A thank you to Wrigleyvillain for the heads up.

That sucks.

tricksonThat sucks.

To be a CEO and die sucks even more.

They have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.

DarkOCeanTo be a CEO and die sucks even more.

To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.

twilythThey have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.

The model is classified as "experimental" by the FAA, not by Lancair. It is classified this way because it is a kit plane, designed to be built by the DIY crowd, and there are plenty of pilots out there that fit into this category, and they aren't all thrill seekers. They are people that just like to make aviation their true hobby, all the way down to building their own airplane. However, being this type of aircraft means that it is more dangerous than a normal factory built plane, but it is still inspected for safety by the FAA before it is allowed to fly. So there is nothing that says he was a thrill seeker out doing crazy things when his plane crashed this time. And he was definitely not acting as a test pilot, chances are the plane had hundreds of hours on it, if not thousands. Especially if he used to to fly around the country on business, which many pilots who own planes and are also in charge of large companies tend to do. Just a guy flying his plane, that he built, just like most of us are people using their computers that we built.

As for the parachute for the small plane thing, that is more experimental than the plane he was flying. Would it have saved him if he had one? Possibly, but not definitely. The parachute only works when the plane is at a certain altitude. If he crashed on take-off or landing it would have been useless.

twilythThey have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.

So says the man who lives in his basement with 50 cats. Honestly I'm jealous of Mr. Appleton. This man was the CEO of a major corporation and a test pilot! Thats something to tell your kids about. Live fast and die young is better then live long and get eaten by cats. IMO. Then again who am I to judge. Squirrels might eat me.

newtekie1To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.

:(

I've rode shotgun in two and four seaters; it's the passion and the thrill that make a must do for those that become pilots. I bet there's a story there, a guy who loved to fly. I hope to leave this earth doing something I like.

Fly on Steve Appleton..

TheMailMan78Live fast and die young is better then live long and get eaten by cats.

So why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D

twilythSo why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D

He never did understand the fast part. Give him some time...


:roll:

twilythSo why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D

Because I failed. Now Im doomed to be eaten by Squirrels. I see them looking at me all the time in my office windows. Anyway.....lets get back on topic.

TheMailMan78Because I failed. Now Im doomed to be eaten by Squirrels. I see them looking at me all the time in my office windows. Anyway.....lets get back on topic.

You're the one who got us off topic. Remember?

Just keepin' it real dude. :rockout:

his plane crashed shortly after take off www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-03/micron-chief-s-lancair-plane-had-disproportionate-crash-rate-faa-says.html

twilythSo why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D

do you think this is appropriate ?

to6ko91his plane crashed shortly after take off www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-03/micron-chief-s-lancair-plane-had-disproportionate-crash-rate-faa-says.html

Thanks for the article.

The Lancair IVP aircraft that Micron Technology Inc. (MU) Chief Executive Officer Steve Appleton was piloting when he died today is known for its performance and a high number of accidents.

A U.S. Federal Aviation Administration notice to Lancair operators on Sept. 25, 2009, warned that the plane had had a “disproportionate” number of fatal accidents.

“The Lancair fatal accident rate is substantially higher than both personal-use general aviation as well as the overall fatal accident rate for all amateur-built experimental aircraft,” the FAA said in the notice.

TheMailMan78Mr. Appleton is survived his wife and children.

I don't understand this part...

n-sterI don't understand this part...

This is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"

n-sterI don't understand this part...

iieeThis is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"

Yes, that's correct. It should have been "survived by" and is commonly written in obituaries to list the immediate, living family members.

Anyway, I wonder what Micron is going to do about this.

newtekie1To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.



The model is classified as "experimental" by the FAA, not by Lancair. It is classified this way because it is a kit plane, designed to be built by the DIY crowd, and there are plenty of pilots out there that fit into this category, and they aren't all thrill seekers. They are people that just like to make aviation their true hobby, all the way down to building their own airplane. However, being this type of aircraft means that it is more dangerous than a normal factory built plane, but it is still inspected for safety by the FAA before it is allowed to fly. So there is nothing that says he was a thrill seeker out doing crazy things when his plane crashed this time. And he was definitely not acting as a test pilot, chances are the plane had hundreds of hours on it, if not thousands. Especially if he used to to fly around the country on business, which many pilots who own planes and are also in charge of large companies tend to do. Just a guy flying his plane, that he built, just like most of us are people using their computers that we built.

As for the parachute for the small plane thing, that is more experimental than the plane he was flying. Would it have saved him if he had one? Possibly, but not definitely. The parachute only works when the plane is at a certain altitude. If he crashed on take-off or landing it would have been useless.

That is one fast plane he was flying too. I wouldn't fly that unless I had lots of experience. Just because you can afford one doesn't mean you have the skill level necessary. I work in aviation BTW. I have seen so many wealthy individuals even hit things while trying to taxi their plane. :eek:

Stunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.

hmmm

I flew a Glasair 3 at an airshow in NZ last weekend, the lancair (which I dont own but have flown) and the glasair I own are tricky on takeoff and landing and an in experienced pilot could easily loose control, I know this sounds bad but I bet this is pilots error, a second of lapse on concentration can cause this, I sold a Lancair I owned and I had it for 2 years NEVER an incident, the new owner flew it for 9 hours and crashed it, then 4 months after rebuilt he crashed it again, they are tricky to fly glasair and lancairs

Is that being treated as a "just the way it is" type of thing or what? An aircraft shouldn't be "tricky" for something as essential as taking off and landing. That's a design flaw. Correct the damn flaw.

The F117 couldn't be flown at all without computer control. Different designs have different flight characteristics and like anything else, you make tradeoffs. As long as the person buying the plane understands the risks involved, and clearly he did, it's not the fault of the design.

DaedalusHeliosStunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.

Yeah this was one of his main hobbies apparently. He actually survived an earlier crash the article says.

n-sterI don't understand this part...

iieeThis is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"

Jstn7477Yes, that's correct. It should have been "survived by" and is commonly written in obituaries to list the immediate, living family members.

Anyway, I wonder what Micron is going to do about this.

No matter how many times I proof read I still miss something. Thanks for the heads up.

With all that has been said about this incident I just want to say:

My deepest condolences to his wife and children!

DaedalusHeliosThat is one fast plane he was flying too. I wouldn't fly that unless I had lots of experience. Just because you can afford one doesn't mean you have the skill level necessary. I work in aviation BTW. I have seen so many wealthy individuals even hit things while trying to taxi their plane. :eek:

Stunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.

Definitely, we don't know his experience, but it sounds like he wasn't an amateur.

And just because you can afford something doesn't mean you have the still level necessary to not wreck it and die, I totally agree. Just look at all the videos on youtube of rich idiots wrecking powerful expensive cars that they don't have anything near the skill level to be driving...:roll:

lashtonI flew a Glasair 3 at an airshow in NZ last weekend, the lancair (which I dont own but have flown) and the glasair I own are tricky on takeoff and landing and an in experienced pilot could easily loose control, I know this sounds bad but I bet this is pilots error, a second of lapse on concentration can cause this, I sold a Lancair I owned and I had it for 2 years NEVER an incident, the new owner flew it for 9 hours and crashed it, then 4 months after rebuilt he crashed it again, they are tricky to fly glasair and lancairs

This plane is certainly akin to the expensive fast cars that rich idiots can't drive, but deadlier. Without knowing his skill level or his experience with the plane, or more importantly what actually caused the crash, no one can say he was doing something dangerous. Heck, for all we know it could have been a system failure, something not totally uncommon in kit built airplanes. Though it definitely could have been pilot error as well.

I think the important thing that we should be concerned with is that a man is dead, a father and husband. That is a tragedy regardless of cause, and IMO, jumping so quickly to point the finger at the dead person is disrespectful. That isn't meant at anyone in particular. I'm just saying we should all show some respect and not start blaming a dead guy like he meant to die or was doing something he knew was dangerous.