YAM 208

[JigglyBus]

Keep in mind, he flew over 230 nautical miles of water from which recovery would have been, very nearly as difficult as from Hudson Bay. Why? Because he had alternate plans. Otherwise, why the trip over to the YXL area before turning north? Because, that's where he'd parked his car? Perhaps on the road to YPL? Food for thought.

Or a lot more inconspicuous on the road to slate falls....just saying. So many possibilities, will we ever know?

Well, I just don't see the reason to go west before turning north. He could have headed north from YAM just as easily.

Where is this westbound story coming from?

[Doc]

Wasn't the ELT signal picked up somewhere north of YXL? If so, that's well west of YAM.

[JMACK]

I flew the super cargo master I am sure you could open the back up from inside 100%

On bank runs and two crew we would take turns going to the back popping the hatch and chucking stuff out while the other guy had the brakes and engine feathered picking up out bound clearance.

J

[switchflicker]

Why would he need to go out the back door?

Sw

[GUMPS]

Why would he need to go out the back door?

Sw

I don't think he'd get the pilot door open.

[Doc]

Why would he need to go out the back door?

Sw

I don't think he'd get the pilot door open.

That, and the strut could do him much harm.

[pdw]

He could have headed north from YAM just as easily

If your heading WEST by car from YAM it's a day's drive to YXL ... past Wawa ... a lonely route where someone might know the car (so little traffic on a Wednesday too), 8 hours on that single road all the way to Thunder Bay. If the disappearance thing is really being considered as a possiblity then it would also be possible the securest position to launch-from would have also been considered. What's the chance someone would have seen a jumper .... (likely not possible if from a higher altitude/ or above cloud )

Stashing a car somewhere in the boonies around YXL has a better chance to remain "inconspicuous" (mentioned above)

Why would he need to go out the back door?

Any belongings that were taken onto the plane, would need a tent and other gear, is better to pitch overboard all at once / all at the same time to help keep the items closer together ... while simply diving out the same big door.

[switchflicker]

...all at the same time to help keep the items closer together...
That makes perfect sense.

Thanks

Sw

[Rudy]

I am sure you could open the back up from inside 100%

Ah, there goes my idea then. Thanks.

[oldtimer]

Certification standards for a CARGO compatment states that shifting cargo cannot unlock a door or hatch nor can shifting cargo prevent the door or hatch from being opened from the outside. All Metro aircraft have the inside cargo door handle removed and usually contained in a pouch sewn into the interior cargo liner. Now, in a combi airplane, the handle probibly is left in place but on a pure cargo aircraft, I would imagine it would be a simple task to remove the interior handle. The cargo compartment is not a pressurized area and there is no requirement for any sort of fire suspression systems like they have in the belly compartments of Transport Category airliners.

[The Barrel Man]

The super cargo master does not have an inside door handle. They come from the factory without one exactly for the reason of cargo shifting and either locking the door closed or opening it in flight. Had shifting cargo lock the door on me once and thank Glob there was the air stair to get at the handle to unlock it, the cargo master has no air stair.

[Doc]

Never done it, but I can't see any reason you couldn't just go with the top half of the door open? May not be "approved", but aerodynamically, there's no reason it wouldn't fly just fine. Taxi out to the active, feather, hop out, open the hatch, hop back in, and off you go! Not like anybody would notice.

[GyvAir]

Doesn't it take a bit of a tug initially to open the upper door, before the struts start to push it up or does it pop open on it's own? I can't remember now. It may just sit there in the closed position in flight anyway, if you simply took off with it unlatched.
Regardless, if the handle is simply not installed, the square shaft or socket that the handle mates to is still right there, likely just a button plug or liner tape covering it. Wouldn't take a mechanical engineer to figure out a tool to work it without the factory handle. The average pilot wielding a Gerberman Schradinox would succeed, I would think.

[boeingboy]

1) As stated - interior handles are deleted.

2) No way a pilot is going to make it from the front seat through the cargo bulkhead into the back to bail out anyway.

3) You could never get the front doors open inflight.

So - Im not buying the DB cooper theory.

Finally - Anyone know who the pilot was yet?

[PilotDAR]

I am buying into the DB Cooper theory as a possibility.

Though I cannot speak for exactly the door and handle arrangement on the Caravan in question, I can tell you from experience that opening the upper aft left door in a Caravan in flight is not a problem (even accidentally, on its own). The handle, properly stowed, is about flush with the inside panel, and unlikely to be snagged by items (which are supposed to be secure anyway).

Getting from the pilot's seat to close the door is no problem (done it), and even with a cargo barrier in place, I think squeezing through is possible.

[pdw]

Finally - Anyone know who the pilot was yet?

Speaking of a disappearing theory, wouldn't that bode well with that sort of plan !

Who can pitch in to help find someone who isn't identified ...

[Sulako]

I know who the pilot is. Young guy. Not sure how posting his name is relevant though.

I would be astounded if he was on board the plane when it went into the water.

[pdw]

Most everyone is still grieving for the suicide, so there first would need to be some grounds to think otherwise, some evidence to show the plane flew on without him from some point along the route ... for the theory he may not have been in the crash itself.

In the meantime, the wishes of the family would have had to be / still need to be respectfully consulted ... to err on the side of caution in how to proceed in the uncertainty.

[Edo]

.... The handle, properly stowed, is about flush with the inside panel, and unlikely to be snagged by items (which are supposed to be secure anyway).

Getting from the pilot's seat to close the door is no problem (done it), and even with a cargo barrier in place, I think squeezing through is possible.

There are provisions in the POH to bulk load cargo compartments divided by nets. I have never seen the install but I there is something about filling 75% by volume (tossing in a bunch of small boxes) then preventing fore/aft movement with a net.

I agree getting thru the barrier is no problem as long are you aren't built like a linebacker.

[frozen solid]

..even if you ARE it's still possible, a bit painful maybe but I've done it several times. Getting back into the cockpit going the other way is a bit harder, but if your theory is correct, that wouldn't have been a consideration.

[GyvAir]

The cargo barrier would pose no barrier:

Nor would the bit of Gilliner and tape that may be covering over the upper door latch mechanism:

[GyvAir]

Recent article from the SSM local paper:
http://www.saultstar.com/2013/10/24/new ... lane-crash

More to be read between the lines, perhaps, than in the body of the article itself regarding what happened and the extent of investigation taking, or to take place and why?

[pdw]

The Cessna had about 11,000 hours total time on its frame - well below its expected lifespan, he added.

Its turbine "total time" has the greatest value ( if low enough ).

(EDIT:It's common knowledge that a new turbine for a Caravan is a $1 million dollars to purchase ...maybe more by now ?)

EDIT: The next comments BELOW by Diadem were made in response to a number of now-deleted posts, not in response to anyone above.

[Diadem]

You, as the claimant, bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that he did, in fact, jump out of the airplane. I don't know you or your source, and I have no way of knowing whether you're pulling this out of your ass. It would never hold up in court, so why should I believe it? "Your Honour, I know a guy who says my client didn't commit the crime. I can't tell you who it is, but he's totally cool." "Case dismissed." Absolute rubbish. The last place the pilot was seen was on board the aircraft, and until some actual proof is presented which demonstrates that he left the airplane in flight there's no reason to assume that he was anywhere but in the pilot's seat. Show me a body, a video of him parachuting out of the plane, or a note indicating he didn't intend to kill himself and I'll believe you. Otherwise you might as well be reciting fairy tales.
I find the comment about there being no death involved callous and disrespectful to a grieving family.

[Doc]

You, as the claimant, bear the burden of proof to demonstrate that he did, in fact, jump out of the airplane. I don't know you or your source, and I have no way of knowing whether you're pulling this out of your ass. It would never hold up in court, so why should I believe it? "Your Honour, I know a guy who says my client didn't commit the crime. I can't tell you who it is, but he's totally cool." "Case dismissed." Absolute rubbish. The last place the pilot was seen was on board the aircraft, and until some actual proof is presented which demonstrates that he left the airplane in flight there's no reason to assume that he was anywhere but in the pilot's seat. Show me a body, a video of him parachuting out of the plane, or a note indicating he didn't intend to kill himself and I'll believe you. Otherwise you might as well be reciting fairy tales.
I find the comment about there being no death involved callous and disrespectful to a grieving family.

Ah, yes. However, this is NOT a court of law. In an actual court setting, the folks on you side of the table would have strapped a double tank of mixed gasses on the backs of a couple of professional divers, and visited the wreck, putting all speculation to sleep at once. There's somebody in it, or there isn't. Simple.
True, I can only offer circumstantial evidence to the contrary:
The flight west bound, before turning north.
The activation of the ELT over "familial" countryside.
Security footage of the pilot loading personal "gear".
The fact he is an experienced sky diver.
Had made suspicious remarks to people who knew him.
As I say, this is not a court of law. We are the equivalent of guys sitting around the campfire sipping beers.....but....there just may be another answer. Callous? Disrespectful? I don't see that. On some level, they're (if they even read this) praying the alternate theory is correct?