N9391M destroyed at KOSH

[LANCECASPER]

2 hours ago, JoshK said:

You get what you give.  Snide remarks to people when information isn't provided but rather "you should have known" is hardly helpful or courteous.  I have some clients in Canada.  They're exceptional applicants at the "passive aggressive snub."  I take it on face value and call it for what it is: discourteous behavior. 

In case it was missed above:  The tapatalk forum platform only shows the signature information and the avatar photo (in which the registration number is illegible anyway) while on a PC.  Tapatalk has an app for mobile platforms which does not show any of the information that our friend Clarence so curtly pointed to unless the user is viewing from a computer, not a mobile app. 

In approximately 10 replies to comments I made we now have 4 snide ones between Clarence and yourself.  That might technically be a minority response, calling it the exception instead of the rule while you chide the new guy for not knowing information which isn't displayed is not what one might call "helpful and courteous".  Have a nice life.

Haha, that's hilarious. My first words to you were "Welcome to Mooneyspace" and your last words to me were "Have a nice life". Even though I was giving you the benefit of the doubt with only 12 posts for not knowing where Clarence was from. 

In almost 13 years on Mooneyspace I have only ignored one other person. You're now the second. 

[JoshK]

I'm having a hard time with it. On one hand I'm glad that my plane was able to minimize the loss of life and wasn't just destroyed. On the other hand it's eating me up a bit that the evidence is pointing at the gyro, the people it saved, being at fault for disobeying the safety procedures. It just doesn't feel right.

It shouldn’t feel right, it sucks. I’m glad it wasn’t me as much as I’m glad you and your family weren’t sitting in the tent or napping under the wing in the shade. Silver linings are there as a way to take the sting out of the dark cloud. Your plane is gone, that really sucks. It must also be hard to process that the people who caused the accident survived it and the ones who didn’t we’re not at fault. Similar to when a drunk kills a family in an accident and the drunk walks away.

Hopefully everything works out with insurance subrogation and you end up with a nicer, faster airplane.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jeffrey Ross]

From somebody I know that was a volunteer in the flight line told me that there were two gyrocopters  (ELA Eclipse 10s) who have been hot-dogging the Ultralight flight pattern all week, doing things like crossing the threshold at 200 ft then spiralling down to a short landing. They were warned several times, to no avail.  He did his spiral trick and slammed right into the chopper turning final. Killed the chopper pilot and injured his own pax. As is often the case, the moron survived.

 

personally I think the ultralight runway is the wild West and if he was warned once he should have been told to leave the second time.

 

I don't know how accurate the information is that I was given but I suspect it is accurate.

[Echo]

6 hours ago, chriscalandro said:

That is debatable

It's a club and we're not in it.

[Echo]

4 hours ago, JoshK said:

You get what you give.  Snide remarks to people when information isn't provided but rather "you should have known" is hardly helpful or courteous.  I have some clients in Canada.  They're exceptional applicants at the "passive aggressive snub."  I take it on face value and call it for what it is: discourteous behavior. 

In case it was missed above:  The tapatalk forum platform only shows the signature information and the avatar photo (in which the registration number is illegible anyway) while on a PC.  Tapatalk has an app for mobile platforms which does not show any of the information that our friend Clarence so curtly pointed to unless the user is viewing from a computer, not a mobile app. 

In approximately 10 replies to comments I made we now have 4 snide ones between Clarence and yourself.  That might technically be a minority response, calling it the exception instead of the rule while you chide the new guy for not knowing information which isn't displayed is not what one might call "helpful and courteous".  Have a nice life.

 

 

 

It's a hobby for some here.  I don't sugarcoat my responses to the passive aggressive behavior.  THAT is why I have many more posts than many of them, but alas it is under over a half dozen different names.

[Echo]

3 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

And yet I bet over 90% of autos carry the min required insurence, because people shop for the cheapest, and I’ll bet when you get hit by an idiot that the odds go up to about 99% they only carry min insurence.

In Florida the requirement is $10,000 https://www.flhsmv.gov/insurance/

That 10K in insurence cost them $878 a year, https://www.carinsurance.com/state/Florida-car-insurance.aspx

Really great rate isn’t it? State mandated insurence is a rip off, way overpriced, we don’t need mandated overpriced insurence for our aircraft. 

‘Our car got hail damage a couple of months ago, no broken glass etc and you couldn’t tell it from 20 ft away, yet it was a $14,000 repair, sort of puts that $10,000 into perspective.

Most people like that are “judgement proof” that is to say they have no assets, sure you’ll win the case but you won’t recover anything, because you can’t get blood from a turnip.

Best to carry your own insurence if your counting on insurence.

Flying must be dangerous, if you don’t believe that price life insurence, then tell them your a pilot and see what happens to the rates, and I don’t think how many hours or years accident and incident free flying you have or your ratings mean anything at all, but they do ask what type aircraft you own.

I went through 40 years of marriage accumulating wealth without an umbrella policy.  A64 (on his soapbox in anotheer thread) made me hit my forehead and snap out of it...We now have a reasonabl umbrella policy.  Thank you

[chriscalandro]

34 minutes ago, Echo said:

It's a club and we're not in it.

That’s what happens when you keep an open mind. 

[ilovecornfields]

7 hours ago, Justin Schmidt said:

Driving is by far more dangerous (between chicago and Cincy I saw 26 crashes, at least 6 of which someone didn't survive)...everything in life is dangerous and you may visit the afterlife at any moment. All we can do in life is mitigate our risks as we see fit in our individual situations and one thing to take away is
live life to the fullest every moment, cherish that which is in front of you and do what makes you be alive

You’re not being serious, right? The accident rate depends on the number of accidents (which you posted) divided by the number of exposures (which you didn’t and is several orders of magnitude higher given the number of people driving vs flying). You essentially have given zero information on the actual accident rate but somehow used this to justify that flying is safer?!

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were being facetious. 

[tigers2007]

On 7/30/2023 at 7:05 PM, 1980Mooney said:

But isn’t that the point?- it DOESN’T cover your plane or any liability you create while flying.  

 

Check your umbrella policy/contract for specific aviation exclusions. Some do not rule out aviation related events. Consider shopping around. My life insurance broker couldn't find me a life policy without ridiculous exclusions specially because I am a pilot (no coverage on non-121 flights,etc). I went to Pilot Insurance Center and they found me a policy (written by North American) that was actually cheaper than what the other guy quoted AND I can fly the damn plane...

The comment about rude Canadians made me spit out some of my beer when I read that (Sleeman's Cream Ale); was quite hilarious to me but I live in the states so maybe my instinctive rudeness has been kept reserved due to the Red White and Blue.

[EricJ]

2 hours ago, Echo said:

I went through 40 years of marriage accumulating wealth without an umbrella policy.  A64 (on his soapbox in anotheer thread) made me hit my forehead and snap out of it...We now have a reasonabl umbrella policy.  Thank you

I kept umbrella coverage for many years, but it only extends underlying policies and has its own limitations.   It doesn't do what many people think it does, and even though it wasn't all that expensive I eventually just stopped it because the value seemed questionable.   Insurance, risk tolerance, etc., are very individualized, so make sure you understand what a potential umbrella policy might actually do or not do for you.    It's not a slam dunk.

 

[Pinecone]

On 7/30/2023 at 7:52 PM, Jeff Uphoff said:

And adding a million or two in liability umbrella over your auto+home policy is surprisingly reasonable. I've been carrying an umbrella for ages. (Sure wish it covered my plane, too!)

But my insurance company required that I max out the liability coverage for my cars and house before I could get an umbrella policy.

But that was stupidly cheap.  IIRC, to go from 250K on the cars to 1 million was less than $15 per year additional.

[druidjaidan]

10 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

Question for those more knowledgeable and close to what happened.  Since the 2 aircraft collided mid-air and the wreckage rained down on the parking/camping area, doesn't that logically mean that BOTH aircraft, the helo and the gyro, were BOTH flying over the parking/camping area?  Winds were mild and from the northeast and the aircraft were low so they debris would not blow far from the point of impact.  And if it did blow, it would actually blow away from the aircraft parking/camping area.

KOSH 291653Z 07006KT 10SM CLR 25/17 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP173 T02500167
KOSH 291753Z 05004KT 10SM CLR 25/16 A3008 RMK AO2 SLP175 T02500156 10250 20189
55003

And as @Boilermonkey pointed out above, the Ultralight/Homebuilt Rotorcraft NOTAM " clearly states "Do not overfly aircraft parking areas".   So doesn't that logically mean that both the helo and the gyro were flying where they should not be?  And as speculated above if there were 2 gyros that had "been hot-dogging the Ultralight flight pattern all week" and "They were warned several times, to no avail", then why didn't the EAA shut the pattern down or ban the offending craft?

There are comments that one party is solely to blame, but it may not be so simple and binary.  

 

It's unlikely to be completely binary, but who knows yet. That said we saw some details. The helicopter did not fall into the camping, it fell on the road.

There exists a rotorcraft forum where more witnesses are discussing the accident. The only detail there worth sharing is that if what they say is true the collision very well could have happened over the road.

[steingar]

Rotorcraft, even gyros, are really expensive.  Even the kits are expensive, I suspect both rotorcraft were more valuable than many of your (damn I miss saying "our" Mooneys).  I'd be shocked if both rotorcraft weren't carrying quite a bit of insurance.  These aren't ultralights, even though they're flying the ultralight field.

I am so sorry for the OP, that is truly horrible thing to happen at a fly-in.  Very glad the OP and his family weren't hurt, and very sorry that the accident victims were.  I'll bet they were part of the show, there's a pattern these aircraft fly to do landings at the ultralight field.  I think there's going to be some examination of procedures.

[Bolter]

18 hours ago, A64Pilot said:

And yet I bet over 90% of autos carry the min required insurence, because people shop for the cheapest, and I’ll bet when you get hit by an idiot that the odds go up to about 99% they only carry min insurence.

In Florida the requirement is $10,000 https://www.flhsmv.gov/insurance/

That 10K in insurence cost them $878 a year, https://www.carinsurance.com/state/Florida-car-insurance.aspx

Really great rate isn’t it? State mandated insurence is a rip off, way overpriced, we don’t need mandated overpriced insurence for our aircraft. 

Include that Florida is a "no-fault" insurance state as well.  Wouldn't that mean the ridiculously low 10k insurance is what protects you, not the other drivers?  I do not really understand no-fault insurance, of why it exists.    

[Echo]

41 minutes ago, Bolter said:

Include that Florida is a "no-fault" insurance state as well.  Wouldn't that mean the ridiculously low 10k insurance is what protects you, not the other drivers?  I do not really understand no-fault insurance, of why it exists.    

This IS a "been done" movie.  You need to keep your Florida insurance angst within your borders directed at those that care.  Or not.

[Echo]

13 hours ago, ilovecornfields said:

You’re not being serious, right? The accident rate depends on the number of accidents (which you posted) divided by the number of exposures (which you didn’t and is several orders of magnitude higher given the number of people driving vs flying). You essentially have given zero information on the actual accident rate but somehow used this to justify that flying is safer?!

I’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you were being facetious. 

So you will not concede that vehicle operation in highly congested high speed urban areas is more dangerous than general aviation operation?  Illogical are your comments.  Unable to get out of "the box".  Change your avitar as you urinate upon the grave of the character portrayed.  Much goes into accident probability.  Is Oshkosh fly in airspace equal in exposure to all General aviation?  You drive one road you drive them all?  You know, statistics.  Your comments and the likes are the club here.  You don't get it.  That is your problem.  It's bias to the core.  Figures lie and liars figure addage comes to mind.

[A64Pilot]

45 minutes ago, Bolter said:

Include that Florida is a "no-fault" insurance state as well.  Wouldn't that mean the ridiculously low 10k insurance is what protects you, not the other drivers?  I do not really understand no-fault insurance, of why it exists.    

I’m no insurence guy but as I understand it no-fault means that in smaller and or difficult to determine fault like parking lots accidents for instance and to prevent the expense of court that my insurence fixes my car and you yours. That’s cheaper than going to court for the insurence companies.

My point was that I believe mandated insurence actually does little to nothing for the driving public, but in fact was lobbied for by the insurence companies in order to increase their profits, it’s not to protect the public.

I don’t want mandated aircraft insurence to protect me, I’ll buy better and cheaper insurence myself to protect me from others without it.

‘Many things are like that for instance I learned in school many years ago that at least in some States if you want to be cremated you must first be embalmed before you’re cremated. That was lobbied for by embalmers I’m sure and so,d as some kind of way to protect the public.

[LANCECASPER]

Is Flying Safer Than Driving?
Richard Collins, Flying Magazine December 1993



 

[glbtrottr]

An OP takes a moment to share a fairly excruciating if not traumatic experience with us here at the board that involves death, family and children.

Then by whatever methods, the thread is allowed to devolve into a pissing contest.

As a community, i find that in terribly poor taste. A thread of this kind should genuinely be about providing an ear for the OP, supporting the OP, lending a helpful hand, and hopefully not pulling out the rulers for appropriate measure. There are hundreds of other threads for that.

IANAL, and what’s typed is strictly my own opinion.

[Echo]

On 7/31/2023 at 2:57 PM, JoshK said:

You get what you give.  Snide remarks to people when information isn't provided but rather "you should have known" is hardly helpful or courteous.  I have some clients in Canada.  They're exceptional applicants at the "passive aggressive snub."  I take it on face value and call it for what it is: discourteous behavior. 

In case it was missed above:  The tapatalk forum platform only shows the signature information and the avatar photo (in which the registration number is illegible anyway) while on a PC.  Tapatalk has an app for mobile platforms which does not show any of the information that our friend Clarence so curtly pointed to unless the user is viewing from a computer, not a mobile app. 

In approximately 10 replies to comments I made we now have 4 snide ones between Clarence and yourself.  That might technically be a minority response, calling it the exception instead of the rule while you chide the new guy for not knowing information which isn't displayed is not what one might call "helpful and courteous".  Have a nice life.

 

 

 

THIS is where "it" went off the rails imo...This is a learning opportunity if ALL allow it.

[Danb]

On 7/31/2023 at 9:59 AM, JoshK said:

Oh so it was inference that I was supposed to understand the situation was based in Canada.  Avatars and the comments underneath don't show up on the Tapatalk App it seems; just the username.  

 

There's a lot of situations in life that can suck unless you have the financial means to take it to court and even then the attorneys are the ones who make out the best in the situation 100% of the time.

 

The situation with the Cirrus and the 172 is a perfect example of why I keep full coverage and full tort on my 10 year old car that has been paid for for 7 years.  Same as why I keep fair market hull on my Arrow that was bought without a loan.  It gives you a very strong lever to pull for influencing the situation.  Now you don't need to hire the attorney and sue.  You make a claim, which isn't your fault, your insurance subrogates on your behalf.  You get paid and move on in life. 

Perhaps it's not this way in Canada but in the US the insured hull value is a predetermined payout value unlike the motor vehicle insurance industry where they always get to negotiate what they think your vehicle is worth.  If your plane is wrecked then they cover up to the amount insured for.  They don't say "well your Cirrus was brand new and you put a 1.3M hull policy on it, but we're only going to pay you 755k due to depreciation."  They pay you the insured hull value.

All in all, the sitaution for the OP who's pretty F model got destroyed sucks.  There are ways to mitigate the suckiness.

The situation for the deceased ultralight pilots is a lot worse.

JK so what the hell did doc say to hurt your feelings, really toughen up a little, a strong ally of MS is now gone through nothing he said was false or arrogant. Now you can start on me. I could care less about your 15 th post this most likely is my last also. 

[T. Peterson]

On 7/29/2023 at 4:44 PM, 1980Mooney said:

With the inflation in GA aircraft prices the last few years, many planes today are underinsured for total loss.  The two (2) Ultralights may have not carried any insurance.  This is a sad situation for all involved.  Before painting a rosy picture, more facts are needed.  

BTW - I am curious to know if attendees can sue the organizers of the EAA Airventure at Oshkosh or do attendees have to sign a waiver to attend?

I don’t know, but I certainly hope that they cannot sue. I am fed up with this litigious society. Bad things happen to good people, but that doesn’t mean the unfortunate are automatically owed financial compensation.

[druidjaidan]

17 minutes ago, T. Peterson said:

I don’t know, but I certainly hope that they cannot sue. I am fed up with this litigious society. Bad things happen to good people, but that doesn’t mean the unfortunate are automatically owed financial compensation.

I guess that means you volunteer your plane as the landing pad next time? Or are you only talking about the actual pilots that were flying? I'm not particularly rich. What I'm looking at losing right now may be enough to keep me from owning a plane again.  All because I was parked in an unfortunate spot.

I'm very glad my family is ok, I'm glad the two occupants of the gyro were saved. I also firmly believe I am owned full compensation for my loss. This isn't some "guy runs out of fuel and dies, family sues Cessna because the plane didn't stop him from killing himself"

 

[Aerodon]

I'm not a fan of insane jury awards, but if my plane was written off through no fault of my own, I would expect my insurance company to replace it. I don't underinsure, and I don't care if they try recoup their losses, that's their business.  

I had a hangar fire, my insurance fixed it and filed a claim on the local utility who were the direct cause.  They reached a settlement pretty quickly and recouped 80% of their outlay.

I'm pretty sure the owner of the Piper M600 that got chewed up by a P51 got compensated and the insurance company would have gone after the P51 pilot?

I am aware of one local pilot / owner that flew into a high rise after a medical issue.  The residents were relocated and repairs ran into millions.  The building owners insurance company filed a claim against everyone and anyone involved.  Some guys were dropped fairly early on (no assets or insurance), but the estate was wiped out and his family was left penniless.  One avionics shop insurer that had worked on the plane settled for a significant mid 6 figure number, just to avoid a trial.

 

Aerodon

 

 

 

 

[JoshK]

JK so what the hell did doc say to hurt your feelings, really toughen up a little, a strong ally of MS is now gone through nothing he said was false or arrogant. Now you can start on me. I could care less about your 15 th post this most likely is my last also. 

He was snotty about information that isn’t displayed but he told me I should know. I told him he was being unreasonable to expect me to know where he’s based when the info isn’t displayed on the mobile app. Then it devolved from there with one of the fanboi responses having a fit and telling me that I’m blocked from their display list. That’s where a few people got worked up; with the post you copied. Irregardless of the discussion about insurance and FAR happenings that others were discussing, myself included.

The byproduct of the entertainment has been seeing who feels the need to assert their own skin thickness by telling me mine is too thin and to stand by their man from the low-post newb that clearly doesn’t understand how Internet forums work.

It lets me know who is especially prone to getting riled up when given even the slightest off-kilter response.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk