Wind puts pilot into hospital

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

The following is for your reading entertainment exactly as printed in the Kindersley Clarion on June 02/ 1993.

Wind puts pilot into hospital

Windy conditions are being blamed for a gyroplane crash which sent the pilot to a hospital in Saskatoon.

An unpredictable gust of wind caused pilot Dan Haseloh to crash land his gyroplane in front of the Rotary Air Force buildings on May 26.

Haseloh had no intention to fly the gyroplane. He had only intended to start the engine to check the propeller he had just fixed for viabrations. While sitting on the tarmac with the engine running the wind caught the aircraft forcing it into the air.

"The gust of wind caught him and put him aloft and he had no alternative other than to fly a short circuit pattern and bring the machine back to the ground, " said Don LaFleur Rotart Air Force General Manager".

Haseloh's forced landing took him into an unoccupied parked van. Haseloh was taken to Saskatoon's University Hospital for treatment.

"He strained his shoulder and neck and he's under supervision, but it's nothing to seroius. "said LaFleur.

The gyroplane and the parked van did not fare as well as Haseloh and both have extensive damage. The gyroplane will have to be stripped down and rebuilt.

Neither the gyroplane nor the pilot are being blamed for the accident.

" It was a freak accident, the pilot could not have predicted this. It wasn't the machine or the pilots fault at all, it was just the wind " said LaFleur.

Because the accident was a freak accident, LaFleur does not think people will have doubts about the gyroplane or the company.

" It's a little bit of a tragedy for us, it was something that we didn't need. Our pilot is probably the best gyroplane pilot in North America and it was just a circumstance he wasn't familiar with "---------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have hightlited some of Dons best statements.

The newspaper would have gotten a better slant on this accident had they interviewed the village idiot instead of LaFleur.

[Brian Jackson]

Thanks for sharing, but in all honesty I wouldn't have said "for your reading entertainment". I know what you meant though, and agree that RAF should be more forthcoming. But I find nothing "entertaining" in reading about any gyroplane accident. It's always sad, even if its a minor accident, and hurts our reputation greatly.

Respectfully,
Brian Jackson

[Vance]

It is doubly sad when people cover something so deep with denial that they can't learn something from the mishap and so deep with BS that others can't learn from it either. Thank you, Vance

[Brian Jackson]

Chuck, I neglected to mention in my previous post that I'm grateful you posted that article. It shows the artfulness of "dodging responsibility." RAF may have had the best of intentions early on, but have demonstrated over time most pilots worst fears...

[banaari]

What exactly *did* happen?

[Udi]

Neither the gyroplane nor the pilot are being blamed for the accident.

"It was a freak accident, the pilot could not have predicted this. It wasn't the machine or the pilots fault at all, it was just the wind " said LaFleur.

This was also the explanation RAF Intl. was giving for the accident that killed Haseloh and two others, as can be seen here:
http://www.mini500.com/oldmini/pra98.html

I think this LaFleur guy is a spin artist, and that's the nicest thing I can say about him. It is frightening that someone like him is running an aircraft company.

If someone is unclear as to why these two examples are so absurd - please ask.

Udi

[Brian Jackson]

Originally Posted by Udi

This was also the explanation RAF Intl. was giving for the accident that killed Haseloh and two others...

Haseloh died? Not from that interview. But did he die in a later accident? Please clarify. Thanks.

Regards,
Brian Jackson

[Chopper Reid]

WOW, some gust of wind ! Never seen a wind pick a gyro up and make it fly without the rotors spinning , then the same nasty wind making you force land the gyro after making a ciruit and delibrately crashing you into a parked van
Thanks for the story Chuck. Makes the downwind turn causing a "crash" look plain silly ! Just for interest sake, how many hours has this "best pilot in North America "actually have to his name ??

[Udi]

Brian,

It was another accident.

Haseloh was flying an RAF 2000 and the RAF test pilot (I think) was flying another RAF 2000 for a video. They collided mid-air. Needless to say Haseloh, the other pilot and the cameraman were killed. Obviously, human error. Why can't people admit to making human errors?

Udi

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

What really gets a lot of people all hepped up about a product is articles such as the one in the link.

When you read that article you would think that the RAF management are just one rung up the ladder above God.....unfortunately con artists like Don, Linda and Peter like all con artists can make you believe anything.

I do however agree with one suggestion the author suggested. quote: "
If you want the most bang for your buck contact Don LaFleur at .... "

That is probably the closest to truth in the whole article, because when RAF2000 bunts it sure will give you a bang for your buck.

As far to many of their customers found out.

Chuck E.

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Just to clarify what kind of a pilot Dan Haseloh was here is my experience with him.

Aside from the fact that he had a large number of accidents he also had no formal training as a pilot and did not even know the meaning of attitudes and movements.

Transport Canada gave Dan temporary approval to train me on the factory RAF 2000 so I could become a gyro CFI and handle all the RAF training through my school that already was approved for airplanes and helicopters.

After around three or four hours I refused to fly with Dan because he was down right dangerous and I was afraid he would kill me. Transport Canada revolked Dans approval to teach after doing an investigation on his flying and lack of concern for safety and the rules.

Chuck E.

[Brian Jackson]

Udi and Chuck,

Thanks to both of you for the clarification about Dan's unfortunate loss. It helps us all learn.

Respectfully,
Brian Jackson

[birdy]

You on holiday or something Chuck??

Thanx for the info,wot a crackup,those di##heads must think we're all simple.Like Brian said,it must have been one hell ofa gust of wind,and if he was the best,why did he get into trouble??

They is definatly different,most pilots end up in hospitol through a LACK of wind.

[Chuck_Ellsworth]

Birdy :

The reason I posted this is nothing can take the place of reading something that the person being discussed has said themselves.

Many of us in these forums have been trying to tell people that RAF and especially Don LaFleur are real con artists and know zilch about flying or flying machines.

That article is the best picture one can paint of a real deceptive con artist at work....and in his own words.

Now to make this even more bizzare that accident acording to RAF and their shills was caused by the H.S. that Dan was testing and he couldnt control it on landing because the H.S. made it to difficult to flare.

Yup these are real beauties when it comes to bull**** artists.

Chuck E.

Chuck E.

[Brian Jackson]

Originally Posted by Udi

Brian,

It was another accident.

Haseloh was flying an RAF 2000 and the RAF test pilot (I think) was flying another RAF 2000 for a video. They collided mid-air. Needless to say Haseloh, the other pilot and the cameraman were killed. Obviously, human error. Why can't people admit to making human errors?

Udi

Udi,
Per your last question I honestly don't know. I'm just a newbie here building a gyro with tons of questions. It just seems irrational that any aviator remain ignorant. When new information is received, especially pertaining to their aircraft, ignoring it seems suicidal.

Airworthiness directives are issued for a very good reason. Ignoring them opens you, your students, clients and everyone else up to a world of hurt.

Shouldn't the very first rule of aviation be "When In Doubt, Don't"?