Colin McRae Fatal accident enquiry - Errr why ??

[SplatSpeed]

Eric Mc said:

Over confidence.

As a breed, I think top level racing drivers mistakenly believe they are masters of ALL machinery they are in control of.

but i am!

[Andy Zarse]

Ask Graham Hill's wife Betty where flying - and crashing - without insurance gets you. Ten bedroom mansion to council house in one easy go.

Tony Brise's young family were left without the breadwinner and I can't see this is any different really.

[eharding]

funster said:

I doubt I'm the only pilot on here glued to the AAIB and various inquest reports that are published each month..

Count yourself lucky - I was in two AAIB reports last year - once as the pax in SIII when the gear collapsed, and they stuck my picture on the end of the YAKH gear-up incident report, even though I was on the bog 5 miles away when it happened.

[fluffnik]

WeirdNeville said:

Actually, even a straightforwards murder investigation costs over a million, and 4 months would be pretty good going.

I think you're on your own. You think it's a waste of your hard earned taxes.
Everyone else thinks it's part of a necessary and valuable process.

I'm not sure that I do.

FAIs may often be a Good Thing but I'm at a loss in this instance to see what one could possibly add to the AAIB report.

• as many will be upset as comforted
• liability will still be litigated

Nope, can't see any good purpose in this FAI all it is likely to do is fuel speculation...

[aeropilot]

Andy Zarse said:

Ask Graham Hill's wife Betty where flying - and crashing - without insurance gets you. Ten bedroom mansion to council house in one easy go.

Tony Brise's young family were left without the breadwinner and I can't see this is any different really.

I imagine the findings regarding the AAIB report regarding his lapsed licence, lapsed type cert and several years lack of pilot log book entries plus the surviving possible flight camcorder footage giving possible ammunition for a legal team to pursure some sort of action....???

As much as I was a huge admirer of McRae as a driver, I'm quite shocked at his total disregard for the responsibilities required of him to manage that 'right' to be able to fly.

Edited by aeropilot on Wednesday 26th January 19:20

[eccles]

Porkis said:

WeirdNeville said:

Actually, even a straightforwards murder investigation costs over a million, and 4 months would be pretty good going.

I think you're on your own. You think it's a waste of your hard earned taxes.
Everyone else thinks it's part of a necessary and valuable process.

I fully understand why we do FAIs, but I think that there are cases where the case facts are so blooming obvious that it's a waste, or in this case, very little that is left to be found from speaking to dog walkers who were 3 miles away, and who contribute some rubbish such as "oh it sounded like it was in trouble, and it looked rather low - and was going rather fast"

and farmer Joe adding that "it was banking at a strange angle"

I mean seriously?

I think we all know what happened on that fateful day ... it's called testosterone, possibly combined with a strong wind coming from the wrong angle. We've all been there at some point, albeit probably not in the air.

Just trying to be helpful, try a bit of googling and find the full CAA accident report(not just the conclusion earlier) and have a read.
Those witness statements are quite valuable as they show (along with the on board footage) the manner in which McRae was flying on the outward journey. This then sets the scene and shows that McRae liked to fly outside the rules, and also points at him as the most likely reason for the accident.

[Life Saab Itch]

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

Why?

And what do you mean by "air industry"?

why not, this is a legitimate cost of air travel. removing this from the public sector would reduce wastage costs.

by air industry I mean not me.

But who are you talking about -

the aircraft manufacturers (French in this case)

The airline industry (this accident had nothing to do with an airline)

the engine manufacturer (also French)

And don't you believe that you wouldn't end up paying for it if there was somehow some sort of levy on "the air industry".
Who mostly flies in aeroplanes and who pays for the priviledge? The public i.e. you and me.

The "air industry" does, in fact, help fund air safety enquiries and legal matters relating to accidents in the form of insurances and bonds.

Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 25th January 19:05

the aircraft operator, if you operate an aircraft you have insurance to cover these expenses

Which is invalid if certain conditions are not met. ie most of the stuff McRae failed to comply with, licence, log book etc.

So if the insurance isn't going to pay for a vital investigation, who is?

[SplatSpeed]

Life Saab Itch said:

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

Why?

And what do you mean by "air industry"?

why not, this is a legitimate cost of air travel. removing this from the public sector would reduce wastage costs.

by air industry I mean not me.

But who are you talking about -

the aircraft manufacturers (French in this case)

The airline industry (this accident had nothing to do with an airline)

the engine manufacturer (also French)

And don't you believe that you wouldn't end up paying for it if there was somehow some sort of levy on "the air industry".
Who mostly flies in aeroplanes and who pays for the priviledge? The public i.e. you and me.

The "air industry" does, in fact, help fund air safety enquiries and legal matters relating to accidents in the form of insurances and bonds.

Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 25th January 19:05

the aircraft operator, if you operate an aircraft you have insurance to cover these expenses

Which is invalid if certain conditions are not met. ie most of the stuff McRae failed to comply with, licence, log book etc.

So if the insurance isn't going to pay for a vital investigation, who is?

then the rules need to be tightened!

[matchmaker]

FAI's are not entirely uncommon in Scotland following air crashes. I've been Clerk of Court at one myself. There had been an AAIB investigation, but because the pilot died during the course of his employment (it was a Loganair air ambulance flight), an FAI was required. The Sheriff appointed a skilled assessor to assist him - a retired pilot.

[Eric Mc]

eharding said:

funster said:

I doubt I'm the only pilot on here glued to the AAIB and various inquest reports that are published each month..

Count yourself lucky - I was in two AAIB reports last year - once as the pax in SIII when the gear collapsed, and they stuck my picture on the end of the YAKH gear-up incident report, even though I was on the bog 5 miles away when it happened.

Hope you sued

[Great Dane]

A friend of a friend was flying with CM some years ago and he said the helicopter was used as any other mode of transport e.g. going out for a meal flying there in the chopper. Surely bad habits must gradually creep in

[Andy Zarse]

aeropilot said:

I imagine the findings regarding the AAIB report regarding his lapsed licence, lapsed type cert and several years lack of pilot log book entries plus the surviving possible flight camcorder footage giving possible ammunition for a legal team to pursure some sort of action....???

As much as I was a huge admirer of McRae as a driver, I'm quite shocked at his total disregard for the responsibilities required of him to manage that 'right' to be able to fly.

Edited by aeropilot on Wednesday 26th January 19:20

I have to agree, it was shocking and I could scarce believe it when I heard what he'd done. Total irresponsibility. Sadly I expect the other family, if it can be proved they didn't know his insurance was invalidated, will sue big time.

God, what a mess.

[Soovy]

Andy Zarse said:

I have to agree, it was shocking and I could scarce believe it when I heard what he'd done. Total irresponsibility. Sadly I expect the other family, if it can be proved they didn't know his insurance was invalidated, will sue big time.

God, what a mess.

Graham Hill all over again.

[Andy Zarse]

Soovy said:

Graham Hill all over again.

I had the pleasure of meeting Betty Hill in the late eighties, she came and did a little talk at our motor club dinner dance. Although quite nervous, she was an absolute delight.

She brought one of her daughters along, who will remain nameless. I was tasked to escort her for the evening, see that she was properly looked after, make chit-chat, dance with her, that kind of thing.

[Porkis]

^^^^ talk about being slightly off topic ^^^^

[Engineer1]

Porkis said:

If my mother was found dead at the bottom of a quarry, I can pretty much guarateee that they wouldn't take at least 4 months and £millions to get to a conclusion over it

Why wouldn't they? 4 months is a piece of piss to use up, a couple of weeks for test results, then people being on holiday or away. A possible suspect is identified and they turn out to be foreign and abroad costs and time can soon mount up. Or would you prefer them to hit a time limit or a spending limit and stop irrespective of how close to an answer they are?

[Life Saab Itch]

SplatSpeed said:

Life Saab Itch said:

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

SplatSpeed said:

Eric Mc said:

Why?

And what do you mean by "air industry"?

why not, this is a legitimate cost of air travel. removing this from the public sector would reduce wastage costs.

by air industry I mean not me.

But who are you talking about -

the aircraft manufacturers (French in this case)

The airline industry (this accident had nothing to do with an airline)

the engine manufacturer (also French)

And don't you believe that you wouldn't end up paying for it if there was somehow some sort of levy on "the air industry".
Who mostly flies in aeroplanes and who pays for the priviledge? The public i.e. you and me.

The "air industry" does, in fact, help fund air safety enquiries and legal matters relating to accidents in the form of insurances and bonds.

Edited by Eric Mc on Tuesday 25th January 19:05

the aircraft operator, if you operate an aircraft you have insurance to cover these expenses

Which is invalid if certain conditions are not met. ie most of the stuff McRae failed to comply with, licence, log book etc.

So if the insurance isn't going to pay for a vital investigation, who is?

then the rules need to be tightened!

The rules can be tightened all you like, but if the end user fails to fill in basic paperwork, the problem remains.

How many times do you read about uninsured drivers in the papers? Same thing really.

[deviant]

The AAIB report is here if anyone feels like a read: http://www.autoevolution.com/pdf/news_attachements...

[limpsfield]

Damning report:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/sep/06/colin-mcr...

"The former world rally champion Colin McRae has been held totally to blame for a helicopter crash that killed himself, another man and two children, including his son, after a judicial investigation."

[JonRB]

"Mr McRae chose to fly the helicopter into the valley. For a private pilot such as Mr McRae, lacking the necessary training, experience or requirement to do so, embarking upon such demanding, low-level flying in such difficult terrain, was imprudent, unreasonable and contrary to the principles of good airmanship."

I'd dispute parts of that. My understanding was that he was very experienced and had plenty of training. However, he was without a doubt a risk-taker and his luck ran out; the accusation of "imprudent" is justified but not inexperience.