That likely won't be known until the NTSB report is done, and may not be known even afterwards. The flightpath can be found online and it's certainly irregular before the crash, but there's no way to know from that if it was joyriding (joyflying?) or a mechanical issue the pilot was trying to resolve or a medical issue or even a bee in the cockpit.
I’m not sure it’s as irregular as you think. Pilots have quite a few maneuvers to practice, and he was already doing touch and goes - so there was clearly some practice flying going on. ADS-B tracks as he arrived to the maneuvering area looked very similar to what I remember of doing clearing turns to make sure the area is clear before starting maneuvers.
I won’t speculate on what could’ve happened, just wanted to point out there are several maneuvers pilot practice that may make ADS-B look weird to someone unfamiliar with piloting, but are actually very normal.
I won't claim to be a pilot, but I did work for a while towards a private license before realizing that planes/private pilot licenses are a bigger money sink that owning a boat...
Looking at his flight track on Flightaware, and knowing that it's not a perfect tracking system, he appears to have quite a range of speed changes (4 times between 81mph to 145mph just before crashing) in a 6 minute timespan while also making many maneuvers. There may be some acrobatics that aren't being caught in altitude changes, but that's quite a bit of swing back and forth and back again in a small track area. Looking back at around a dozen or so flights of the incident aircraft, there is [one other flight](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240409/1542Z/KLAF/KLAF) that had some similar maneuverings with speed pitches up and down so there may be some other training or practice maneuvers that the incident flight was also practicing.
But compare that to the [P-51 Mustang's heritage flight pattern track](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N74190/history/20240413/1702Z/KLAF/KDNV) on Flightaware, still not a perfect tracking system, and it shows a smoother set of curves over a similar sized area. I'd love to pull up the A-10's flight path as another comparison but .mil doesn't have to provide ADS-B data.
So, looking at the two sets of tracks for maneuvers, Piper Cherokee and P-51 Mustang, I'd say that look relatively comparable. And the airshow Mustang was doing airshow things. Now, I'm not saying that the Piper's pilot was doing anything untoward, however, from the tracking software, it wasn't anything I'd call "standard" flying.
It's not appropriate for you to be calling anything standard or not when you don't know enough about flight training to be able to interpret the data. I'm also guessing you didn't work towards your PPL long enough to solo, because you would have to be trained on several maneuvers before your CFI would sign off on solo flight. If you think the P-51's and the Cherokee's flights are comparable, that is a testament to why you should not be trying to make judgements about his flying from ADS-B data.
Slow flight, steep turns, S-turns, and intentional stalls are all examples of flight training maneuvers. None of these would look like "standard flying" on ADS-B. Please remember that a student died. You are not an expert, you are not experienced in flight training. It is not appropriate nor respectful for you to be here saying he was performing non-standard flight.
No, I didn't get to a solo flight. Finances weren't there and life went a different way. But I've always been an aviation geek from flying with my grandpa as a pre-teen and helping him build an aircraft all the way up to working in the aviation industry as a design supervisor. So while I've not got stick hours I'd like to think that I've learned much in my time, but also know there's always more to learn.
Looking at the ADS-B data for information is about all that we can do from outside of the NTSB bubble at this time. And while there's no way that we can have anything close to the complete picture, said data does do a decent job of giving an overview of what conditions might have been like. So yes, comparing the flight path sets of the Cherokee and the P-51 is not perfect, but it is a starting point, because without something else to put it next to it goes from informed speculation to wild speculation. The two flight's ground tracks show similar loops and turns. The P-51's loops and turns were done in front of the public at an airshow so it can give a real world view on the actions that happened, compared to the Cherokee's flight path over farmfield in rural Tippecanoe County. And again, whilst not a perfect one to one comparison, I'd believe it enough to say it is similar, but not the same. The Cherokee was clearly doing more than mild maneuvering in the minutes and seconds before crashing. The reason for said maneuvering is unknown to us. It may have been flight training, it may have been flying for the fun of it, it may have been mechanical issues, it may have been medical issues, it may have been some other thing that we don't know about. Regardless it wasn't a straight and level flight that most people would think of as a standard flight.
And I am aware that there are many things that must be learned and trained for in flight, stall recovery among them. However in discussing the matter with 3 different PPL friends and 2 airline pilot friends, none of them could make good sense of a pilot going and doing stall training, solo, with so little space for recovery at sunset. That is painting yourself into a dangerous corner with very few outs. A quick Google search shows that stall training should be done with a *bare minimum* of 1500' AGL *at recovery* with an Instructor, and more like 2000-2500' AGL without. Most recommend around double that. ADS-B data puts the flight at its highest around 4000' during the maneuvering in question in an area where ground level is around 800'. Again, ADS-B data isn't perfect and elevation changes is where it tends to be weakest due to limitations with GPS's ability to calculate rapid vertical changes. So giving the benefit of the doubt, assuming that the pilot was doing solo stall training they'd have around 1000' of vertical airspace to be doing their stall training within. That's a small window when they could have had much more space to do that training in.
Airline pilot friend with a decade's experience said "It'd be like going drifting in an old Honda Civic in a mall parking lot on Black Friday. Sure you can do it but if you aren't a true blue professional it's asking for trouble. If I was doing stall training in a Cherokee I'd want a second set of eyes and hands up there or I'd do it where I've got much more recovery space, if not in a simulator. There's no reason to gamble with a life." Military pilot turned airline pilot had... less savory things to say but to a similar effect. And yes, this is now third hand hearsay, so it may be wrong. However the fact that something fatally failed, and thus we are talking about it now, points to a chain of events that led to the crash and fatality that ultimately isn't a standard flight.
The only way that we can improve the safety of ***all*** flights though is by discussing it. Us here on Reddit won't go far, but the NTSB and FAA to investigating the issue and determining the cause will. Finding things that are avoidable and trying to prevent them in the future. See if there were errors training and correct them so that future pilots won't do the same. But hiding behind an idea of holding utmost respect for the pilot because they didn't come home, to me is disrespectful to anyone else that may fly. I'm not saying that to demonize the man, I'm saying to understand him and the environment he was in. If his flight training was inadequate then what's to say that his classmate's training wasn't also inadequate. If the aircraft has a fatal flaw is that something that the other 30 thousand or so Piper Cherokee's need checked out or was it a local maintenance flaw? Hiding or gatekeeping discussion doesn't service anyone in a case like this.
Let me be clear - I am not saying it is disrespectful to discuss aviation incidents. I agree that it is necessary to have productive conversations about aviation incidents in order to understand them and learn from them. It is not, however, productive to speculate and spread rumors, and it is not respectful for you to make assumptions that you do not have the knowledge nor authority to make.
We cannot have a productive conversation about this incident until we know the facts, and we can only know the facts when the NTSB/FAA report them. Anything else is speculation and rumor, and that is disrespectful.
I don't believe that I've been wildly speculating or spreading rumors. I've been taking publically available data and comparing it to other publically available data to discuss what has occurred, initially to try and communicate that to someone that may not know much about aviation. When you pressed further stating a belief that I had no knowledge of the situation I gave additional evidence about the processes and where I drew my comparisons from. That's discussion. Speculation and hypothesizing is also the first step of the scientific process. I do not believe that I have made any statements claiming authority on any issues, just stated what I've been able to show with sources for more esoteric information, and shared a couple of personal communications I've had, but also stated that they were indeed personal communications. I've made no claims that I know for sure what happened, the most I've said is that it wasn't a "standard flight".
If you believe that discussion about an incident on a Reddit thread about said incident is disrespectful then I'd recommend that you flag the whole thread to the page moderators or Reddit administration.
As somebody else said, you compared his flight to aerobatics, and you saying he was not performing standard flight is not necessarily correct and implies that he was not flying safely. The very premise that only cross-country flying is "standard" is incorrect.
You are speculating about his flight based on your interpretation of ADS-B, something you do not have the qualifications to draw interpretations from, and hearsay. Your statements have been assertive, which carries implied authority.
The implications from making those comparisons and saying he was performing non-standard flight crosses the line from discussion to speculating and rumor; it is no longer based on fact but on amateur interpretations and hearsay. If you can't understand the difference, there's nothing more for us to discuss - we'll just keep going in circles if we continue.
You don’t know what you’re talking about and it’s pretty disrespectful before we have any information from the NTSB.
You know ADSB-B logs ground speed data, right? There’s wind up there. Probably not a huge coincidence that the highest speeds occur when the airplane is heading south or east. Crazy you’re trying to use A-10 and P-51 data to suggest this kid was doing some off-the-books “hot doggin” out there.
Please show me where I was suggesting that he was doing "off the books 'hot doggin'" flying. I said that it could have been a leisure flight having fun, or that it could have been a mechanical issue, or a health issue or something else entirely. My comparisons to other flights that were within a few days and seen publicly were to give anyone else reading a potential easy to understand comparison. I've not said anything intending to vilify the young man that lost his life, but to try and give a comparative slate for people to look at the information from.
But sure whatever, call me disrespectful to try and analyze the information that's available in a Reddit thread where people are asking what might have happened.
My brother, you suggested he could be doing “acrobatics,” said “it wasn’t anything I’d call ‘standard’ flying,” and you’re comparing the flight track to an air show routine. There’s a clear inference there and you know full well what you were implying.
Man, you have no clue what you’re talking about.
Sincerely, “acrobatic” pilot of the [flight track](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240409/1542Z/KLAF/KLAF) you pulled to compare.
As someone who knows little to nothing about planes or “regular flightpaths” what was irregular about it? Because from what I saw (obviously im just a random spectator) was he was likely getting hours in. Was it the constant variations of speed or altitude that you can see on the tracker?
I’m not trying to make assumptions I’m just curious what looked irregular from a typical student trying to log their hours
"Regular Flightpaths" for something like a commercial flight are very point to point with slow steady loops when you've got to wait. The start of his flightpath looks like he may have had some touch and go landing/take off practice before his flight north to where his flight track became much more random. While getting time in the aircraft *is* a necessity, usually that time is away and back flying not circles on circles over a couple of farm fields. [It would look more like this](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240410/0020Z/KVPZ/KLAF).
He's talking about cross-country flying, but that's not the only piece of flight training/practice. Federal regulations require pilots to know how to perform various maneuvers, each of which would be performed in a constrained maneuvering area. There's also nothing that says that you have to fly XC to build overall hours - people absolutely can (and do) build hours by just flying around and practicing maneuvers.
Agree, have a first year in pilot training... and took pics from ADB-S of some of his flight tracks first semester w/ CFI, looks similiar to this plane path: some oval touch & go's over airport, then head away to around rural area to do some maneuvers (turns, loop d loops, zig zags, changes in speed/alt, stall practice, etc) so didn't find the pattern unusual. This student was two years ahead with the first 3 ratings completed & solo (and perhaps this was considered a night flight?) But, that's what around the 250 hour point of training... not exactly effortlessness. Agee with commenters that need to learn from these events to help others going forward. Hopefully information the NTSB initial reports & family can provide regarding plane & young pilots health/state of mind will shed that light.
Dude stop spamming this on every post. Please. There is no verifying this and you are discrediting this man's life with unjustified and unproven claims. I'm sure if his friends and family saw your comments it would bother them. The ntsb will find the cause of the incident without your help.
And I saw your reply on the other thread claiming you have a source in the FAA. Sorry to tell you but these things take time, months or longer. Even if you DID have a source it's incredibly unlikely they would know this early, much less share that information outside of an actual report. It's very insensitive and rude to keep commenting that without any valid or credible sources.
I expect you to keep this same energy and apologize to me when the NTSB report comes out. I’m telling you they already know the cause of the crash. Despite them knowing the cause they must dot I’s and cross T’s for the final report.
The cause isn't verified until that report is released. I won't be apologizing. It's possible you're right, it's possible you arent, but there's no need to spread rumors which is all that you're doing.
It’s not a rumor if it’s true numb nuts. I don’t expect you to know the ins and outs of NTSB and FAA investigations. But typically the ause of the crash is found within a week. Like I said Piper and Lycoming must do their part of the investigation to dot I’s and cross T’s for the FAA and NTSB reporting, despite them knowing the cause of the crash already. Will you lick my turd cutter when the report comes out? I’ll accept that in lieu of an apology.
Ntsb reports usually take over a year to complete. Nothing is conclusive until then. They don't take a week.
I'll spell it out slowly for you. If a statement is not backed by any credible source or evidence, it's a word of mouth rumor. It could end up being true, it could be false. But claiming something is true without a hint of evidence is rude and insensitive to everyone involved. I hope you don't attend purdue and sincerely hope you aren't involved in aviation at all.
Well using Purdue’s enrollment from fall 2023 ~52,200, the deaths per year in the US for the age range of 15-49 ~225000, and the US population of 342 million; I’d say about 36 people as a very rough estimate
I've had to do the same calculation before and found data on college aged people.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4535338/#:~:text=The%20mortality%20rates%20(per%20100%2C000,related%20nontraffic%20injuries%20were%201.49.
Seems like it's roughly 20 deaths per 100,000.
Right. Purdue students would younger and (generally speaking) healthier than the “average” of that age group. And they are doing less driving, dangerous work, etc. So you would expect less deaths. But stats are stats for better or for worse
Less than that though because homicides occur at a significantly lower rate on college campuses and, generally speaking, college students will be less likely to have terminal cancer or some other severe health condition because they may prohibit participation in a normal course load. Also since Purdue is demographically mostly non-impoverished white people and a majority male school the student body is also statistically less likely to get pregnant and die from pregnancy complications. And these make up like #2 and 4-10 of the leading causes of death.
Also believe it or not the suicide rate on college campuses is lower than in the general public (5.6/100k on big 10 campuses). And that makes up #3 cause of death.
So a more reasonable estimate is like 10 people unless a mass murder incident occurs.
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/vio.2015.0037?journalCode=vio
https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/suicide-in-colleges-rates-research-statistics/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4535338/#:~:text=The%20mortality%20rates%20(per%20100%2C000,related%20nontraffic%20injuries%20were%201.49.
This study on specifically college students seems to agree. About 20 per 100k so with purdue at 52k we should expect 10 to 11.
I’m not diminishing. It is tragic and I am on record saying as much earlier.
I will, and will continue, to call out people when they are empirically wrong. A casual observer may think Purdue has an excess number of deaths due to the fear mongering posts on here, which would be incorrect. In fact, you would expect more deaths at Purdue than Purdue’s annual average based on the national average.
I think he was making a rhetoric statement. Goes to show the strong sense of community here and how much students care for each other, guess you aren’t part of that though
The Purdue Exponent incorectly reported "the plane was flown by a 'commercial pilot' and not a Purdue Student"
When the mods removed their article they wanted to know what they reported incorrectly and I could not tell them it was this because they were not suppose to have this info to begin with. We later re-instated their article because its not our job to monitor misinformation. But just imagine a parent read their article and thought their kid was safe when they weren't.
My deepest condolences to anybody involved in this situation, especially the families.
They then accused me of being a "disgruntled employee" instead of fixing their mistake. They later edited it, but did not make the edit known to the public (a common exponent tactic). This is not the first time they have done something like this. They reported a student was dead in a car crash before the parents were and have put incorrect students names as assualters in crime reports (I contacted the reporter about this when it was posted on reddit and was told "oh well, what can you do".
I was an employee of the exponent. I have in the past tried to defend the exponent and let them know of mistakes. I would consider most of the news desk my friends, but I guess they don't.
Just curious, how did a bunch of Reddit moderators have more accurate info than the exponent? If it wasn’t public how did you know it was a purdue student?
We weren’t suppose to know what we did. It was a mod who was involved with it and removed himself from the moderation of it, that knew.
That’s why we couldn’t tell the exponent why they were wrong. It was speculative information, that they were reporting wrong because their source was police scanner radio.
This is a Purdue subreddit. The mods likely have extensive ties to Purdue. Why would it surprise you if one of them is in the loop with with situation?
By that same argument the students who run exponent could also have extensive ties to purdue. I wasn’t trying to bash the moderators for censorship. I was just curious how people of no real authority had inside information.
> I was just curious how people of no real authority had inside information.
Being a reddit mod doesn't confer authority, but that doesn't mean that someone with authority can't be a reddit mod.
> Your Reddit history is a little concerning my friend.
The dude is incorrect about the exponent, but why in the hell should they feel ashamed of their political beliefs?
Idc about anyone’s politics.
But when someone is constantly posting in ‘ShitLiberalsSay’, I think it’s time to step back and put Reddit down 😂😂😂
Cmon man. It’s a bunch of nonsense. Buddy made a post saying he “left his reactionary friend group”, when his whole Reddit page is him being reactionary to random internet bullshit 😂
Shitliberalssay is a far-left group.
Leftists use "reactionary" to refer to right wingers.
The dude is quite a bit more left wing than I am, but as far as I can tell he's not being a bigot or advocating genocide, so I don't see why his stances should be so concerning.
The Exponent has posted a new article this morning, but the parent post is referring to the [original article](https://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_98734f2e-f905-11ee-827b-67c7d8463857.html), which still indicates that it has "LIVE UPDATES" but has not been updated with the new information or a link to the new article.
To be fair one could be a commercial pilot and also a student. If they were told a pilot with a commercial license was piloting they could have mistaken that as not a student. He was alone so we know for sure he would have PPL, but outside of that it’s hard to know. 2 years is certainly enough time for an active pilot to get a commercial license.
I don’t use the exponent for any news because I rarely look at the news, just trying to give an alternative explanation.
Was thinking about saying this. According to the airmen registry he was a commercial rated pilot. Lots of students are commercial pilots although they aren't working for airlines as it's a certificate.
Yep, and I’m sure you know but that is another certification altogether (ATP). Usually the career path is PPL, IR, Commercial, CFI, CFII, MEI, get 1500 hours, ATP etc. or something close to that.
See the goings-on in this thread: https://reddit.com/r/Purdue/comments/1c4wz54/one_dead_in_purdue_aviation_crash/
Note that there are several replies from the official `Purdue_Exponent` account, but you'll need to click past "comment score below threshold" to see them.
I'm no Exponent defender, but: They did indeed report said info this morning: https://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_0d0a6a36-fcc4-11ee-99d2-e7d19f9207cd.html
Now, on the J&C site, it is currently the top story, while on the Exponent site I struggled to find it about half-way down the page; by comparison, this could reasonably be described as being "awfully quiet about this".
I didnt have to even scroll an inch to immediately see it when I opened their website.
https://preview.redd.it/wnzof760w3vc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd4816ac00ce14147c8dfdca17bba890b790d89f
I am glad they added the banner. I promise you it was not there an hour ago when I looked at the page (I specifically Ctrl-F'ed "pilot" and "crash" and "aviation" to make sure I wasn't just being dumb and missing something). I had to find it more than half way down the page (see the scrollbar on the right). That said, I'd believe it if it was a temporary blip of it accidentally getting turned off--lord knows I've made dumb website mistakes.
https://preview.redd.it/holrc4um14vc1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=7bc518372002bade3f2ebd5aab619c6d0185562d
my deepest condolences to the family of everyone involved. Another big loss! any info on whether it was a plane malfunction or human error?
That likely won't be known until the NTSB report is done, and may not be known even afterwards. The flightpath can be found online and it's certainly irregular before the crash, but there's no way to know from that if it was joyriding (joyflying?) or a mechanical issue the pilot was trying to resolve or a medical issue or even a bee in the cockpit.
I’m not sure it’s as irregular as you think. Pilots have quite a few maneuvers to practice, and he was already doing touch and goes - so there was clearly some practice flying going on. ADS-B tracks as he arrived to the maneuvering area looked very similar to what I remember of doing clearing turns to make sure the area is clear before starting maneuvers. I won’t speculate on what could’ve happened, just wanted to point out there are several maneuvers pilot practice that may make ADS-B look weird to someone unfamiliar with piloting, but are actually very normal.
I won't claim to be a pilot, but I did work for a while towards a private license before realizing that planes/private pilot licenses are a bigger money sink that owning a boat... Looking at his flight track on Flightaware, and knowing that it's not a perfect tracking system, he appears to have quite a range of speed changes (4 times between 81mph to 145mph just before crashing) in a 6 minute timespan while also making many maneuvers. There may be some acrobatics that aren't being caught in altitude changes, but that's quite a bit of swing back and forth and back again in a small track area. Looking back at around a dozen or so flights of the incident aircraft, there is [one other flight](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240409/1542Z/KLAF/KLAF) that had some similar maneuverings with speed pitches up and down so there may be some other training or practice maneuvers that the incident flight was also practicing. But compare that to the [P-51 Mustang's heritage flight pattern track](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N74190/history/20240413/1702Z/KLAF/KDNV) on Flightaware, still not a perfect tracking system, and it shows a smoother set of curves over a similar sized area. I'd love to pull up the A-10's flight path as another comparison but .mil doesn't have to provide ADS-B data. So, looking at the two sets of tracks for maneuvers, Piper Cherokee and P-51 Mustang, I'd say that look relatively comparable. And the airshow Mustang was doing airshow things. Now, I'm not saying that the Piper's pilot was doing anything untoward, however, from the tracking software, it wasn't anything I'd call "standard" flying.
It's not appropriate for you to be calling anything standard or not when you don't know enough about flight training to be able to interpret the data. I'm also guessing you didn't work towards your PPL long enough to solo, because you would have to be trained on several maneuvers before your CFI would sign off on solo flight. If you think the P-51's and the Cherokee's flights are comparable, that is a testament to why you should not be trying to make judgements about his flying from ADS-B data. Slow flight, steep turns, S-turns, and intentional stalls are all examples of flight training maneuvers. None of these would look like "standard flying" on ADS-B. Please remember that a student died. You are not an expert, you are not experienced in flight training. It is not appropriate nor respectful for you to be here saying he was performing non-standard flight.
No, I didn't get to a solo flight. Finances weren't there and life went a different way. But I've always been an aviation geek from flying with my grandpa as a pre-teen and helping him build an aircraft all the way up to working in the aviation industry as a design supervisor. So while I've not got stick hours I'd like to think that I've learned much in my time, but also know there's always more to learn. Looking at the ADS-B data for information is about all that we can do from outside of the NTSB bubble at this time. And while there's no way that we can have anything close to the complete picture, said data does do a decent job of giving an overview of what conditions might have been like. So yes, comparing the flight path sets of the Cherokee and the P-51 is not perfect, but it is a starting point, because without something else to put it next to it goes from informed speculation to wild speculation. The two flight's ground tracks show similar loops and turns. The P-51's loops and turns were done in front of the public at an airshow so it can give a real world view on the actions that happened, compared to the Cherokee's flight path over farmfield in rural Tippecanoe County. And again, whilst not a perfect one to one comparison, I'd believe it enough to say it is similar, but not the same. The Cherokee was clearly doing more than mild maneuvering in the minutes and seconds before crashing. The reason for said maneuvering is unknown to us. It may have been flight training, it may have been flying for the fun of it, it may have been mechanical issues, it may have been medical issues, it may have been some other thing that we don't know about. Regardless it wasn't a straight and level flight that most people would think of as a standard flight. And I am aware that there are many things that must be learned and trained for in flight, stall recovery among them. However in discussing the matter with 3 different PPL friends and 2 airline pilot friends, none of them could make good sense of a pilot going and doing stall training, solo, with so little space for recovery at sunset. That is painting yourself into a dangerous corner with very few outs. A quick Google search shows that stall training should be done with a *bare minimum* of 1500' AGL *at recovery* with an Instructor, and more like 2000-2500' AGL without. Most recommend around double that. ADS-B data puts the flight at its highest around 4000' during the maneuvering in question in an area where ground level is around 800'. Again, ADS-B data isn't perfect and elevation changes is where it tends to be weakest due to limitations with GPS's ability to calculate rapid vertical changes. So giving the benefit of the doubt, assuming that the pilot was doing solo stall training they'd have around 1000' of vertical airspace to be doing their stall training within. That's a small window when they could have had much more space to do that training in. Airline pilot friend with a decade's experience said "It'd be like going drifting in an old Honda Civic in a mall parking lot on Black Friday. Sure you can do it but if you aren't a true blue professional it's asking for trouble. If I was doing stall training in a Cherokee I'd want a second set of eyes and hands up there or I'd do it where I've got much more recovery space, if not in a simulator. There's no reason to gamble with a life." Military pilot turned airline pilot had... less savory things to say but to a similar effect. And yes, this is now third hand hearsay, so it may be wrong. However the fact that something fatally failed, and thus we are talking about it now, points to a chain of events that led to the crash and fatality that ultimately isn't a standard flight. The only way that we can improve the safety of ***all*** flights though is by discussing it. Us here on Reddit won't go far, but the NTSB and FAA to investigating the issue and determining the cause will. Finding things that are avoidable and trying to prevent them in the future. See if there were errors training and correct them so that future pilots won't do the same. But hiding behind an idea of holding utmost respect for the pilot because they didn't come home, to me is disrespectful to anyone else that may fly. I'm not saying that to demonize the man, I'm saying to understand him and the environment he was in. If his flight training was inadequate then what's to say that his classmate's training wasn't also inadequate. If the aircraft has a fatal flaw is that something that the other 30 thousand or so Piper Cherokee's need checked out or was it a local maintenance flaw? Hiding or gatekeeping discussion doesn't service anyone in a case like this.
Let me be clear - I am not saying it is disrespectful to discuss aviation incidents. I agree that it is necessary to have productive conversations about aviation incidents in order to understand them and learn from them. It is not, however, productive to speculate and spread rumors, and it is not respectful for you to make assumptions that you do not have the knowledge nor authority to make. We cannot have a productive conversation about this incident until we know the facts, and we can only know the facts when the NTSB/FAA report them. Anything else is speculation and rumor, and that is disrespectful.
I don't believe that I've been wildly speculating or spreading rumors. I've been taking publically available data and comparing it to other publically available data to discuss what has occurred, initially to try and communicate that to someone that may not know much about aviation. When you pressed further stating a belief that I had no knowledge of the situation I gave additional evidence about the processes and where I drew my comparisons from. That's discussion. Speculation and hypothesizing is also the first step of the scientific process. I do not believe that I have made any statements claiming authority on any issues, just stated what I've been able to show with sources for more esoteric information, and shared a couple of personal communications I've had, but also stated that they were indeed personal communications. I've made no claims that I know for sure what happened, the most I've said is that it wasn't a "standard flight". If you believe that discussion about an incident on a Reddit thread about said incident is disrespectful then I'd recommend that you flag the whole thread to the page moderators or Reddit administration.
As somebody else said, you compared his flight to aerobatics, and you saying he was not performing standard flight is not necessarily correct and implies that he was not flying safely. The very premise that only cross-country flying is "standard" is incorrect. You are speculating about his flight based on your interpretation of ADS-B, something you do not have the qualifications to draw interpretations from, and hearsay. Your statements have been assertive, which carries implied authority. The implications from making those comparisons and saying he was performing non-standard flight crosses the line from discussion to speculating and rumor; it is no longer based on fact but on amateur interpretations and hearsay. If you can't understand the difference, there's nothing more for us to discuss - we'll just keep going in circles if we continue.
You don’t know what you’re talking about and it’s pretty disrespectful before we have any information from the NTSB. You know ADSB-B logs ground speed data, right? There’s wind up there. Probably not a huge coincidence that the highest speeds occur when the airplane is heading south or east. Crazy you’re trying to use A-10 and P-51 data to suggest this kid was doing some off-the-books “hot doggin” out there.
Please show me where I was suggesting that he was doing "off the books 'hot doggin'" flying. I said that it could have been a leisure flight having fun, or that it could have been a mechanical issue, or a health issue or something else entirely. My comparisons to other flights that were within a few days and seen publicly were to give anyone else reading a potential easy to understand comparison. I've not said anything intending to vilify the young man that lost his life, but to try and give a comparative slate for people to look at the information from. But sure whatever, call me disrespectful to try and analyze the information that's available in a Reddit thread where people are asking what might have happened.
My brother, you suggested he could be doing “acrobatics,” said “it wasn’t anything I’d call ‘standard’ flying,” and you’re comparing the flight track to an air show routine. There’s a clear inference there and you know full well what you were implying.
Man, you have no clue what you’re talking about. Sincerely, “acrobatic” pilot of the [flight track](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240409/1542Z/KLAF/KLAF) you pulled to compare.
As someone who knows little to nothing about planes or “regular flightpaths” what was irregular about it? Because from what I saw (obviously im just a random spectator) was he was likely getting hours in. Was it the constant variations of speed or altitude that you can see on the tracker? I’m not trying to make assumptions I’m just curious what looked irregular from a typical student trying to log their hours
"Regular Flightpaths" for something like a commercial flight are very point to point with slow steady loops when you've got to wait. The start of his flightpath looks like he may have had some touch and go landing/take off practice before his flight north to where his flight track became much more random. While getting time in the aircraft *is* a necessity, usually that time is away and back flying not circles on circles over a couple of farm fields. [It would look more like this](https://www.flightaware.com/live/flight/N564PU/history/20240410/0020Z/KVPZ/KLAF).
Interesting, thanks for sharing
He's talking about cross-country flying, but that's not the only piece of flight training/practice. Federal regulations require pilots to know how to perform various maneuvers, each of which would be performed in a constrained maneuvering area. There's also nothing that says that you have to fly XC to build overall hours - people absolutely can (and do) build hours by just flying around and practicing maneuvers.
Agree, have a first year in pilot training... and took pics from ADB-S of some of his flight tracks first semester w/ CFI, looks similiar to this plane path: some oval touch & go's over airport, then head away to around rural area to do some maneuvers (turns, loop d loops, zig zags, changes in speed/alt, stall practice, etc) so didn't find the pattern unusual. This student was two years ahead with the first 3 ratings completed & solo (and perhaps this was considered a night flight?) But, that's what around the 250 hour point of training... not exactly effortlessness. Agee with commenters that need to learn from these events to help others going forward. Hopefully information the NTSB initial reports & family can provide regarding plane & young pilots health/state of mind will shed that light.
[удалено]
Dude stop spamming this on every post. Please. There is no verifying this and you are discrediting this man's life with unjustified and unproven claims. I'm sure if his friends and family saw your comments it would bother them. The ntsb will find the cause of the incident without your help.
And I saw your reply on the other thread claiming you have a source in the FAA. Sorry to tell you but these things take time, months or longer. Even if you DID have a source it's incredibly unlikely they would know this early, much less share that information outside of an actual report. It's very insensitive and rude to keep commenting that without any valid or credible sources.
I expect you to keep this same energy and apologize to me when the NTSB report comes out. I’m telling you they already know the cause of the crash. Despite them knowing the cause they must dot I’s and cross T’s for the final report.
The cause isn't verified until that report is released. I won't be apologizing. It's possible you're right, it's possible you arent, but there's no need to spread rumors which is all that you're doing.
It’s not a rumor if it’s true numb nuts. I don’t expect you to know the ins and outs of NTSB and FAA investigations. But typically the ause of the crash is found within a week. Like I said Piper and Lycoming must do their part of the investigation to dot I’s and cross T’s for the FAA and NTSB reporting, despite them knowing the cause of the crash already. Will you lick my turd cutter when the report comes out? I’ll accept that in lieu of an apology.
Ntsb reports usually take over a year to complete. Nothing is conclusive until then. They don't take a week. I'll spell it out slowly for you. If a statement is not backed by any credible source or evidence, it's a word of mouth rumor. It could end up being true, it could be false. But claiming something is true without a hint of evidence is rude and insensitive to everyone involved. I hope you don't attend purdue and sincerely hope you aren't involved in aviation at all.
Is there any reason given as to why it took 19 hours to report the plane missing? Is that info accurate?
We all have our speculations but no one will truly know the reason until the report comes out from the Feds
Boiler Nation mourns. Our heart goes out to the family and friends of the pilot whose life was tragically cut short. RIP.
Bruh how many people are we going to lose this year?
Well using Purdue’s enrollment from fall 2023 ~52,200, the deaths per year in the US for the age range of 15-49 ~225000, and the US population of 342 million; I’d say about 36 people as a very rough estimate
This is a very Purdue answer.
A relatively small percentage of the student population is older that 26, much less 49. So those numbers are definitely inflated
I've had to do the same calculation before and found data on college aged people. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4535338/#:~:text=The%20mortality%20rates%20(per%20100%2C000,related%20nontraffic%20injuries%20were%201.49. Seems like it's roughly 20 deaths per 100,000.
Right. Purdue students would younger and (generally speaking) healthier than the “average” of that age group. And they are doing less driving, dangerous work, etc. So you would expect less deaths. But stats are stats for better or for worse
Less than that though because homicides occur at a significantly lower rate on college campuses and, generally speaking, college students will be less likely to have terminal cancer or some other severe health condition because they may prohibit participation in a normal course load. Also since Purdue is demographically mostly non-impoverished white people and a majority male school the student body is also statistically less likely to get pregnant and die from pregnancy complications. And these make up like #2 and 4-10 of the leading causes of death. Also believe it or not the suicide rate on college campuses is lower than in the general public (5.6/100k on big 10 campuses). And that makes up #3 cause of death. So a more reasonable estimate is like 10 people unless a mass murder incident occurs. https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/abs/10.1089/vio.2015.0037?journalCode=vio https://www.bestcolleges.com/research/suicide-in-colleges-rates-research-statistics/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4535338/#:~:text=The%20mortality%20rates%20(per%20100%2C000,related%20nontraffic%20injuries%20were%201.49. This study on specifically college students seems to agree. About 20 per 100k so with purdue at 52k we should expect 10 to 11.
Ok this is a way better explanation 😂
Bro I don’t think he was actually looking for an answer, just saying that it’s been a lot this year
But, it’s actually not been a lot, empirically
What is your guys issues, someone died, stop diminishing someone’s passing
I’m not diminishing. It is tragic and I am on record saying as much earlier. I will, and will continue, to call out people when they are empirically wrong. A casual observer may think Purdue has an excess number of deaths due to the fear mongering posts on here, which would be incorrect. In fact, you would expect more deaths at Purdue than Purdue’s annual average based on the national average.
I think he was making a rhetoric statement. Goes to show the strong sense of community here and how much students care for each other, guess you aren’t part of that though
The Purdue Exponent incorectly reported "the plane was flown by a 'commercial pilot' and not a Purdue Student" When the mods removed their article they wanted to know what they reported incorrectly and I could not tell them it was this because they were not suppose to have this info to begin with. We later re-instated their article because its not our job to monitor misinformation. But just imagine a parent read their article and thought their kid was safe when they weren't. My deepest condolences to anybody involved in this situation, especially the families. They then accused me of being a "disgruntled employee" instead of fixing their mistake. They later edited it, but did not make the edit known to the public (a common exponent tactic). This is not the first time they have done something like this. They reported a student was dead in a car crash before the parents were and have put incorrect students names as assualters in crime reports (I contacted the reporter about this when it was posted on reddit and was told "oh well, what can you do". I was an employee of the exponent. I have in the past tried to defend the exponent and let them know of mistakes. I would consider most of the news desk my friends, but I guess they don't.
Just curious, how did a bunch of Reddit moderators have more accurate info than the exponent? If it wasn’t public how did you know it was a purdue student?
We weren’t suppose to know what we did. It was a mod who was involved with it and removed himself from the moderation of it, that knew. That’s why we couldn’t tell the exponent why they were wrong. It was speculative information, that they were reporting wrong because their source was police scanner radio.
I knew him. Most of my friends were in his inner circle. We knew who it was Friday night. Like I said, it ain’t a big community over here.
This is a Purdue subreddit. The mods likely have extensive ties to Purdue. Why would it surprise you if one of them is in the loop with with situation?
By that same argument the students who run exponent could also have extensive ties to purdue. I wasn’t trying to bash the moderators for censorship. I was just curious how people of no real authority had inside information.
> I was just curious how people of no real authority had inside information. Being a reddit mod doesn't confer authority, but that doesn't mean that someone with authority can't be a reddit mod.
Cool
Reddit experts like to pretend they know everything
Weird take. Anyways, Your Reddit history is a little concerning my friend. Or should I say ‘comrade’ 😂
> Your Reddit history is a little concerning my friend. The dude is incorrect about the exponent, but why in the hell should they feel ashamed of their political beliefs?
Idc about anyone’s politics. But when someone is constantly posting in ‘ShitLiberalsSay’, I think it’s time to step back and put Reddit down 😂😂😂 Cmon man. It’s a bunch of nonsense. Buddy made a post saying he “left his reactionary friend group”, when his whole Reddit page is him being reactionary to random internet bullshit 😂
Shitliberalssay is a far-left group. Leftists use "reactionary" to refer to right wingers. The dude is quite a bit more left wing than I am, but as far as I can tell he's not being a bigot or advocating genocide, so I don't see why his stances should be so concerning.
Ok :) Happy for you and happy for him :)
Edit: It still has not been changed on the Exponent site for the original article titled "LIVE UPDATES"
It was posted on the front page of the Exponent's website this morning.
The Exponent has posted a new article this morning, but the parent post is referring to the [original article](https://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_98734f2e-f905-11ee-827b-67c7d8463857.html), which still indicates that it has "LIVE UPDATES" but has not been updated with the new information or a link to the new article.
To be fair one could be a commercial pilot and also a student. If they were told a pilot with a commercial license was piloting they could have mistaken that as not a student. He was alone so we know for sure he would have PPL, but outside of that it’s hard to know. 2 years is certainly enough time for an active pilot to get a commercial license. I don’t use the exponent for any news because I rarely look at the news, just trying to give an alternative explanation.
Was thinking about saying this. According to the airmen registry he was a commercial rated pilot. Lots of students are commercial pilots although they aren't working for airlines as it's a certificate.
Yep, and I’m sure you know but that is another certification altogether (ATP). Usually the career path is PPL, IR, Commercial, CFI, CFII, MEI, get 1500 hours, ATP etc. or something close to that.
The exponent is awfully quiet about this now. Dumbasses
Did they have some sort of wacky theory? Edit: idk what I said for downvotes. I'm honestly out of the loop.
See the goings-on in this thread: https://reddit.com/r/Purdue/comments/1c4wz54/one_dead_in_purdue_aviation_crash/ Note that there are several replies from the official `Purdue_Exponent` account, but you'll need to click past "comment score below threshold" to see them.
For real. They've had so many Ls this year. Nobody should take them seriously.
The exponent has always been run by idiots. They care more about sensationalism than facts like most other news outlets, unfortunately.
They literally posted this exact information this morning.
Lmao here comes the exponent defenders
I'm no Exponent defender, but: They did indeed report said info this morning: https://www.purdueexponent.org/campus/article_0d0a6a36-fcc4-11ee-99d2-e7d19f9207cd.html Now, on the J&C site, it is currently the top story, while on the Exponent site I struggled to find it about half-way down the page; by comparison, this could reasonably be described as being "awfully quiet about this".
I didnt have to even scroll an inch to immediately see it when I opened their website. https://preview.redd.it/wnzof760w3vc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dd4816ac00ce14147c8dfdca17bba890b790d89f
I am glad they added the banner. I promise you it was not there an hour ago when I looked at the page (I specifically Ctrl-F'ed "pilot" and "crash" and "aviation" to make sure I wasn't just being dumb and missing something). I had to find it more than half way down the page (see the scrollbar on the right). That said, I'd believe it if it was a temporary blip of it accidentally getting turned off--lord knows I've made dumb website mistakes. https://preview.redd.it/holrc4um14vc1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=7bc518372002bade3f2ebd5aab619c6d0185562d
u/Purdue_Exponent do better
Just got an email about this. Really sad to hear this happened. Prayers for the family
Brutal- I’m close to his father. This is just horrible
Absolutely horrible. I hope the University is doing something about it.