Primarily for general aviation discussion, but other aviation topics are also welcome.
#1542410
Yes, I think it was a 390kg 2-seater that somebody's taken the second seat out and declared as a single seater to take the deregulated advantages.

I think it's relevant to the investigation, as AAIB if they're doing their job properly should be asking whether deregulation permitted anything to be done, or not done, to the aircraft that contribibuted to the accident.

It may or may not be relevant to the accident, but it'll certainly be relevant to the investigation - yes.

G
Danny liked this
#1542412
Genghis the Engineer wrote:Yes, I think it was a 390kg 2-seater that somebody's taken the second seat out and declared as a single seater to take the deregulated advantages.

I think it's relevant to the investigation, as AAIB if they're doing their job properly should be asking whether deregulation permitted anything to be done, or not done, to the aircraft that contribibuted to the accident.

It may or may not be relevant to the accident, but it'll certainly be relevant to the investigation - yes.

G


I do agree with G that this may cause a spotlight to be shone on ssdr, which isn't just about the original construction of the aircraft, but also allows modification and maintenance to be deregulated.

But this was not a two seater that was modified to be single seat. The accident aircraft was one of three kolb fireflys in the UK. They are a single seat aircraft as designed and built. This one was the first in the UK and was reviewed in the aviation press at the time, in Microlight Flying I think.
#1542452
lobstaboy wrote:
I do agree with G that this may cause a spotlight to be shone on ssdr, which isn't just about the original construction of the aircraft, but also allows modification and maintenance to be deregulated.


It is an unfortunate fact of risk sports that people are often killed or badly injured. It is always important that as many lessons as possible are taken from these accidents, and rightly, investigations into fatal accidents should be especially thorough.

However, to suggest this may, or should, cause a spotlight to be shone on ssdr is deeply flawed. There are no airworthiness regulations for hang gliding, paragliding, or paramotors either, and people have been killed and injured in those sports for longer than the nearly four decades I have been participating in them. They mostly turn out to be pilot error, but of course there have been structural failures too. Nobody is suggesting those suddenly become heavily regulated.

These accidents aren't going to stop. That is the harsh reality. People are killed horse riding, and in boats, and on motorcycles, and in cars. Why should this accident have any bearing on ssdr as either a class or a concept? One of the reasons ssdr was introduced was because the single seat microlight industry was dead on its feet. It had been strangled to death by well intentioned people, and it took a lot of drive, determination, willpower, and logical argument to roll that back. Look at how the industry has had a real shot in the arm since ssdr was introduced. No participants I know of want to see those changes rolled back.

To be honest, the two seat flexwing microlight industry is similarly suffering. What is needed is still less regulation, not more, but that needs to be combined with an effective dissemination of knowledge.

If there are lessons that can be learned from this accident, then it is right they should be shouted from the rooftops. Looser regulation comes with more personal responsibility. But, the only way to stop all death and injury in risky activities is to close them down. Well, we have come pretty close already. Let's not make that mistake again.
Dave W, insink, nallen and 1 others liked this
By patowalker
FLYER Club Member  FLYER Club Member
#1542459
Genghis the Engineer wrote:I stand corrected - yes, Firefly, not the Twinstar that I had in mind.

G


So an unmodified, ex-permit aircraft. Are you suggesting that its airworthyness is questionable because it was not inspected in the last 2 or 3 years?
#1542462
Whilst I agree with everything else you say there Pato, it's inevitable that the fact that this is the first SSDR fatality (we think) will inevitably put that under the spotlight. But, it may well be a conclusion, for example, that more and better education and promulgation of best practices is needed.

In my opinion that last, if it is a lesson from this, it is equally applicable to other branches of aviation. But, of course, we do have no idea yet what caused this accident.

So an unmodified, ex-permit aircraft. Are you suggesting that its airworthyness is questionable because it was not inspected in the last 2 or 3 years?

Neither of us know whether it's unmodified, neither of know what inspection or maintenance regime was applied to it.

G