Anyone Following This Whole Trevor Jacobs Crash ?

[billt460]

This is all over You Tube. People, many of them experienced pilots, say this guy crashed a Taylorcraft allegedly on purpose, in order to bolster his You Tube Channel. He parachuted out of it after a supposed engine failure at high altitude, and made no attempt at a landing.

The aircraft was fitted with Go Pro cameras everywhere. And there is a slew of things that make the whole thing look as if it was a staged bail out, and crash. This guy makes a pretty fair and through analysis of the whole thing, and it sure looks to stink worse than a fish market during a heat wave.

If you want more information than what I've provided, you won't have any trouble finding it. Just Google Trevor Jacobs plane crash, and you'll get the phone book. What say you guys?

Pilot may have crashed his plane on purpose for clout, aviation experts say

YouTuber pilot Trevor Jacob made a video of himself crashing his aircraft in November.

nypost.com

 

[wings&wheels]

My opinion, and just that MY opinion, as a 30+ year GA pilot and aircraft owner? Intentional, and if so and if charged and convicted, he deserves serious jail time.

Assuming this was intentional; endangering the public, destroying a perfectly good and nice old airplane and the damage this idiotic behavior does to the hobby which has enough of a PR problem (leaded fuel, wasteful, perceived as 'elite'), I have no sympathy.

 

[Krieg]

WOW!

 

[billt460]

My opinion, and just that MY opinion, as a 30+ year GA pilot and aircraft owner? Intentional, and if so and if charged and convicted, he deserves serious jail time.

Assuming this was intentional; endangering the public, destroying a perfectly good and nice old airplane and the damage this idiotic behavior does to the hobby which has enough of a PR problem (leaded fuel, wasteful, perceived as 'elite'), I have no sympathy.

The pilot in the video that I posted, said the FAA is unlikely to give him jail time. Most likely they'll pull his license and give him some fines.

There could be other agencies, (National Park Service), etc. who might pursue other legal action against him. But even that is unlikely. It did look intentional. Trimmed nose down. Exiting the aircraft so early, without even trying to restart the engine. Cameras everywhere. And what's with the whole deal with the fire extinguisher strapped to the inside of his pants leg?

Plus, trying to land close to the aircraft crash site. Instead of going for clear, somewhat level ground like most ANY parachutist would do, all add up to this whole thing most likely being staged. Stupid and dangerous thing to do. And an idiotic way to wreck a nice old airplane that could have had a lot of hours left in it.

 

[Cujet]

The pilot in the video that I posted, said the FAA is unlikely to give him jail time.

The FAA is a civil agency and can only impose civil penalties. Although the cost can be eye-watering!

The FAA can refer a case to other authorities that will bring criminal charges.

 

[slo town]

A disturbed young man who is in love with himself and desperate for attention. What a disgrace.

Scott

 

[AZjeff]

Came across it right after it happened through other channels I watch on YouTube. Total 100% made for YouTube sensationalism to get views. So much incriminating stuff surfaced leaves little doubt. Hopefully no agency involved shows leniency.

 

[Cujet]

If nothing else, it brings up the point that single engine aircraft don't fare well over hostile terrain, when disaster strikes. When I started flying, my instructor would ask "where's your out" with regard to a flight path. This was not the standard question of what specific place (golf course or highway) are you going to land when the engine fails. It was a more general concern while flying too far offshore, too low and deep into the forest, too far away from airports, and so on.

He was right to require an "out". Whether this was real or not, this guy's "out" was his parachute. An acceptable choice for such a flight. Flying over the Gulf of Mexico, cutting the corner in FL was his favorite example. As one could easily be 50 miles offshore for a bit. No way to make the beach, and little chance of survival without the proper setup. All to save 10-15 minutes. He would insist on flying the shorline instead.

 

[AZjeff]

@Cujet, no doubt everything you say is true. If you haven't yet do some checking about this deal. Bogus from beginning to end. From making a parts bird flyable to all the cameras (bail out of a fallling plane with a selfie stick?) to the parachute to the fire extinguisher taped to his leg under his pants to bailing at high altitude and letting the plane glide away it was all bogus.

 

[srfdude]

Sorry to see the T-crate ditched. I also bought one, in the '70s, a basket case. Took a year to restore it, then provided much pleasure flying in and out of sandbars, mussel beaches at low tide, just a great airplane. They came with a 65 hp I think, but mine had been upgraded to an 80 continental before I bought. Pretty underpowered at 80, much less 65. Unleaded auto gas worked just fine, flying for peanuts compared to now. No electrics, just a handheld VHS/VOR . Only problem I ever had was a mag died once while flying, but there are villages all over Alaska and the mags were a dime a dozen (rebuilt ones). Had to sell it when I moved to SoCal.

 

[Fordiesel69]

All we need to do is just wait and find out............patience is a vertue.

I am going with Dan Gryder on this one. Mix in some video editing and the fact there is no hull loss recorded as of yet for the oringinal plane, the best possible explanation to go off of is the fact there was a wreckage already and it is all staged, someone was most likely hiding in the back of the plane to fly it back.

We won't know the truth for some time.

 

[Owen Lucas]

Another video I watches stated the plane was high enough to glide to another airport or hit a nearby school and community.

 

[y_p_w]

His pilot's certificate is being pulled for one year by the FAA, although it's not sure if he's facing criminal charges. It might have been staged, but there's clear video that the plane crashed from the plane. Not sure how that worked out, if the video file was retrieved or if he had planned it all out to transmit the video stream.

YouTuber Gets Off Easy After Intentionally Crashing Plane

Trevor Jacob will lose his pilot's license for a year after staging a plane crash on video.

jalopnik.com

 

[ctechbob]

Hadn't heard about it until Juan posted something about it today. What a turd that guy (Trevor) is.

Speaks volumes about the scourge social media has become. Not that anyone is surprised.

 

[BusyLittleShop]

Trevor is just repeating history... you see Adolphe Pégoud a Bleriot test pilot is believed to be the first to sacrifice an aircraft...

In 1913 using a sacrifice aircraft, Pégoud was the first pilot to make a parachute jump from an airplane. During the first jump, observing the unexpected path of the plane and particularly a loop-like trajectory, he was convinced he could reproduce and control the same in flight. After landing, Pégoud addressed reporters: "I've seen him, alone, looping the loop. So you see that this is possible. Also, I will try!"

 

[MRC01]

His pilot's certificate is being pulled for one year by the FAA, although it's not sure if he's facing criminal charges. It might have been staged, but there's clear video that the plane crashed from the plane. Not sure how that worked out, if the video file was retrieved or if he had planned it all out to transmit the video stream.

YouTuber Gets Off Easy After Intentionally Crashing Plane

Trevor Jacob will lose his pilot's license for a year after staging a plane crash on video.

jalopnik.com

I don't think it's quite that easy. As I read, it was not a suspension, but a revocation. That means after the year is over he no longer has a pilots license, but has to earn it all over again: take ground school, take the flight test, etc. Which also means getting signed off by a DPE. In some cases (not sure whether this will happen to him) the FAA tells DPEs that anyone who passes him, loses his DPE privileges. In this case, it amounts to a lifetime revocation.

In Martha Lunken's case, the FAA did a partial version of it. She earned back her private pilot but she'll never get her other certificates back.

 

[Cujet]

I really can't (and won't) take the side of the Youtuber. However, the FAR's do spell out the following that might apply: (note the wording "ANY OBJECT")

"No pilot in command of a civil aircraft may allow any object to be dropped from that aircraft in flight that creates a hazard to persons or property. However, this section does not prohibit the dropping of any object if reasonable precautions are taken to avoid injury or damage to persons or property"

In this case, with regard to this regulation, reasonable care may have been taken. No fuel, no risk of fire, no people for miles, no property for miles, and the pilot had a safe way to the ground.

 

[MRC01]

He wasn't dropping an object from an aircraft. He was abandoning the aircraft while in the air, intentionally and unnecessarily. I dunno about you, but that seems reckless to me.

By my read, at a minimum it does appear he violated 91.105. And perhaps other regs, like 91.13 which the FAA usually cites when you intentionally do something they don't like. Surely, the FAA's letter will show which regs they believe he violated. From what I read, there were a couple of good places nearby within glide distance that any good pilot would have used to make an emergency landing.

 

[Malo83]

Never heard of him.

 

[Cujet]

He wasn't dropping an object from an aircraft. He was abandoning the aircraft while in the air, intentionally and unnecessarily. I dunno about you, but that seems reckless to me.

By my read, at a minimum it does appear he violated 91.105. And perhaps other regs, like 91.13 which the FAA usually cites when you intentionally do something they don't like. Surely, the FAA's letter will show which regs they believe he violated. From what I read, there were a couple of good places nearby within glide distance that any good pilot would have used to make an emergency landing.

I'm not defending him, and thank god I'm not his lawyer. I simply thought of this regulation and wondered about it.