Friday, August 25, 2017

ICON Aircraft





What onlookers & law enforcement thought was a forced-landing off Cape Neddick turned out to be a very normal occurrence for ICON Aircraft.

Representatives of ICON Aircraft told NEWS CENTER the aircraft was delivered to its owner.


“He landed it on the water normally and it was subsequently picked up and hoisted onto the owner’s yacht -- where he stores it when he is there," said Nathan Strange, Vice President of Marketing and Communications with ICON Aircraft. "The ICON A5 is an award-winning, amphibious aircraft designed to be extraordinarily easy to fly and can safely land on both land or water. Given its popularity and innovative design, the A5 will start to become more and more prevalent. If you live on or around water you can expect to see more of these aircraft in the future.”


CAPE NEDDICK, Maine (NEWS CENTER) — No one was hurt Friday when a small plane was forced to land off the coast of Cape Neddick, police in York said.

Dispatch got a call around 3:15 p.m. from a person on Short Sands Beach. The caller reported seeing a small plane skip the water a couple times and appear to go into the trees.


Emergency crews then spotted the amphibious plane in the water, which appeared to be under tow from a boat.


Police said York Harbor Master personnel made contact with the pilot and confirmed no one was trapped or injured.


According to an initial investigation conducted by officials, the plane was launched from a large luxury boat anchored off of Short Sands Beach. Shortly after taking off it likely developed mechanical problems, thus forcing the pilot to land in the water.


The plane was towed a short distance back to the boat it was launched from.


The case was referred to the FAA for further investigation.


Original article can be found here ➤  http://www.wcsh6.com


August 29, 2017

Hi,


I’m reaching out on behalf of ICON Aircraft to clarify that the landing referred to in your recent story was in fact NOT a crash. There was no incident. The plane landed on the water and was subsequently picked up and hoisted onto the owner’s yacht – it’s normal operation for them. A bystander on shore reported the incident as a crash which is false.


Amphibious aircraft such as the ICON A5 will start to become more and more prevalent, and those who live on or around water can expect to see more of these great planes.


Please make this correction at your earliest convenience and feel free to reach out with any questions.


Thank you,

Fi

Regards,

Fi Bergandi 

fiorella@thebrandamp.com

CAPE NEDDICK – A plane crash reported over the weekend in the waters off the Maine coast wasn’t a crash at all.

California-based airplane manufacturer ICON said Tuesday that one of its A5 amphibious aircraft landed in the water and was lifted by crane onto a yacht by its owner.


Witnesses who saw the plane skip across the water thought they’d witnessed a crash and notified the York Police Department, which responded accordingly on Friday.


The incident was reported by several media outlets, including The Associated Press.


The police department notified the Federal Aviation Administration. An FAA spokesman said Monday there’s no investigation and the landing was a “routine event.” 


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.pressherald.com


CAPE NEDDICK, Maine -  A plane crash reported in the waters off Maine wasn't a crash at all.

Vacaville, California-based airplane manufacturer Icon said Tuesday that one of its A5 amphibious aircraft landed in the water and was lifted by crane onto a yacht — all by design.


Witnesses who saw the plane skip across the water Friday thought they'd seen a crash and notified the York Police Department, which responded accordingly.


The incident was reported by several media outlets, including The Associated Press, based on information from the police department.


The department notified the Federal Aviation Administration. An FAA spokesman said Tuesday there's no investigation and the landing was a "routine event."


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.miamiherald.com


CAPE NEDDICK, Maine (AP) — A plane crash reported over the weekend in the waters off the Maine coast wasn't a crash at all.

California-based airplane manufacturer ICON said Tuesday that one of its A5 amphibious aircraft landed in the water and was lifted by crane onto a yacht by its owner.


Witnesses who saw the plane skip across the water thought they'd witnessed a crash and notified the York Police Department, which responded accordingly on Friday.


The incident was reported by several media outlets, including The Associated Press.


The police department notified the Federal Aviation Administration. An FAA spokesman said Monday there's no investigation and the landing was a "routine event."


=========



A seaplane was forced to land in the water off York shortly after takeoff Friday afternoon.

No one was hurt in the incident off Cape Neddick around 3 p.m. Friday, according to Sgt. Brian Curtin of the York Police Department.


Curtin said the plane was launched from “a large luxury boat” off Short Sands Beach, but developed mechanical problems shortly after takeoff and pilot was forced to put it down in the water.


The plane was towed back to the boat, Curtin said.


A caller on the beach had contacted police to say that the plane seemed to skip a few times on the water, and appeared to have gone into some trees, but the York harbor master determined that the plane landed safely and was towed back to the boat, Curtin said.


The Federal Aviation Administration was contacted for further investigation, Curtin said.


Original article ➤ http://www.pressherald.com


YORK, Maine – No one was injured after a small amphibious plane launched off of a luxury boat anchored off Short Sands Beach Friday afternoon was forced to land in the water.

Police, York Beach fire officials and the York harbormaster were all called to the scene after the incident was reported about 3:15 p.m. Friday. The incident has been turned over to the Federal Aviation Commission for further investigation, police said.


According to beachgoer Ted Chadwick of Dracut, Mass., the yacht and what appeared to be a large research vessel came into the cove at the same time. From the yacht, a large vessel with three decks, two jet skis and one small boat were put in the water. The plane was also part of the apparatus of the yacht, York Beach Fire Chief Dave Bridges was told.


“Then we see this small seaplane fly by and try to land” on the Concordville side of the cove. Chadwick said it came around three or four times, attempting to land, but was unsuccessful. It then flew out of sight, and was towed back in by one of the small boats a short time later.


The plane and later the jet skis were brought aboard the vessel, which had a flat deck and several antenna dishes mounted to the house.


Bridges said he received a call from someone on one of the jet skis, who told him the one-person plane ran out of fuel. Police said the plane appeared to have developed mechanical problems. The exact cause was unclear Friday evening.


According to police, harbormaster personnel made contact with the pilot and confirmed no one was trapped or injured.


“It was interesting,” said Chadwick. “How often would you see two big boats like that come and one take on an airplane.”


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.fosters.com 


CAPE NEDDICK, Maine (NEWS CENTER) — No one was hurt in a small plane was forced to land Friday off the coast of Cape Neddick, police in York said.

Dispatch got a call around 3:15 p.m. from a person on Short Sands Beach. The caller reported seeing a small plane skip the water a couple times and appear to go into the trees.

Emergency crews then spotted the amphibious plane in the water, which appeared to be under tow from a boat.


Police said York Harbor Master personnel made contact with the pilot and confirmed no one was trapped or injured.


According to an initial investigation conducted by officials, the plane was launched from a large luxury boat anchored off of Short Sands Beach. Shortly after taking off it likely developed mechanical problems, thus forcing the pilot to land in the water.


The plane was towed a short distance back to the boat it was launched from.


The case was referred to the FAA for further investigation.


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.wcsh6.com


CAPE NEDDICK, Maine —

A seaplane crashed into the water off Cape Neddick shortly after taking off from a "large luxury boat," Friday afternoon, according to the York Police Department.


The pilot was the only person on board and there were no injuries, according to York Police.


The boat was anchored off of Short Sands Beach when the plane took off. The plane then encountered mechanical problems and the pilot was forced to land on the water.


The plane was then towed back to the boat.


The Federal Aviation Administration is now investigating the crash.


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.wmtw.com 


Sources:

http://www.wmtw.com

https://www.usnews.com

http://www.seattletimes.com


http://www.pressherald.com

NTSB Identification: WPR17FA101
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Monday, May 08, 2017 in Lake Berryessa, CA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 08/07/2017
Aircraft: ICON AIRCRAFT INC A5, registration: N184BA
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 commercial pilot departed in the light sport, amphibious airplane during daytime visual meteorological conditions to perform a new employee familiarization flight with the passenger, who the company had recently hired. A witness, who was in a boat on a lake, reported seeing the accident airplane flying about 30 to 50 ft over the water at what appeared to be between 30 to 40 mph. The witness added that, as the airplane passed by his position and entered a nearby cove, which was surrounded by rising terrain on either side and at its end, he heard the engine "rev up and accelerate hard" as the airplane approached the right side of the canyon "in what appeared to be an effort to climb out of" the canyon. Subsequently, the airplane climbed to about 100 ft above the water and entered a left turn as it began to descend before it flew beyond the witness's field of view. The witness stated that he heard the sound of impact shortly after losing sight of the airplane.

Review of recorded data from two separate recording devices installed in the airplane revealed that, about 15 minutes after departure, the airplane started a descent from 3,700 ft GPS altitude. About 7 minutes later, it had descended to 450 ft GPS altitude and turned to a northerly heading, staying over the water between the shorelines. About 46 seconds later, at a GPS altitude of 450 ft and 54 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS), the airplane entered the cove. About 20 seconds later, engine power was increased, and the airplane began to climb while it turned slightly right before initiating a left turn. The airplane reached a maximum GPS altitude of 506 ft before it began to descend. Shortly after, the airplane impacted terrain at a GPS altitude of 470 ft and 66 KIAS. Postaccident examination of the airframe and engine revealed no evidence of any preexisting mechanical malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation.

It is likely that the pilot mistakenly thought the canyon that he entered was a different canyon that led to the larger, open portion of the lake. Additionally, it is likely that, once the pilot realized there was no exit from the canyon, he attempted to perform a 180° left turn to exit in the direction from which he entered. Based upon performance information outlined in the Pilot's Operating Handbook for the accident airplane, the airplane's altitude above the water's surface and its indicated airspeed, and the ridge line elevations in the area adjacent to the accident site, the airplane would have not been able to climb out of the rising terrain that surrounded the area, which led to his failure to maintain clearance from terrain.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot's failure to maintain clearance from terrain while maneuvering at a low altitude. Contributing to the accident was the pilot's mistaken entry into a canyon surrounded by steep rising terrain while at a low altitude for reasons that could not be determined.

HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On May 8, 2017, about 0908 Pacific daylight time, an amphibious, light sport Icon Aircraft, Inc., A5, N184BA, impacted terrain while maneuvering near Lake Berryessa, California. The commercial pilot and passenger were fatally injured, and the airplane sustained substantial damage. The airplane was registered to a private individual and operated by Icon Aircraft, Inc., Vacaville, California, as a 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 business flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed near the accident site about the time of the accident, and no flight plan was filed. The local flight originated from Nut Tree Airport (VCB), Vacaville, California, at 0852.

Representatives from Icon Aircraft reported that the pilot was conducting a new employee familiarization flight with the passenger, who the company had recently hired. A witness, who was in a boat on Lake Berryessa near the entrance to Little Portuguese Canyon, reported seeing the airplane flying about 30 to 50 ft above the lake at what appeared to be between 30 to 40 mph. The witness stated that the engine was running smoothly and that the airplane was level. The airplane passed by his position flying in a northerly direction and entered Little Portuguese Canyon. The witness reported hearing the engine "rev up and accelerate hard" as the airplane approached the right side of the canyon "in what appeared to be an effort to climb out of" the canyon. Subsequently, the airplane climbed to about 100 ft above ground level and then entered a left turn as it began to quickly descend. The witness stated that it appeared that the pilot attempted to make a "U-turn in the air" just before the airplane flew beyond his field of view. The witness stated that he heard the sound of impact shortly after losing sight of the airplane.

A second witness, who was located inside a house boat parked in a cove adjacent to the accident site, reported that she saw an airplane fly by her position at a low altitude in a northerly direction and did not see it return. The witness added that neither her nor anyone in her group heard the airplane impact the ground.

The airplane was equipped with a flight data monitoring device that captured data from the flight data computer. In addition, the airplane was equipped with an engine control unit that captured the most recent hour of data from the engine. The recovered data showed that the engine was started at 0839:34, and that, at 0852:00, the airplane departed runway 2 at VCB and then initiated a left turn to a northerly heading. The airplane reached a maximum GPS altitude of about 3,700 ft at 0900:00 and began to descend shortly thereafter. At 0905:25, the airplane turned to the west, crossed the shore of Lake Berryessa near the Monticello Dam, and continued to descend. By 0906:44, the airplane descended to 450 ft GPS altitude and turned to a northerly heading while it remained over the water between the shorelines. At 0907:30, the airplane entered Little Portuguese Canyon at 450 ft GPS altitude and 54 KIAS. At 0907:50, engine power was increased, and the airplane began to climb while it turned slightly east and then initiated a left turn to the west. The airplane reached a maximum altitude of 506 ft GPS altitude at 0908:03 before it began to descend. The airplane struck terrain at 0908:06 at 470 ft GPS altitude and 66 KIAS. Throughout the entire span of the recorded data, all engine parameters were within the normal operating range. For further information regarding the downloaded data, see the Other Devices Factual Report in the public docket for this accident.

Lake Berryessa is a reservoir that is about 23 miles long and 3 miles wide. The southern area of the lake features various coves and canyons, which are mostly surrounded by areas of steep rising terrain. In addition, there is only one entrance to the larger area of the lake from the southern area of the lake. The areas of rising terrain that surrounded Little Portuguese Canyon varied between 780 and 1,420 ft msl. The accident site was located about 0.35 nautical mile (nm) from the tops of 1,200-ft-high ridges to the west, 0.36 nm from the 1,050-ft-high ridges to the east, and 1.34 nm from the 1,200-ft-high ridges to the north. In addition, Little Portuguese Canyon narrowed in width from about 700 ft at the opening to about 300 ft near the accident site and 240 ft near the farthest northern area of the canyon.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot held a commercial pilot certificate with airplane single-engine and multiengine land and sea, rotorcraft helicopter, glider, and instrument airplane ratings. The pilot was issued a Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) second-class airman medical certificate on November 25, 2016, with the limitation that he "must wear corrective lenses." At the time of his most recent medical application, the pilot reported that he had accumulated 4,600 hours total flight time, 14 hours of which were in the previous 6 months.

Review of the pilot's logbook and company flight records revealed that the pilot had accumulated a total of 4,506 hours of flight time, 595 hours of which were in the accident make/model airplane. The pilot had logged 23 hours of flight time in the 90 days before the accident. The pilot's most recent flight review was completed on April 23, 2016.

The passenger did not hold any pilot or medical certificates.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The two-seat, high-wing, retractable gear, amphibious light sport airplane, serial number 00007, was manufactured in 2016. It was powered by a 100-horsepower Rotax 912IS Sport engine and was equipped with a Sensenitch three-blade propeller. In addition, the airplane was equipped with a ballistic recovery parachute. Review of the airframe and engine maintenance logbook records revealed that the most recent 100-hour inspection was completed on May 5, 2017, at a Hobbs time of 94.8 hours. At the time of the accident, the engine and airframe had accumulated 182.7 hours since new.

The accident make/model airplane's Pilot's Operating Handbook, Section 2.2, "Airspeed Limitations," noted that the published clean configuration stall speed (Vs) was 45 knots indicated airspeed (KIAS) at idle power, maximum takeoff weight, and flaps not extended. The published landing configuration stall speed (Vso) was 39 KIAS at idle power, maximum takeoff weight, and flaps extended to 30°.


Section 5.1, "Summary of Performance Specifications," stated that the best angle of climb speed (Vx) with flaps retracted was 54 KIAS and that the best rate of climb speed (Vy) was 58 KIAS. Section 5.4.1 stated that, at maximum gross weight, the stall speeds for flaps retracted, 0°, 30°, 45°, and 60° angle of bank were 45, 48, 54, and 64 KIAS, respectively. Section 5.8, "Rate of Climb," stated that the published climb rate at maximum gross weight, flaps retracted, full throttle, airspeed of 58 KIAS, and 60° outside air temperature would be 629 ft per minute (fpm) at sea level and 592 fpm at 1,000 ft mean sea level (msl).


METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION


At 0853, a recorded weather observation at VCB, located about 13 miles southeast of the accident site, revealed that the wind was from 030° at 5 knots, visibility 10 statute miles, clear sky, temperature 64°F, dew point 52°F, and an altimeter setting of 29.95 inches of mercury.


WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION


Examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane impacted terrain on an approximate 194° heading and came to rest upright in the northern area of Little Portuguese Canyon on Lake Berryessa at an elevation of about 440 ft msl. All major structural components of the airplane were located at the accident site. The fuselage, right wing, and a portion of the empennage were located on the shoreline along a steep embankment, and the outboard portion of the left wing and left side of the empennage were partially submerged in water. A large area of freshly disturbed dirt was observed immediately in front of the right wing. No damage was observed to the surrounding vegetation and trees immediately in front of the right wing or behind (upslope) of the wreckage.


Examination of the fuselage revealed that the fuselage structure, engine nacelle, and wing center section were crushed downward and displaced laterally to the left. The canopy structure was displaced from the airplane and located adjacent to the wreckage. The forward portion of the cockpit area exhibited significant impact damage with most of the instrument panel separated. The empennage structure was separated from the airframe just forward of the vertical stabilizer; however, it remained attached via control cables. The ballistic parachute handle was partially extended, and the pin was removed. The parachute and rocket were intact and not deployed.


The wreckage was recovered to a secure location for further examination; both wings and empennage were removed to facilitate transport of the wreckage. 


The roof structure of the fuselage, which included the wing mounts, was crushed downward and slightly rotated right about 10° and was shifted laterally to the left. The engine remained attached to the fuselage structure. The right sea wing exhibited impact damage and was fractured throughout. The left sea wing exhibited impact damage, was partially separated from the fuselage, and was displaced upward. One of the propeller blades was embedded in the left sea wing. Both main landing gears appeared to be in the "up" position. Both wing lock mechanisms were in the "locked" position.


Rudder control continuity was established from the rudder pedals aft to the area of the separated portion of the empennage. Aileron control continuity was established from the left and right control sticks to the wing root bell crank (cables continuous). The right side aileron bell crank was pulled away from its mount with the cables still attached, consistent with impact damage. Elevator control continuity was established from the control sticks to the separated portion of the empennage.


The right wing leading edge to the wing root remained attached to the wing structure. The wing structure aft of the aileron bell crank at the wing root was separated, extending aft at a 45° angle to about 18 inches outboard of the wing root. The separated portion of the wing structure remained attached to the fuselage. The leading edge exhibited impact damage throughout its span. The flap remained attached via the center and outboard mount. The aileron remained attached via the inboard mount. Flight control continuity to the aileron was established from the wing root bellcrank to the aileron.


The left wing was fractured in half from the leading edge (at the flap/aileron junction) extending outboard at an approximate 45° angle outboard to the trailing edge. The aileron was separated into two pieces. The inboard section remained attached to the inboard mount. The outboard portion of the aileron was separated just outboard of the inboard mount and separated from the middle and outboard mounts. Flight control continuity was established from the wing root aileron bellcrank to the aileron.


The rudder and elevator remained attached to their respective mounts. Flight control continuity of the rudder and elevator was established from the area of separation. Both left and right elevator tips were in the "locked" position.


The engine remained intact and attached to the airframe. The crankshaft was partially rotated by the propeller; however, rotation was limited due to one propeller blade being embedded in the left sea wing. The embedded propeller blade exhibited chordwise striations on the front and aft sides of the blade tip.


MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION


According to the Napa County Coroner's autopsy report, the pilot's cause of death was "multiple blunt impact injuries," and the manner of death was "accident."


The FAA's Bioaeronautical Sciences Research Laboratory conducted toxicology tests on specimens from the pilot. The results were negative for all tests performed. 


NTSB Identification: GAA17CA213
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, April 01, 2017 in Key Largo, FL
Probable Cause Approval Date: 06/07/2017
Aircraft: ICON AIRCRAFT INC A5, registration: N672BA
Injuries: 2 Uninjured.

NTSB investigators used data provided by various entities, including, but not limited to, the Federal Aviation Administration and/or the operator and did not travel in support of this investigation to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot of the amphibious airplane reported that, during a no-flap water landing, he noticed a higher descent rate than expected. He added that he applied full power to initiate a go-around but that the airplane landed hard on the water. The pilot and passenger egressed the airplane and were rescued without further incident.
The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.
The pilot reported that he believed the airplane encountered “a windshift/shear to a tailwind as [he] transitioned high to low for landing approach toward the [south-southwest].” A review of recorded data from the automated weather observation station located about 6 miles west of the accident site reported that, about 17 minutes before the accident, the wind was from 090° at 9 knots.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows:
The pilot’s failure to maintain a proper descent rate during the approach, which resulted in a hard landing.

The pilot of the amphibious airplane reported that during a no flap water landing, he noticed a higher descent rate than expected. He added that he applied full power to initiate a go-around, but the airplane landed hard on the water. The pilot and passenger egressed the airplane and were rescued without further incident.

The airplane sustained substantial damage to the fuselage.

The pilot reported that there were no preaccident mechanical failures or malfunctions with the airplane that would have precluded normal operation.

The pilot reported that he believes the airplane encountered "a windshift/shear to a tailwind as [he] transitioned high to low for landing approach toward the [south-southwest]". A review of recorded data from the automated weather observation station located about 6 miles to the west of the accident site reported that about 17 minutes before the accident the wind was 090° at 9 knots.
=========

Former Boeing Chairman and Chief Executive Phil Condit has joined the board of ICON Aircraft, makers of a small two-person, amphibious sport airplane that has gone through turbulent development.

Former Boeing Chairman and Chief Executive Phil Condit, who most significantly led Boeing’s merger with rival planemaker McDonnell Douglas, has joined the board of ICON Aircraft, makers of a two-person, amphibious sport airplane that has gone through turbulent development.


Based in Vacaville, California, ICON delivered its first production aircraft in July 2015 but the following year halted production, laid off workers and announced a one-year delivery pause.


The company also suffered two crashes of its plane, including a fatal crash in May that killed chief test pilot John Karkow and another employee.


A National Transportation Safety Board investigation determined that the probable cause was pilot error not mechanical failure.


In June, ICON resumed deliveries to customers and now plans to ramp up production.


Condit has been an adviser to the company since 2010 and an investor since 2011.


Original article can be found here ➤ http://www.seattletimes.com

25 comments:

Anonymous said...

Looks like an A5. I didn't know there were that many out there.

Andy said...

So much for good quality journalism theses days. How about some info on who was involved in this incident? Who is the owner of the two yatchs? The plane?

Andy said...

My previous comment is more a dig on the press - not on Kathryn as the blogger. I should have been clear about that. It was pretty neat thing to see while spending a day the beach!

Miz Margaret said...

was also on the beach that day and those boats were in the cove before that plane showed up and skipped across the water..alot of people moving back and forth between boats and were there for HOURS. Not buying this story

Fi Bergandi, The Brand Amp said...

Hi,

I’m reaching out on behalf of ICON Aircraft to clarify that the landing referred to in your recent story was in fact NOT a crash. There was no incident. The plane landed on the water and was subsequently picked up and hoisted onto the owner’s yacht – it’s normal operation for them. A bystander on shore reported the incident as a crash which is false.

Amphibious aircraft such as the ICON A5 will start to become more and more prevalent, and those who live on or around water can expect to see more of these great planes.

Please make this correction at your earliest convenience and feel free to reach out with any questions.

Thank you,
Fi

Regards,
Fi Bergandi
fiorella@thebrandamp.com

Andy said...

How about identifying the pilot/owner of the aircraft? I was on the beach that day. Been going to York beaches for over 30 years. Never seen an aircraft land nor have I seen yatchs that size 100 yards off shore. To me that fits the definition of an "incident" I see no reason for anyone to make any corrections in this blog. The only corrections I'd like seen in the media about this incident is to do some better reporting and obtain more information on the aircraft and the yatchs. For example, perhaps in their news articles they could have identified the A5 and provided some information on the increase in personal sport aircrafts. Not all news stories need to be doom and gloom. This is an example of something that was out of the ordinary, cool, and exciting in a good way!

To me, the story here isn't whether an airplane crashed or not - but that something neat and unusual took place. I'd like to learn more about it. And that is in part the media's place. And as a marketing agent for the Icon company (presumably??) rather than run wild and demanding corrections...maybe you could enlighten the general public as to what makes these planes so great.

Andy said...

Additionally, the Fire Chief is the one that said their was a mechanical failure. And the police dept. indicated that someone on one of the Jet Skis involved in the "incident" claimed the aircraft ran out of fuel. So there you go - to individuals with authority and professional roles and responsibilites with knowledge of the situation reported otherwise. I don't know why you are trying to correct a story in two very small local papers and a bloggers report. Seems you don't need to do any damage control on this...why do you feel the need?

Anonymous said...

Nothing to see here...

They've simply not reported all the other real incidents/mechanical failures that have happened already to keep it out of the press.

Anonymous said...

ICON needs to be careful with their tactics or they could lose consumer confidence.

Anonymous said...

Just more fake news.

Andy said...

According to the company the aircraft is "...designed to be extraordinarily easy to fly and can safely land...". Is this why the companies lead aeronautical engineer and colleague were killed in a crash this past May? According to the company, their lead engineer who died in the accident had more than 20 years experience as a test pilot.

One of many articles about this aircraft can be found at https://www.wired.com/2017/05/icon-a5-crash-kills-2-including-unique-planes-lead-engineer/.

The Icon A5 with only about 20 produced (according to a recent internet search) remains an an experimental aircraft with a dangerous history. It is extremely irresponsible for the company or anyone to landing/flying this experimental toy 100 yards off a popular beach full of families and children!

Anonymous said...

Indeed sir-only 20 or 21 planes flying, two crashes (one double fatal), and many other mechanical failures/aeroplane problems that were kept very quiet and not reported.

Anonymous said...

Hmm. Only 20 or 21 of these planes are flying and two have crashed including one with two fatalities? How can the company market these as safe? And what is the rush by the company to have this story corrected that it was not a crash? This story sounds like an onion...the more layers you peel back the more suspicious this incident is looking!

Anonymous said...

Well, this certainly is a first. In my entire aviation career I have read tens of thousands of accidents / incidents news reports. Everything is preliminary in aviation event news reporting, same goes with NTSB preliminary reports - subject to change. But, not once - not once, have I read or heard where a aircraft maker demanded news media outlets, Associated Press to change a story from an "accident" to "incident" or from "incident" to whatever. This company is sounding like they are in a desperate situation. They made all those news outlets change a story. Ridiculously stupid and unbelievable.

Anonymous said...

News publishers update stories all the time as additional information comes in. This isn't just about an update change to the initial story. ICON PR had all the news media outlets, specifically AP, print an entire NEW story about the event. At a time when Hurricane Harvey was at it's height with horrific damage and deaths, people wanting to know about their loved ones well check, ICON had the journalists do a brand new story about the event that took place a week ago. Free publicity for ICON. Shame on them! Shame, shame, shame.

Anonymous said...

Something has to be up for the company to be so aggressive on what was a small story in a small town. Why else would the company be trying so hard on this? It appears as if the company may have put out their on press release and that has been picked up by the wire.

This company and aircraft have a troubled history. 20 planes produced. Two have crashed. Major cutbacks in anticipated production (Originally planned to build 500 by 2017). Delays in customer deliveries. Plagued by these production delays the company layed off a massive part of their work force in 2016.

The company also had an extremely unusual purchasers agreement. Including a clause that the purchaser would not sue the company leading to a cat and mouse game between the media and the company in which the company reportedly ignored media requests, refused interview requests, and provided extremely vague answers.

On April 1, 2017 a factory owned A5 crashed in Biscayne National Park, Florida.
On May 8, 2017 a factory owned A5 crashed in Lake Berryessa in Napa County, Ca.

Normally, a reputalbe company with a reputable product would not care so much by a small story in a small town. But they seem to be irked by this for some reason. It has certainly struck a cord to have provoked a most unusual PR/Marketing response.

Anonymous said...

I wish more luxury yatchs were equiped with such giant cranes.

Anonymous said...

Putting Themselves Out Of Business.

Anonymous said...

"I’m reaching out on behalf of ICON Aircraft to clarify that the landing referred to in your recent story was in fact NOT a crash. – it’s normal operation for them."

Hmmmmm sounds about right, lol.

Anonymous said...

Ha! Ha! Ha! Too funny! "Normal Operation" = Crashes

Anonymous said...

Love is like a baseball game - 3 strikes and you're out! By The Intruders ;)

1.) On April 1, 2017 a factory owned A5 crashed in Biscayne National Park, Florida.
2.) On May 8, 2017 a factory owned A5 crashed in Lake Berryessa in Napa County, Ca.
3.) On August 25, 2017 factory owned A5 crashed (strike that), incident (strike that) normal operation (strike that).

Anonymous said...

The odd reaction is because it's getting too close to something that hurts.

Hundreds of millions...the house of cards could topple!

John Darke, Sr. said...

In my opinion, the ICON business plan is flawed in the following ways. It purports to have created an aircraft that anyone (think jet ski) can "safely" fly. A pilots license not required. The company is relying on an attitude indicator to keep drivers of this crash safe from stalls. The aircraft (any aircraft) needs a well trained and experienced pilot in the left seat to keep the pilot, passenger and people on the ground (or water) safe. Yet their promotional videos depict a fun day at the beach with the ICON aircraft flying around boaters and swimmers much closer than the 500 feet required by law behaving in a manner similar to jet ski drivers showing off in irresponsible ways.

Anonymous said...

Very poor leadership, a lot of politics, bad management, people clawing their way up the ladder. Their business plan is really no plan at all.

Former employee

Anonymous said...

Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) ;