N9391M destroyed at KOSH

[ilovecornfields]

Anyone else get uncomfortable when they think about how safe we convince ourselves GA is and then think about all the accidents/fatalities at or or the way to Oshkosh each year? I guess we’re still doing better than Sturgis, but not by much.

[JoshK]

Anyone else get uncomfortable when they think about how safe we convince ourselves GA is and then think about all the accidents/fatalities at or or the way to Oshkosh each year? I guess we’re still doing better than Sturgis, but not by much.

How many of the accidents at Sturgis involve riders with chemical substances in their system? On top of a huge number of bikers flooding an otherwise small town…

While AirVenture is likely to involve far lower amounts of alcohol related incidents I was surprised at how many people are applying the “8 hours bottle to throttle” and flying demanding/high performance machines after poor night’s rest and being in the sun all day.

The airspace is incredibly busy, the landings coming in show a lot of people who while probably competent at their home and surrounding airports, are barely up to task of coming in on a structured arrival after a long XC in a machine they haven’t flown like that for a long time. Putting a hotrod in the pattern behind a 75kt Cherokee and making the speed machine fly close to MCA on the same arrival takes more skill than bombing in and landing under normal operations.

There are lots of factors that make the risks higher. We have to apply our own honest limitations to operating at Airventure.

Couple that with EAA allowing ultralights, gyrocopters, antique piston helos, Powered parachutes and ultralights to fly over crowded areas well below 500ft there’s a recipe for problems. I would not be surprised if the FAA has something to say about the operations over crowded campsites and discussing FAR violations. They’re clearly a densely populated spot, I don’t think any argument can be made to the contrary.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoshK]

How much time and effort do you think it generally takes to "win the law suit"?  - months?...years?  Then how long does it generally take to actually collect funds from someone that, as you suggest, may have to sell assets to raise cash.  And then how much goes into the lawyers' pockets and not the claimant?  In cases like this does the claimant ever really get "made whole"?
In the meantime, the Cirrus owner is footing the bill or his plane is down.

I’ve been through it when an underinsured driver hit my wife while she walked through a crosswalk. Two knee surgeries and an ankle surgery later his insurance company paid the maximum and was done. We hired an attorney to sue our insurance company for the underinsured motorist policy we carry. Our out of pocket was 0 because the hired attorney wrote a letter to each medical office that said essentially “send all bills to our office, this situation is under litigation, do not contact my client”

It took just under 9 months to settle everything out. Our insurance ended up suing the guy who hit her, I have no idea what happened to him.

Liability-only insurance is a common thing, maybe instead of saying we need to be writing new laws we look at the exact situation at hand… liability insurance on the part of the 172 pilot will cover the damage to the cirrus. If it was a rental 172 then the renters policy and liability policy of the owner who rented it will cover the cirrus. All in all this is a discussion that was being crutches up by “but he has to be out of pocket”

For a short period of time, and even then if he has a brand new cirrus it is insured. If he wrote a check for the whole thing he has assets valued high enough to cover the cost and he can sue the 172. In the (far more likely situation) that it is financed then his finance company requires it to be insured and the deductible value is pretty low. Standard is 5k max deductible for situations exactly like this. I just went through this as well.

And furthermore, the difference between 0 deductible and 5k deductible insurance for my annual policy was $800…

If you’re flying a cirrus and you are bellyaching over a $800 annual difference in insurance you probably shouldn’t be flying a cirrus. The parachute repack lifespan alone costs more than twice that much each year when amortized.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[M20F]

4 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

I suspect that lawyers for the deceased parties' estates and injured parties will be lining up at EAA's doorstep and the courthouse with exactly that case.

And when there is no more KOSH we can all be safe. 

[JoshK]

And when there is no more KOSH we can all be safe. 

Bingo

Let’s make some more restrictive laws about flying and private aviation too!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoshK]

You seem to missing that the Cirrus/172 incident happened in Canada, so any thoughts laws and insurance are kind of invalid.

Was that stated in the original post? Or were we supposed to infer that


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoshK]

Right there with the picture of my plane and its registration.  Mooneyspace is on the “world wide web” 

Strangely I saw Canadian planes all over Oshkosh this week and that’s in Wisconsin USA. But no photo has shown up anywhere in this thread that I’ve seen. Must be settings on the forum or something for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[BDPetersen]

Curious what row you were in. I was in 148 (next to Skates) but left earlier in week. Several Mooneys in area.

[druidjaidan]

I was in row 123

[Jeff Uphoff]

9 hours ago, Hank said:

It's that way for car insurance, too. Minimums are pricey per thousand, a d it costs little extra to get reasonable limits, but many are only interested in the required minimum amount. 

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!)

[DXB]

What an awful tragedy - I do hope it helps refine the ultralight procedures to protect lives and property.  I think this year was my 5th (?) time attending and 4th time coming in on the FISK arrival in the left seat.  Though it's sobering (and appropriate) to be reminded of the risks and liabilities, it's still a remarkable spectacle and human enterprise that I hope continues.  

[Hank]

2 minutes ago, M20Doc said:

It’s complicated.  The OP of this thread lost his plane through no fault of his own.  I related a similar incident that happened to a client of mine here in Canada, there are nor with there be pictures of this incident here.  The picture I was referring to was my avatar, and my registration to help you understand that I’m in Canada. Yes we have www. things here too.

I thought we all knew that Clarence and the mighty IO-720 live in Canada. Toronto, isn't it?

[Jeff Uphoff]

12 hours ago, 1980Mooney said:

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

 

I was speaking to the more general topic point of some people carrying the absolute minimum in liability on insurance policies--limits so low they might not even cover replacing someone else's relatively modest car. It's nigh crazy to expose yourself like that.

[JoshK]

13 hours ago, M20Doc said:

It’s complicated.  The OP of this thread lost his plane through no fault of his own.  I related a similar incident that happened to a client of mine here in Canada, there are nor with there be pictures of this incident here.  The picture I was referring to was my avatar, and my registration to help you understand that I’m in Canada. Yes we have www. things here too.

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.

[LANCECASPER]

1 hour ago, 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.

Welcome to Mooneyspace.

Clarence has a shop in Canada and is a major contributor to Mooneyspace, with over 11,300 posts, helping people with Mooney maintenance questions and is highly valued here. If there is anyone who is regularly on here that knows more about Mooneys, I can't imagine who that would be. Everyone who has been on here any length of time knows about his shop and appreciates his contributions greatly.

It's understandable with only 12 posts you might not realize that, but observing and giving the benefit of the doubt goes a long way on here. One of the reasons people have migrated here from other online forums is that people genuinely try to help each other and treat each other civilly. It doesn't always happen that way but it's the norm here, not the exception. 

[MikeOH]

2 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Welcome to Mooneyspace.

Clarence has a shop in Canada and is a major contributor to Mooneyspace, with over 11,300 posts, helping people with Mooney maintenance questions and is highly valued here. If there is anyone who is regularly on here that knows more about Mooneys, I can't imagine who that would be. Everyone who has been on here any length of time knows about his shop and appreciates his contributions greatly.

It's understandable with only 12 posts you might not realize that, but observing and giving the benefit of the doubt goes a long way on here. One of the reasons people have migrated here from other online forums is that people genuinely try to help each other and treat each other civilly. It doesn't always happen that way but it's the norm here, not the exception. 

Ah, so that gives M20Doc the excuse to be rude to the newcomer??  Got it, civility only applies to the new guys.

If we don't see a 13th post from JoshK I'll know why.  But, I guess that's okay because HE didn't "play nice"???

[chriscalandro]

2 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

One of the reasons people have migrated here from other online forums is that people genuinely try to help each other and treat each other civilly. It doesn't always happen that way but it's the norm here, not the exception. 

That is debatable

[Boilermonkey]

With respect to the EAA liability, FAA review of the precautions in place prior to the accident, etc.   The NOTAM on page 21 details the procedures.  It clearly states "Do not overfly aircraft parking areas or Runways 18/36 L/R.  It also states do not overfly people, houses, livestock, parked aircraft, etc. lower than 300' AGL.   I would interpret that as a NEVER overfly the parking areas AND don't fly elsewhere over things below 300' AGL.  Having watched the video below, that's possible, but it puts you directly over the road to the South 40.   With any wind it would be easy for things to fall on the camping area.  Moreover, I'm not sure you want things falling on the road where trams and busses operate either.

They also required anyone operating in the pattern to attend daily briefings.  

A video of the pattern is found here:  https://www.eaa.org/airventure/eaa-fly-in-flying-to-oshkosh/ultralight-arrivals

From a safety perspective it seems like it is as good as it can get and would likely ensure safe operation if an engine quit.   A mid-air or stall spin event in the pattern is still too close to spectators, camping, etc.   I'm not sure what can be done about that, perhaps they would need to eliminate camping in some of those areas?  Make it transient parking and continue to move people to the S40?

 

[Martín Gómez]

On 7/29/2023 at 12:46 PM, druidjaidan said:

My plane for the past 6 years was destroyed today. Two ultralights collided on approach and one of the planes came down on top of my plane.

We were on our way back from the seaplane base, had we decided to take the South 40 bus instead of main gate we, and my children, likely would have been at the tent when it happened.

I’m so sorry this happened, and I’m glad you and your family weren’t at your campsite.  I was in a red/black/white Twin Bonanza in Row 120.  Your wife and your kids stopped by to ask about my solar generator a day or two before I left on Thursday.

Good luck with the upcoming insurance and logistics struggles.

Martín

[Martín Gómez]

I’m sure you’ve heard this a dozen times already, but perhaps it’s of some comfort that, as reported on BeechTalk by one of the first people on the scene “That Mooney gave its life to save them. The fuselage was crushed, the right gear collapsed, and the plane was mostly sitting on its belly. There was just a small ground scar. The Mooney took all that energy and cushioned them from a fall of probably 100 feet or more.”

[JoshK]

4 hours ago, LANCECASPER said:

Welcome to Mooneyspace.

Clarence has a shop in Canada and is a major contributor to Mooneyspace, with over 11,300 posts, helping people with Mooney maintenance questions and is highly valued here. If there is anyone who is regularly on here that knows more about Mooneys, I can't imagine who that would be. Everyone who has been on here any length of time knows about his shop and appreciates his contributions greatly.

It's understandable with only 12 posts you might not realize that, but observing and giving the benefit of the doubt goes a long way on here. One of the reasons people have migrated here from other online forums is that people genuinely try to help each other and treat each other civilly. It doesn't always happen that way but it's the norm here, not the exception. 

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.

 

 

 

[Jcmtl]

Wow, i was not far away in the vintage camping area when i heard a loud thump, saw black smoke, and a minute later 2 firetrucks rushing towards the area.  Everyone was speculating as to what happened.  I never expected a mooney on the ground to be a casualty.  Glad you and your family are ok.

i found it a little weird that the organizers never actually announced what happened.  I thought for sure during the airshow they would say something.

[Justin Schmidt]

On 7/30/2023 at 11:42 AM, ilovecornfields said:

Anyone else get uncomfortable when they think about how safe we convince ourselves GA is and then think about all the accidents/fatalities at or or the way to Oshkosh each year? I guess we’re still doing better than Sturgis, but not by much.

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

[A64Pilot]

9 hours ago, Jeff Uphoff said:

I was speaking to the more general topic point of some people carrying the absolute minimum in liability on insurance policies--limits so low they might not even cover replacing someone else's relatively modest car. It's nigh crazy to expose yourself like that.

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.

Edited July 31, 2023 by A64Pilot

[druidjaidan]

1 hour ago, Martín Gómez said:

I’m sure you’ve heard this a dozen times already, but perhaps it’s of some comfort that, as reported on BeechTalk by one of the first people on the scene “That Mooney gave its life to save them. The fuselage was crushed, the right gear collapsed, and the plane was mostly sitting on its belly. There was just a small ground scar. The Mooney took all that energy and cushioned them from a fall of probably 100 feet or more.”

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.