. Dati insisted that such practices constitute safety challenges as an aircraft with a private license is not subjected to compulsory maintenance checks as those with commercial license are made to do by the regulatory body, the Nigeria Civil Aviation Authority (NCAA).

Dati noted also that about 80 per cent of the 150 private jets operating in the country are registered overseas.

Said he: “What that means is that they are exempted from paying taxes as well as the five per cent charges to NCAA. And although they are owned by Nigerians, they are still designated as leased, so they are brought into the country without paying Customs duty.

“So, when you collate what government agencies lose by the illegal operations of many of these private jets, it amounts to over N25 billion in a year. And I can authoritatively tell you that it is now a lucrative business that businessmen bring in aircraft to operate as private jets while they are actually used for commercial purposes. So it makes nonsense of those charter operators who followed the laid down process, whose business has now been taken away by the illegal private operators.”

Dati informed that private jet owners that illegally engage their aircraft in charter operations have taken away substantial business from scheduled airlines, noting that those that would have filled the business class cabin are now airlifted by such illegal private charter services.

“This explains why our airlines are not growing. Instead of marked growth of our airlines, it is the number of private jets that are growing. This is an aberration. So government cannot fold its hands and watch this unfavorable situation which has already started affecting the nation’s economy, especially knowing the crucial role that scheduled airline operation play in any country.”

Dati said it was regrettable that the money used to buy these aircraft was made locally but taken away from the country to maintain foreign licence, foreign pilots and engineers and foreign maintenance services.

He said the Goodluck Jonathan administration, through the Aviation Minister, Princess Stella Oduah, has decided to put a decisive end to such illegal operations.

While unveiling the new National Civil Aviation Policy, the federal government had insisted that the new policy was necessary, as the aviation policy in the country was last reviewed in 2001. According to the Aviation Minister, Princess Stella Odua, many provisions in the last policy review had become obsolete and out of tune with modern realities in the global aviation sector. The new policy, she said, was intended to introduce new and sustainable regulatory regimes into the Nigeria aviation sector.

At the event, held in Abuja, Oduah had noted: “This revised policy captures the new vision and mission, the Aviation Master Plan of the Ministry and more importantly major programme areas like state safety programme; accident investigation and prevention, including the establishment of family assistance programme in the case of aviation accident; monitoring and control of General Aviation; introduction of an effective search and rescue mechanism, and the development of an effective and sustainable Economic Regulatory Framework, among others.”

She informed that the new policy places considerable focus on the efficient airspace management, human capital development, infrastructural development, and the introduction of dedicated policy and regulatory framework in controlling and monitoring of General Aviation operations, especially foreign registered aircraft. The essence of this, she stressed, is to streamline the operations of non-scheduled flights to conform with International Standards and Recommended Practices (ICAO SARPs) and the Nigerian Civil Aviation Regulations.

The minister noted that the adoption of the policy would ensure that the General Aviation would now have a dedicated policy, regulatory framework, infrastructure and services to support its operations, unlike in the past when it operated largely in the shadow of commercial airlines.

“The policy also captures the validation of foreign crew license required to certify foreign pilots who will be employed solely to train our qualified local flight crew towards the acquisition of mandatory flying experience.”

The minister expressed conviction that the revised National Civil Aviation Policy would, among others, “be responsive and adaptable to the new safety, security and technological dynamics of the global aviation industry; strengthen the existing regulatory framework; facilitate the growth of domestic airlines, the setting up of the National Carrier, the development of Aerotropolis (Airport Cities), and support the introduction and sustainability of affordable flights to remote and underserved cities as a Public Service Obligation.”


Story and Reaction/Comments:  http://sunnewsonline.com

New Garden Flying Field (N57), Toughkenamon, Pennsylvania: Open House, June 1



NEW GARDEN — The New Garden Flying Field will hold an open house, Saturday June 1, featuring food, fun, live music, and of course, airplanes. The event is free and open to the general public. 

The general aviation airport, owned and operated by the township, will show off its facilities during a fun-filled event, running from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. Rain date is June 2.

The event organizers say that area residents are invited to visit New Garden Flying Field to experience general aviation and learn about the important role the airport plays in our community.

The family-friendly event will feature live music, remote control airplanes, safety presentations, airplane rides, and more.

In addition to the aviation-themed activities, there will also be an antique car gathering.

For more information, go the airport’s Website:  http://www.newgardenflyingfield.com


Source:  http://www.unionvilletimes.com

Cessna 182E Skylane, N817JT: Accident occurred May 13, 2013 in Southwick, Massachusetts

NTSB Identification: ERA13LA241 
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Monday, May 13, 2013 in Southwick, MA
Aircraft: CESSNA 182E, registration: N817JT
Injuries: 1 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators may not have traveled in support of this investigation and used data provided by various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On May 13, 2013, about 1215 eastern daylight time, a Cessna 182E, N817JT, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain after performing a precautionary landing at Cannizzaro Field Airport (28MA), Southwick, Massachusetts. The commercial pilot was not injured. The flight departed from Newport State Airport (UUU), Newport, Rhode Island, about 1130 and was destined to Columbia County Airport (1B1), Hudson, New York. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed. The personal flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to the pilot, the airplane was in cruise flight at 4,500 feet mean sea level when the engine started running rough. He enriched the fuel mixture and applied carburetor heat, but the engine continued to run rough. The pilot then switched the fuel selector from the “both” position to the left tank position, and the engine started to run smoothly for a short period of time. Within a few moments, the engine started running rough again. The pilot switched the fuel selector to the right tank, then back to “both,” and the engine continued to run rough. He then decided to perform a precautionary landing at 28MA. The pilot reported he didn't have the time or altitude to land into the wind so he landed half way down the turf runway. The airplane crossed a dirt road at the end of the field, and the airplane impacted the raised edge of the road, breaking off the nose landing gear. The airplane nosed over and came to rest inverted.


Postaccident examination by Federal Aviation Administration inspectors revealed substantial damage to both wings. The wreckage was retained for further examination.  


SOUTHWICK -- The pilot of a single-engine plane who tried to make an emergency landing on a field midday Monday was unharmed, according to police.

“He walked away. No injuries at all,” Southwick Police Department Dispatcher Robert J. Eak said.

He did not have the name of the pilot, whose plane ended up on its roof in a field in the vicinity of 247 North Loomis St., the dispatcher said. There were no other people on the plane, he said. The incident was called in to the Police Department at 12:10 p.m.

Eak said the plane had been having mechanical problems.

State police as well as members of the Southwick police and fire departments were still at the scene as of 1:30 p.m., according to the dispatcher.

A 1600-foot grass air strip known as Cannizzaro Field is located at 327 North Loomis St., according to Federal Aviation Administration records.


Source:  http://www.masslive.com
  
SOUTHWICK, Mass. (WWLP) - A pilot has escaped without serious injuries after a small plane accident in Southwick early Monday afternoon.

Jim Peters from the Federal Aviation Administration told 22News that the Cessna 182 made a "forced landing" on a grass strip and flipped over.

The field where the plane crashed is located off North Loomis Street, which is in the northwestern section of town, near the Granville and Westfield lines.

Peters said that only the pilot was aboard the plane.

Trooper Rogers of State Police in Russell told 22News that it doesn't appear the pilot was injured.


Source: http://www.wwlp.com