Quickie fatality

This builder was unknown to the California Quickie community. So far, non
of our guys have come forward and said this builder had contacted any of
them about flight testing, quirks and handling characteristics of the Q
breed. Since the builder listed it as a "QZ" he may have designed in some
changes.

We have several planes flying with over 1,000 hours and lots of experience.
However, it is not a plane that someone can just jump into. This is the
second first-flight fatality we have suffered this year. Please, no more!

If you are building a Quickie, Q-2, Tri-Q, or Q-200, please tap into the
resources. We have an excellent builders organization and e-mail list.
There are also many guys around the country willing to look your project
over and lend their knowledgeable advice.

It's a fun plane, you just have to know what you're getting into. Here's a
couple of useful links for those interested in more info.
http://www.quickiebuilders.org/index.htm

http://home.globaleyes.net/shoskins/wantQuickie.html

See you at Oshkosh.

Sam Hoskins
Quickie Q-200 1,302 hrs.

Sam Hoskins wrote:

This builder was unknown to the California Quickie community. So far, non
of our guys have come forward and said this builder had contacted any of
them about flight testing, quirks and handling characteristics of the Q
breed. Since the builder listed it as a "QZ" he may have designed in some
changes.


From my post in another thread:

"But more than that, most accidents can be traced back to a conflict in
priorities. Rather than balancing risk against necessity and finding
appropriate hazard mitigation, most accidents can be traced back to a
latent human error of placing objective ahead of caution and process.
No pilot wakes up and says, "I'm going to go crash an airplane today."
But many, especially in recreational aviation, will push on when caution
dictates otherwise. "

If this is true that the pilot was no know to the user group, we have a
classic example:

1. An aircraft with a distinct reputation for requiring special
techniques and skills for flying.
2. A well established process for mitigating the increased risk by
shared experience.
3. Possible ignorance or disregard of the established process.
4. Objective (fly my new aircraft) placed ahead of process.

Towards prevention of further occurrences, I ask the following question:
1. Since aircraft requires special skills, does manufacturer attempt to
notify purchaser of the existence of such knowledge sharing groups? If
not, I strongly urge it.

R/
Jim

More likely the builder was using a quirk in the California personal property
law that exempts aircraft with fewer than 5 per model from tax. Simply changing
a letter when you register the model insures that there will be less than 5. It
is quite commonly done.

Jim



Since the builder listed it as a "QZ" he may have designed in some
-changes.

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

"Sam Hoskins" wrote in message ...
This builder was unknown to the California Quickie community. So far, non
of our guys have come forward and said this builder had contacted any of
them about flight testing, quirks and handling characteristics of the Q
breed.

Not to cast aspersions, or slight the loss to the family (I have four
kids - can't begin to imagine...) but might it be possible that an
engineer for Scaled Composites, working on the X-prize aircraft, might
have thought that he already knew everything he needed to know about
unusual composite aircraft?