An anonymous forum to allow you to share those moments in flying that caused you concern. You can post without registering a username, registered users can log out to post
User avatar
By Rob P
#1634615
Anon wrote:There is a certain "frustration" at the sheer number of times one revisits an accident.


Trust me, you will 'revisit it', mentally, on most days for quite a while. For me nearly five years on it has reduced to a couple of times a week.

Rob P
mick w liked this
By Anon
#1634921
I hope not - but time of course will tell.

Anyhow, flew for the first time since the accident this morning. A little nervous, rather more obsessive about checking engine gauges than usual, but basically fine. Stuck to a simple trip I've done many times, in an aeroplane I know well.
Miscellaneous, dparnell, AndyR and 6 others liked this
User avatar
By David Wood
#1635100
It doesn't even have to be an accident, per se. I had an Airprox two or three months ago. First time in 40 years of flying that I felt sufficiently endangered to actually file an Airprox Report. The process of filing reports, answering questions, re-examining assumptions means that I have found myself thinking about it, re-analysing it and generally being affected by it rather more than I would have expected.

Maybe we're just getting older, or wiser, or both, or neither...
By Anon
#1636049
By the way, one other "trouble" that I don't think would ever have occurred to me before the accident.

Like many other people, I wear glasses, and have a spare pair. Like many other pilots I wear glasses to fly, and my medical is endorsed requiring me to carry a spare pair - which I did.

Somewhere, my glasses are in the hedge I scrambled through getting out of the aeroplane - having got pulled off, and my spare glasses are presumably somewhere in/under the wreckage.

Have a spare pair OUTSIDE the cockpit! I did, but just saying !
User avatar
By foxmoth
#1649921
I see you have now done a flight, for anyone that finds themself in a similar position you can of course always do a flight with an instructor before you get your medical back, not a bad idea anyway if the accident is still on your mind!
By Anon
#1650510
foxmoth wrote:I see you have now done a flight, for anyone that finds themself in a similar position you can of course always do a flight with an instructor before you get your medical back, not a bad idea anyway if the accident is still on your mind!


For the record, I've flown about 30 hours since the accident and added a rating (or will have when CAA pull their fingers out and do their bit). I've developed something of a new obsession with monitoring engine gauges to an extent to which I didn't before - I'm sure that will do me no harm. After the first couple of hours I found flying fine, the only "flashbacks" I've suffered have been caused by reading about my, or similar accidents: even talking about it has been largely fine. I have taught PFLs since the accident, with no personal issues at-all, beyond a redoubled belief that my student should be able to do them really very very well. The worst, curiously enough, was in a ground training session where somebody put up a humorous cartoon showing an aeroplane flying into a tree, and I got close to leaving the room for five minutes.

Largely, it's not haunting me - but it's still with me.

And, I may as well admit, it's the last report in this month's AAIB bulletin.
By cockney steve
#1650562
Well, Anon, the report in "the magazine" was back in the "October" edition. - I'm sorry to hear this particular event has left such a mark.Don't beat yourself up about the ramifications of your forced landing. Your skill and expertise meant a happy outcome for all directly involved, but unfortunately appears to have played into the hands of those opposed.- It would still be the case, anyway,only probably a worse outcome of the engine-failure, had you not been there.

Worth going back to the site to recover your glasses......they aren't cheap!
Mine are like milk-bottle bottoms (next stop -a Labrador and a white stick) I found an excellent firm on the net , did a reglaze of a good frame with plastic, thin, coated Bi- Focal's for £56. in my hand. they also do frames. I suspect they actually sub them out to an ex-Eastern-Bloc lab. excellent quality and service, I'm now due for a retest
directsight.co.uk....local wanted over double that , just for the lenses.
Best wishes, you're still posting, a good sign! :thumleft:
By cockney steve
#1650731
:oops: Thanks, @Flyin'Dutch'
I checked the post on the aaib report and everything seemed to fit!......I'll keep my own counsel in future. :oops:

Commiserations to the OP of this thread still apply. We're all fallible and an accident is just that. I was in my very early 20's ,when my car was written-off and I was hospitalised. The car had an Irvine full harness installed (previous owner must have had rally-driver aspirations in a Skoda Octavia :lol: ) - This was a 1966 car and the massive backbone chassis probably saved me.....but, had I stopped to fiddle about with that harness.......... turned out the other driver was 4-up and missed his red light at a cross-roads....T-boned me , spun , slapped mine up the backside and then I hit a building on the street corner. shortly after, I took a Rep's job driving about 30,000 miles a year.

I'm aware, but it doesn't trouble me...and, yes, I always wear a belt! (I have the scars to remind me! )
User avatar
By Charles Hunt
#1650802
Assuming we’re talking about the Thruster one. Didn’t try to turn back, plonked it down at low speed in the least worst option available. Walked away. Excellent flying. Well done.
By Anon
#1650859
Steve and Charles are correct - it was the Thruster.

Steve was referring to some discussion in the microlight world - rather than in the later published AAIB report, which is also one reason that I've been a bit reticent to talk very openly about it. Unfortunately, it turns out that if you crash in the back garden of the chairman of the local parish council, they become rather difficult and try to get the airfield shut down.
User avatar
By JReading
#1650865
Anon wrote:Steve and Charles are correct - it was the Thruster.

Steve was referring to some discussion in the microlight world - rather than in the later published AAIB report, which is also one reason that I've been a bit reticent to talk very openly about it. Unfortunately, it turns out that if you crash in the back garden of the chairman of the local parish council, they become rather difficult and try to get the airfield shut down.
Reading the report it looks like you had sound decision making skills and both of walked away unharmed, so well done

When i destroyed a windsock last year i felt how you have described in your past posts but my instructor just got me back on the 'horse' almost immediately which cured it...although i try not to do touch and go's anymore!

J

Sent from my SM-G955F using Tapatalk
User avatar
By Flyin'Dutch'
#1650866
cockney steve wrote:Well, I was, but FD says not CCUZ. :? (that was the last one in the report issued November.) Pilot usually manages to find a convenient field and pub :wink:


[usermentioon=14390]@cockney steve[/usermention]

Point of order - I hinted at it being the CCUZ in the November issue - you had written it was in the October issue.

CCUZ report referred to Leylandi as did @Anon