Update on Denver plane crash...

[Sam]

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html

1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.

2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.

[Peter Gottlieb]

I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in such
a plane.


"Sam" > wrote in message
om...
> http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html
>
> 1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
> email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
> misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.
>
> 2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
> wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
> Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
> do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:57:20 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> wrote:

>I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in such
>a plane.

Yes but there's no legal requirement to be insured.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
.. .
> I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in
such
> a plane.
>

Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:57:20 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> > wrote:
>
> >I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in
such
> >a plane.
>
> Yes but there's no legal requirement to be insured.
>

No...only the cash to pay the premiums.

[Ron Rosenfeld]

On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:59:12 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller" >
wrote:

>Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
>afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.

What makes you think the a/c was insured?


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

[Judah]

But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...


"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in news:Ql8yc.412$p01.54131
@news.uswest.net:

>
> "Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
> .. .
>> I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in
>> such a plane.
>>
>
> Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
> afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Judah wrote:
>
> But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...

They haven't made them with throw-over yokes in years.

George Patterson
None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Nathan Young]

In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
insurance for private pilots.

Lienholders will require insurance, but if the aircraft owner 'owns'
the plane outright, it is her/her decision whether or not to insure
(hull and/or liability).

Having said that, if you can afford a new A36, you can probably afford
the premiums (which I am guessing are over 10k/year.)

-Nathan



On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 00:57:20 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> wrote:

>I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in such
>a plane.
>
>
>"Sam" > wrote in message
om...
>> http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html
>>
>> 1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
>> email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
>> misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.
>>
>> 2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
>> wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
>> Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
>> do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.
>

[Peter Gottlieb]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
> insurance for private pilots.
>

There are airports that "require" $1MM liability insurance, although I have
no idea how they enforce that (except for those based there).

[Nathan Young]

Great point. Midway airport used to be one of these. Forced my
father-in-law from his tie-down because they wanted him to sign a $1M
policy.


On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:04:48 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> wrote:

>
>"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
>> In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
>> insurance for private pilots.
>>
>
>There are airports that "require" $1MM liability insurance, although I have
>no idea how they enforce that (except for those based there).
>

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Ron Rosenfeld" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:59:12 -0700, "Tom Sixkiller" >
> wrote:
>
> >Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
> >afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.
>
> What makes you think the a/c was insured?
>
>

Not 100% sure...which is why I said _evidently_. If he could go out and pop
for a brand new A36 (it had something like 95 hours on it and the report
said something about it being "brand new" (IIRC) I somehow suspect money was
not an factor for him. They guy is, what, 65 years old? And just got his
license? I suspect he's got a lot of money for toys.

Just like some people that are paying $5000 or more for car insurance, I'm
guesstimating that he could afford a steep premium. Someone asked who would
insure him, but I rather suspect that some insurance company, even major
ones, would cover him, but they'd want a lot of green!!

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Judah" > wrote in message
...
> But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...

The money...or the knowledge/sense?


>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in news:Ql8yc.412$p01.54131
> @news.uswest.net:
>
> >
> > "Peter Gottlieb" > wrote in message
> > .. .
> >> I thought a new pilot had a very very difficult time getting insured in
> >> such a plane.
> >>
> >
> > Not necessarily difficult, but _expensive_. Evidently the father could
> > afford a brand new A36 AND the insurance to go with it.
> >

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
> insurance for private pilots.
>
> Lienholders will require insurance, but if the aircraft owner 'owns'
> the plane outright, it is her/her decision whether or not to insure
> (hull and/or liability).
>
> Having said that, if you can afford a new A36, you can probably afford
> the premiums (which I am guessing are over 10k/year.)
>
Exactly...here's a guy 65 years old, right near or already into retirement.
He buys a (virtually) brand new A36 right after getting his PPL.

My guess is he's LOADED. Whether he had bought insurance or not is still to
be answered, but he most like could afford even two or three times that
much. Hell, theA36 probably ran $500-600K or more.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...
> Great point. Midway airport used to be one of these. Forced my
> father-in-law from his tie-down because they wanted him to sign a $1M
> policy.
>

This guy flew (IIRC) out of Watkins, Colorado...a far cry from Midway.

>
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 17:04:48 GMT, "Peter Gottlieb"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> In the States - there are not any FAA or other govt rules requiring
> >> insurance for private pilots.
> >>
> >
> >There are airports that "require" $1MM liability insurance, although I
have
> >no idea how they enforce that (except for those based there).
> >
>

[Richard Hertz]

"Sam" > wrote in message
om...
> http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html
>
> 1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
> email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
> misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.
>
> 2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
> wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
> Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
> do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.

The article says he owned it for 6 months - It is not unreasonable to assume
he had been trained in it and was fairly competent in it. The speculation
about the ink being wet and such is silly. Perhaps you could not handle the
plane, or other fresh pilots when they just come out of a 152 or 172, but it
is not impossible to have a fairly low time pilot be able to fly that plane.
(They handle quite nicely - things just happen quicker...)

If I had the money I would have bought a plane like that instead of a
grumman cheetah for my training. Why not?

[Dylan Smith]

In article >, Tom Sixkiller wrote:
>> Yes but there's no legal requirement to be insured.
>
> No...only the cash to pay the premiums.

Or not pay any premiums at all. I know of at least two aircraft that are
flown uninsured, however, this is because they are slow and have very
low hull values so insurance is almost certainly a dead loss for the
owners.

--
Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
"Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Judah]

Oh... Didn't realize that. I'm not of the financial disposition to have
ever flown in a Bonanza that wasn't made in years...

:)


"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in news:40C9BB44.17667CD3
@verizon.net:

>
>
> Judah wrote:
>>
>> But not the mod to change the throw-over yoke to a double-yoke...
>
> They haven't made them with throw-over yokes in years.
>
> George Patterson
> None of us is as dumb as all of us.

[Sam]

"Richard Hertz" > wrote in message >...
> "Sam" > wrote in message
> om...
> > http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html
> >
> > 1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
> > email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
> > misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.
> >
> > 2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
> > wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
> > Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
> > do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.
>
> The article says he owned it for 6 months - It is not unreasonable to assume
> he had been trained in it and was fairly competent in it. The speculation
> about the ink being wet and such is silly. Perhaps you could not handle the
> plane, or other fresh pilots when they just come out of a 152 or 172, but it
> is not impossible to have a fairly low time pilot be able to fly that plane.
> (They handle quite nicely - things just happen quicker...)
>
> If I had the money I would have bought a plane like that instead of a
> grumman cheetah for my training. Why not?


Maybe I don't have a good answer for your question. I just recently
started training as a student pilot, so I don't have a lot of
experience. I've been reading about aviation and looking through
these newsgroups (admittedly subjective opinions) for several years,
and the combo of new pilot, complex, high performance plane, and
apparent student training (of his daughter) seems like it would be a
bit much for someone that just started training in January.

Its been said that these types of a/c can easily get ahead of you, but
you always have the option of slowing things down to a manageable
level. So if someone were to train in one of these w/ a good
instructor, perhaps it's not all that bad to start w/ one if you're
careful and understand the risks.

It'll obviously take awhile before all the info is gathered on this
case, and luckily there were a couple of witnesses. But we at least
know the owner (or his daughter) stalled the a/c at low altitude and
crashed. The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
pilot. Stalling any aircraft unintentionally = you are not proficient
in the plane. Allowing a student pilot to have control of the a/c at
low altitudes would say to me the guy is not too keyed in on risk
management either.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Sam" > wrote in message
om...
> The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
> tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
> enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
> pilot.


95 hours is plenty to be proficient in an aircraft, just not when they're
your only 95 hours, as your second statement pointed out. For an experienced
pilot, though, 95 hours is plenty (but no level is ever "enough").

[Earl Grieda]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
...
>
> 95 hours is plenty to be proficient in an aircraft, just not when they're
> your only 95 hours, as your second statement pointed out. For an
experienced
> pilot, though, 95 hours is plenty (but no level is ever "enough").
>
The military takes students with no flight experience and turns them into
competent pilots. What type of aircraft do the Air Force/Navy pilots use to
start their training and how long before they advance to the more complex
aircraft?

Earl G

[Bill Denton]

Probably not important, but you are making an assumption that since the
airplane only had 95 hours on it that the pilot only had 95 hours in type.

We don't know if the pilot had previously owned Bonanzas, or if he had been
renting them for a number of years.

Based on the information we have been presented with, we have no way of
determining the pilots experience level, and consequently, we have no way of
knowing if inexperience contributed to the accident...


"Sam" > wrote in message
om...
> "Richard Hertz" > wrote in message
>...
> > "Sam" > wrote in message
> > om...
> > > http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/3399604/detail.html
> > >
> > > 1)Looks like somebody either told them of the stall (whether it was my
> > > email or not) and they corrected the article. Sounds like they
> > > misquoted the flight sim tech as I had thought.
> > >
> > > 2)What an unfortunate and strange crash. The ink must've still been
> > > wet on that guys PPL, and he's flying around in a complex, high power
> > > Bonanza w/ his student pilot daughter at the controls? Why do people
> > > do this?? What a waste of life and airplane.
> >
> > The article says he owned it for 6 months - It is not unreasonable to
assume
> > he had been trained in it and was fairly competent in it. The
speculation
> > about the ink being wet and such is silly. Perhaps you could not handle
the
> > plane, or other fresh pilots when they just come out of a 152 or 172,
but it
> > is not impossible to have a fairly low time pilot be able to fly that
plane.
> > (They handle quite nicely - things just happen quicker...)
> >
> > If I had the money I would have bought a plane like that instead of a
> > grumman cheetah for my training. Why not?
>
>
> Maybe I don't have a good answer for your question. I just recently
> started training as a student pilot, so I don't have a lot of
> experience. I've been reading about aviation and looking through
> these newsgroups (admittedly subjective opinions) for several years,
> and the combo of new pilot, complex, high performance plane, and
> apparent student training (of his daughter) seems like it would be a
> bit much for someone that just started training in January.
>
> Its been said that these types of a/c can easily get ahead of you, but
> you always have the option of slowing things down to a manageable
> level. So if someone were to train in one of these w/ a good
> instructor, perhaps it's not all that bad to start w/ one if you're
> careful and understand the risks.
>
> It'll obviously take awhile before all the info is gathered on this
> case, and luckily there were a couple of witnesses. But we at least
> know the owner (or his daughter) stalled the a/c at low altitude and
> crashed. The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
> tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
> enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
> pilot. Stalling any aircraft unintentionally = you are not proficient
> in the plane. Allowing a student pilot to have control of the a/c at
> low altitudes would say to me the guy is not too keyed in on risk
> management either.

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Earl Grieda" > wrote in message
link.net...
>
> "Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > 95 hours is plenty to be proficient in an aircraft, just not when
they're
> > your only 95 hours, as your second statement pointed out. For an
> experienced
> > pilot, though, 95 hours is plenty (but no level is ever "enough").
> >
> The military takes students with no flight experience and turns them into
> competent pilots. What type of aircraft do the Air Force/Navy pilots use
to
> start their training

Much more complex than a C172 whatever it is.

> and how long before they advance to the more complex
> aircraft?

By about 300 hours (IIUC) they're ready for F-16's and the like.

I also understand they spend a lot of time in ground school first, and they
are selected for their educational background, physical characteristics
(coordination, hand-eye, etc.), attitude....

[Tom Sixkiller]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message
...
> Probably not important, but you are making an assumption that since the
> airplane only had 95 hours on it that the pilot only had 95 hours in type.
>
> We don't know if the pilot had previously owned Bonanzas, or if he had
been
> renting them for a number of years.

He bought it new and had a virtually brand new PPL.

>
> Based on the information we have been presented with, we have no way of
> determining the pilots experience level, and consequently, we have no way
of
> knowing if inexperience contributed to the accident...

See above.

[Sam]

"Bill Denton" > wrote in message >...
> Probably not important, but you are making an assumption that since the
> airplane only had 95 hours on it that the pilot only had 95 hours in type.
>
> We don't know if the pilot had previously owned Bonanzas, or if he had been
> renting them for a number of years.
>
> Based on the information we have been presented with, we have no way of
> determining the pilots experience level, and consequently, we have no way of
> knowing if inexperience contributed to the accident...
>

From the NTSB investigators...

He received his student pilot certificate in January, and only
recently obtained his PPL.

[Sam]

"Tom Sixkiller" > wrote in message >...
> "Sam" > wrote in message
> om...
> > The a/c only had 95 hours on it, so it's not like he had
> > tons of time in it. 95 hours is a lot to me, but I know it's not
> > enough to be "proficient" in the a/c, particularly if you're a new
> > pilot.
>
>
> 95 hours is plenty to be proficient in an aircraft, just not when they're
> your only 95 hours, as your second statement pointed out. For an experienced
> pilot, though, 95 hours is plenty (but no level is ever "enough").

Yeah, I'd agree w/ that. It'll be interesting to see what his total
time is. I'm sure the a/c didn't arrive w/ 0.0 hours on it.

[Newps]

One of my buddies carries no insurance at all. He owns/flies a Cub, two
182's, two Agwagons, a Baron, a Beech 18, a Cessna 414 and two helicopters,
a Hiller and a Jet Ranger. The helicopters and the Agwagons are used in his
business, although since he is sitting on a pile of money it doesn't matter
if he ever sprays again.



"Dylan Smith" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Tom Sixkiller wrote:
> >> Yes but there's no legal requirement to be insured.
> >
> > No...only the cash to pay the premiums.
>
> Or not pay any premiums at all. I know of at least two aircraft that are
> flown uninsured, however, this is because they are slow and have very
> low hull values so insurance is almost certainly a dead loss for the
> owners.
>
> --
> Dylan Smith, Castletown, Isle of Man
> Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
> Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net
> "Maintain thine airspeed, lest the ground come up and smite thee"

[Newps]

"Nathan Young" > wrote in message
...


> Having said that, if you can afford a new A36, you can probably afford
> the premiums (which I am guessing are over 10k/year.)

If you own a new A36 and don't owe any money on it there's no reason for
hull insurance.