Pilot's 2nd Fatal Accident

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Richard Russell" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer
pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the
*auto-pilot*?

Good question. The report was ambiguous. It could be interpreted
that he was putting on the autopilot just prior to the crash.
Depending on how you interpret what was written, the autopilot could
have saved his butt or contributed to the cause of the accident by
providing a distraction. The investigation will sort it all out, I'm
sure.

Sounds a bit like this one where the pilot was looking down (to engage the
autopilot??) and had a collision.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X09798&key=1

That is a different accident. The accident in question here happened near
Tenino, WA on Sunday and involved a collision between a Cessna 210 and a
170.

"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Richard Russell" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer
pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with
his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the
*auto-pilot*?

Good question. The report was ambiguous. It could be interpreted
that he was putting on the autopilot just prior to the crash.
Depending on how you interpret what was written, the autopilot could
have saved his butt or contributed to the cause of the accident by
providing a distraction. The investigation will sort it all out, I'm
sure.

Sounds a bit like this one where the pilot was looking down (to engage
the
autopilot??) and had a collision.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X09798&key=1

That is a different accident. The accident in question here happened near
Tenino, WA on Sunday and involved a collision between a Cessna 210 and a
170.

I didn't say it was the SAME accident, just SIMILAR. (i.e., distracted while
engaging the autopilot).

You forgot looking at a chart (well they call it a map)


"C J Campbell" wrote in message
...

"Tom Sixkiller" wrote in message
...

"Richard Russell" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer
pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with
his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the
*auto-pilot*?

Good question. The report was ambiguous. It could be interpreted
that he was putting on the autopilot just prior to the crash.
Depending on how you interpret what was written, the autopilot could
have saved his butt or contributed to the cause of the accident by
providing a distraction. The investigation will sort it all out, I'm
sure.

Sounds a bit like this one where the pilot was looking down (to engage
the
autopilot??) and had a collision.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...11X09798&key=1

That is a different accident. The accident in question here happened near
Tenino, WA on Sunday and involved a collision between a Cessna 210 and a
170.

On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:43:42 -0400, Richard Russell
wrote:

Betcha a big glass of your favorite beer there is/was no autopilot
in the 170 (who would put an autopilot in a 170?!!!).
What more likely happened, is the "witness" heard what
he wanted to hear (the pilot was quoted at some point saying
(words to the effect that) he was just "cruising along and POOF...
he never saw the other aircraft"

Bela P. Havasreti



On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the *auto-pilot*?

Good question. The report was ambiguous. It could be interpreted
that he was putting on the autopilot just prior to the crash.
Depending on how you interpret what was written, the autopilot could
have saved his butt or contributed to the cause of the accident by
providing a distraction. The investigation will sort it all out, I'm
sure.
Rich Russell

Yea because he was looking at his chart and not outside.


"Bela P. Havasreti" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:43:42 -0400, Richard Russell
wrote:

Betcha a big glass of your favorite beer there is/was no autopilot
in the 170 (who would put an autopilot in a 170?!!!).
What more likely happened, is the "witness" heard what
he wanted to hear (the pilot was quoted at some point saying
(words to the effect that) he was just "cruising along and POOF...
he never saw the other aircraft"

Bela P. Havasreti



On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the
*auto-pilot*?

Good question. The report was ambiguous. It could be interpreted
that he was putting on the autopilot just prior to the crash.
Depending on how you interpret what was written, the autopilot could
have saved his butt or contributed to the cause of the accident by
providing a distraction. The investigation will sort it all out, I'm
sure.
Rich Russell

"Bela P. Havasreti" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:43:42 -0400, Richard Russell
wrote:

Betcha a big glass of your favorite beer there is/was no autopilot
in the 170 (who would put an autopilot in a 170?!!!).

My favorite 'beer' is root beer.

On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:06:28 -0700, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

But I "win" the bet, and mine isn't root beer (mine is Moose Drool).

So pay up! 8^)

Bela P. Havasreti

"Bela P. Havasreti" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 18 May 2004 10:43:42 -0400, Richard Russell
wrote:

Betcha a big glass of your favorite beer there is/was no autopilot
in the 170 (who would put an autopilot in a 170?!!!).

My favorite 'beer' is root beer.

On Tue, 18 May 2004 13:02:15 GMT, "Jay Honeck"
wrote:

Typical eye-witness faux-pas.... (BS)

But the engine, mount & cowling did depart the aircraft in flight.
The engine was found 1000+ feet from the rest of the airplane.

Bela P. Havasreti

Aside from the fact that this lad should perhaps find a safer pastime...

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the *auto-pilot*?

Did he really land his Cessna 170, after a mid-air collision, with his
engine no longer attached to the airframe -- by turning on the *auto-pilot*?

I read the accident reports and my understanding was that he was on
autopilot, reading a chart, when the midair happened.

Scott Devlin left behind a wife and two children aged 1 year and 3 years,
Perhaps those that find this a source for their feeble attempts at
humour may reflect on that.

Tony

--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Almost Instrument
Cessna 172H C-GICE

"tony roberts" wrote

I read the accident reports and my understanding was that he was on
autopilot, reading a chart, when the midair happened.

Scott Devlin left behind a wife and two children aged 1 year and 3 years,
Perhaps those that find this a source for their feeble attempts at
humour may reflect on that.

Tony

Easy, Tony. I don't think anyone was attempting to make humor out of
Scott's untimely and tragic death. Understanding the chain of events was
not easy, given how the two different incidents were reported on these
posts. We lose far too many good people, sometimes by events that should
have been preventable.

We all feel the pain.
--
Jim in NC


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.686 / Virus Database: 447 - Release Date: 5/15/2004