Friday, February 3rd 2012

Micron CEO Steve Appleton Dies In Plane Crash

CNN is reporting Micron CEO Steve Appleton has died in a small-plane crash in Boise this morning. According to CNN, 'Appleton was flying a Lancair fixed-wing single-engine plane that crashed at 8:58 a.m. local time at Boise Airport' Said a spokeswoman for the airport. She could not confirm whether the accident took place at takeoff, landing or during flight.' No other details are currently known.

Micron was founded in Boise in October 1978, and it became a public company in June 1984. The company ranked No. 287 on the 2011 Fortune 500 list. At the end of 2011, Micron employed about 20,000 full-time staffers. Mr. Appleton is survived by his wife and children.Source: CNN
Add your own comment

31 Comments on Micron CEO Steve Appleton Dies In Plane Crash

#1
TheMailMan78
Big Member
A thank you to Wrigleyvillain for the heads up.
Posted on Reply
#2
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
That sucks.
Posted on Reply
#3
DarkOCean
by: trickson
That sucks.
To be a CEO and die sucks even more.
Posted on Reply
#4

They have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.
#5
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: DarkOCean
To be a CEO and die sucks even more.
To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.

by: twilyth
They have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.
The model is classified as "experimental" by the FAA, not by Lancair. It is classified this way because it is a kit plane, designed to be built by the DIY crowd, and there are plenty of pilots out there that fit into this category, and they aren't all thrill seekers. They are people that just like to make aviation their true hobby, all the way down to building their own airplane. However, being this type of aircraft means that it is more dangerous than a normal factory built plane, but it is still inspected for safety by the FAA before it is allowed to fly. So there is nothing that says he was a thrill seeker out doing crazy things when his plane crashed this time. And he was definitely not acting as a test pilot, chances are the plane had hundreds of hours on it, if not thousands. Especially if he used to to fly around the country on business, which many pilots who own planes and are also in charge of large companies tend to do. Just a guy flying his plane, that he built, just like most of us are people using their computers that we built.

As for the parachute for the small plane thing, that is more experimental than the plane he was flying. Would it have saved him if he had one? Possibly, but not definitely. The parachute only works when the plane is at a certain altitude. If he crashed on take-off or landing it would have been useless.
Posted on Reply
#6
TheMailMan78
Big Member
by: twilyth
They have parachutes for small light aircraft that you attach to the body of the plane and which will deploy in the event of an accident. It adds weight but it will also save your ass. This apparently was an experimental Lancair model so I guess he was acting as a test pilot. This is why I just shake my head when people talk about the adrenaline rush of doing things like this. Yeah, maybe it's fun, but at some point it just becomes stupid.
So says the man who lives in his basement with 50 cats. Honestly I'm jealous of Mr. Appleton. This man was the CEO of a major corporation and a test pilot! Thats something to tell your kids about. Live fast and die young is better then live long and get eaten by cats. IMO. Then again who am I to judge. Squirrels might eat me.
Posted on Reply
#7
DarkOCean
by: newtekie1
To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.
:(
Posted on Reply
#8
SteelSix
I've rode shotgun in two and four seaters; it's the passion and the thrill that make a must do for those that become pilots. I bet there's a story there, a guy who loved to fly. I hope to leave this earth doing something I like.

Fly on Steve Appleton..
Posted on Reply
#9

by: TheMailMan78
Live fast and die young is better then live long and get eaten by cats.
So why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D
#10
cadaveca
My name is Dave
by: twilyth
So why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D
He never did understand the fast part. Give him some time...


:roll:
Posted on Reply
#11
TheMailMan78
Big Member
by: twilyth
So why aren't you dead yet? :eek: :D
Because I failed. Now Im doomed to be eaten by Squirrels. I see them looking at me all the time in my office windows. Anyway.....lets get back on topic.
Posted on Reply
#12

by: TheMailMan78
Because I failed. Now Im doomed to be eaten by Squirrels. I see them looking at me all the time in my office windows. Anyway.....lets get back on topic.
You're the one who got us off topic. Remember?

Just keepin' it real dude. :rockout:
#14

by: to6ko91
his plane crashed shortly after take off http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-02-03/micron-chief-s-lancair-plane-had-disproportionate-crash-rate-faa-says.html
Thanks for the article.
The Lancair IVP aircraft that Micron Technology Inc. (MU) Chief Executive Officer Steve Appleton was piloting when he died today is known for its performance and a high number of accidents.

A U.S. Federal Aviation Administration notice to Lancair operators on Sept. 25, 2009, warned that the plane had had a “disproportionate” number of fatal accidents.

“The Lancair fatal accident rate is substantially higher than both personal-use general aviation as well as the overall fatal accident rate for all amateur-built experimental aircraft,” the FAA said in the notice.
#15
n-ster
by: TheMailMan78
Mr. Appleton is survived his wife and children.
I don't understand this part...
Posted on Reply
#16
iiee
by: n-ster
I don't understand this part...
This is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"
Posted on Reply
#17
Jstn7477
by: n-ster
I don't understand this part...
by: iiee
This is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"
Yes, that's correct. It should have been "survived by" and is commonly written in obituaries to list the immediate, living family members.

Anyway, I wonder what Micron is going to do about this.
Posted on Reply
#18
DaedalusHelios
by: newtekie1
To be a husband and father and die sucks the worst.



The model is classified as "experimental" by the FAA, not by Lancair. It is classified this way because it is a kit plane, designed to be built by the DIY crowd, and there are plenty of pilots out there that fit into this category, and they aren't all thrill seekers. They are people that just like to make aviation their true hobby, all the way down to building their own airplane. However, being this type of aircraft means that it is more dangerous than a normal factory built plane, but it is still inspected for safety by the FAA before it is allowed to fly. So there is nothing that says he was a thrill seeker out doing crazy things when his plane crashed this time. And he was definitely not acting as a test pilot, chances are the plane had hundreds of hours on it, if not thousands. Especially if he used to to fly around the country on business, which many pilots who own planes and are also in charge of large companies tend to do. Just a guy flying his plane, that he built, just like most of us are people using their computers that we built.

As for the parachute for the small plane thing, that is more experimental than the plane he was flying. Would it have saved him if he had one? Possibly, but not definitely. The parachute only works when the plane is at a certain altitude. If he crashed on take-off or landing it would have been useless.
That is one fast plane he was flying too. I wouldn't fly that unless I had lots of experience. Just because you can afford one doesn't mean you have the skill level necessary. I work in aviation BTW. I have seen so many wealthy individuals even hit things while trying to taxi their plane. :eek:

Stunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.
Posted on Reply
#19
lashton
hmmm

I flew a Glasair 3 at an airshow in NZ last weekend, the lancair (which I dont own but have flown) and the glasair I own are tricky on takeoff and landing and an in experienced pilot could easily loose control, I know this sounds bad but I bet this is pilots error, a second of lapse on concentration can cause this, I sold a Lancair I owned and I had it for 2 years NEVER an incident, the new owner flew it for 9 hours and crashed it, then 4 months after rebuilt he crashed it again, they are tricky to fly glasair and lancairs
Posted on Reply
#20
LAN_deRf_HA
Is that being treated as a "just the way it is" type of thing or what? An aircraft shouldn't be "tricky" for something as essential as taking off and landing. That's a design flaw. Correct the damn flaw.
Posted on Reply
#21

The F117 couldn't be flown at all without computer control. Different designs have different flight characteristics and like anything else, you make tradeoffs. As long as the person buying the plane understands the risks involved, and clearly he did, it's not the fault of the design.
#22
Wrigleyvillain
PTFO or GTFO
by: DaedalusHelios


Stunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.
Yeah this was one of his main hobbies apparently. He actually survived an earlier crash the article says.
Posted on Reply
#23
TheMailMan78
Big Member
by: n-ster
I don't understand this part...
by: iiee
This is a common way to say after somebody's death, his wife and children are still alive. I think should be "survived by"
by: Jstn7477
Yes, that's correct. It should have been "survived by" and is commonly written in obituaries to list the immediate, living family members.

Anyway, I wonder what Micron is going to do about this.
No matter how many times I proof read I still miss something. Thanks for the heads up.
Posted on Reply
#24
stinger608
Dedicated TPU Cruncher & Folder
With all that has been said about this incident I just want to say:

My deepest condolences to his wife and children!
Posted on Reply
#25
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: DaedalusHelios
That is one fast plane he was flying too. I wouldn't fly that unless I had lots of experience. Just because you can afford one doesn't mean you have the skill level necessary. I work in aviation BTW. I have seen so many wealthy individuals even hit things while trying to taxi their plane. :eek:

Stunt piloting is kind of asking for it. As a father you should remember to be safe as your family needs you.
Definitely, we don't know his experience, but it sounds like he wasn't an amateur.

And just because you can afford something doesn't mean you have the still level necessary to not wreck it and die, I totally agree. Just look at all the videos on youtube of rich idiots wrecking powerful expensive cars that they don't have anything near the skill level to be driving...:roll:

by: lashton
I flew a Glasair 3 at an airshow in NZ last weekend, the lancair (which I dont own but have flown) and the glasair I own are tricky on takeoff and landing and an in experienced pilot could easily loose control, I know this sounds bad but I bet this is pilots error, a second of lapse on concentration can cause this, I sold a Lancair I owned and I had it for 2 years NEVER an incident, the new owner flew it for 9 hours and crashed it, then 4 months after rebuilt he crashed it again, they are tricky to fly glasair and lancairs
This plane is certainly akin to the expensive fast cars that rich idiots can't drive, but deadlier. Without knowing his skill level or his experience with the plane, or more importantly what actually caused the crash, no one can say he was doing something dangerous. Heck, for all we know it could have been a system failure, something not totally uncommon in kit built airplanes. Though it definitely could have been pilot error as well.

I think the important thing that we should be concerned with is that a man is dead, a father and husband. That is a tragedy regardless of cause, and IMO, jumping so quickly to point the finger at the dead person is disrespectful. That isn't meant at anyone in particular. I'm just saying we should all show some respect and not start blaming a dead guy like he meant to die or was doing something he knew was dangerous.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment