C208 has mid air with a paraglider

[kerry]

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/state/texas/article256764962.html

[TheAv8r]

My neck of the woods... was just flying in that area last night. My condolences to him and his family, such a hard time to lose someone.

[Mcstealth]

Well crud. Not fun. 

[RobertGary1]

I worry about this when flying my PPC. I use a aviation radio to listen to traffic but few ultralights do. Most of these guys using BT comms and don't have aviation bands. 

It would be difficult in a PPC to avoid a plane since we move so slowly.

 

-Robert

[chriscalandro]

It’s been my experience that PPG pilots have a lack of understanding of any rules or regulations, have bad attitudes, and in general, get in the way. 

[flyboy0681]

"A witness told TV station KHOU that they saw a person parachute out of the plane before it crashed."

[ArtVandelay]

"A witness told TV station KHOU that they saw a person parachute out of the plane before it crashed."

Witness accounts aren’t worth much, it could have just been what’s left of the paraglider.

[Utah20Gflyer]

Last summer I was setting up to enter the pattern for South Valley regional Airport in Utah and there was a powered parachute at pattern altitude just West of the airport where I was setting up on a 45 for the downwind.   Fortunately I saw him and was able to avoid the guy but was concerned about where he was operating as that can be very busy airspace, even though it is a pilot controlled airport.  

What I am wondering is why a person is operating an aircraft within the mode C Veil of SLC international without  radio, transponder or ADSB?   I get it if you want to fly your parachute out in the middle of no where but it seems unreasonable to fly around in congested airspace right outside of an airports traffic pattern.  

 

 

[elimansour]

This one hits close to home and is very upsetting.  In addition to being a happy Mooney driver, I also fly a Caravan EX and PG and PPG.  My PG flying has only been at official USHPA sites and my PPG tends to be out in the desert away from any populated sites.  I have not done any cross country flights in PG or PPG and frankly don't quite get the appeal...but I guess the Mooney spoiled me!   The Caravan is a massive aircraft and I was shocked to see that it went so out of control that it sustained the damage that it did.  Perhaps the PPG must have been hit near the strut which may have separated or altered the wing leading to loss of control.  A terrible tragedy.  

This accident happened at 4800' and I believe that any ultralight operating at such an altitude should have air band receiver and should be transmitting position reports if near any uncontrolled airport traffic area or at least monitoring the relevant controller.    It's not just common sense but this concept as well as airspace and right of way, etc. was also reinforced when I got my PPG (USPPA) and PG (USHPA) training.  Unfortunately training per the syllabus approved by the relevant national organizations is not required to fly either PG or PPG.  I also think that anyone flying an ultralight anywhere near controlled airspace should have an ADSB transmitter.  The technology is getting pretty inexpensive and is necessary in congested airspace.   I suspect that this will be a requirement at some point but it is terrible that we have to see such horrible accidents to cause a regulatory reaction.

Prayers to all involved.   

 

[RobertGary1]

9 minutes ago, elimansour said:

This one hits close to home and is very upsetting.  In addition to being a happy Mooney driver, I also fly a Caravan EX and PG and PPG.  My PG flying has only been at official USHPA sites and my PPG tends to be out in the desert away from any populated sites.  I have not done any cross country flights in PG or PPG and frankly don't quite get the appeal...but I guess the Mooney spoiled me!   The Caravan is a massive aircraft and I was shocked to see that it went so out of control that it sustained the damage that it did.  Perhaps the PPG must have been hit near the strut which may have separated or altered the wing leading to loss of control.  A terrible tragedy.  

This accident happened at 4800' and I believe that any ultralight operating at such an altitude should have air band receiver and should be transmitting position reports if near any uncontrolled airport traffic area or at least monitoring the relevant controller.    It's not just common sense but this concept as well as airspace and right of way, etc. was also reinforced when I got my PPG (USPPA) and PG (USHPA) training.  Unfortunately training per the syllabus approved by the relevant national organizations is not required to fly either PG or PPG.  I also think that anyone flying an ultralight anywhere near controlled airspace should have an ADSB transmitter.  The technology is getting pretty inexpensive and is necessary in congested airspace.   I suspect that this will be a requirement at some point but it is terrible that we have to see such horrible accidents to cause a regulatory reaction.

Prayers to all involved.   

 

I’ve never thought to announce my position when I’m 4,800 feet over a passing airport in an airplane, ppg or otherwise. Is that common? Seems like a lot of noise on ctaf

[elimansour]

9 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

I’ve never thought to announce my position when I’m 4,800 feet over a passing airport in an airplane, ppg or otherwise. Is that common? Seems like a lot of noise on ctaf

Lots of us in SoCal make position announcements on 122.75 especially near some of the busy areas and to also let C or D towers know when you're transitioning over their airspace since it can get pretty crowded - usually within 1000' of the top of their airspace.  Not everyone does it but it's good to make as many people aware that you're out there and the controllers seem to appreciate it.  I think it may be less frequent than before since the ADSB mandate came into effect but lots still do it.  Our airspace is a crazy patchwork of B and C and restricted airspace with, in some cases, very narrow tunnels of E airspace to go through so it's good to let people above and below know where you are.      

[RobertGary1]

25 minutes ago, elimansour said:

Lots of us in SoCal make position announcements on 122.75 especially near some of the busy areas and to also let C or D towers know when you're transitioning over their airspace since it can get pretty crowded - usually within 1000' of the top of their airspace.  Not everyone does it but it's good to make as many people aware that you're out there and the controllers seem to appreciate it.  I think it may be less frequent than before since the ADSB mandate came into effect but lots still do it.  Our airspace is a crazy patchwork of B and C and restricted airspace with, in some cases, very narrow tunnels of E airspace to go through so it's good to let people above and below know where you are.      

To my knowledge we don’t have good ads-b out choices jn ppc’s. An N numbered machine could in theory get one but the power requirements would probably be too much. In gliders we tend to use flarm instead of ads-b for this reason but that doesn’t help others see you. I do have ads-b in in my machine although mine is a true ultralight with no n number so I assume no legal ads-b out option. 

[elimansour]

13 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

To my knowledge we don’t have good ads-b out choices jn ppc’s. An N numbered machine could in theory get one but the power requirements would probably be too much. In gliders we tend to use flarm instead of ads-b for this reason but that doesn’t help others see you. I do have ads-b in in my machine although mine is a true ultralight with no n number so I assume no legal ads-b out option. 

I think the technology is getting there.  uAvionixs is selling an ADSB solution for UAS that weighs 26g so could easily be adapted to PG/ PPG.  (https://uavionix.com/products/ping2020/)  It should not be too difficult to adapt to PG/PPG with some sort of battery solution.  

[elimansour]

One additional data point, uAvionics has a portable ADSB transceiver used for ultralights, gliders, etc. https://uavionix.com/products/skyecho/#resellers but for some reason FAA did not approve it for sale in the USA.  The unit can be purchased for ~$600 overseas for use in other countries.  It also can interface with flarm.  If FAA approved it for sale in USA I would imagine it would easily solve the issue.

[chriscalandro]

47 minutes ago, elimansour said:

One additional data point, uAvionics has a portable ADSB transceiver used for ultralights, gliders, etc. https://uavionix.com/products/skyecho/#resellers but for some reason FAA did not approve it for sale in the USA.  The unit can be purchased for ~$600 overseas for use in other countries.  It also can interface with flarm.  If FAA approved it for sale in USA I would imagine it would easily solve the issue.

I think that will take a while. With the current supply line issues, red tape is hard to come by at the moment. 

[skykrawler]

>>>  but for some reason FAA did not approve it for sale in the USA

Maybe they will now.  I've encountered ultra lights at 5k and have the opinion they don't belong there.

[RobertGary1]

3 hours ago, skykrawler said:

>>>  but for some reason FAA did not approve it for sale in the USA

Maybe they will now.  I've encountered ultra lights at 5k and have the opinion they don't belong there.

What does that mean? Why would you be allowed there and them not??

[chriscalandro]

52 minutes ago, RobertGary1 said:

What does that mean? Why would you be allowed there and them not??

Because none of them know what they’re doing and they cause chaos?  At least that’s been my experience. 

[Hank]

44 minutes ago, chriscalandro said:

Because none of them know what they’re doing and they cause chaos?  At least that’s been my experience. 

Sounds like what corporate pilots is turbo & joy prop twins think about our turbo-Mooney brethren flying in the low FLs.

If you can fly, go where you want to within regulatory limits. Then again, I've been unable to hold altitude in IMC due to strong lift . . . .

[RobertGary1]

1 hour ago, chriscalandro said:

Because none of them know what they’re doing and they cause chaos?  At least that’s been my experience. 

Well I’d obviously disagree with that. I have a pocket of faa certs. 
and not all are ultralights. It’s very common to put N numbers on them so they can carry passengers. No real way to know without seeing the machine. 

[Will.iam]

Ah Crap, i know that caravan 208. It’s from Martinaire here in addison texas. I know because i used to fly that very route. I just looked up on flight aware and sure enough MRA 685 is still estimated to arrive and the adsb track log ends abruptly at 09:25 at 4700ft. The news papers say its a small GA aircraft but it’s one of the biggest single engine airplanes out there. My condolences to the families. 

[skykrawler]

On 12/23/2021 at 3:10 PM, Hank said:

Sounds like what corporate pilots is turbo & joy prop twins think about our turbo-Mooney brethren flying in the low FLs.

If you can fly, go where you want to within regulatory limits. Then again, I've been unable to hold altitude in IMC due to strong lift . . . .

Some ultralight pilots are certificated.   There is no requirement for that - so the regs allow people with potentially no aviation knowledge to be in the sky.  Lawn chairs and balloons, whatever.  Gliders require a certificate - so why not ultralights?.      As you likely know, flight levels in the US start at 18000.   Even turbo-Mooney pilots who are not IFR rated are not permitted to fly there.

Maybe they should have transponders, too.  That 208 might have got a warning.

[RobertGary1]

3 hours ago, skykrawler said:

Some ultralight pilots are certificated.   There is no requirement for that - so the regs allow people with potentially no aviation knowledge to be in the sky.  Lawn chairs and balloons, whatever.  Gliders require a certificate - so why not ultralights?.      As you likely know, flight levels in the US start at 18000.   Even turbo-Mooney pilots who are not IFR rated are not permitted to fly there.

Maybe they should have transponders, too.  That 208 might have got a warning.

Requiring certificates sounds like a solution looking for a problem. No one is claiming the ultralight guy did anything wrong. 
ultralights don’t need transponders for the same reason gliders don’t. Because the current solutions require a lot of power. The community tried to persuade the FAA to go with a technology like flarm that many are already using today but the FAA declined. 

[skykrawler]

What about this clown?  Not using oxygen either.   He is a problem looking for a solution.

 

[RobertGary1]

1 hour ago, skykrawler said:

What about this clown?  Not using oxygen either.   He is a problem looking for a solution.

 

I’ve seen certified pilots to do similar. Not sure it’s the certificate you’re looking for.