Vance Breese Mentone 2020

[All_In]

...

People err and make mistakes that is human but you gotta call what you see and from the UK I hear that the aircraft has circa 200hrs and yet isn't registered? I just don't figure how that happens. I mean - and anyone please guide me to an alternative view - how do you log that kind of hours when as I understand phase 1 flying is 40 hours local flying and then it gets an AW cert to allow public phase 2 flying - which I then guess means its registered concurrent to that process?

PRA's approach is to look for and prevent all unairworthy aircraft from flying at our events. If they flew in they are only allowed to fly one more time and that is to leave. But we would advise them to ask if anyone has room on their trailer that is going in your direction and we would announce it and try and help them get a ride home.
The gyroplane in question was and is very airworthy!!!

I cannot remember how I even found out it was not registered.

At the event, I saw an N#, knew it was an individual's responsibility in America of the owner to make sure the paperwork is in order and assume it was registered.
I'm not, nor do I wish to ever become the government authorities of registrations or weighing of fat ultralights.

Heck from what I just learned the FAA directive not to inspect them are airshows. Would suggest the government does not want to be paperwork dicks as they want the same reputation as PRA we are here to help.

That may be a basic American trait of at least most conservatives, just get the government out of their way. They represent about 1/2 of our population. But usually, government employees are liberals in the States.
That the FAA has this directive is surprising in government and I suspect you fault them where I cheer them for not being dicks when they see it is airworthy.

I did inspect the gyro right after the hard landing for damage but I never even thought to ask it had been registered.

I believe it was a follow-up PRA phone call to the owner as soon as I learned.

When I asked why it wasn't registered after 200 hours of flight? He said his friend the DPE is still fighting cancer is still the main delay.

When I asked why didn't you kick him to the curb like a business decision.

Here is what I learned not in his words but in my summary.

The time-lapse happened because of loyalty, friendship, respect, illness, and the FAA changing to a new portal system of reporting that they did not have all the bugs out, and it's not intuitive, and the DPE's did not know any more about how to input data than clients.

The likely hood of all of those delaying events happening again at our fly-in is remote!

 

[Martin W.]

Maybe at the root of all of this is the 244 year old argument between the mindset of Subject vs. Citizen?
Worked with Brits plenty of times and they think differently from us.
Key to understanding Americans is "self-reliance".
I'm not sticking up for either side here, but as an outside observer it sure seems to be cultural in nature.
I can't imagine a scenario where AFTER making a mistake the best course of action is to bring in the regulators? Vance makes money teaching people, they could have easily suspended his certs or grounded him. John remember what happened after we landed at
Chino?
Phil, maybe things are done differently on your side of the pond but in general, we Americans have a basic deep-seated mis trust for gov't 3 letter groups. Part of the culture of freedom flying small light craft attracts is the "do it yourselfer" .
We are not ATP pilots hauling 200 butts around, we are people who appreciate the ability to be up in the air for its own sake. Some of us spending hundread thousand dollars to do so for no gain, some of us scrounging parts to get up there, but the freedom of flights is the siren song.
Maybe this piece of paperwork wasn't just so or that one.
Phil, if the situation was 100 percent exactly the same and the aircraft JUST HAPPENED to weigh less then 254 lbs. Would you have continued to persue this?
I dunno, maybe it does? Never saw the rig and I never seen anybody carry scales with them....
Just sayin.....

.

Perfect ... you got it exactly right.

 

[All_In]

PS:
Since I've been helping to run them.
We have stopped at least 10 or more mostly barn finds to not be flown until they take them apart and inspect all the holes for cracks etc.
Our main concern is saftey and assuring they are airwothy! Not becoming an extention of the government athorties to inspect paperwork.
When Airventure thinks this is the American way PRA will follow.

 

[All_In]

Maybe at the root of all of this is the 244 year old argument between the mindset of Subject vs. Citizen?
Worked with Brits plenty of times and they think differently from us.
Key to understanding Americans is "self-reliance".
I'm not sticking up for either side here, but as an outside observer it sure seems to be cultural in nature.
I can't imagine a scenario where AFTER making a mistake the best course of action is to bring in the regulators? Vance makes money teaching people, they could have easily suspended his certs or grounded him. John remember what happened after we landed at
Chino?
Phil, maybe things are done differently on your side of the pond but in general, we Americans have a basic deep-seated mis trust for gov't 3 letter groups. Part of the culture of freedom flying small light craft attracts is the "do it yourselfer" .
We are not ATP pilots hauling 200 butts around, we are people who appreciate the ability to be up in the air for its own sake. Some of us spending hundread thousand dollars to do so for no gain, some of us scrounging parts to get up there, but the freedom of flights is the siren song.
Maybe this piece of paperwork wasn't just so or that one.
Phil, if the situation was 100 percent exactly the same and the aircraft JUST HAPPENED to weigh less then 254 lbs. Would you have continued to persue this?
I dunno, maybe it does? Never saw the rig and I never seen anybody carry scales with them....
Just sayin.....

I believe you all figured this one out way before I did!
It is liberals' way of thinking vs conservatives' way of thinking of the government's role in our lives.
I suspect you could find many liberal Americans who would also fault PRA for not being authoritarian controllers of assuring all paperwork is in order and control individuals' responsibility and thus behavior.
.

 

[All_In]

PSPS:
On the safety plus side, PRA gets dozens of requests by phone, and emails from owners teaching them how to fulfill their individual responsibility of registering their rotorcraft, reporting their accidents, and how to get a pilot license.
We are advocates of individuals following all of the FAA regulations but we are not enforcers. Unless it is unairworthy!!!

 

[Smack]

Regulation to the British is rather like regulation is to a motor racing team. You read the rules, and work within that framework, its not really that problematic. In the UK gyroplanes are not made here not because our rules are particularly tough but because the marketplace is tiny and becoming even more so ...

Phil, do you ever STOP and think "maybe I am part of the problem"?
As an outside observer, just observing....
Brian

 

[StanFoster]

I am sure glad this country was founded by entrepreneurs who believed in themselves, and didnt go by Britains rule book.

 

[Martin W.]

Yep maybe Ben. Regulation to the British is rather like regulation is to a motor racing team. You read the rules, and work within that framework, its not really that problematic.
(snip)

Rules are good .... including in motor racing ... a few accidents will require a few new rules because safety is important.
But there comes a point where personal individual risk is the deciding point , not a rule book.

Otherwise the perfect safety rule book would be published that has only one page and one rule which reads:
Motorsport racing is completely prohibited anywhere , by anybody , at anytime

--------------------

Your original gripe & question was whether the hard-landing-gyro had the piece of paper known as an Airworthy Certificate.
I have a better question .... did the SR71 Blackbird have an Airworthy Certificate ?
NO .... it was built by a bunch of unleashed brilliant renegade American engineers who threw away all the conventional rules and built the fastest aircraft in the world .

Kelly Johnson was the project manager and was a promoter of streamlined design teams who worked and invented side by side.

He said if the bureaucrats had been involved the paperwork would weigh more than the aircraft , it would still be grounded , and the Soviets would have won the cold war.

 

[BEN S]

Phil, you never answered my question.
Of the rig weighed less then 254 lbs. Would you care?
You do understand why I am asking?

 

[Philbennett]

Phil, you never answered my question.
Of the rig weighed less then 254 lbs. Would you care?
You do understand why I am asking?

Sorry Ben I thought it was rhetorical and I didn't reply as by Oct 24th when you asked I thought had that been the case that riddle would have been solved. Do I understand? I assume you are making a nod towards FAR Part 103 and no doubt with 103.7 peoples approach to flying such aircraft becomes increasingly cautious. From John's response in post 130 I suspect it is academic in this case?

To John's points its clear there is sensitivity around reconciliation of the issues and others are trying to make the case that this is all about the God-damn paperwork and commies. Hoist the flag. Good grief it is unbelievable. You do have regulation in the US, even FAR Part 103 lays down regulation.

For whatever the reason, the aircraft hadn't gone through the process it should have [process read regulation]. It wasn't known about because nobody checked. The tide went out when the aircraft got pranged mainly because of a lack of training / familiarity on the aircraft and a overly keen attitude to get into the air. All those things are dangerous and have killed more than many people in the past. It common aviation parlance its called a lack of airmanship.

Airmanship from our friends wikipedia:-

"A review paper presented at a NATO research and training symposium on military aviation human factors defined airmanship as "a personal state that enables aircrew to exercise sound judgment, display uncompromising flight discipline and demonstrate skillful control of an aircraft and a situation. It is maintained by continuous self-improvement and a desire to perform optimally at all times." Combining modern academic and industry definitions, it's accepted now that airmanship is a multi-dimensional concept involving skilful control of an aircraft, making good decisions about the flight, and is tightly linked to flight discipline"

Keep safe.

 

[All_In]

Phil, wow, I thought you finally figured out the difference when you could not answer what YOU would have done differently if you were in charge of the airshow for this accident.
I see it much more simply than that.
You want all the fly-ins in America to start inspecting paperwork as I assume they do in Britain to assure the paperwork is perfect.

1. Assume the paperwork is perfect but it's obvious it is UN-AIRWORTHY with cracks in the mast bolt holes!
2. Assume the aircraft is obviously AIRWORTHY, it has 5 times the 40 hours needed, without a hiccup, to assure it is airworthy but it is not registered!

Which scenario would have a greater chance of having an accident?
This is what Americans call common sense with a touch of anti-authority/government sentiment that may help you understand American nature with one of our favorite movie lines "Papers, we don't need no stinking papers" The government needs to make sure we pay for the paperwork, not fly-in operators.
I think I'm funny = I know it's sad, isn't it?

 

[Philbennett]

You want all the fly-ins in America to start inspecting paperwork as I assume they do in Britain to assure the paperwork is perfect.

That isn't how it works in the UK. At a UK fly in nobody is checking paperwork, officially via our CAA [the UK equivalent of the FAA] or via the organiser. The difference is attitude however. You in particular are promulgating a view that centres around your moral compass and the word "snitch" keeps cropping up.

In the UK however there is a collected sense of responsibility which aligns with a notion that everyone is better served if we do the right thing. So in this particular case, at a UK fly-in, it is unlikely that it would have been flown at all, why? Well select any of the following:-

1) the owner (with a UK attitude) knowing the aircrafts status wouldn't have put himself or others in that position
2) the pilot asking to check docs (or at least asking the question, is this aircraft legal to fly?) would not have put himself in that position
3) differences training would have made the flight inappropriate even if 1 & 2 didn't make it so
4) Had the situation been pushed then the attendant CAA rep (they do usually attend bigger events) would have pulled the owner/pilot aside and explained their errors
5) The people with knowledge / or close to the owner would have pulled him aside and told him to stop had 1,2,3, or 4 not been enough

Nothing in your attitude suggests the points 1-5 are very likely in the US, and so as you keep pushing "what would YOU do..." I'd start down the path of points 1 - 5.

You push a point, and continue to push a point that all this is not common sense. That is the error of your way and very sadly that a high official within the PRA fundamentally can not promote good airmanship is pitiful and it is yet another reason why your situation particularly around insurance is as it is.

You are looking down the wrong end of the telescope John and had someone pulled those like Chris Lord aside earlier not only would he be alive today but the poor bloke he killed who was sat in the passenger seat who very likely expected better and should have got better.

I post this shite for no other reason than for those who don't know any better and might learn to find there are those who fly gyroplanes that take things seriously.

 

[All_In]

That isn't how it works in the UK. At a UK fly in nobody is checking paperwork, officially via our CAA [the UK equivalent of the FAA] or via the organiser. The difference is attitude however. You in particular are promulgating a view that centres around your moral compass and the word "snitch" keeps cropping up.

In the UK however there is a collected sense of responsibility which aligns with a notion that everyone is better served if we do the right thing. So in this particular case, at a UK fly-in, it is unlikely that it would have been flown at all, why? Well select any of the following:-

1) the owner (with a UK attitude) knowing the aircrafts status wouldn't have put himself or others in that position
2) the pilot asking to check docs (or at least asking the question, is this aircraft legal to fly?) would not have put himself in that position
3) differences training would have made the flight inappropriate even if 1 & 2 didn't make it so
4) Had the situation been pushed then the attendant CAA rep (they do usually attend bigger events) would have pulled the owner/pilot aside and explained their errors
5) The people with knowledge / or close to the owner would have pulled him aside and told him to stop had 1,2,3, or 4 not been enough

Nothing in your attitude suggests the points 1-5 are very likely in the US, and so as you keep pushing "what would YOU do..." I'd start down the path of points 1 - 5.

You push a point, and continue to push a point that all this is not common sense. That is the error of your way and very sadly that a high official within the PRA fundamentally can not promote good airmanship is pitiful and it is yet another reason why your situation particularly around insurance is as it is.

You are looking down the wrong end of the telescope John and had someone pulled those like Chris Lord aside earlier not only would he be alive today but the poor bloke he killed who was sat in the passenger seat who very likely expected better and should have got better.

I post this shite for no other reason than for those who don't know any better and might learn to find there are those who fly gyroplanes that take things seriously.

How dare you suggest we inspect the paperwork more than you do.
How do you know that is it not the exact same percentage of all American gyroplane owners do not follow 1-5).
Having an unregistered gyroplane fly and have an accident has never happened before at any of PRA chapter fly-in either in the last ten years since I've been attending!

Let's examine the evidence and call a space a spade.
Your country does not inspect at fly-ins either
and You have no solution for what you could have or should have done differently
your last attempt to be right is your pompous attitude that you Brits are superior in registering their aircraft.

Only common sense answer for your posts right from the start = You and Greg have or had a vendetta against Vance and now your arguments have proven baseless without a solution. Your true indent is busted my friend and we all now know the reality.
Gee's get over it. Forgiveness would have saved you the embarrassment of your feeble complaints about a problem that has only occurred once in the last 50 fly-in around the country in the last 10 years. Rebel without a cause!

 

[Greg Vos]

How dare you sugest we inspect the paperwork more than you do.
How do you know that is it not the exact same percentage of all American gyroplane onwers do not follow 1-5).
Having an unregistered gyroplane fly and have an accident has never happen before at any of PRA chapter fly-in either in the last ten years since I've been attending!

Let's examine the evidence and call a space a spade.
Your country does not inspect at fly in either
and You have no soltuion for what you could have or should have done differently
your last attempt to be right is your pompost aditude that you Brits are superior in registering they aircarft.

Only common sense anwser for your posts right from the start = You and Greg have or had a vendetta against Vance and now your arguments have proven baseless without a soltuion. Your true indent is busted my friend and we all now know reality.
Gee's get over it. Forgiveness would have saved you the embarssment of your feable conplains.

I have no vandetta ? Not sure where you get this idea, but reading this thread from the beginning one does draw a conclusion that a very respected vocal person in the game went against his very own recommendations...this comes out very load and clear, while we don’t all have to be as vocal as some posters we cannot ignore fact.
I have no dog in this race nor do I wish to see any fellow enthusiast burn because of an oversight but one cannot be on record preaching the rules and then one day break them.... sadly it happens everywhere this unfortunate occurrence happens often in many different sports or walks of life.

 

[All_In]

Greg, I was not accusing you, Greg, that only been Phil. Where do you see PRA or myself defending Vance? Where have I ever said anything but what you said adding the embarrassment for a vocal person is even worse as everyone knows him.

Not one of my posts to Phil was I defending or answering for Vance, Greg, he right off the batt started going after Vance by attacking what PRA should have done to turn him in. when that didn't work he switched to attacking PRA and me personally.

I'm defending PRA. First, read how PRA should have called it major damage, from everyone who wasn't there.
Then it was PRA should have turned Vance and everyone involved in.
Read how PRA covered it up. PRA has never called the FAA for any of the accidents. They call us.
Read how inept we were in handling it. But he has no better solution other than to imply in his country we would have to check the paperwork.
Read how he implied we were negligent and liable for not asking for paperwork.
I call BS, the FAA looked into it and all of his complaints are about what PRA should have done. Where are your logical complaints about Vance in the last 20 pages from Phil? I've only defended Phil's continued condemnation of PRA and my actions solely because he has a vendetta against Vance and my explaining the FAA did has not what Phil had hoped of a public hanging. Somehow PRA is to blame in Phil's mind.

 

[All_In]

Greg understand, because I explained what happened at the event and why PRA agreed it was a hard landing. Phil perceived PRA was on Vance's side and ever since he's been attacking the messenger for only telling the truth. And when the FAA agreed that really set him off attacking PRA.
I could not figure out why at first. Then others pointed out a cultural difference so I grasp at that.
But then he cannot tell us how to do it any better and he persisted with his pompous we American need PRA to inspect when the Brits don't. Are you kidding me!!!!

 

[All_In]

I'm not on anyone's side Phil. I'm only an honest messenger and unless you can offer any real solution for this one in a million event why are you still persisting at this feeble attempt to blame PRA.

 

[Steve_UK]

available on Youtube too

 

[All_In]

Phil's hatred of Vance is so unfair to PRA and I cannot win.

Go back and look at Greg's accident. It was the reverse. Read my posts it was me/PRA defending Greg against Vance's saying he should not be practicing beach landings and then he posted a picture of a crowded beach. But that was not the beach and it was not crowded and I/PRA had researched that too and defended Gerg even explain that if Greg fly's over the beach he needs to practice beach landing.

Phil, I'm not on anyone's side.

 

[All_In]

available on Youtube too

I was disappointed. I thought it was the video I saw the in-camera view of the actual landing. That is what Vance posted about the accident too except he also added he did not test his helmet communication for a long enough period either and that was cutting in and out.