What boggles my mind is that these people have jeopardized (likely now forfeited) the privilege to fly. Some of us have to fight just to get it. It’s maddening to think of how wasteful it is. And for a stunt. That tells me they don’t live flying; they loved the risk and social reward.
I think the FAA going to make an example out of them send a message to the social media crowd I would not be surprised if all 3 of them end up with criminal charges.
Perhaps have a look at the FAA's completely needless case against Trent Palmer. Hopefully you could share this around with the wider community and get the judge to reconsider.
Thanks, Evan. We are looking hard into that. Some elements of the FAA behavior in that case that are troubling to us. Stand by...we'll have more on that.
Agree with you Evan, The issues discussed in this video, are very common sense and a no brainer. But I would really like to see AOPA focus their efforts on the Trent Palmer case instead. Based on his video, he was done dirty by the FAA (NTSB), and the ramifications of his judgment will have a ripple effect going forward on all off field landing activities going forward (ie.. Bush Flying). It takes organizations like AOPA to be a voice for the pilots and to affect change in protecting pilots and their privileges. Yes I know the key word privileges is a hard pill to swallow. My thoughts Dion
@@richardmcspadden9189 Great! I am a UK based pilot, so we only have small farm strips in fields we can land on, so no real off airport backcountry flying apart from that (not legally allowed to land on public land). I find it shocking that the FAA is penalising a pilot for following their safety guide and making low passes to evaluate a strip before landing on it, then deciding not to attempt it in the interest of safety. It's almost as if they want you to land first attempt, or even if you feel unable to do so. That being said, they will probably also punish you for not making low passes beforehand instead...
@@Dionm01 Completely agree with you Dion. I'm a UK based pilot and our laws leave no ability for proper backcountry flying, other than farm strips. Our aviation community is relatively small, but we don't have too much of this crazy regulatory overreach that allows them to prosecute you for following the safety advice that they published. I think we had a pretty good idea about Trevor Jacob before the NTSB and FAA even started investigating, so we don't need to keep hearing about it. Besides, that gives him the publicity he craves. The Red Bull stunt appeared to be very well planned out, but still a questionable idea at best. Although saying that, their safety measures worked well, the plane that crashed didn't hit anyone and both pilots survived uninjured.
Wondering if AOPA is aware of the Trent Palmer license suspension: ruclips.net/video/RpFDRoStcd4/видео.html. Would love to hear the AOPA's view of this episode in part because Mr. Palmar presents his case as a major threat to the "freedom to land off airport"
Very aware. We are troubled by the FAA’s actions in Palmer’s case. We’re committed to protecting off airport landing locations and the sanctity of pilot judgement on whether or not to land or go around.
@@richardmcspadden9189 I'd like to know if you and/or the AOPA consider that specific property a legitimate off-airport landing site (in any case other than an actual emergency), and why or why not.
Technically, Luke is the one that requested the waiver. He is now saying that he did not share the denial letter with any of the other people involved. Not sure if that is true, or if he decided to take the fall for everyone.
Finally we get a fact based rational analysis of the recent social media inspired dangerous airplane stunts. Most of the the other social media videos on the topic are based solely on the content creators uneducated opinions. One guy (you know who) went so far as to assert the Red Bull aircraft swap was safe!
Thanks, Richard. As always, clear-eyed, thoughtful analysis from Air Safety Institute. I've been so impressed by your tenure at the organization; best hiring decision at AOPA!
@@richardmcspadden9189 Nice to see such highly respected source of information on RUclips. Social media is starting to have a positive and negative impact on aviation we saw it with the drones for years and received much heavier hand of regulation against the RC model aviation community from the FAA because of some of it. While General Aviation has lot of regulation I could see more coming to Part 103 if folks don't think about the ramifications posting a video might have.
was case #1 or case #2 members of aopa? and if so are they supported by aopa legal team? Does this have any negative effects on our insurance premiums? were any of the incidents covered by aopa insurance?
not that it's of any relevance any more, but he also had to pull the yoke back multiple times in order to slow the craft enough to get the door open. Instead of picking up the airspeed he needed to windmill the engine back to life (which would have happened if the magneto was left on instead of being turned off in order to stop the engine), his focus was on slowing it enough so the wind resistance wouldn't override his need to get the door open.
Trent is a member of AOPA’s legal support plan and continues to receive legal support from one of our panel attorneys. We are troubled by FAA behavior here and adamantly defend pilots rights to fly into appropriate off airport locations.
@@Bibocas it may be arguable Trent went against laws or rules if looked at in a particular direction, the issue is that the direction argued against Trent is detrimental to safety of flight. The laws and guidelines need to be clarified whereas Trent’s actions are within pilot’s rights as it’s a safety issue otherwise. Laws and guidelines need to be based on level minded action, and not detrimental to society.
I would like to see the GA community not allow Red Bull to be associated with and uninvited to their events (no "Red Bull Air Force" or "Red Bull Helicopter" at EAA Airventure for example). I enjoy their shows and some of the stunts they have pulled, but going against an explicit "no go" from the regulatory authority is flat out stupid and should have consequences. Red Bull needs to own this, affirm the problems this may represent for GA and the regulations on it, and apologize to the community for the potential harm this sort of activity has on us. I'm not talking a lifetime ban on Red Bull sponsorships, but long enough and harsh enough to maybe get their attention that this will not be tolerated (not just by the feds, but by fellow members of the GA community).
I hope you take a look at Trent Palmer's FAA legal challenges ... from an external look ... it appears to be anything but a stunt on his part and more like a legal lynching on that of the FAA. Your insight would be useful to all who care about this issue.
Trent is a member of AOPA’s Legal Support Plan and continues to get support from an AOPA panel attorney. AOPA adamantly supports the freedom to access appropriate off airport sites and ESPECIALLY the judgement of a pilot on when to land and when not to.
@@richardmcspadden9189 He admits he was not landing. He could just as easily have "checked it out" without violating any FARs, like the anti-buzzing, 500 ft rule. Applying the Off Airport Landing manuel does not overrule actual FARs like Buzzing neighborhoods. It's a very bad precedence for the AOPA to support Buzzing neighborhoods checking out potential landing spots. This is how new restrictive laws get passed.
The more commentary about this man i see the more worried i am: ppl often point out how self centered jacobs is and according to that the more you talk about him, the more important he feels himself. I recently saw Pilot Blog tearing to pieces that case ,especially when he presented jacobs vlog (the one where he was about to submit his license back to FAA ). And i was amazed how jacobs still cares about attention he achieves: nonchalant, egoistic, laughing directly into ppl faces. The best way to deal with such cases could be ignoring such persons. But since it's about very serious problem: overall safety based on strict rules -i bet it's not likely to happen.
Great video, thank you. This comment is not directly related to this video, but I just wanted to see if it would make it to someone at AOPA, someone involved with GA pilot safety. Comment and question: I love aviation and spend a lot of time learning about it and watching videos on it. One aviation technology that I think could use much improvement is the quality of radio communications. In this day and age of satellite GPS and satellite phone communications, why are we still using communications over VHF frequencies? Why not digital communications to/from ATC-to-satellite-and-to-aircraft? Such communications would be crystal clear and impervious to altitude or terrain. It's the 21st century. It's about time. You could even design the equipment in the airplane so you would still enter the appropriate COM frequency for communicating with ATC, as per VFR/IFR charts and airport information. The onboard equipment would just encode that target destination COM frequency into the digital audio signal sent up to an appropriate satellite, down to ATC and then back again on its way to the pilot. The delays in transmission would be minimal if the satellites are in low earth orbit of 1000 miles up or so and if appropriate COM satellites are placed over large cities or other areas of the country. Delays of just a fraction of a second would be possible. I suppose the pilot would still be FAR required to monitor VHF communications, to remain aware of local traffic situations. The communications over VHF radio would continue as well, in order to remain compatible with existing aircraft that do not have the newer satellite setup. Note that if the transponder code issued to an airplane by ATC is embedded into the information transmitted to/from the COM satellite, then the pilot could optionally filter the incoming satellite communications and not hear the audio meant for other aircrafts. In addition, with the location of the aircraft, the ATC communications would properly encode the transmission for reception by only the appropriate closest target plane to location of ATC, to account for the case of the same VHF frequencies used in multiple places over the country. The above technology would certainly enhance safety for GA aviation. I wonder if this type of request can be made from AOPA or other GA pilot organizations. The support of such GA special interest groups would be needed in Congress to request the required funds for the study and implementation. I just wonder if all this would be feasible and affordable.
It would be interesting to know how far in advance of the Plane Swap the request for the waiver was made. To have the denial take place only 2 days before the event is strange. It’s going to be interesting to see how this is litigated/decided.
Original application on 2/28. FAA asked for additional information on 3/24. Additional information provided in writing and by phone on 4/11. Interestingly - and probably not good for the pilots' case - part of that additional information was (paraphrasing) "we have to go ahead because we already made media commitments."
2 года назад+2
@@clandry1234 If media commitments are more important than safety (regulations), then you should get in trouble for that.
The red bull pilots definitely would've been better off using the ask for forgiveness rather than permission plan since they were gonna do it regardless.
Disappointing to many of us who strive every day to avoid bending metal or getting anyone hurt. FAA should stop wasting taxpayer money conducting years-long investigations on folks like Mr. Palmer, and focus on making a public example out of those who willfully violate written orders purely for the sake of social media views and sponsorship deals. I'm not normally a fan of "public hangings", but I fear that if FAA does not make a big, public deal about this, this sort of non-sense will continue and people will get hurt.
lol, and who would that someone be? NoOne and NoBody, the imaginary twins who work inside the minds of a Bureaucrat. Could you be a little bit more specific as to the probabilities that someone was anywhere close? Zero or damn near. Every aircraft that lands in a city, statistically is a much larger risk to "another" than where Trevor went Solo Skydiving. The NTSB needs to apply FARs correctly and not listen to internet lynch mobs.
The FAA needs a reduction in force, if they have people doing nothing but wasting their time investigating "not an accident", "not a safety issue" like Barnstormer Jacobs' Solo Skydiving Adventure Video.
some guy did a vid on this. He showed where the airplane was carried and explained how it was probably done. I’m sorry I don’t know the person that uploaded the vid and talked about the crashed plane location but there is one out there.
I'm so confused! In his latest video , the "bald screagle" is seen wearing a shirt that reads, always wear your parachute, yet he is not wearing one while flying.
LOL, actually it's safer to the general public to do what Trevor Jacob did with an "engine out". To, bail out of the aircraft and let it crash in a desolate area is much safer than gliding the disabled aircraft back to civilization and endangering everyone along the glide path and around the airport. But, we allow the aviators to endanger people on the ground so that they can attempt to save their aircraft. That's acceptable. But, endangering no one and no property is not when solo skydiving or a true engine out. "Always wear your parachute" LOL
Thank you for this. Stunts for clicks have no place in aviation. If the FAA denies your request, then respect their decision, prove that your plan is safe, then re-submit. On the heels of the Trever Jacob video, it was just plain stupid to even attempt this stunt. Red Bull needs to be held responsible as well.
I love Barnstorming Video on RUclips. There are lots of them, and they are all great. Barnstormer Trevor Jacob's was great, brought out lots of emotions in me, and apparently everyone else. I hope Red Bull trys the plane swap again, but they need an Aerospace Engineer to design a better speed brake, the one they did sucked. Inverted flat spin.
@@WeBeGood06 Leaving your aircraft with no PIC - for No Good Reason - is simply unacceptable. At that point it becomes an unguided missile and puts innocent lives in danger. Red Bull should have pulled the plug on this ill advised stunt, especially so soon after the Tevor Jacobs incident. WTF were they thinking? I lost a LOT of respect for Red Bull after this fiasco.
Here is a owner/pilot who crashed and died on takeoff, what would be the purpose of a report? There is nothing to be gained, other than counting the dead. ruclips.net/video/1n4kFN-1axs/видео.html
Thanks Red Bull! Bravo! Hope you got enough likes and thanks for not killing or injuring anyone this time. You just created another chapter in the FAR/AIM for good pilots to add to their studies! It’s all fun until it’s not.
If the Red Bull guys face more repercussions in the end than Trevor Jacob, isn't the FAA, NTSB, etc., Effectively telling the aviation community they're better off ignoring the rules and guidelines entirely than asking permission?
I would say yes, just look at what's going on with Trent Palmer. The FAA is basically saying he should have landed instead of being safe and aborting the landing.
I think Trevor Jacob has more to worry about he actually made false statements to a federal agency which is a felony he could land in prison. The red bill pilots my guess there is revoked for life could get civil penalty they can still fly part 103. I can only assume they knew what was going to happen did it anyway had to have planned for the outcome. Trevor Jacob if he had not made those false statements he be much better off. Should have consulted an attorney right away instead of talking to the FAA first.
Didn’t the plane that crashed deploy it’s ballistic parachute? It still looked like the plane is “totaled” and I doubt anyone would’ve survived that. That being said, what’s the point of these parachutes if they save neither the plane nor anyone on board? Honest question. I’m not a pilot and don’t know much about this stuff.
I don't have a problem with the Red-Bull stunt by it's idea.... they planned and planned. It was carefully thought out. (or at least there was an attempt to do so). Hollywood blows up stuff all the time... so trashing a couple planes isn't much more exciting than what goes on for a typical action movie set. And properly, they asked for a waiver --- and when the FAA said "no" -- that should have been the end of it. (Unless they want to go to another country and ask the aviation authority there...) The Trevor Jacob stunt was 100% reckless. He should be pursued to the fullest extent the law can allow. Hopefully the FAA has tools to keep him from every having a license again as his followup video clearly shows he has no remorse for what he did, the rules he broke and the danger he potentially presented to those on the ground.
We get enough grief from the media when there is a general aviation accident. We don’t need this. Trevor Jacob is an irresponsible clown. I hope the FAA refers this to Justice, and Trevor Jacob goes to prison.
@@WeBeGood06 Because of the laws Trevor violated in a stunt that was not approved. Why else? He already has his PPL revoked because of it. The Red Bull pilots on the other hand, had a pre-approved stunt.
I am a pilot and this makes me wonder why I even bothered to go through the trouble and expense of getting a license. In my opinion, anyone who would intentionally violate a denial, knowing full well they would be caught after global TV exposure, will pay little to no attention to all the other laws and regulations pilots deal with on a daily basis, and when nobody is looking. Can we trust these guys and companies to watch out for our safety when they aren’t on TV? I don’t think so. I did things like this when I was 12. But I was at least smart enough to not ask for dad’s permission if I knew he was gonna say NO, and I was gonna do it anyway.
You don't have to bother getting a license. Get into Ultralights or Paramotors, and your good to go. The FAA should not be in the business of approving what people what to do while flying,, like Barnstorming, just enforcing the FARs. Punishing Barnstormer who endanger the general public like Trent Palmer when he Buzzed his friends house and neighborhood.
G,day from Sydney Australia. * What influence corporate image "RED BULL" makes on public perception: not the law. * I would NOT like to see a precidence of un-controlled planes !!!! 🌏🇦🇺
Lots of things that are not illegal can be used by prosecutors as evidence of planning a crime, or to show a person's state of mind at the time a crime was committed. Have you ever flown a plane with a fire extinguisher strapped to your leg? I sure haven't. Unless you were doing something with a high risk of fire (i.e. intentionally crashing an airplane), why would you? Carrying an extinguisher on your person isn't criminal on its own, but it's evidence of a larger plan that potentially was criminal.
Icing on the cake... He actually had TWO fire extinguishers, one strapped to each leg. Both are seen in Trevor's video. One is directly seen up his pant leg, the second has its outline visible through his trousers. The mind boggles what this man wears when boarding a commercial flight...
Why? Is it a "Crash" report, or an "Accident" report? If the NTSB requires notification of Crash reports, then yes. If it's an accident report, then no. The NTSB should be concerned about Safety and Property of others, not the Barnstormers safety, not the damage to a Barnstormers Property, especially the "why" of a Barnstormer wanting to do something.
Have you looked into the idea that the whole thing was faked? There's fairly competing evidence that the entire thing couldn't have happened the way it appears. Jump pilots dive to race jumpers to the ground but this Taylor in a glide beat him to the ground by a huge amount? One mechanic claims the plane was better than new and then another said it was junk and not air worthy?
IMHO he's not guilty of failing to report the accident and he cannot be accused of it. The reason is simple - it was not an accident, by the FAA's own reckoning. Although that of course makes him guilty of a more serious offences.
There is a general resistance to anyone having governance over the skies from many newer recreational pilots. Recreational flying is far more accessible than it has ever been and the numbers are skyrocketing, pun intended. The FAA is scrambling to control and uncontrollable situation of the surging popularity of recreational RUclips pilots.
There was someone else flying with Trevor… it was impossible to get the shot he has of the plane from above while crashing…. Remember he jumped out of the plane. The videos were made over several days. And there had to have been others involved.
With technology today Trent didn't even have to actually perform this stunt. He could have easily Blue Screened this and still make it look like he actually jumped. And no plane destroyed and no FAA or local codes/laws broken. He screwed up big time.
Trevor Jacob is an adrenaline junkie, like sky divers, wing suits, the Red Bull plane swap really a lot of people are in a way. A lot of adrenaline rush comes from doing something new, the first spin, first loop, solo...Think back, remember when you solo-ed? Not so much adrenaline, tapping away at a computer making a blue screen show. The sad thing is Trevor broke on FARs or local laws, when he went Solo Skydiving for the first time. Red Bull plane swap didn't either, they should never have asked for permission. "What you want to go Barnstorming? Explain to me why I should care?" was the answer they got from the FAA.
@@WeBeGood06 adrenaline junkie... good point. But some find just as much satisfaction filming and producing special effects as much as those actually pushing the edge.
If this guy was my legal council, I'd fire him on the spot. Suggesting that TJ's accident might not be reportable because he left the plane in the air, is absurd. The fact that he would suggest this indicates a mentality that cannot understand the concept of "intent". Yes, you can parse the specific words in the law or regulations in many different ways. In some cases you can parse words in a regulation to mean the opposite. However, every law or regulation includes the common sense understanding of "intent". Clearly TJs intended to crash the plane when he left it, and this would be a reportable crash. It seems to me the AOPA legal council can't see the trees for the forest. With his logic he should be on the Amber Heard defense team. Not the guy I'd go looking for to defend me.
He's just explaining all angles of the letter of the law. It's literally what attorneys do. So he's actually probably exactly the person you'd want representing you.
It was intentional, not an accident, Barnstorming. Last time I looked, it's not against the law to destroy your own property. Barnstormer Trevor Jacob went Solo Skydiving, it's obvious to everyone except the NTSB who think the script of a Barnstorming Theatrical Production is some sort of Testimony, which it is not. Quit calling it an Accident.
The Barnstormer Trevor Jacob video was a Theatrical Production for RUclips, why are you talking like the Storyline of a Theatrical Production, Barnstorming, is Testimony? It's simply a great Barnstormer Video, an extremely cheeky funny video. Nowhere in the letter does the FAA meet the requirements of 14 C.F.R. 91.13(a). It's just not there. The letter states the obvious, it was a Theatrical Production, Barnstorming, so what! He shut the engine off, why would he try to start it? Why would he look for an emergency landing spot, he intended to go Skydiving, he had a Sport Parachute on, a fire extinguisher strapped to his leg. Looked like he was very "safety conscious" during his whole Barnstorming event. My question is, where is the law making it illegal to intentionally crash your own aircraft. Intentionally crashing your own aircraft is not an accident, does the reporting of an accident even required. He went Solo Skydiving. The NTSB could prosecute him for filing a "False Accident Report" if he reported it. It's obvious to everyone it was no accident. What does the NTSB care about preserving wreckage of NOT AN ACCIDENT! There is nothing to learn from NOT AN ACCIDENT What the NTSB and FAA need to prove the entire sentence of 91.13a. For someone who was so careful as to shut the engine down, have a fire extinguisher with him, land next to the aircraft landing site with a fire extinguisher, it's going to be an extremely hard thing to do. It was a Great Barnstorming Solo Skydiving Adventure Video! Is it the NTSB's job to be a Movie Critic, or correctly apply FARs, which they failed miserably here.
They should have taken their Dog and Pony show out over international waters or Mexico! They ( he ) is going to get a good ' Strupin ' for blatantly defying big brother!
These stunts will not be the last that these RUclipsrs do unless the FAA come down hard and I mean hard on these guys. Flying accidents are bad for all of aviation without doing it for likes on RUclips.
Crashing Airplanes on purpose has nothing to do with an "accident" and has nothing to do with commercial or general aviation. The FAA needs to stick to safety and NOT "come down" at all pm Barnstormers that do their Barnstorming safely, as Trevor Jacob's did. I love the dare devil Barnstorming RUclips videos, they are great.
![FORTNITE CLASSICS IS BACK! Fortnite Item Shop [November 15th, 2024] (Fortnite Chapter 5)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/RbQURbeFwqs/mqdefault.jpg)
What boggles my mind is that these people have jeopardized (likely now forfeited) the privilege to fly. Some of us have to fight just to get it. It’s maddening to think of how wasteful it is. And for a stunt. That tells me they don’t live flying; they loved the risk and social reward.
I think the FAA going to make an example out of them send a message to the social media crowd I would not be surprised if all 3 of them end up with criminal charges.
Perhaps have a look at the FAA's completely needless case against Trent Palmer. Hopefully you could share this around with the wider community and get the judge to reconsider.
Thanks, Evan. We are looking hard into that. Some elements of the FAA behavior in that case that are troubling to us. Stand by...we'll have more on that.
Agree with you Evan, The issues discussed in this video, are very common sense and a no brainer. But I would really like to see AOPA focus their efforts on the Trent Palmer case instead. Based on his video, he was done dirty by the FAA (NTSB), and the ramifications of his judgment will have a ripple effect going forward on all off field landing activities going forward (ie.. Bush Flying). It takes organizations like AOPA to be a voice for the pilots and to affect change in protecting pilots and their privileges. Yes I know the key word privileges is a hard pill to swallow. My thoughts Dion
@@richardmcspadden9189 Great! I am a UK based pilot, so we only have small farm strips in fields we can land on, so no real off airport backcountry flying apart from that (not legally allowed to land on public land). I find it shocking that the FAA is penalising a pilot for following their safety guide and making low passes to evaluate a strip before landing on it, then deciding not to attempt it in the interest of safety. It's almost as if they want you to land first attempt, or even if you feel unable to do so. That being said, they will probably also punish you for not making low passes beforehand instead...
@@Dionm01 Completely agree with you Dion. I'm a UK based pilot and our laws leave no ability for proper backcountry flying, other than farm strips. Our aviation community is relatively small, but we don't have too much of this crazy regulatory overreach that allows them to prosecute you for following the safety advice that they published. I think we had a pretty good idea about Trevor Jacob before the NTSB and FAA even started investigating, so we don't need to keep hearing about it. Besides, that gives him the publicity he craves. The Red Bull stunt appeared to be very well planned out, but still a questionable idea at best. Although saying that, their safety measures worked well, the plane that crashed didn't hit anyone and both pilots survived uninjured.
Totally agree with your comments Evan and really hope AOPA, EAA, etc. step forward quickly before the FAA makes the Trent Palmer incident Case Law.
Wondering if AOPA is aware of the Trent Palmer license suspension:
ruclips.net/video/RpFDRoStcd4/видео.html.
Would love to hear the AOPA's view of this episode in part because Mr. Palmar presents his case as a major threat to the "freedom to land off airport"
Very aware. We are troubled by the FAA’s actions in Palmer’s case. We’re committed to protecting off airport landing locations and the sanctity of pilot judgement on whether or not to land or go around.
I sent emails to both AOPA and EAA. I received positive reply from both organizations.
@@richardmcspadden9189 I'd like to know if you and/or the AOPA consider that specific property a legitimate off-airport landing site (in any case other than an actual emergency), and why or why not.
Technically, Luke is the one that requested the waiver. He is now saying that he did not share the denial letter with any of the other people involved. Not sure if that is true, or if he decided to take the fall for everyone.
Finally we get a fact based rational analysis of the recent social media inspired dangerous airplane stunts. Most of the the other social media videos on the topic are based solely on the content creators uneducated opinions. One guy (you know who) went so far as to assert the Red Bull aircraft swap was safe!
Thanks, Richard. As always, clear-eyed, thoughtful analysis from Air Safety Institute. I've been so impressed by your tenure at the organization; best hiring decision at AOPA!
Very kind. Thanks! I often present information, but the insight comes from tapping the broad and deep expertise at AOPA.
@@richardmcspadden9189 Nice to see such highly respected source of information on RUclips. Social media is starting to have a positive and negative impact on aviation we saw it with the drones for years and received much heavier hand of regulation against the RC model aviation community from the FAA because of some of it. While General Aviation has lot of regulation I could see more coming to Part 103 if folks don't think about the ramifications posting a video might have.
Seems to me that there is less penalty for trying to overt through the Government than there is in this case.
was case #1 or case #2 members of aopa? and if so are they supported by aopa legal team? Does this have any negative effects on our insurance premiums? were any of the incidents covered by aopa insurance?
not that it's of any relevance any more, but he also had to pull the yoke back multiple times in order to slow the craft enough to get the door open. Instead of picking up the airspeed he needed to windmill the engine back to life (which would have happened if the magneto was left on instead of being turned off in order to stop the engine), his focus was on slowing it enough so the wind resistance wouldn't override his need to get the door open.
Let’s not waste our time with that clown TJ. Trent Palmer needs AOPAs help.
Trent is a member of AOPA’s legal support plan and continues to receive legal support from one of our panel attorneys. We are troubled by FAA behavior here and adamantly defend pilots rights to fly into appropriate off airport locations.
@@Bibocas it may be arguable Trent went against laws or rules if looked at in a particular direction, the issue is that the direction argued against Trent is detrimental to safety of flight. The laws and guidelines need to be clarified whereas Trent’s actions are within pilot’s rights as it’s a safety issue otherwise. Laws and guidelines need to be based on level minded action, and not detrimental to society.
I would like to see the GA community not allow Red Bull to be associated with and uninvited to their events (no "Red Bull Air Force" or "Red Bull Helicopter" at EAA Airventure for example). I enjoy their shows and some of the stunts they have pulled, but going against an explicit "no go" from the regulatory authority is flat out stupid and should have consequences.
Red Bull needs to own this, affirm the problems this may represent for GA and the regulations on it, and apologize to the community for the potential harm this sort of activity has on us. I'm not talking a lifetime ban on Red Bull sponsorships, but long enough and harsh enough to maybe get their attention that this will not be tolerated (not just by the feds, but by fellow members of the GA community).
Sponsorships notwithstanding, it’s plain that Red Bull has left a bad taste with the aviation community. Yes, I know what I did.
I hope you take a look at Trent Palmer's FAA legal challenges ... from an external look ... it appears to be anything but a stunt on his part and more like a legal lynching on that of the FAA. Your insight would be useful to all who care about this issue.
Trent is a member of AOPA’s Legal Support Plan and continues to get support from an AOPA panel attorney. AOPA adamantly supports the freedom to access appropriate off airport sites and ESPECIALLY the judgement of a pilot on when to land and when not to.
@@richardmcspadden9189 He admits he was not landing. He could just as easily have "checked it out" without violating any FARs, like the anti-buzzing, 500 ft rule. Applying the Off Airport Landing manuel does not overrule actual FARs like Buzzing neighborhoods. It's a very bad precedence for the AOPA to support Buzzing neighborhoods checking out potential landing spots. This is how new restrictive laws get passed.
The more commentary about this man i see the more worried i am: ppl often point out how self centered jacobs is and according to that the more you talk about him, the more important he feels himself. I recently saw Pilot Blog tearing to pieces that case ,especially when he presented jacobs vlog (the one where he was about to submit his license back to FAA ). And i was amazed how jacobs still cares about attention he achieves: nonchalant, egoistic, laughing directly into ppl faces. The best way to deal with such cases could be ignoring such persons. But since it's about very serious problem: overall safety based on strict rules -i bet it's not likely to happen.
Narcissistic personality disorder
Great video, thank you.
This comment is not directly related to this video, but I just wanted to see if it would make it to someone at AOPA, someone involved with GA pilot safety.
Comment and question: I love aviation and spend a lot of time learning about it and watching videos on it. One aviation technology that I think could use much improvement is the quality of radio communications. In this day and age of satellite GPS and satellite phone communications, why are we still using communications over VHF frequencies? Why not digital communications to/from ATC-to-satellite-and-to-aircraft? Such communications would be crystal clear and impervious to altitude or terrain. It's the 21st century. It's about time.
You could even design the equipment in the airplane so you would still enter the appropriate COM frequency for communicating with ATC, as per VFR/IFR charts and airport information. The onboard equipment would just encode that target destination COM frequency into the digital audio signal sent up to an appropriate satellite, down to ATC and then back again on its way to the pilot. The delays in transmission would be minimal if the satellites are in low earth orbit of 1000 miles up or so and if appropriate COM satellites are placed over large cities or other areas of the country. Delays of just a fraction of a second would be possible. I suppose the pilot would still be FAR required to monitor VHF communications, to remain aware of local traffic situations. The communications over VHF radio would continue as well, in order to remain compatible with existing aircraft that do not have the newer satellite setup. Note that if the transponder code issued to an airplane by ATC is embedded into the information transmitted to/from the COM satellite, then the pilot could optionally filter the incoming satellite communications and not hear the audio meant for other aircrafts. In addition, with the location of the aircraft, the ATC communications would properly encode the transmission for reception by only the appropriate closest target plane to location of ATC, to account for the case of the same VHF frequencies used in multiple places over the country.
The above technology would certainly enhance safety for GA aviation.
I wonder if this type of request can be made from AOPA or other GA pilot organizations. The support of such GA special interest groups would be needed in Congress to request the required funds for the study and implementation.
I just wonder if all this would be feasible and affordable.
It would be interesting to know how far in advance of the Plane Swap the request for the waiver was made. To have the denial take place only 2 days before the event is strange. It’s going to be interesting to see how this is litigated/decided.
Original application on 2/28. FAA asked for additional information on 3/24. Additional information provided in writing and by phone on 4/11. Interestingly - and probably not good for the pilots' case - part of that additional information was (paraphrasing) "we have to go ahead because we already made media commitments."
@@clandry1234 If media commitments are more important than safety (regulations), then you should get in trouble for that.
The red bull pilots definitely would've been better off using the ask for forgiveness rather than permission plan since they were gonna do it regardless.
Disappointing to many of us who strive every day to avoid bending metal or getting anyone hurt. FAA should stop wasting taxpayer money conducting years-long investigations on folks like Mr. Palmer, and focus on making a public example out of those who willfully violate written orders purely for the sake of social media views and sponsorship deals. I'm not normally a fan of "public hangings", but I fear that if FAA does not make a big, public deal about this, this sort of non-sense will continue and people will get hurt.
That's exactly what you should do. But why do you hate Barnstormers who bend the metal so you don't have to?
@@WeBeGood06 So I don't have to? Sorry, I have no idea what you mean by that.
What would have happened if the plane fell on someone in the area? I hope the NTSB takes away his license and a fine
lol, and who would that someone be? NoOne and NoBody, the imaginary twins who work inside the minds of a Bureaucrat. Could you be a little bit more specific as to the probabilities that someone was anywhere close? Zero or damn near. Every aircraft that lands in a city, statistically is a much larger risk to "another" than where Trevor went Solo Skydiving. The NTSB needs to apply FARs correctly and not listen to internet lynch mobs.
The FAA really needs to throw the book at Mr. Jacobs to ensure no other social media vlogger ever gets an idea like this ever again.
The FAA needs a reduction in force, if they have people doing nothing but wasting their time investigating "not an accident", "not a safety issue" like Barnstormer Jacobs' Solo Skydiving Adventure Video.
Does anyone actually know where the wreck of Jacob’s Taylorcraft wound up?
some guy did a vid on this. He showed where the airplane was carried and explained how it was probably done. I’m sorry I don’t know the person that uploaded the vid and talked about the crashed plane location but there is one out there.
I'm so confused! In his latest video , the "bald screagle" is seen wearing a shirt that reads, always wear your parachute, yet he is not wearing one while flying.
LOL, actually it's safer to the general public to do what Trevor Jacob did with an "engine out". To, bail out of the aircraft and let it crash in a desolate area is much safer than gliding the disabled aircraft back to civilization and endangering everyone along the glide path and around the airport.
But, we allow the aviators to endanger people on the ground so that they can attempt to save their aircraft. That's acceptable. But, endangering no one and no property is not when solo skydiving or a true engine out. "Always wear your parachute" LOL
Thank you for this. Stunts for clicks have no place in aviation. If the FAA denies your request, then respect their decision, prove that your plan is safe, then re-submit. On the heels of the Trever Jacob video, it was just plain stupid to even attempt this stunt. Red Bull needs to be held responsible as well.
I love Barnstorming Video on RUclips. There are lots of them, and they are all great. Barnstormer Trevor Jacob's was great, brought out lots of emotions in me, and apparently everyone else. I hope Red Bull trys the plane swap again, but they need an Aerospace Engineer to design a better speed brake, the one they did sucked. Inverted flat spin.
@@WeBeGood06 Leaving your aircraft with no PIC - for No Good Reason - is simply unacceptable. At that point it becomes an unguided missile and puts innocent lives in danger. Red Bull should have pulled the plug on this ill advised stunt, especially so soon after the Tevor Jacobs incident. WTF were they thinking? I lost a LOT of respect for Red Bull after this fiasco.
What happens if the owner/pilot dies in the crash and no report is made?
Here is a owner/pilot who crashed and died on takeoff, what would be the purpose of a report? There is nothing to be gained, other than counting the dead.
ruclips.net/video/1n4kFN-1axs/видео.html
Thanks Red Bull! Bravo! Hope you got enough likes and thanks for not killing or injuring anyone this time. You just created another chapter in the FAR/AIM for good pilots to add to their studies! It’s all fun until it’s not.
It's their lives and their money to spend how they want. I was just glad they were Barnstormers and recorded the event for all to enjoy.
I would love to see Jacob also lose his Skydiving certificates.
Why?
Revocation does also mean loss of other certifications.
If the Red Bull guys face more repercussions in the end than Trevor Jacob, isn't the FAA, NTSB, etc., Effectively telling the aviation community they're better off ignoring the rules and guidelines entirely than asking permission?
I would say yes, just look at what's going on with Trent Palmer. The FAA is basically saying he should have landed instead of being safe and aborting the landing.
I think Trevor Jacob has more to worry about he actually made false statements to a federal agency which is a felony he could land in prison. The red bill pilots my guess there is revoked for life could get civil penalty they can still fly part 103. I can only assume they knew what was going to happen did it anyway had to have planned for the outcome. Trevor Jacob if he had not made those false statements he be much better off. Should have consulted an attorney right away instead of talking to the FAA first.
Didn’t the plane that crashed deploy it’s ballistic parachute? It still looked like the plane is “totaled” and I doubt anyone would’ve survived that. That being said, what’s the point of these parachutes if they save neither the plane nor anyone on board? Honest question. I’m not a pilot and don’t know much about this stuff.
The size of the repair bill for the aircraft after in landed. I think this one got totaled.
I heard that it opened late
I don't have a problem with the Red-Bull stunt by it's idea.... they planned and planned. It was carefully thought out. (or at least there was an attempt to do so). Hollywood blows up stuff all the time... so trashing a couple planes isn't much more exciting than what goes on for a typical action movie set. And properly, they asked for a waiver --- and when the FAA said "no" -- that should have been the end of it. (Unless they want to go to another country and ask the aviation authority there...)
The Trevor Jacob stunt was 100% reckless. He should be pursued to the fullest extent the law can allow. Hopefully the FAA has tools to keep him from every having a license again as his followup video clearly shows he has no remorse for what he did, the rules he broke and the danger he potentially presented to those on the ground.
We get enough grief from the media when there is a general aviation accident. We don’t need this. Trevor Jacob is an irresponsible clown. I hope the FAA refers this to Justice, and Trevor Jacob goes to prison.
It wasn't an accident. It was a premeditated and purposeful/intentional act. He will most likely be investigated criminally and charged accordingly.
Why?
@@WeBeGood06 Because of the laws Trevor violated in a stunt that was not approved. Why else? He already has his PPL revoked because of it. The Red Bull pilots on the other hand, had a pre-approved stunt.
I am a pilot and this makes me wonder why I even bothered to go through the trouble and expense of getting a license. In my opinion, anyone who would intentionally violate a denial, knowing full well they would be caught after global TV exposure, will pay little to no attention to all the other laws and regulations pilots deal with on a daily basis, and when nobody is looking. Can we trust these guys and companies to watch out for our safety when they aren’t on TV? I don’t think so. I did things like this when I was 12. But I was at least smart enough to not ask for dad’s permission if I knew he was gonna say NO, and I was gonna do it anyway.
You don't have to bother getting a license. Get into Ultralights or Paramotors, and your good to go. The FAA should not be in the business of approving what people what to do while flying,, like Barnstorming, just enforcing the FARs. Punishing Barnstormer who endanger the general public like Trent Palmer when he Buzzed his friends house and neighborhood.
G,day from Sydney Australia.
* What influence corporate image "RED BULL" makes on public perception: not the law.
* I would NOT like to see a precidence of un-controlled planes !!!!
🌏🇦🇺
It's not against the law to have a fire extinguisher strapped to your leg. A good boy scout is always prepared.
Lots of things that are not illegal can be used by prosecutors as evidence of planning a crime, or to show a person's state of mind at the time a crime was committed. Have you ever flown a plane with a fire extinguisher strapped to your leg? I sure haven't. Unless you were doing something with a high risk of fire (i.e. intentionally crashing an airplane), why would you? Carrying an extinguisher on your person isn't criminal on its own, but it's evidence of a larger plan that potentially was criminal.
Icing on the cake... He actually had TWO fire extinguishers, one strapped to each leg. Both are seen in Trevor's video. One is directly seen up his pant leg, the second has its outline visible through his trousers. The mind boggles what this man wears when boarding a commercial flight...
Just curious, could the helicopter pilot who removed the wreckage face any consequences?
I don't know, do they give "awards" for cleaning up litter in the wilderness?
So Red Bull needs to notify NTSB of their accident? Or maybe not since the pilot had disembarked their A/C too.
Mmm...
Why? Is it a "Crash" report, or an "Accident" report? If the NTSB requires notification of Crash reports, then yes. If it's an accident report, then no. The NTSB should be concerned about Safety and Property of others, not the Barnstormers safety, not the damage to a Barnstormers Property, especially the "why" of a Barnstormer wanting to do something.
@@WeBeGood06 ah good answer.
Have you looked into the idea that the whole thing was faked? There's fairly competing evidence that the entire thing couldn't have happened the way it appears. Jump pilots dive to race jumpers to the ground but this Taylor in a glide beat him to the ground by a huge amount? One mechanic claims the plane was better than new and then another said it was junk and not air worthy?
IMHO he's not guilty of failing to report the accident and he cannot be accused of it. The reason is simple - it was not an accident, by the FAA's own reckoning. Although that of course makes him guilty of a more serious offences.
There is a general resistance to anyone having governance over the skies from many newer recreational pilots. Recreational flying is far more accessible than it has ever been and the numbers are skyrocketing, pun intended. The FAA is scrambling to control and uncontrollable situation of the surging popularity of recreational RUclips pilots.
I love the Barnstormers on RUclips. Great videos.
Both were deliberate acts violating federal regulations… yes, you can go to federal prison.
The Feds need to set harsh examples.
All for clicks !
Not all should be allowed to have driving license,
And even fewer should be given pilots license...
There was someone else flying with Trevor… it was impossible to get the shot he has of the plane from above while crashing….
Remember he jumped out of the plane.
The videos were made over several days. And there had to have been others involved.
Jacob got what he wanted, millions of views and a brain dead public eager and waiting for his next stunt. The whole thing was an outstanding success.
The internet lynch mob of outrage got orders of magnitude more "views"
With technology today Trent didn't even have to actually perform this stunt. He could have easily Blue Screened this and still make it look like he actually jumped. And no plane destroyed and no FAA or local codes/laws broken.
He screwed up big time.
Trevor Jacob is an adrenaline junkie, like sky divers, wing suits, the Red Bull plane swap really a lot of people are in a way. A lot of adrenaline rush comes from doing something new, the first spin, first loop, solo...Think back, remember when you solo-ed?
Not so much adrenaline, tapping away at a computer making a blue screen show.
The sad thing is Trevor broke on FARs or local laws, when he went Solo Skydiving for the first time. Red Bull plane swap didn't either, they should never have asked for permission. "What you want to go Barnstorming? Explain to me why I should care?" was the answer they got from the FAA.
@@WeBeGood06 adrenaline junkie... good point.
But some find just as much satisfaction filming and producing special effects as much as those actually pushing the edge.
If this guy was my legal council, I'd fire him on the spot. Suggesting that TJ's accident might not be reportable because he left the plane in the air, is absurd. The fact that he would suggest this indicates a mentality that cannot understand the concept of "intent". Yes, you can parse the specific words in the law or regulations in many different ways. In some cases you can parse words in a regulation to mean the opposite. However, every law or regulation includes the common sense understanding of "intent". Clearly TJs intended to crash the plane when he left it, and this would be a reportable crash. It seems to me the AOPA legal council can't see the trees for the forest. With his logic he should be on the Amber Heard defense team. Not the guy I'd go looking for to defend me.
He's just explaining all angles of the letter of the law. It's literally what attorneys do. So he's actually probably exactly the person you'd want representing you.
It was intentional, not an accident, Barnstorming. Last time I looked, it's not against the law to destroy your own property. Barnstormer Trevor Jacob went Solo Skydiving, it's obvious to everyone except the NTSB who think the script of a Barnstorming Theatrical Production is some sort of Testimony, which it is not. Quit calling it an Accident.
The Barnstormer Trevor Jacob video was a Theatrical Production for RUclips, why are you talking like the Storyline of a Theatrical Production, Barnstorming, is Testimony? It's simply a great Barnstormer Video, an extremely cheeky funny video. Nowhere in the letter does the FAA meet the requirements of 14 C.F.R. 91.13(a). It's just not there. The letter states the obvious, it was a Theatrical Production, Barnstorming, so what! He shut the engine off, why would he try to start it? Why would he look for an emergency landing spot, he intended to go Skydiving, he had a Sport Parachute on, a fire extinguisher strapped to his leg. Looked like he was very "safety conscious" during his whole Barnstorming event.
My question is, where is the law making it illegal to intentionally crash your own aircraft. Intentionally crashing your own aircraft is not an accident, does the reporting of an accident even required. He went Solo Skydiving.
The NTSB could prosecute him for filing a "False Accident Report" if he reported it. It's obvious to everyone it was no accident.
What does the NTSB care about preserving wreckage of NOT AN ACCIDENT! There is nothing to learn from NOT AN ACCIDENT
What the NTSB and FAA need to prove the entire sentence of 91.13a. For someone who was so careful as to shut the engine down, have a fire extinguisher with him, land next to the aircraft landing site with a fire extinguisher, it's going to be an extremely hard thing to do.
It was a Great Barnstorming Solo Skydiving Adventure Video!
Is it the NTSB's job to be a Movie Critic, or correctly apply FARs, which they failed miserably here.
They should have taken their Dog and Pony show out over international waters or Mexico! They ( he ) is going to get a good ' Strupin ' for blatantly defying big brother!
Barnstormer Trent Palmer needs to stop Buzzing his friends while waving the "Off Airport Ops Guide"
I love Trent Palmer's Barnstorming Videos.
These stunts will not be the last that these RUclipsrs do unless the FAA come down hard and I mean hard on these guys. Flying accidents are bad for all of aviation without doing it for likes on RUclips.
Crashing Airplanes on purpose has nothing to do with an "accident" and has nothing to do with commercial or general aviation. The FAA needs to stick to safety and NOT "come down" at all pm Barnstormers that do their Barnstorming safely, as Trevor Jacob's did. I love the dare devil Barnstorming RUclips videos, they are great.