Rare fatal CH-801 crash

Previously, I knew of only one other CH-801 crash resulting in
fatalities. Here's one that just happened, and as far as I can tell, had
they been doing testing "by the book" I think only one fatality would
have resulted, all else being unchanged:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?n... 172922&rfi=6

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
.. .
Previously, I knew of only one other CH-801 crash resulting in
fatalities. Here's one that just happened, and as far as I can tell, had
they been doing testing "by the book" I think only one fatality would
have resulted, all else being unchanged:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?n... 172922&rfi=6

If it was not in its first 25 hour experimental test period, it is not
unheard of for two people to go up for a test flight, I would think.

It would have been better if a power out situation had not happened, that is
for sure. If they had not done a full power runup test, with the nose up in
takeoff attitude, perhaps that would have been enough to prevent the
situation, but if they did, damn crappy luck, I would say.

With the scant information in the article, it would be difficult to come to
any accurate conlusion.
--
Jim in NC

On Jun 7, 7:13*pm, "Morgans" wrote:

With the scant information in the article, it would be difficult to come to
any (((accurate))) conlusion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That won't stop anyone from coming to INACCURATE conclusions :-)

-R.S.Hoover

"Veeduber" wrote

That won't stop anyone from coming to INACCURATE conclusions :-)

THAT is _certainly_ accurate! ;-)
--
Jim in NC

On Jun 7, 10:41*pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Veeduber" wrote

That won't stop anyone from coming to INACCURATE *conclusions :-)

THAT *is * _certainly_ * accurate! * ;-)
--
Jim in NC

HI guys. Word on the street is... Plane was built several years ago by
Rick Cambell in VA, had hundreds of hours on it. Powered by a Franklin
220 hp Cyl. These guys were apparently getting used to an 801 and
something went terribly wrong. If they were practicing engine outs
they didn't realize the 801 has a glide ratio of about 4-1, on a good
day.... From the looks of the wreckage it appears they had plenty of
fuel on board to burn it up so completely,, Godspeed to those two.


Ben
N801BH
www.haaspowerair.com

wrote

HI guys. Word on the street is... Plane was built several years ago by
Rick Cambell in VA, had hundreds of hours on it. Powered by a Franklin
220 hp Cyl. These guys were apparently getting used to an 801 and
something went terribly wrong. If they were practicing engine outs
they didn't realize the 801 has a glide ratio of about 4-1, on a good
day.... From the looks of the wreckage it appears they had plenty of
fuel on board to burn it up so completely,, Godspeed to those two.

Ben
************************************************** ******
Do you know if there was extensive engine or fuel system work done in the
recent restoration work reported in the media?
--
Jim in NC

wrote in message
...
On Jun 7, 10:41 pm, "Morgans" wrote:
"Veeduber" wrote

That won't stop anyone from coming to INACCURATE conclusions :-)

THAT is _certainly_ accurate! ;-)
--
Jim in NC

HI guys. Word on the street is... Plane was built several years ago by
Rick Cambell in VA, had hundreds of hours on it. Powered by a Franklin
220 hp Cyl. These guys were apparently getting used to an 801 and
something went terribly wrong. If they were practicing engine outs
they didn't realize the 801 has a glide ratio of about 4-1, on a good
day.... From the looks of the wreckage it appears they had plenty of
fuel on board to burn it up so completely,, Godspeed to those two.

Had it recently undergone restoration, (as stated in the media report) and
perhaps had work done to the engine and or the fuel system?

Indeed, Godspeed to the occupants.
--
Jim in NC

Jim Logajan wrote:
Previously, I knew of only one other CH-801 crash resulting in
fatalities. Here's one that just happened, and as far as I can tell, had
they been doing testing "by the book" I think only one fatality would
have resulted, all else being unchanged:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?n... 172922&rfi=6

Gary Mosley was an acquaintance & the brother of a friend of mine. He
was an A/P & ran the local airport.

For once, an article about an aviation subject was fairly accurate. And
not to beat up on you too much, Jim, but you misread the article &
started an inaccurate ugly rumor about homebuilts & homebuilders.

The plane was not in its phase one testing. They had a power failure,
topped a tree & flipped into the ground, where it caught fire.

Charlie

Charlie wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
Previously, I knew of only one other CH-801 crash resulting in
fatalities. Here's one that just happened, and as far as I can tell,
had they been doing testing "by the book" I think only one fatality
would have resulted, all else being unchanged:

http://www.zwire.com/site/news.cfm?n...377&PAG=461&de
pt_id=172922&rfi=6

Gary Mosley was an acquaintance & the brother of a friend of mine. He
was an A/P & ran the local airport.

For once, an article about an aviation subject was fairly accurate.
And not to beat up on you too much, Jim, but you misread the article &
started an inaccurate ugly rumor about homebuilts & homebuilders.

Sorry - I had no intention of starting any ugly rumors about homebuilts and
homebuilders, since I not only intend to build a homebuilt, I am in the
process of designing my own rather unusual aircraft design.

If you can tell me specifically what rumor I started and where it has
spread I will do what I can to correct it.

The plane was not in its phase one testing.

Just to be clear, since another person brought up the same claim but I made
the mistake of not replying, I knew immediately on reading "they were
restoring the plane..." that the "test flight" was not phase one. I made no
misread of the article on this point. I've done my best to acquaint myself
with the regulations since I have an interest in design of homebuilts.

I chose to write "by the book" to indicate safest possible practice. But
being lazy I didn't go back and edit it to say something like "had they
been using safest possible testing...." Author screwup.

But in retrospect I simply shouldn't have written the post at all, because
no matter how I would try to make my point it could only come across as
insulting the men. They clearly were competent and good men. Optimum
aviation safety is achieved by never leaving the ground, and it is not my
intent to even suggest they should have followed that dictum.

They had a power failure,
topped a tree & flipped into the ground, where it caught fire.

It appears to have been a very bad break in luck when they flipped.