• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Another rich guy dies in a helicopter crash. This time a Billionaire

JEDI

Lifer
Czech Billionaire (age 56) Is Among 5 Killed in Heli-Skiing Crash Near Alaska Glacier

The other rich guy i was thinking of that died in a helicopter was Kobe.

Anyway, 'The accident was the latest misadventure for an extreme sport with little margin for error that has become a magnet for thrill seekers.'

so it seemed like he was willing to risk his life and not play it safe to enjoy his $$$.
altho going out inside a helicopter instead of hitting a tree (like Cher's ex-husband) or taking a wrong turn and skiing off a cliff
 
Last edited:
It seem these things happen on almost a yearly basis. The last billionaire I remember was the guy how owned the EPL team Leicester City.


Helicopter's are deceptively safe and shouldn't be used for everyday transport In my opinion.

Unless your riding in a military/medical transport with veteran pilots your'e not safe in this type of transport.
 
Lol there is a big difference between heli skiing and taking a chopper from one pad to another.
um.. does it matter what the helicopter was being used for when you die in it because it crashed?

i'm just saying another rich guy dies in a helicopter crash.

if your point is that the Billionaire knew he was putting himself at risk for his event but Kobe wasnt, then yes
 
When you are that rich, why take such risks without some additional safety. Just build your own helicopter with builtin parachutes.

 
um.. does it matter what the helicopter was being used for when you die in it because it crashed?

i'm just saying another rich guy dies in a helicopter crash.

if your point is that the Billionaire knew he was putting himself at risk for his event but Kobe wasnt, then yes

You don't think there is a different level of expected risk between a commuter run and an extreme sport drop?
 
You don't think there is a different level of expected risk between a commuter run and an extreme sport drop?
yes there is.
but why are you adding risk to my comparison?

but im just saying another rich guy dies in a helicopter crash. nothing more.
thats the only thing kobe and the Billionaire have in common with helicopters. (they were both wealthy)
 
I was wondering when we'd see this for helicopters. There has been one for small planes for several years now. Always been uncomfortable riding on an eggbeater with ambition, I would be extra anxious up in super thin mountain air.

Cool stuff. Now they just need to invent something to keep them right side up when they hit the water.
 
Was he whacked? Wouldn't be the first time some criminal or government group took out several people just to get the one target they wanted...
 
Helicopters have lots of trouble with high altitudes near their ceiling.


Absolutely! I can recall watching one of those "I shouldn't be alive" type shows involving a high-altitude mountain rescue attempt via chopper.

Apparently the ridge where they needed to land on was JUST below its ceiling so they elected to go for it.

This was a fatal mistake.

As they slowed to hover for landing they completely lost lift and then dropped like a stone tumbling down the cliff-face.

😳
 
Last edited:
helicopters are more dangerous than many other transport methods, also hundreds, maybe thousands of flights a day are safely conducted just in the oil industry. it seems like a lot of the crashes are tourist/rich people based. The crews and the passengers have a ton of training in our industry because of the danger as well.
I worked offshore for a short time.

training like this:
 
helicopters are more dangerous than many other transport methods, also hundreds, maybe thousands of flights a day are safely conducted just in the oil industry. it seems like a lot of the crashes are tourist/rich people based. The crews and the passengers have a ton of training in our industry because of the danger as well.
I worked offshore for a short time.

training like this:


I used to hang out with a guy who was a professional helicopter-pilot ... got his training in the Navy flying rescues off a carrier.

He actually survived a tail-rotor failure and ocean-ditching (immediately after takeoff) AND in his civi-job a total engine-failure where he was able to auto-rotate to a landing from approx 2500 feet damaging only the landing skids. (he got a substantial pay-raise)

He was the ONLY person I've met I would get into a helicopter with.


*(To be fair I've never actually MET you!) 😉
 
Helicopter crashes get a lot of press but it's safer than driving/riding in cars and fixed wing general aviation.

Still the machines give me a bit of the willies even though its not logical.
 
Helicopter crashes get a lot of press but it's safer than driving/riding in cars and fixed wing general aviation.

Still the machines give me a bit of the willies even though its not logical.


Still no matter what the numbers say I like my odds of surviving multiple car-accidents vs ONE serious misadventure involving any aircraft!

In fact I've already half-proven my theory! 😀

(hoping NEVER to complete the study with a plane-crash lol)

😛 😳
 
Last edited:
There are over 40,000 motor deaths in America every year. Would you say "oh, another average American dead today?"

People die all the time. If its your time to die it doesn't matter what you could be doing. You could be eating potato chips and die from choking on a chip.
 
Helicopter crashes get a lot of press but it's safer than driving/riding in cars and fixed wing general aviation.
i guess variable wing aviation is safer since those are currently only found in military jets?
(military jets = lots more backup systems plus over engineered to stay in the air)
 
Last edited:
i guess variable wing aviation is safer since only those are currently only found in military jets?
(military jets = lots more backup systems plus over engineered to stay in the air)

As I've read the stats before the distinction is that fixed wing general is usually separated out from professional charter operations (which are safer)
 
Helicopters ARE statistically slightly less likely to kill you in a crash because they can use the kinetic energy stored in the main rotor to do a semi-controlled or auto-rotate descent if you lose power.

HOWEVER helicopters also are extremely complex machines with many mechanical systems and literally hundreds of moving parts that carry a ton of power through them.

Failure of any of a large number of said moving parts while in-flight can be a disaster.
 
There are over 40,000 motor deaths in America every year. Would you say "oh, another average American dead today?"

People die all the time. If its your time to die it doesn't matter what you could be doing. You could be eating potato chips and die from choking on a chip.


Only comparisons I found were these and I admit it surprised me



I had the general sense of helicopters being dangerous - my guess would have been that they were to fixed-wing craft as motorbikes are to cars, i.e. much more likely to result in a fatality, per mile. But seems like that isn't the case and they are only slightly riskier than non-scheduled fixed-wing flights. I suppose the reporting is unrepresentative because of the disproportionately rich and famous people who use helicopters and hence who die in helicopter crashes. (Plus the fact that whenever a baddie gets into a helicopter in the last third of an action movie, you know they are not getting out again alive)

Cars are of course the most dangerous of all, per mile, but that's one reason why I haven't been in a car, even as a passenger, in decades (the other being all the people they kill outside the vehicle via pollution).
 
Back
Top