Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

Topics related to accidents, incidents & over due aircraft should be placed in this forum.

Moderators: ahramin, sky's the limit, sepia, Sulako, lilfssister, North Shore

Post Reply
Message
Author
pelmet
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 3105
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 2:48 pm

Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#1 Post by pelmet » Fri Feb 16, 2018 11:57 am

---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
Pratt X 3
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 754
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2004 12:19 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#2 Post by Pratt X 3 » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:55 pm

Brought to you by the same marketing genius' that came up with Icon's advertising campaign?
Image
https://www.flyskyrunner.com/
---------- ADS -----------
  
Have Pratts - Will Travel

Heliian
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1205
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:14 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#3 Post by Heliian » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:36 pm

Specs say a takeoff distance of 450 ft. It looked like it was flying but then sank.

The whole thing looks like a bad idea.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Schooner69A
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 351
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2008 5:17 pm
Location: The Okanagan

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#4 Post by Schooner69A » Fri Feb 16, 2018 2:49 pm

SKYRUNNER: A solution for which no problem exists... (;>0)
---------- ADS -----------
  

SuperchargedRS
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1485
Joined: Fri Mar 03, 2006 1:30 am
Location: the stars playground

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#5 Post by SuperchargedRS » Fri Feb 16, 2018 3:37 pm

I get it, it's a pretty good idea for some areas, could see that idea being good in baja, some places in FL or CA, but the big issue for me would be it seems way underpowered, and it's like 120,000USD.

With another 50hp and a 15-maybe 20k price tag, sure, that'd beat a quad in some settings for sure.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#6 Post by rookiepilot » Fri Feb 16, 2018 4:10 pm

Couldn't pay me to ride in that death trap.
---------- ADS -----------
  

Jet Jockey
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 201
Joined: Sun Sep 22, 2013 8:42 am
Location: CYUL

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#7 Post by Jet Jockey » Fri Feb 16, 2018 7:41 pm

WOW! Simply WOW!

Hope they recuperate and live a normal life after that crash.
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
mantogasrsrwy
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 281
Joined: Thu Apr 01, 2004 9:07 pm
Location: The good side of the tracks

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#8 Post by mantogasrsrwy » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:59 am

Do you think that guy who stopped filming and turned his back on the crash was kicking himself?
---------- ADS -----------
  

mbav8r
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1760
Joined: Sun Jul 02, 2006 8:11 am
Location: Manitoba

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#9 Post by mbav8r » Sat Feb 17, 2018 8:03 am

I have to say and really hate to admit it but this might be a case for PDWs wind demons!
The roll cage on that thing looked pretty robust, so hopefully just some bumps and bruises, has anyone seen information on injuries?
---------- ADS -----------
  

User avatar
marlin
Rank 0
Rank 0
Posts: 9
Joined: Thu May 28, 2015 11:06 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#10 Post by marlin » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:40 am

Video description says both on board were severely injured, but alive. I hope they recover as well, hitting a building and then falling off of it... Yikes.
---------- ADS -----------
  

pdw
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1468
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2012 6:51 am
Location: A mile final 24 CYSN

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#11 Post by pdw » Sat Feb 17, 2018 10:55 am

That's awful.

"Mantogas", the cameraman with his back turned was spared watching that in real time.

Considering mbav8r, the takeoff would likely be upwind as per normal practice; yet nearing the distant building on its lee side they are still so low .. then all at once can't compensate for what appears to be a drop in lift, the lee-effect of the "Obstacle". At first still appears will easily clear (as the cameraman turns around), just at the point of an obvious downdraft tendency / unexpected and unplanned sink rate. (especially for this heavier equipment) Perhaps the smaller losses of relativewind might also be a lot BIGGER, right where the usual anticipated increases with height are being relied upon ?

Needs date & time and location.
---------- ADS -----------
  
Last edited by pdw on Sat Feb 17, 2018 2:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
rookiepilot
Rank 8
Rank 8
Posts: 757
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2017 3:50 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#12 Post by rookiepilot » Sat Feb 17, 2018 1:51 pm

.....and maybe the thing has a scary 50 FPM climb rate, heavy, didn't use whole runway.....anyway....hope for full recovery
---------- ADS -----------
  

RatherBeFlying
Rank 7
Rank 7
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 9:27 am
Location: Toronto

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#13 Post by RatherBeFlying » Sat Feb 17, 2018 4:14 pm

The Wright brothers before their first flight had worked out directional control - something that appears to have escaped the attention of the "designers" of this contraption.
---------- ADS -----------
  

GyvAir
Rank (9)
Rank (9)
Posts: 1749
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 7:09 pm

Re: Crash video. Performance over 50 foot Obstacle not Calculated

#14 Post by GyvAir » Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:48 pm

Helmets? Why would you want to wear helmets in an airborne ATV?
Apparently happened in Dubai on February 9th, 2018 at 10:15am local time.
Supposed to be a hangar that they collided with. Windsock at 0:44?

Looking at the canopy trailing edge, it looks like they were trying to roll, from the the moment they got light on the wheels, right up to point of impact. I think a lot of what appears to be sink rate is actually illusion cause by them being blown rapidly to the left, once they'd gained a little altitude, entering the higher wind speeds, aloft.
How much climb performance is sacrificed in a powered parachute when trying to roll?
---------- ADS -----------
  

Post Reply

Return to “Accidents, Incidents & Overdue Aircraft”