Another ICON goes down

[rwanttaja]

Almost true, Bill. But I don't perceive the anger to be because they CAUSED the crash, only because of irresponsible, inaccurate, or sensationalist reporting. As you well know, that's been a problem with (most) media reporting on anything aviation for a long, long time -- they don't understand and/or they don't care.

Actually, it's a problem with media reporting on most subjects. The typical reporter doesn't understand aircraft, trains, spacecraft, the law, teaching, medicine, etc. so a lot of garbage gets published.

A modern problem is the 24-hour news cycle. There's an insane push to get information out the fastest, and accuracy falls by the wayside. This most recent Icon accident is a classic example, with one new source reporting multiple Mayday calls from the aircraft.....

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Greenwood]

Imuss, as for as accutate reporting, its a goal, but a reporter doesnt have to be a CPA to expose Bernie Madoff or a football player to report on OJ much less a burglar to write about Watergate. As for sensational, sure the exceptional is always going to draw more notice. As for iresponsible that would have to be intentional or at least faiing to correct any major errors in a story.

[Mike B]

Another view sort of supporting the idea of Icon trying to push this aircraft to more inexperienced pilots.
https://youtu.be/A1AjJ19QqbE

[martymayes]

Doesn’t Cirrus do similar marketing? For sure ICON wants to sell its product and they focus on who has the $mack to buy their product. That’s called free enterprise.

[Floatsflyer]

Another view sort of supporting the idea of Icon trying to push this aircraft to more inexperienced pilots.
https://youtu.be/A1AjJ19QqbE

A consumer recreational marketing concept led by chief promoter and CEO Kurt Hawkins, a slimy, smarmy, egotistical, narcissist who along with his VP Sales will tell you anything to sell you an order slot. Take away the negative personality stuff of these guys and the marketing was totally original in that sales were taken out of the long time confines of traditional flying/aviation publications and instead promoted with stories and profiles in non-aviation media. That was a very unique, purposefull approach and concept to attract non-flying high energy sports enthusiasts. Cessna or Piper never had free, high profile publicity promotional articles in The Robb Report.

This video is excellent. The host provides a succinct synopsis of SLSA, the Icon company, it's history and mounting problems and the accidents this year. It should be a mandatory syllabus to be seen by the reporting media before they write more Halliday accident stories.

I wish he had talked more about the 2016 controversial new mandatory sales contract Hawkins wanted all buyers to agree to and sign. The host touches on a number of contract changes but neglects to say that the overarching reason for all of it was to completely shift the burden of liability from Icon to the purchaser. It was beyond cynical. They designed a marketing campaign and an airplane to appeal to non-flying jet-ski type yahoos and then realized years later that all these adrenalin junkies might kill themselves in droves, so they better transfer all liability to the newly minted pilots so they avoid being sued out of existence. It's why they placed the flight recorders in the plane-- to provide proof of negligence, wrong doing and error on the part of the pilot. Beyond cynical.

[dougbush]

It's why they placed the flight recorders in the plane-- to provide proof of negligence, wrong doing and error on the part of the pilot. Beyond cynical.

If that’s cynical, are we not ALL cynical? Who among us does not believe that ~80% of crashes are the pilot’s fault? Who among us doubts that manufacturers are frequently sued because of deep pockets even though they did not contribute to the accident? Seems perfectly rational for a manufacturer to seek to avoid liability when they are not at fault.

[lnuss]

In this case I don't know enough about the facts to say they were right or wrong, Bill, but the reporting I've seen tends to the sensationalist side, though perhaps not as bad as they sometimes do.

[martymayes]

If that’s cynical, are we not ALL cynical? Who among us does not believe that ~80% of crashes are the pilot’s fault? Who among us doubts that manufacturers are frequently sued because of deep pockets even though they did not contribute to the accident? Seems perfectly rational for a manufacturer to seek to avoid liability when they are not at fault.

Well that’s why crashes should be studied. Some airplane designs seem to cause pilots to make more errors. We can’t put those under the pilot error category even though on the surface, that’s what they seem to be.

[Buzz]

Who among us doubts that manufacturers are frequently sued because of deep pockets even though they did not contribute to the accident? Seems perfectly rational for a manufacturer to seek to avoid liability when they are not at fault.

First of all, agree. Manufacturer get sued because they have deep pockets.

However, getting sued and losing are two different things.

They lose when they are found to be in "the line of causality". If you have deep pockets, I can, indeed, sue you for having a package on the FedEx jet that crashed into my house.

But I won't win unless I can prove your package was in the line of causality. Like you illegally shipping batteries that then exploded, cause a fire and a crash. If your package was a bunch of paper that is not in the line of causality.

So liability has nothing to do with deep pockets. It has to do with your role in contributing to what happened.

Take a look at ICON's promotional video. Roy was flying the plane EXACTLY the way it's promoted in the videos. Low and fast. [Because legally you can fly low and fast on floats in many areas.] As Roy apparently stated publicly;he'd enjoyed flying it "like a fighter". Nothing gives you the fighter feel more than flying low and the ground speeding by. However, also where you have no reaction time.

How many instructors encourage you to roll into a bank immediately after breaking ground with your wingtip about 3' off the ground??? It is part of one of Icon's promotional video

Sadly, Roy was killed using the ICON much like the product is promoted in many of their promotional videos. Killing yourself using the product one one of the way it's promoted? That costs you a TON of money as manufacturer. Car companies get sued if they show a car racing around curves and don't put a disclaimer on their commercial that says "Professional driver on closed course." so they are clear that is NOT the way the car should be operated. Icon never did any of that.

Not a lawyer but took a couple courses on product liability at a Big Ten law school. I think if his wife gets just an average lawyer, Icon's promotional videos will probably cause a jury to give her a massive settlement. Those videos put Icon right in the line of causality because of how Hawkins promoted the product to be used. Exactly the way Roy killed himself with it. [Assuming there was no mechanical issue.]

[Frank Giger]

I fear that this latest crash has less to do with the Icon A5 itself and the dreaded LSA curse. I suspected the pilot was rated for "heavy" aircraft and spent most of his time in "long leg" type GA aircraft, which is implied by the multi rating.

Remember when Light Sport rules came out and long time pilots were cracking them up at an alarming rate? The message went out - transition, transition, transition, and bone up on stick and rudder skills. Re-frame your expectations of what the aircraft can do and tolerate.

I did my flight training in a FlightDesign CTLS, and transitioned to a 7AC Champ and now my super light Nieuport 11. The CLTS is a quirky little plane, slick and very unfriendly in cross winds. The Champ is the Black Lab of aircraft - a willing big footed, friendly plane that just wants to go fly and have fun. My Nieuport is something of a high strung terrier.

I've done flight reviews in a C172. What a bus! One has to pay attention, of course, but it's actually easier to fly than light aircraft. And more difficult. One places it into a slip rather deliberately. In an LSA type aircraft, one just suggests a slip and it's there. I suppose the term I'm looking for is "responsiveness," meaning it's very easy to over control and then over correct in an LSA compliant aircraft.

Does the Icon marketing encourage reckless behavior? I'm doubtful. I've seen amazing displays of aerobatics done with a J3 Cub - but I'd never attempt to fly like that in one. It's one thing to see advertising of the aircraft scooping low over the water at cruise, it's another to do so one's self.

For all the denigrating of the Sport Pilot ticket as "easy," it's the exact same as that for the Private Pilot, ending just prior to The Hood and Night Flying, and without a requirement for Tower operations. True the cross country distances are shorter, but I don't know anyone who didn't fly the same as for PPL. Becoming a pilot is serious business, and any CFI worth his ticket is sure to press the point home.