The great "Balls to the Wall" Challange, GT450 vs Whirlwind 912s

[RV4ker (RIP)]

With his 7 year old son as well!!!!

[kloot piloot]

Hey guys, please relax a bit.
I don't think the last page on this thread reflects the spirit of this forum.

I know little of this project, the accident or the future of the project other than what is on the thread and in the accident report.

1. I think it is/was commendable that a South Afican progressed very far with a project, which if priced as claimed earlier in this thread, would certainly have become a popular product. I am fully convinced that Aiden, Mike and Manfred must have faced similar critisms from the market and competitors at the time of them entering the market. It is called Pioneering ! Well they proved everyone wrong. With blood, sweat and tears their perserverence left a legacy in our African flying conditions, as well as abroad. What would SA's microlighting scene have been without the Aqcuilas, Scouts, Cobras and the ever so sturdy Raptors ?

2. The CAA report is very clear about the accident. A licensed 3rd party investor and his 7 year old son crashed the trike, and not the owner of the trike ! The licensed pilot / investor should know better than to fly an experimental un-registered trike with "nil" hours on type and no conversion !!!

3. The accident reporter (not worth calling the reporter an investigator) throws in 2 pages right at the end. An unsupported addendum about marital affairs. WTF has that to do with an accident report if the reporter is unwilling to explain his intent with the addendum in the report ?

I dare all of you to read the book "Avoiding fatal flying traps" by Johan Lottering. An accident report is an anonymous document for others to learn from. The report of the above accident correctly states the wrongs about an unregistered aircraft. But other than that it has in summary failed terribly to point out the wrongfull actions of the PIC on that day ! The PIC decided to fly an a/c with zero hour rating. The PIC took a passenger on an experimental flight. The PIC goes game watching because of a passenger's needs. I could carry on and on, but I probably have overwelcomed my stay by now.

I recently criticized a similar biased accident report on AVCOM, and I will do so again.

I personally hope that the Whirlwind will fly one day. It looks promising from what I read here. I also personally hope that the PIC on the day (and not the manufacturer) will be nailed as hot as it can get for him.

I smell foul play and anti-competitive behaviour by the accident reporter.

[AndyG]

Hey guys, please relax a bit.
I don't think the last page on this thread reflects the spirit of this forum.

I know little of this project, the accident or the future of the project other than what is on the thread and in the accident report.

1. I think it is/was commendable that a South Afican progressed very far with a project, which if priced as claimed earlier in this thread, would certainly have become a popular product. I am fully convinced that Aiden, Mike and Manfred must have faced similar critisms from the market and competitors at the time of them entering the market. It is called Pioneering ! Well they proved everyone wrong. With blood, sweat and tears their perserverence left a legacy in our African flying conditions, as well as abroad. What would SA's microlighting scene have been without the Aqcuilas, Scouts, Cobras and the ever so sturdy Raptors ?

2. The CAA report is very clear about the accident. A licensed 3rd party investor and his 7 year old son crashed the trike, and not the owner of the trike ! The licensed pilot / investor should know better than to fly an experimental un-registered trike with "nil" hours on type and no conversion !!!

3. The accident reporter (not worth calling the reporter an investigator) throws in 2 pages right at the end. An unsupported addendum about marital affairs. WTF has that to do with an accident report if the reporter is unwilling to explain his intent with the addendum in the report ?

I dare all of you to read the book "Avoiding fatal flying traps" by Johan Lottering. An accident report is an anonymous document for others to learn from. The report of the above accident correctly states the wrongs about an unregistered aircraft. But other than that it has in summary failed terribly to point out the wrongfull actions of the PIC on that day ! The PIC decided to fly an a/c with zero hour rating. The PIC took a passenger on an experimental flight. The PIC goes game watching because of a passenger's needs. I could carry on and on, but I probably have overwelcomed my stay by now.

I recently criticized a similar biased accident report on AVCOM, and I will do so again.

I personally hope that the Whirlwind will fly one day. It looks promising from what I read here. I also personally hope that the PIC on the day (and not the manufacturer) will be nailed as hot as it can get for him.

I smell foul play and anti-competitive behaviour by the accident reporter.

Sorry Kloot,

I normally respect your postings but what you are saying here are does not make sense. I don't give a damn about who owns the trike, the marital aspects etc. To take your kid flying in a prototype aircraft with no ATF is not on, forget the politics behinds this. I agree it was a promising looking plane and I certainly hope to see it fly in the future but what happened was wrong pure and simple.

Cheers,

Andy

[Africa]

Andy i think what Kloot is trying to say, this post is becoming to the point of slandering the product and the manufacturer and trying to make them out as liars etc, so he is defending them not the incident/accident . just my 2 cents

[kloot piloot]

I normally respect your postings

Bliksem, that is the biggest compliment in years. My own 9 year old would not even put that on paper.

Andy, what I meant (and I think that is what I wrote) is that an accident report should leave a message to you and me. The report does do that in any sense, it rather concentrates on the plane not being certified. The crux of the report is wrong. Dacron, tubing and Rotaxes can be repaired and replaced, but a pilot and 7 year old son are not automotive spare parts. Nor is the hurt for the surviving family.

The fact is that the manufacturer did not fly the plane. At least that is what the investigator states. The manufacturer therefor does not have a 7 year old son.

The plane was flown (according to the report) by an investor. And this zero hour rated investor thought it prudent to take his own son for a flip in a non registered plane. Now that is my problem !!!

It would therefor appear (again as stated in the report) that the manufacturer has nothing to do with the factal accident. (Whether he approved of the flight is immeterial to the facts of the report) He / she is in the process to build a new pioneering product. Comes the investor/ financier and decides to fly the value of his investment, even decides to "gooi" his kid in the back, then slams the deck.

Who should be rapped ? Plane or pilot ?

I say the PIC. Not the plane, nor the manufacturer.

Now let me state loud and clear: I do not dispute the possibility that the manufacturer requested / approved that the investor fly the plane on that day.

The report does not do this. The report therefor is useless to students pilots and pilots. The on-face value of the report together with the remarks made on this thread heads towards rediculing a possible product and a possible pioneering manufacturer.

That's all I meant to highlight, and I think Africa wished to confirm.

Africa wrote:

Andy i think what Kloot is trying to say, this post is becoming to the point of slandering the product and the manufacturer and trying to make them out as liars etc, so he is defending them not the incident/accident . just my 2 cents

[Aerosan]

Guys, we should not become "the other forum" all forums have good and bad vibes we have always been good, good sprit and good times. If you cannot help someone, please just dont hurt them. Is that so difficult to do

my 2c

[Bundy]

Who should be rapped ? Plane or pilot ?

I say the PIC. Not the plane, nor the manufacturer.

Now let me state loud and clear: I do not dispute the possibility that the manufacturer requested / approved that the investor fly the plane on that day.

The report does not do this. The report therefor is useless to students pilots and pilots. The on-face value of the report together with the remarks made on this thread heads towards rediculing a possible product and a possible pioneering manufacturer.

That's all I meant to highlight, and I think Africa wished to confirm.

Fair enough Kloot. I will keep my opinion of the PIC and the manufacturer seperate.

I can tell you that I dont think this challenge will ever take place, the manufacturer in question is my instructor as well and the whirlwind I see every time I fly is a long way away from flying condition. It is however a very sleek and beautiful looking machine, much nicer than the Thunderbolt parked next to it.

Marketing a new trike like these two must be a hell of a challenge if I think about it now. Trying to introduce a trike to compete with others that have decades of development behind them is no easy feat. I will afford Alex that much.

I hope he gets this thing going finally as he has invested a lot of money in just getting it this far.

[AndyG]

I have nothing against the product or manufacturer. What got my goat was the fact that someone chose to fly an unlicensed aircraft and to top it all took an innocent youngster up with him. I can imagine the time, money and investment that has gone into the development of the product and hope that it will continue and prosper.

The main thing is that they are both alright. If I came across as attacking the mnufacturer I certainly wasn't and the accident report means nothing to me. What incensed me was the points above plain and simple. Jamie I got the gist of what Kloot was trying to say so no need to explain for me mate (hope that you and the family are well)

No further comments suffice to say, fly safely guys and think and be responsible for your thoughts and actions

Cheers,



Andy

[Tumbleweed]

Well this now clears up who flew the plane and illiminates the questioning of integrity about the designers and real test pilots.

At least all future pilots on this type and their pax's and families would not have to be concerned about 'cowboy testing'.

Good luck to them with the certification. Research and development costs are dead without production and sales.

[bobthebuilder]

Will the project continue?

[bobthebuilder]

IMHO, I don’t think the report was as well, and professionally written as we have come to expect.

Was this the maiden flight?
I think not.

[Rudix]

IMHO, I don’t think the report was as well, and professionally written as we have come to expect.

Was this the maiden flight?
I think not.

Before you can fly a plane, even a test flight, it must be registered and it must have a proving ATF so sorry, the manufacturer is NOT innocent

I love the idea of more locally produced planes and I will support them 100% but what happened here is not cool......

Fly safe,
Rudi

[bobthebuilder]

The accident happened a long time ago. It took some time to come out.

Also, the wreckage was moved. Is not also a big NO NO?

[Morph]

I do not know any of the details regarding this but I can say this

CAA are focusing very seriously on aircraft accidents and incidents. There have been far too many of these that happen, and the wrong procedure is followed. There is no excuse for this, there is enough information on this forum that describes the correct process to follow in the case of an accident or incident. In the Case of an accident, the aircraft cannot be moved until given permission to do so by the CAA inspector.

There have been recent cases of training aircraft being involved in an accident, serious injuries, and not reported. By the time CAA/Misasa got there the aircraft had been stripped already.

Let's get serious about our sport guys, or we will start to lose our privileges. You don't get into trouble for reporting an accident, you do if you don't. You also can't hide it, it will come out, sooner or later.

[bobthebuilder]

Will charges be brought against the owner and PIC?

I don't understand why they would have gone ahead and flown the aircraft without the propper paperwork.
Impatience?
Impatience could close down their opperation before it has even opened it's doors to the public.