12 thoughts on “Cause Of Icon Crash Revealed: NTSB Preliminary Report

  1. Got low and slow,
    Then trapped in a cove,
    And nowhere to go,
    Then loss of contro’.

    Appears left wing stalled when pilot pulled back on the stick/yoke.

  2. Spin-resistant but not stall-proof.
    And not pilot-proof. Not even experienced-pilot-proof. The news sometimes includes stories of pilots or sports legends or other people who have lots of experience who make an elementary mistake – out of overconfidence or carelessness or whatever – and suffer serious consequences. Every student pilots is taught not to get caught in the situation that this pilot found himself in. But human nature can override good sense even in (an maybe especially in?) people who think they have everything under control and don’t need to follow the rules.
    This crash could raise a serious issue for Icon. They’ve heavily marketed their airplane as a low-altitude fun machine, something like an airborne jet ski. Their training program had better emphasize the dangers of the type of maneuver that this pilot performed. Otherwise, lives could be lost, the company could be lost, and the most promising future of GA could be lost.

  3. I’ve always been weary about the Icon basically encouraging low level flying, since the airplane’s only advantage is flying around lakes…which often have cliffs,mountains and coves around them.

  4. There are old pilots….and there are bold pilots….but there is no such thing as an old, bold pilot
    A pilot of 42 years

  5. If it was Sever first flight, the PIC was the Chief pilot Karkow.

    Would you buy a plane from a company that you cant have a checkout ????

    How reliable is a testimony from a witness in the boat?? was he (the witness) a pilot?

    This company is doomed, needs a shakeup in management and a CEO that will restore confidence in the product and the employees.

  6. It has been a comment I have made for years to various pilots in my activities as a flight instructor….airplanes DO NOT respect numbers of hours or high levels of experience….either fly it properly or the aircraft will bite both the amatuer and the professional equally. The wing is very dumb, it’s the pilot who needs to give the wing what it needs and wants to “keep the shiny side up”……
    A little airplane will only kill you a little bit ??

  7. Just goes to show that fancy gadgets such as an angle of attack indicator aren’t going to save you if you run out of airspace!

  8. I cannont believer the number of experts AFTER the event.

    It looks like simple human error on an excellent aeroplane.

  9. We still really do not know exactly what happened. Witness is not a professional so let us wait for professional reporters and examiners to weigh in.

  10. Was this cove the intended landing site? Was the wind coming from the left? Was the pilot intending a left turn to final approach? While expecting to land, was the amount of drift to the “right side of the cove” underestimated? Is the “rev up” evidence of an aborted landing? It’s likely that the “pitched upward and entered a left turn” caused the plane to stall. Or worse, forget the landing theory. Did the g-force of that climbing left turn exceed the design limits of the wing? LSA weight limits present quite a challenge for designers, maybe especially for an aircraft with so many moving parts. Let the NTSB decide.

  11. There’s safety in altitude, less than 500 feet AGL is dangerous flying. Curiosity killed the cat.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *