Skip to comments.
Missing MU-2 Found In California
Aero-News ^
| 032204
| N/A
Posted on 03/22/2004 7:56:00 AM PST by Archangelsk
Authorities in California have found what appears to be the wreckage of a Mitsubishi MU-2 at the bottom of the Napa River, not far from where it was headed more than a week ago. The bodies of Ronald and Peggy Scott, both 62 years old, were found inside the wreckage.
The discovery of the downed aircraft ended a search that began on Monday, after the Scotts were reported missing by concerned family members. They had taken off from Imperial County Airport in Southern California March 11 and weren't heard from since.
Officials said the Scotts didn't file a flight plan for the trip and weren't using flight following. It was last tracked on radar that night between the Napa County Airport and San Pablo Bay, according to a Napa County Sheriff's report.
Using sonar, deputies located the aircraft in about 20 feet of water. It apparently rested there without anyone's knowledge for several days.
"He (Ronald Scott) didn't show up for his meeting on Friday, and nobody did anything or said anything until ... Monday," said airport administrative assistant Winona Boyer. She said Scott was a frequent visitor to the Napa County Airport.
"He has been a regular transient at the airport since 1999," the employee said, adding that Ronald Scott worked with a cancer research institute in San Diego and made several trips a month to Napa County for meetings. He had one place he usually parked, and no one paid much attention," she said.
TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: doctorkiller; mu2
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
If I've said it once, I've said it a billion times: no GA pilot should fly this very hot, very temperamental airplane.
To: Aeronaut; Criminal Number 18F
Ping
2
posted on
03/22/2004 7:59:14 AM PST
by
Archangelsk
(Shall we have a king?)
To: Archangelsk
Better yet, no aviator (private, commercial, whathaveyou) should fly cross country without filing a flight plan or using flight following, regardless of what kind of aircraft you're piloting.
To: Tijeras_Slim; FireTrack; Pukin Dog; citabria; B Knotts; kilowhskey; RckyRaCoCo; cyphergirl; ...
Ping to the G.A. list.
General Aviation Ping list. FReep mail me if you want on or off this list.
4
posted on
03/22/2004 8:04:07 AM PST
by
Aeronaut
(John Kerry's mother always told him that if you can't say anything nice, run for president. ....)
To: sirshackleton
What are the reasons a person would ignore filing a flight plan?
5
posted on
03/22/2004 8:06:43 AM PST
by
sarasota
To: sirshackleton
There is an old saying about, " old and bold" pilots.
6
posted on
03/22/2004 8:07:28 AM PST
by
cynicom
To: sirshackleton
no aviator (private, commercial, whathaveyou) should fly cross country without filing a flight plan or using flight following, regardless of what kind of aircraft you're piloting. Quite true -- although in this case, it appears that all it would have done is allowed the searchers to find the bodies sooner. (Which is a good thing in itself, for many reasons.)
7
posted on
03/22/2004 8:07:28 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: sirshackleton
Yeah, but he was a doctor (or ex-doctor now) anddontyouknow that flight plans are for little people. /sarcasm off
(I think I'll take a couple of physiology courses and, just for the hell of it, walk into a surgical theatre and start slicing patients open). /sarcasm really off now
8
posted on
03/22/2004 8:07:49 AM PST
by
Archangelsk
(Shall we have a king?)
To: sarasota
What are the reasons a person would ignore filing a flight plan? I imagine that the three most common excuses are impatience, being in a hurry, and "who cares -- nobody needs these things anyway."
9
posted on
03/22/2004 8:09:36 AM PST
by
r9etb
To: Archangelsk
Pardon my ignorance, but what's an MU-2?
To: Archangelsk
One sweet airplane however. Too bad for the family.
One does wonder how many such follies that "cancer research" money affords however......
11
posted on
03/22/2004 8:25:13 AM PST
by
blackdog
(I feed the sheep the coyotes eat)
To: sarasota
Number one reason is probably because it's technically not required. And there are plenty of cases where it wouldn't make sense to file a flight plan...like you're just going out to do some touch and gos at another nearby airport ten minutes away, or some other situation where you'll pretty much be in contact with a tower or in view of a field the entire time (like going out for a lesson, practicing manuevers, things like that). But my own thinking, and the way I was taught, was that it's always a very good idea to file a flight plan for anything considered cross country (more than 50 NM from point A to point B).
To: babyface00
Pardon my ignorance, but what's an MU-2? I don't know much about aircraft, but I know a little about this one.
It's a very cool looking corporate twin-turboprop airplane. I once saw one back up under its own power to get into position for its takeoff run at a rural airport.
The first-stage compressor blade circle is about the same diameter as the blower in a canister-style vacuum cleaner. Somewhat more expensive, I'll wager.
I always thought that ability to change prop-pitch to reverse thrust would make me a little nervous about flying in one. If it happened in flight it could really ruin your day.
(steely)
To: sarasota
Scud running, norad situation, seaplane routing(you fly low and follow bodies of water), and that's about it that I could think of or have ever been involved in.
An MU-2 is a very out in front airplane. Not to be flown as some seat of the pants junkett.
14
posted on
03/22/2004 8:29:59 AM PST
by
blackdog
(I feed the sheep the coyotes eat)
To: Steely Tom
Thanks, Steely! Sounds pretty cool.
To: babyface00
Sorry about that. This is the MU-2:
16
posted on
03/22/2004 8:32:08 AM PST
by
Archangelsk
(Shall we have a king?)
To: Steely Tom
All turboprops have such pitch control. At least that I know of. Nobody uses it at a standstill though because of the damage done to the blades by getting sandblasted by grit, dirt, and small stones.
17
posted on
03/22/2004 8:32:37 AM PST
by
blackdog
(I feed the sheep the coyotes eat)
To: babyface00
Go to Google.com, click on Images, paste "Mitsubishi MU-2" into the box, then click search.
18
posted on
03/22/2004 8:33:12 AM PST
by
Musket
To: Archangelsk
This really is a strange accident. The weather that night was beautiful. The river is narrow and the odds of crashing in it is small, when the approach and area just around the airport is surrounded mostly by land.
It also sounds like he's flown in the area many times.
Even if he had problems he still should have been able to decend over land.
Sounds like he had a lot of experience, but I don't know how much time he had in the MU-2 but it doesn't sound anything to do with the plane being "hot."
Fuel starvation maybe? Only time will tell.
It's a shame, no matter what the cause.
19
posted on
03/22/2004 8:36:32 AM PST
by
skyman
To: blackdog
All turboprops have such pitch control. At least that I know of. Nobody uses it at a standstill though because of the damage done to the blades by getting sandblasted by grit, dirt, and small stones. Well, I knew that much. I guess I assumed they had motion-limiting stops to keep the blades from going into a reverse-thrust configuration.
Oh. You mean they don't?
That's a little more than I wanted to know!
Seriously though, I would think that a professional pilot would know how to deal with that situation. If there's any way to deal with it, that is. All it would take would be a bad relay contact, or some other glitch, to make it happen.
(steely)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-59 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson