FYI for anyone interested.

>From the Spokesman Review, Spokane Wa 03/27/05
(excerpts, with editing, of article follow)
Spokane Men killed in Ultralight crash

Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less than
200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.
The plane went down just after 2 pm saturday in the Ladd Canyon area
about 10 miles south of La Grande, The wreckage was found on a steep
hillside.
Victims idenitied as Ezra M. Ward, 71, and Keith G Bir, 47.
Unknown who was at the controls as both were pilots.
Witness told the police that the 52 hp Challenger II seemed to be
having trouble in a snow squall and was either following the freeway or
trying to land on it.

Harry K

In article om>, Harry K
says...
>
>FYI for anyone interested.
>
>>From the Spokesman Review, Spokane Wa 03/27/05
>(excerpts, with editing, of article follow)
>Spokane Men killed in Ultralight crash
>
>Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less than
>200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.


A minor clairifaction it was an Amatuer Built experimental 2 Place challenger
calling it an U/L is a common mistake.

See ya

Chuck S

ChuckSlusarczyk wrote:
> In article om>,
Harry K
> says...
> >
> >FYI for anyone interested.
> >
> >>From the Spokesman Review, Spokane Wa 03/27/05
> >(excerpts, with editing, of article follow)
> >Spokane Men killed in Ultralight crash
> >
> >Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less
than
> >200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.
>
>
> A minor clairifaction it was an Amatuer Built experimental 2 Place
challenger
> calling it an U/L is a common mistake.
>
> See ya
>
> Chuck S

I wondered about that. Seeing 52 hp and ultralight and ref to 2 people
in the same description set off warning bells. Oddly, a google search
of 'ultralight airplane challenger II' returns many hits with
ultralight in the title.

Harry K

> >Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less than
> >200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.
>
>
> A minor clairifaction it was an Amatuer Built experimental 2 Place
challenger
> calling it an U/L is a common mistake.
>

A common mistake that can attributed to the name of the company that sales
Challenger II kits and plans. (Quad City Ultralight Aircraft Company)

Wayne
http://www.soaridaho.com/

Wayne Paul wrote:
> > >Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less
than
> > >200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.
> >
> >
> > A minor clairifaction it was an Amatuer Built experimental 2 Place
> challenger
> > calling it an U/L is a common mistake.
> >
>
> A common mistake that can attributed to the name of the company that
sales
> Challenger II kits and plans. (Quad City Ultralight Aircraft
Company)
>
> Wayne
> http://www.soaridaho.com/

Yeah, I found that out when I searched with 'challenger II homebuilt
aircraft'. Nice looking plane. From the accident report and the
website it would appear that it was the 2 seat trainer version. Report
did say that they had just bought it.

Harry K

Harry K wrote:
> I wondered about that. Seeing 52 hp and ultralight and ref to 2 people
> in the same description set off warning bells. Oddly, a google search
> of 'ultralight airplane challenger II' returns many hits with
> ultralight in the title.

They may be Canadian aircraft. See:
http://www.challenger.ca/faq.html
The article implies that the Canadian CAA has a different definition of
"Ultralight" than the US's FAA.

-Luke

"Luke Scharf" > wrote in message
...
> Harry K wrote:
> > I wondered about that. Seeing 52 hp and ultralight and ref to 2 people
> > in the same description set off warning bells. Oddly, a google search
> > of 'ultralight airplane challenger II' returns many hits with
> > ultralight in the title.
>
> They may be Canadian aircraft. See:
> http://www.challenger.ca/faq.html
> The article implies that the Canadian CAA has a different definition of
> "Ultralight" than the US's FAA.
>
> -Luke

Also, don't forget that you can take a 2 seat ultralight, or for that
matter, a 1 seat ultralight, and if it meets the 51% rule of owner assembled
work, you can register it as amateur experimental, and put N numbers on it.
It then does not have to meet the ultralight rules of 5 gallons of fuel,
weight, speed, where it can fly, training flights only, ect. Probably the
legal way to do it, anyway, in the case of 2 seat "ultralights."
--
Jim in NC

Bob Chilcoat wrote:

> White Knuckle Airways


They were flying for 'White Knuckle Airways' <vbg>

And ducking. . .
John

Why were they flying in a snow squall?

--
Bob (Chief Pilot, White Knuckle Airways)


"Harry K" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Wayne Paul wrote:
> > > >Two Spokane men were killed when an ultralight plane crashed less
> than
> > > >200 yards from Interstate 84 in Eastern Oregon.
> > >
> > >
> > > A minor clairifaction it was an Amatuer Built experimental 2 Place
> > challenger
> > > calling it an U/L is a common mistake.
> > >
> >
> > A common mistake that can attributed to the name of the company that
> sales
> > Challenger II kits and plans. (Quad City Ultralight Aircraft
> Company)
> >
> > Wayne
> > http://www.soaridaho.com/
>
> Yeah, I found that out when I searched with 'challenger II homebuilt
> aircraft'. Nice looking plane. From the accident report and the
> website it would appear that it was the 2 seat trainer version. Report
> did say that they had just bought it.
>
> Harry K
>

(Bob Chilcoat wrote)
> Why were they flying in a snow squall?


Two buddies out fishing in a (too) small 14' aluminum boat with a 25 hp
Evinrude hanging on the transom, stuck in the middle of a very big (now
suddenly choppy) lake, with ominous looking weather starting to roll in from
the obscured distant shoreline - this is the picture that comes to mind for
me.

BTDT

Snow on the 'Fishing Opener' is not uncommon in Northern Minnesota - May
14th this year


Montblack
Landof10klakes-at-ya-hoo is my other e-mail