Categories: Florida

1 Person Dead In New Smyrna Beach Plane Crash

NEW SMYRNA BEACH, Florida — One person is dead following a crash of a twin engine plane just west of the New Smyrna Beach Municipal Airport early Wednesday afternoon.


The Volusia County Sheriff’s Office said that the Cessna 337 had taken off from the airport when it went down sometime later in an open field near the city’s sports complex. The tower manager at the airport called in the crash at 1:13 p.m. The plane broke apart upon impact, killing the pilot.


No one else was on board, and no one on the ground was injured.


The Volusia County Sheriff’s Office is conducting a routine death investigation, while the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board will be called in to investigate the cause of the crash.

UPDATE:

Officials have released the name of the pilot who was killed in today’s plane crash. The pilot has been identified as Paul Rooy, age 56, of Daytona Beach, Florida.

View Comments

  • "The plane went down shortly after taking off and an investigator from the National Transportation Safety Board is at the scene of a fatal plane crash."What is it with aircraft engines that seem to fail after takeoff and what has the NTSB ever correlated about this anomaly?Why did the NTSB ignore my Petition about this anomaly? http://www.sumpthis.com/ntsbpetition/ntsbpetitioncontents.htmCould the sump drains that check for water in the fuel tanks not work as certified?Is the preflight procedure checking for water in the fuel flawed?Pending the discovery of a catastrophic engine failure was it undetectable water in the fuel tanks the pilot could not positively detect during the preflight?When was the first or last time the FAA or NTSB did a real world test of the sump drains and preflight procedure?Aircraft takes off and changes it attitude. When it takes off and changes its attitude could water hiding in the fuel tank then change its attitude? Could this water in the fuel tank leave its hiding place, after takeoff, and make its way to the engine fuel pick-up?The NTSB has written off engine failures in General Aviation Aircraft well over six thousand four hundred eighteen times with the probable cause of UNDETERMINED.If the NTSB cannot get a handle on the complexities of air, spark, compression and UNCONTAMINATED FUEL, maybe the NTSB should ask a good old country boy mechanic.Do not believe blindly in the FAA certification where the pre-flight procedure and checking the sump for water in the fuel tanks is concerned.Do your own red dyed water in the fuel tank test as the aircraft sits in its normal ground attitude. Pour in 16 ounces of red dyed water just as the NTSB did over two decades ago,see NTSB Safety Recommendation A-83-6, then go to the sump drains and see if you can positively detect and then eliminate the entire 16 ounces of red dyed water you just poured into the fuel tank.In my opinion, neither the NTSB or FAA on the scene could investigate their way out of a paper bag. But both government agencies are excellent when it involves a twenty nine year old cover-up.

  • "The plane went down shortly after taking off and an investigator from the National Transportation Safety Board is at the scene of a fatal plane crash."What is it with aircraft engines that seem to fail after takeoff and what has the NTSB ever correlated about this anomaly?Why did the NTSB ignore my Petition about this anomaly? http://www.sumpthis.com/ntsbpetition/ntsbpetitioncontents.htmCould the sump drains that check for water in the fuel tanks not work as certified?Is the preflight procedure checking for water in the fuel flawed?Pending the discovery of a catastrophic engine failure was it undetectable water in the fuel tanks the pilot could not positively detect during the preflight?When was the first or last time the FAA or NTSB did a real world test of the sump drains and preflight procedure?Aircraft takes off and changes it attitude. When it takes off and changes its attitude could water hiding in the fuel tank then change its attitude? Could this water in the fuel tank leave its hiding place, after takeoff, and make its way to the engine fuel pick-up?The NTSB has written off engine failures in General Aviation Aircraft well over six thousand four hundred eighteen times with the probable cause of UNDETERMINED.If the NTSB cannot get a handle on the complexities of air, spark, compression and UNCONTAMINATED FUEL, maybe the NTSB should ask a good old country boy mechanic.Do not believe blindly in the FAA certification where the pre-flight procedure and checking the sump for water in the fuel tanks is concerned.Do your own red dyed water in the fuel tank test as the aircraft sits in its normal ground attitude. Pour in 16 ounces of red dyed water just as the NTSB did over two decades ago,see NTSB Safety Recommendation A-83-6, then go to the sump drains and see if you can positively detect and then eliminate the entire 16 ounces of red dyed water you just poured into the fuel tank.In my opinion, neither the NTSB or FAA on the scene could investigate their way out of a paper bag. But both government agencies are excellent when it involves a twenty nine year old cover-up.

Copyright 2011-2023 Brevard Times. All Rights Reserved. Contact Us Privacy Policy