Light Aircraft down in Staffordshire

[autothrottle]

Reports of a light aircraft down near Colwich, Staffordshire. Emergency services on the scene. No more details. Lets hope no fatalities.

[Avitor]

Sky news states Little Heywood.

[autothrottle]

So does BBC.

BBC NEWS | England | Staffordshire | One dead in light aircraft crash (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7808254.stm)

RIP

[lastgasp]

BBC radio reporting it as near Little Heywood, also reporting one dead.

[flybyday]

From the description in the BBC News story I assume the crash location is visible in the satellite view shown in the link below or somewhere very close by:

little haywood - Google Maps (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=little+haywood&sll=53.800651,-4.064941&sspn=20.17361,39.550781&ie=UTF8&t=h&ll=52.791266,-2.00155&spn=0.010043,0.019312&z=16&g=little+haywood&iwloc=addr)

[500 Fan]

Sky News now reporting two dead.

R.I.P.

500 Fan.

[lastgasp]

Express and Star newspaper:A light aircraft crashed near Rugeley today and burst into a ball of flames with at least one person feared dead. The plane came down and exploded just before 11.50am near the villages of Colwich and Little Haywood.The emergency services say they do not yet know if anyone has been killed.But an eyewitness told the Express & Star he feared there would be no survivors from the wreckage. Michael Wareham, of Wolseley Close, Colwich, saw the drama unfold just a few hundred yards from his home and called 999.The former paratrooper said he fears that no-one will leave the wreckage alive after seeing the plane plummet to the ground. He said: “I saw it flying over and I went into the back garden and saw the aircraft – I thought: ‘This is a bit low.“I thought it’s not going to pull out of there.’ and then it vanished from sight and I heard this hard thump and saw a huge plume of black smoke coming up from the ground.”Mr Wareham said he couldn’t understand why the plane had crashed as the engine sounded as if it was working normally. He said: “The engine actually increased in speed as it came down, which planes do when you put them into a dive. “There was no damage I could see and no indication it was actually going to come down at all until it did.” This article posted on January 2, 2009 at 12:51 pm. Now reporting two dead. RIP

[Mike Parsons]

Did anyone manage to see the comments by people on the Sky News site. There were a few people defending the fact this is a tragic accident and not to speak about 'inconveniences to commuters'. Someone looked as though they were giving it (someone called Alan) on the comments, either way Sky have done a good job in removing said comments.

[nav3]

Potentially, from the Sky News clip it could turn out to be a PA 28 - 140 registered 'locally', which is self evident from 'G Info'. I won't post the suspected Reg / details. Authorities need to confirm that but I would be surprised if it is not that one.

RIP and thoughts especially to family and friends.

[chessman]

It is a Piper PA-28 140 Cherokee.Reg No.G-AWPS

[fisbangwollop]

BBC NEWS | England | Staffordshire | Fatal crash plane hits rail line (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/staffordshire/7808254.stm)

[wings on stornoway]

I Cant believe that the Aircraft reg has been posted on the forum!

I would like to say that my heart goes out to both of the familys
and i am sure that this will be said by every member on this forum i am sure!


God Bless R.I.P

[Malt]

Chessman,
Firstly you don't know for sure.... but if it was them it wasn't exactly sensitve was it:* Somebody's Dad, Brother, son. + A.N other has just perished & left their nearest & dearest very very sad.
IF it was that aircraft the owner was well known & liked in the area.
The field I (any many others) fly from is very close to the crash site & I have already had txts & calls asking if I was ok. Any need to publish the reg..... no I didn't think so:*
Day 2 in 2009 & we have already lost 2 fellow flyers. RIP.

[Johnny F@rt Pants]

Two feared dead in aircraft crash - AOL News (http://news.aol.co.uk/two-feared-dead-in-aircraft-crash/article/20090102090447820475921)

[Nearly There]

Being discussed on the private flying forum.


http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/356505-light-aircraft-down-staffordshire.html

[luvly jubbly]

Totally disgusted by Sky News reporting on the accident, ......two feared dead in light aircraft crash on railway lines in Staffordshire......all this on the day when rail fares increased blaah blaah, inconvenienced travellers etc followed by the next 30mins live from the site with the Skycopter.

They really have lost the plot.

[Cusco]

While I'm not so sure about posting the reg, who is to say Chessman doesn't have intimate knowledge?

He hails from Wolverhampton: could have links with the a/c.

Anything's possible.

Still a dreadful start to the new year.

Cusco

[chessman]

I apologise if i have upset anybody but the reg can clearly be seen on the footage on sky news.It is not my intention to offend anybody and if the reg was not seen on the news i would not have posted it.It is always a great shame when a plane goes down and my heart too goes out to the families involved

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

In all fairness, it didn't take batvision to piece the letters together from the air to ground footage.

Anyway, a sad loss and a tragic start to the new year. I also pole through that lump of sky quite often.

[vee-tail-1]

This is a pilots site. As a pilot I recognise that flying can be dangerous. If an aeroplane similar to the type that I fly has crashed, I would like to know the details as soon as possible. This is not mawkish curiosity, but a simple matter of flight safety.

[aviate1138]

Chessman's first post. He didn't realise the avalanche of hatred that would fall upon him.

How many car crashes have killed people today? Every time we fly there is always the possibility of an accident but that is a calculated risk. Same risk for the PA 140 pilot. Frankly the sentimental RIP stuff is unnecessary IMHO.

[Pilotdom]

First off, condolences to those who have been affected by todays accident. Sad news indeed.

Whats the big deal about a reg being posted? Sky have been blasting part of the reg to the millions on the news?

[Aerodynamik]

Sorry, but I'm on Cheesmans side. Like it or not this is a RUMOUR network. If you only want facts go to the BBC website.

[Keygrip]

Already been deleted from R&N by super-mods.

It's continuing in the Private Flying forum - and no doubt a "West Coast Mainline" forum (somewhere).

[jxc]

DO you only get facts on the BBC ?

[dom175b]

So sorry to hear this news, on the start of a new year. RIP, I am sure everyone will be thinking of the families. Very sad.

[Malt]

It's not an issue about posting the reg, just the timing within hours of the crash. I just think it was a little insensitive to those who flew with the people who perished, who may indeed read this thread.
On a need to know basis we need to know why it crashed ASAP (I also fly a PA28) but do we need to broadcast the victims names yet?
Anyway.... it's hardly a hanging offence so lets move on & find out what happened.

[172driver]

DO you only get facts on the BBC ?

and

Like it or not this is a RUMOUR network. If you only want facts go to the BBC website.

Sometimes I'm not too sure if it's not the other way round :E

Seriously - I'm also with Chessman. If anything like that ever happens to me, please do post the reg - it will at least put those not affected to ease.

Not a great start to the year for GA. Guess the journos will now add train lines to the convents/schools/playgrounds, etc...

[Mariner9]

Posting a registration is not insensitive - it allows us all a quick verification either way whether we knew the a/c involved. Checking on flying friends and family is the reason I logged on to proon having seen tonight's 6 oclock news.

[FREDAcheck]

I'm with Chessman et al here. I don't think it insensitive to post information that's already in the public domain (TV news and the Sky web site, and probably elsewhere). What would be insensitive would be to speculate on blame, and no one's yet commenting on the cause, let alone allocating blame.

[d192049d]

I am stunned! I believe this aircraft took off from sittles farm over my house this morning and then was pottering around the local area just as I left to go and book some hours at east mids.

Speechless...

[207592]

Let's be sensible. If data is already in the public domain, reporting it here will inform only those who know of the network. An anology is when military personnel are killed on active service: the fact is reported and the name withheld until next of kin are informed. I would hope no networker would access G-INFO and then telephone an owner's spouse!

What will be more instructive for a pilot, is what caused the accident. Was it the result of carb icing?

[Genghis the Engineer]

What will be more instructive for a pilot, is what caused the accident. Was it the result of carb icing?

(1) I doubt very much that we'll know for some considerable time. AAIB investigations are thorough, but not necessarily quick.

(2) Given how cold it's been, carb icing seems unlikely, there won't have been much liquid water in the air. Also PA28s tend not to sneak up on you like that with sudden carb icing. That said, I've no doubt it's on the long list of possibilities that AAIB will be looking at.


My sympathies, of course, to the friends and family of those on board. Not a good start to the year.

G

[Flying Signman]

I also appreciate finding out Registrations as soon as possible once published. That area is also on the number 1 Cross country route from Halfpenny Green (Wolverhampton) and I know many Walsall based pilots (actually living in Walsall myself) who have shares in/or own Piper Aircraft.

It is quite common for News agencies to mix up the type of aircraft on early reports, so knowing it is not one of your friends as early as possible is quite re-assuring.

Meantime, my condolances are with the families and friends of those involved.

[Pace]

It looks from the witness reports that one wing dropped and it went vertically down at high prop speed.

Nothing left of the aircraft.

A bad and very sad start to the year.

Pace

[LateFinals]

Very sad start to the new year....


But as a pilot who likes to keep alive by examining accidents and hopefully learning from them, I'm puzzled by this.

We must of course learn from the AAIB report when it is published, but the accident site would look like a loss of control impact. No apparent mayday / PAN call, doesn't look like forced landing attempt, or maybe loss of control / stall trying to avoid relatively closeby houses.

LF

[modelman]

Read this on BT Yahoo News,I think her day has been somewhat less spoiled than that of the victims and their families.

Kate Kay, 60, from Wigan, saw the funny side: "I recently just turned 60 and only took the train because I got the cheap pass, I really wish I hadn't bothered now.
"I've no idea when I'm going to get back, it's like travel hell."

[Mike Parsons]

What a ****. Who cares what peter kay has to say....sorry katy kay.

[DX Wombat]

To say I felt sick when I saw the headline is putting it mildly. I learned to fly at HGFC and flew the No1 Xcountry route a few times so the possibility of it being someone I knew is high. I now fly mainly from Shobdon and I have a dreadful feeling that the aircraft was based there. I'm hoping I am wrong but I'm sure there is one with a very similar registration if it isn't that one. This would be the second person / aircraft I know which has crashed in less than 12 months with fatal results. My sympathy to the families and friends of the deceased. RIP.

[VFE]

Okay, if this is a rumour network, what possible causes do we suspect given the witness accounts?

One witness said the aircraft engine was going full tilt so I hardly suspect carb icing. Any cloud about in the area today? Severe airframe icing might lead to loss of control and might account for the impression another eyewitness gave of it "looking like it was doing aerobatics" (witnesses often describe a spin as looking like "aerobatics") and another said it rolled over and went in, leaving little doubt those on board would get out alive.

Sounds to me like the aircraft had totally lost control, the engine still running would indicate perhaps a stuck throttle, which in itself might lead to loss of aircraft control only if the pilot could not trim adequately and stop the pitch up tendancy. Or perhaps an inability to reduce power might suggest they were in a spin and unable to physically reduce power as per spin recovery....

Clouting railways power cables would suggest they were not attempting a standard forced landing without power otherwise they'd have been aiming for somewhere else if rule 5 was being adhered to and we have no reason to suspect it wasn't.

Or maybe inadvertant flight into IMC led to loss of control?

Or pilot incapacitation?

Basically, we don't have a clue.

But one positive outcome from this event and PPRuNe is that we might stop and contemplate a few scenarios which may just lead to us being safer up there in the future. If I go, please speculate freely.

My condolences to those affected in this tragic accident.

VFE.

[pumpkinpilot]

"Okay, if this is a rumour network, what possible causes do we suspect given the witness accounts? "

Speculating, in my opinion, based on observations of similar accidents, is a waste of time. Don't trust "eyewitnesses" - stick them in front of a TV camera, or a reporter, and they say any old rubbish.

Be patient, wait for the facts, once the dust has settled, and make an informed judgement if you wish, but you will be wasting your time if you attach any credence to early "eye witness" reports.

[VFE]

Even with AAIB reports I shall be making no "judgements"... there but for the grace of God. My thoughts are that stimulating conversation about any accident never does any harm if people can leave their emotions outside and refrain from jumping to possibly offensive conclusions about the causes. I seek not to know sepcifically what happened in this or any accident by posting here, merely to put the metophorical wet dog on the table and let it shake itself - surely that's a positive thing?

VFE.

[AMEandPPL]

leaving little doubt those on board would get out alive

Nitpicking, I know . . . . but there should be a "not" in there.

What a dreadful way to start the 2009 GA year :ugh:

[DX Wombat]

Modelman and Mike P, a little something to balance things up; a young, university student friend of mine was on the train which was delayed. On hearing the reason for the delay her comment to her parents was words to the effect that what had happened really put the inconvenience of the delay into perspective.

[MikeGranby]

> Sounds to me like the aircraft had totally lost control, the
> engine still running would indicate perhaps a stuck throttle,
> which in itself might lead to loss of aircraft control only if
> the pilot could not trim adequately and stop the pitch up
> tendancy.

In a 140?

[VFE]

Ok, so that's rather flimsy...

VFE.

[Zorst]

Some posts above are plumbing profound new depths of idiotic hypothesis.

Better to keep your mouth shut and perhaps be thought a fool than open it and remove the doubt.

[Pace]

Don't trust "eyewitnesses" - stick them in front of a TV camera, or a reporter, and they say any old rubbish.

The one I listened to on the television seemed quite a serious sort, spoke clearly and didnt appear to be making anything but a factual statement of what he saw.

That was that the aircraft dropped a wing and then went into an almost vertical dive into the ground.

The wreckage would appear to be a high speed impact, the engine sound would indicate high speed too.

Why? is the bit that I would not like to speculate on because there could be numerous reasons from aircraft failure to pilot error, incapaciation etc.

All we do appear to know is the aircraft impacted at high speed and out of control. A very sad start to the year for us and an awful nightmare start to the year for for their family and friends.

Pace

[theavionicsbloke]

The 215 forecast for 12:00 didn't look favourable from an icing point of view.

Does any body know what the actual WX was for this area at the time of the accident?

Media now confirming one of the deceased as Alan Matthews and having 19 years experience. Mr Matthews was the owner.

RIP. Condolences to family, friends and colleagues....

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Deffo a high-speed near-vertical impact (very compact wreckage area and total airframe destruction). A very credible witness on BBC news described what looked like a 'roll / loop' into the ground, which fits the pictures of the accident site.

So, unlikely to be carb heat or a wire-strike in a precautionary landing (though it did slice the wires on the railway as it went in).

I have a couple of likely theories, but that's all they are, so I'll keep them to myself for now. But a bit of imagination and a bit of looking at past accidents will show what these might be.

What a terrible start to '09.

SSD

[seagull2200]

I now fly mainly from Shobdon and I have a dreadful feeling that the aircraft was based there.

The aircraft was not based at Shobdon to my current knowledge.

Deepest sympathy and thoughts at this painful time for the families of those lost.

[JEM60]

Pumpkin. People do not necessarily pump out rubbish when placed in front of a camera etc. I witnessed [and videod] a fatal collision at Oshkosh 18 months ago. I gave a TV interview, and a newspaper one, simply because I was asked to. I have,sadly, witnessed 11 crashes over the years at Airshows. When I saw the footage when I got back home, [some numpty put it on U Tube] I was amazed at how much I got wrong. Shock and unfamiliarity play a big part in what people say, and for sure the information can be faulty many times, but not always rubbish. The journo was unsensationalist, polite and asked very sensible questions.

[Insight]

Heard them say on the news this am they believe they have found a third body :(

They have also named the pilot on the news.

RIP :( Not a good start to the year.

[bigfoot01]

...every time there is a crash and if relatives come on this site, they will be upset because the reg of plane has been publsihed; or people wonder what happened and to whom; or whether the thread has broken down into a massive row about what is appropriate and how bad somebody is for putting some information up.

If it was my relatives, that would be the bit that upset me...

[jonkil]

Human nature dictates that we speculate to the reason.
Some of us verbally speculate here and on other places, some don't.

It is a sad start to 2009 and my thoughts lie with the people concerned.

Jon

[pilotmike]

Oh dear, VFE...
to put the metophorical wet dog on the table and let it shake itself...

Ok, so that's rather flimsy...

Basically, we don't have a clue...
Your posts have conveniently removed all doubt - YOU clearly don't have a clue.
If I go, please speculate freely.
More importantly, now you've speculated freely, please do us all a favour and go.

[Pace]

Human nature dictates that we speculate to the reason.
Some of us verbally speculate here and on other places, some don't.

It is always best to put yourself in someone elses shoes. If it was me i would be perfectly happy with pilots discussing possible scenarios for my accident in a sensible considered and respectful way and I am sure so would my family and friends.

I would not be happy with someone jumping to conclusions, being judge and jury and saying things as if they were fact rather than one of many possible situations which could have caused such a crash.

I would also not be happy to see some using my misfortune as a play thing to massage their own egos or to prove their superior knowledge.

But if my crash and disussions about it could help others to avoid something simular then I for one would be delighted.

Pace

[Rightbase]

if relatives come on this site, they will be upset because the reg of plane has been publsihed; or people wonder what happened and to whom; or whether the thread has broken down into a massive row

A good thought, Bigfoot. I wonder why bereaved relatives might come here, and what they might be hoping to find, or not to find. Of similar concern might be friends or family hearing a news report and desperate to find out whether their friend or loved one was involved. How do we meet the needs of those for whom it is reassuring news, as well as the hopefully few for whom it is not?

[NutLoose]

My condolencies to all of those that died in this sad and horrific crash......

Now one of the bereaved has been identified, perhaps the CAA would have the good sense to remove his address from the *-**** site until all of those others involved have been informed and identified..... :ugh:

A Sad day and something the CAA should look at as well.

Site name removed so as to prevent the morbid and press linking to it, but those involved in flying should know what I mean.

[VFE]

Exactly PKPF68-77, and well elucidated.

I for one have thought about carb icing, airframe icing, the carbon monoxide detectors in the aircraft I fly and all manner of other threats to the safety of my daily flying activities as a result of thinking about possible causes of this accident. Those who say they haven't are fooling nobody but themselves and what is more, miss a vital opportunity to draw a positive from a negative but hey, this is the internet and if someone thinks I'm a fool then more fool them. I have worked everyday with light aircraft for the best part of ten years and accidents are a genuine working hazard, always a possibility day in/day out, which I naturally have some degree of knowledge about and a deep desire to prevent occuring.... but each to their own. If one false theory espoused here can help prevent a future accident then who can really complain? A better way to salute those lost I cannot find.

VFE.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

A very sad start to the year.

The trouble with a PA28-140 is that it can catch the unwary - I owned one for several years and have instructed on the type for many years.

Although it has 4 seats, it is by no means a 4-seater. More sensibly a 2+2.

It would be almost certainly over-weight with 3 on board and full fuel (pictures on the Web show it parked outside - so maybe it still was and with full fuel to reduce the chance of water contamination). It will DEFINATELY be over-weight (and possibly uncontrollable in certain situations) with 3 on board if operating in the Utility category (that is, carrying out certain manoeuvres, such as spinning). There was another sad accident some years ago when two very experienced airline pilots and instructors crashed in the sea after spinning a -140 off the Fylde Coast. The aircraft was over-weight for the exercise and CG out of limits.

As an example, I have flown the -140 with 3 on board and 3/4 tanks and 4 on board with (just) 1/2 tanks. Any more with average weight males on board and you are outside the envelope. It is probably one of the trickiest aircraft in common use in this respect and is not tolerant to over-loading. I checked the weight and balance carefully if I went flying with more than 2 on board (which was quite often as I used it for flying family and friends and hours building at the time).

No speculation about the cause of the crash, just sadness that a enjoyable day out should end in tragedy.

KR

FOK

[connel flyer]

Well posted FOK.Keeping it real instead of who said what and who never.:D

Sad day for GA

R.I.P

CF

[Paul-S]

The most interesting on this subject so far - Thanks FOK.

I am a PPL and look here out of wanting to know why this sad accident happened and to learn from it. Despite what others have said, I do find even some of the more far fetched theories, good, as reminders of what could and can happen when flying.

My condolences to family and friends.

Paul-S

[Pace]

It would be almost certainly over-weight with 3 on board and full fuel (pictures on the Web show it parked outside - so maybe it still was and with full fuel to reduce the chance of water contamination). It will DEFINATELY be over-weight (and possibly uncontrollable in certain situations) with 3 on board if operating in the Utility category (that is, carrying out certain manoeuvres, such as spinning). There was another sad accident some years ago when two very experienced airline pilots and instructors crashed in the sea after spinning a -140 off the Fylde Coast. The aircraft was over-weight for the exercise and CG out of limits.

FlyingOfficerKite

I think and correct me if I am wrong but the 140 with a rearward C of G had a problem coming out of a spin.

This appears to be a high speed almost vertical dive into the ground which would not indicate a spin to the ground.

In a spin the vertical descent speed is relatively low and stabilises

Maybe an initial spin followed by a dive coming out of it or even a spiral dive but I would question this as a spin to the ground as it appears it was too fast and at very high speed.

Pace

[DavidHoul52]

The amount of height required to climb out of a dive is increases massively with the speed of the aircraft. Could this be a case of a too-fast dive (caused for whatever reason) from which the pilot was too low to recover?

[FlyingOfficerKite]

Pace

I don't want to speculate about the cause of the accident - but yes it's the rearward CofG which tends to put the aircraft out of limits. I would have to check the figures carefully, but it is not always the weight, per se, that causes the problem but the CofG issue.

Weight and balance is the one element of flight training I have always rammed down the throats of my students.

For some reason it is always the bete noire of flying training with students. Either they can't be bothered due to an over-eagerness to 'get flying' or for some bizarre reason think it only applies whilst they're training!

I'm not speculating on this accident, but if this Thread can serve a flight safety purpose by reminding people of some Golden Rules regarding loading of light aircraft then, perhaps, some good can come of it?

Remember if you're flying a '4-seater', it will be unusual to get 4 people and full fuel in the tanks and still be within weight and balance limits.

ALWAYS get a copy of the Loading Schedule from the Flight Manual or CURRENT Weight and Balance Schedule for the aircraft you intend to fly. Copy it and use it (as a rule) if you intend flying with more than 2 persons on board. As a general rule 4-seaters will not be overloaded with 2 persons on board and full fuel - but don't take my word for it -CHECK!!!

I always gave my students a copy of the weight and balance schedule and/or graph as a part of a type conversion course and explained the potential dangers to them of an incorrectly loaded aeroplane.

A simple method (particularly if you fly the same aircraft regularly) is to do a 'residual' weight and balance calculation. In other words work out how much 'spare' capacity there is after taking into account the weight of the aircraft prepared for service, full fuel and your own weight PLUS BAGS ETC. Then you will see what is left. Do a calculation of CofG and that will give you a means of assessing the allowable weight of any additional passengers. Alarm bells should start to ring if you suspect you will be over the limits - but ALWAYS do the final calculation and check - it takes 5 minutes and could cost you a lifetime if you don't!!!

Read the CAA Safety Safety leaflets - safety is not an accident!!!

I have had one of two 'near do's' in my flying career due to weight issues. Not because I was over-weight but because the aircraft did not respond as expected. One experience was grass airfield, no wind, hot day (27 degrees in the UK!) and three on board a Piper PA28-140. We just got airborne by the end of the runway - even after all my calculations - and nearly wiped out myself and my mother and father. If I had crashed the accident would have been hard to explain because, technically, nothing was wrong. With hindsight and several thousand more flying hours under my belt I hope I would have aborted the take-off if it happened now. Back then with only a couple of hundred hours I pressed on - because after all I'd checked the weight and balance AND the performance and the aeroplane MUST fly. Well it almost didn't. Another 'I Learn't About Flying From That' incident!

Always plan for and expect the unexpected.

Fly safely

KR

FOK

[Sensible]

At the risk of being "flamed" the cause is more likely to be a stall/spin accident but hey, patience, the AAIB report is more likely to produce a more accurate assesment of the cause of the crash! As has been mentioned here on this thread, 140's are easily overloaded and a stall and resulting spin is not entirely unheard of!

[LH2]

Better to keep your mouth shut and perhaps be thought a fool than open it and remove the doubt.

Indeed. Welcome to my killfile Zworst! :ok:

[preduk]

The passengers have been named as Nick and Emma O'Brien, a married couple with 2 young children.

My thoughts are really with the families at the moment, especially the children.

[S-Works]

I would suggest the steep nose down into the ground may be a sign of a stall after attempting to stretch the glide to clear the railway lines.

[DavidHoul52]

Weight and balance

There is a little application for the iPhone called "FlightPlan" which does Weight and Balance calcs as well as many others (Weather, Navigation, Conversion).

[fireflybob]

In a spin the vertical descent speed is relatively low and stabilises

In a developed spin the airspeed is low but the rate of descent is high (typically a few thousand feet a minute depending on type etc).

The only thing that may give some info could be the GPS if on, active and recording the flight path

Not so, I believe experienced investigators can glean much from the wreckage as to what the aircraft was doing at the time.

Stalling or spinning into the ground is invariably fatal although I am not saying this is what happened in this case.

Did many hours in the Cherokee 140 - great little a/c if flown within the limitations.

Thoughts and prayers with the bereaved.

[Rhyspiper]

You could always use the weight and balance charts in the tech log, a pencil and a ruler.

Call me old fashioned.

[Keygrip]

"You're old fashioned"

(So am I).

[DX Wombat]

Thank you Seagull.

[liam548]

Exactly PKPF68-77, and well elucidated.

I for one have thought about carb icing, airframe icing, the carbon monoxide detectors in the aircraft I fly and all manner of other threats to the safety of my daily flying activities as a result of thinking about possible causes of this accident. Those who say they haven't are fooling nobody but themselves and what is more, miss a vital opportunity to draw a positive from a negative but hey, this is the internet and if someone thinks I'm a fool then more fool them. I have worked everyday with light aircraft for the best part of ten years and accidents are a genuine working hazard, always a possibility day in/day out, which I naturally have some degree of knowledge about and a deep desire to prevent occuring.... but each to their own. If one false theory espoused here can help prevent a future accident then who can really complain? A better way to salute those lost I cannot find.

VFE.

thats a good idea, carrying a carbon monoxide detector. Which model do you use to avoid the silent killer?

[S-Works]

I have a CO gaurdian, it is fitted as an Instrument and also does, density alt, battery volts timer etc. Miles better than those little plastic thingies.

[VFE]

I often wonder how reliable the little plastic thingies are... how much time do they give etc? Most of the ones I have seen fitted are out of date.

VFE.

[Pace]

FireFlyBob

Stalling or spinning into the ground is invariably fatal although I am not saying this is what happened in this case.

While that is the case in most stall spin accidents it does vary from aircraft to aircraft. There is a 4 seater Canard (Velocity)which on its test flight was stalled. The test pilot could not get the aircraft out of a flat spin and to save the only test airframe opened the canopy and attempted to break the flat spin by putting his body weight towards the nose.

This failed and the aircraft spun to the ground landing on a beach. The test pilot climbed out and the same airframe was repaired and used again.

As stated in a spin the vertical speed is relatively low compared to a dive. One witness described the engine sound like a high speed drill and the accident would look like a high speed dive crash.

Pace

[IO540]

I do not for a moment this was caused caused by CO poisoning because you normally get some effects from that, and of the three people aboard one would expect at least somebody to get a headache and have a moan about it.

I have a BW Gasalert (http://www.bwtechnologies.nl/gasalerteng.html) CO detector. Great little unit. The battery lasts about a year and costs about £3. It even picks up the exhaust from the plane which landed before me.

[will5023]

Looking through all the threads and the possible time on type the pilot had on the aircraft, maybe a spin is a bit of a factor, but if he had the aircraft a long time and knew it well maybe not, think someone said he had a PPL for 19yrs? Could be more of a health problem leading to loss of control, especially if the passengers were not pilots. There is also the issue of mechanical problems, or structural, by that I means controls.
Whatever it was will come out in either a post-mortem report or from the aicendent report. Condolences to the families involved.

[Genghis the Engineer]

Statistically low-level stall-spin departures are not necessarily fatal but, being realistic, they are a common cause of fatalities. By type, the older "plank wing" PA28s, whilst not excessively dangerous, do have some history of fatal accidents of this nature (which, incidentally, was almost totally eliminated with the later tapered wing aircraft). This *may* be due to the aircraft's stall warner, which is very non-intrusive, unlike the relatively effective audio-warned of the later aircraft. Or it may be unrelated.

W.R.T. Discussion on performance. Whilst I'd agree that a Cherokee 140 is easily overloaded, an overload related accident is most likely to occur just after take-off, not some time later. Two people in the front and one in the back seat is unlikely to be close to the aft CG limit at any fuel load.



I was listening to the radio news driving home from flying yesterday when the BBC gave the names of the two passengers. A 10 year old and 18 month old child who will never see their parents again. This is the best reason in the world why we should all pay every attention to understanding and teaching the best practice in safety in our flying. I've spent a lot of my life studying and researching the causes of fatal light aircraft accidents; to some extent this has been reduced in the last year or so; this concentrated my mind painfully on the need for continued efforts in this area.

G

[beatnik]

I'm astounded

Instead of temporarily removing the aircraft details from G-xxxx, the CAA have in fact already listed the owner/pilot as deceased....

Speechless :rolleyes:

[172driver]

Speechless

Why? The CAA website provides factual information, and this is a - certainly very, very sad - fact.

I feel sorry for the kids......

[beatnik]

172Driver

I recognise that the website is a factual database, and a good one at that - but today is a Sunday, and the CAA is the epitome of a bureaucracy. So it seems to me that some admin/techie person must have gone in to work and updated the website.

[VFE]

Well said Genghis, it appears from reading this thread that much work still needs to be done in drawing peoples attention to flight safety given the desire by some to use the emotional aspect to stifle all positive discussion on preventing them.

VFE.

[interpreter]

I flew this type frequently in the late 1960's with a visual RED LAMP stall warning indicator. On one occasion with 4 on board the stall warning lamp came on at take off just as I eased back on the column. I had no idea why so pushed the nose down running into the X area for an extra 5 knots and very gently eased back the column. This time OK but I did not attempt a normal rate of climb until some time later. Subsequently I was told I should have had TWO stages of flap down rather than just ONE. This time I survived to know better.

However I was surprised at how heavy and "lumpily" the aircarft flew with four up and for finals I set up the aircarft some way out and longer than normal to get a feeling for the sink rate.

Nevetheless I never experienced any problems with 3 up and even although the aircraft had the "squared wings" never had any problems handling the stall even under blind flying instruction. I lovely little aircarft.

[montag]

Instead of temporarily removing the aircraft details from G-xxxx, the CAA have in fact already listed the owner/pilot as deceased....
Maybe the intention is to prevent members of the media from mistakenly attempting to contact the aircraft's owner, which would only cause additional distress to his family. I do not think that the CAA have acted insensitively.

My thoughts are with the families and friends involved.

[VictorGolf]

I expect I shall get flamed for this and I apologise for any thread drift but I have question. I was coming back from the Fly-In at North Weald today and chugging up "Mig Alley" between Luton and Stansted. Stansted ATIS was giving a temp of minus 2 degrees when I saw some lowish cloud ahead, fortunately off my track. The question is how quickly would a windscreen ice up in these conditions? I'm not suggesting for a minute it was a factor in this crash but I would like to know as I don't usually fly in such cold conditions. BTW don't engines perform better when it is cold.

[IO540]

The question is how quickly would a windscreen ice up in these conditions?

Anything from not at all, to totally covered in seconds. It all depends on how much humidity there is in the air. I think bookworm is the one to ask how much icing potential there would have been on the day.

It's an interesting possibility - assuming the pilot was completely unable to fly on instruments.

BTW don't engines perform better when it is cold.

They do but in a PA28-140 you tend to be grateful for the smallest mercies, like having the prop rotating ;) So, not a lot of difference.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

We all know that non-pilot witness statements are to be taken with a very big pinch of salt, but the consistancy of the reports (initially very low flight, high revving engine noise before impact, high speed descent, ground-shaking thump on impact, total destruction of the aircraft with no recognisable pieces left - and one credible description of a 'looping roll' [barrel roll?]into the ground) plus the video evidence of the accident site make me think this accident does not fit the usual GA accident scenarios. I await the AAIB report with interest. This one looks 'different'.

SSD

[youngskywalker]

I often wonder how the AAIB cope with the amount of work they seem to have, I reckon they must be investigating at least one new fatal GA prang per month.

[vabsie]

I was wondering how much press GA Accidents like these get in the UK?

If this unfortunate accident did not disrupt a rail track would it have made the BBC evening news?

I'm purely asking in order to try and gauge how frequent fatal GA accidents are? Is there an easy way to search on the AAIB Site for fatal accidents for a specific year?

And lastly .. terrible news of course and thoughts with all the family and friends.

[cessna-kevin]

how many people really mean "my thoughts go out to the family" or waffle on about the incident without knowing the facts? i spoke with a friend of mine with whom ive flown on and off with for some years, who also said look on pprune and you will have countless comments of people getting at each other or trying to score browney points about the cause of the incident.this is one area of pprune that saddens me,i hope i am not alone and that many pilots out there feel likewise but cant be bothered to be caught up in this posting of a sad event.

[Genghis the Engineer]

We all know that non-pilot witness statements are to be taken with a very big pinch of salt, but the consistancy of the reports (initially very low flight, high revving engine noise before impact, high speed descent, ground-shaking thump on impact, total destruction of the aircraft with no recognisable pieces left - and one credible description of a 'looping roll' [barrel roll?]into the ground) plus the video evidence of the accident site make me think this accident does not fit the usual GA accident scenarios. I await the AAIB report with interest. This one looks 'different'.

SSD

On the contrary, non-pilots tend to describe what they saw. We pilots, I'm afraid, have a bad habit of trying to interpret what we saw and describing our interpretation of it - which can be much useful to an investigator.

G

[cessna-kevin]

i rest my case ,after the last post............i hope pprune changes for the better.

[A and C]

I have to agree with Genhis, more than a few years back when a Helicopter crashed at EGTB (fortunally the pilot escaped with only bruses) the best witness to the accident was the guy digging the footings for the new toilet block!

He had no aviation background and just described exactly what happend.

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

On the contrary, non-pilots tend to describe what they saw. We pilots, I'm afraid, have a bad habit of trying to interpret what we saw and describing our interpretation of it - which can be much useful to an investigator.

If that's the case, this aeroplane approached low and fast, pulled up into a barell roll with nothing like enough height to complete, and dived into the ground near - vertically off the exit. According to a very credible non-pilot witness.

That may or may not have happened. I don't know. I wasn't there. If I had been, as an aerobatic pilot, I'm pretty sure I could positively confirm or deny that analysis. If it had spun in, I think I'd recognise that as well and be a credible witness for AAIB.

But in the past (not this accident, where the witness evidence seems remarkably consistant) eye-witness reports of accidents have all sorts of contradictory evidence - the aeroplane broke apart in the sky or it didn't, it was on fire before impact or wasn't. Often, the shock of seeing something as tragic confuses the memory. A post-flight fire becomes a pre-flight fire, it spun left, or it spun right, etc.

I have witnessed three fatal accidents, all at airshows, and in each case I was aware, long before the watching public, that the display aeroplane was doomed (it's to do with rate and angle of descent, speed, and possibility of recovery in the space available). In all 3 cases, as a pilot what happened was immediately obvious (one was a barrell roll into the ground, one was a loop into the ground, the other was a spin off a stall turn, with all the preceeding horrid loss of stability). In all instances, the evidence of non-pilot witnesses varies from pretty accurate to miles off.

Also, pilots tend to stop what they are doing and watch the entire passage of an aeroplane, so they tend to see the entire accident sequence. Non-pilot witneses tend only to look up if the sound is unusual - and might see the final few seconds and not what (vitally) lead up to the tragedy. The consistency of non-pilot evidence at Colwich might be becuase the aeroplane was said to be unusually low prior to the accident sequence, so more people looked up.

SSD

[NutLoose]

pilotmike
Only one thing seems astounding about this.

Whereas the CAA have simply done their JOB, you by contrast, appear to have specifically searched for this information which you ghoulishly report back to us here, apparently for your own gratification. After all, it is not exactly information that you would just accidentally stumble across, now, is it?







Actually Mike, he may have read the site after reading the post I put on this thread ( Link below),

I looked when the Pilots name was announced as I had a gut feeling his address would be present (which it was)and posted that his address was on the site and that it may be a good idea for the CAA to remove it on the hope that someone from the CAA may have read this thread and concurred it would of been a good Idea.
After all the press visit here and the last thing his poor family need is a load of press on their doorstep at this moment in time,I did not post a link to the site or mention it's name for that very reason, but as It is generally known in the indusrty, he may have looked after I mentioned it and been appalled at seeing the CAA's rather uncaring response. To simply of removed the address or even to have taken the page down temporarily would have shown some tact for a short perid, especially as the other occupants had not been identified at the time, If I unintentionally through my post caused some distress I apologise, but it was done for all the best reasons at this time of extreme sadness.

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying/356505-light-aircraft-down-staffordshire-3.html

[vabsie]

What a stupid comment by cessna-kevin below:

"how many people really mean "my thoughts go out to the family" or waffle on about the incident without knowing the facts?"

Of course people's thought's go out to those affected?! In fact, it's probably the first thing most people think!

[S-Works]

vabsie, sorry to seem to contradict you. You are judging others by your own moral code and expecting them to behave in a certain manner. A manner in this case of aviation accidents from your own personal affinity as an aviator.

As callous as it sounds I would ask the same question. Tens of thousands of men, women and children die every day through accident disease, starvation, murder and conflict. I wonder if your thoughts go out to everyone of them as well (if so then I raise my hat as you are truly a saint) or do you just fail to even acknowledge that death toll as do most normal people? So why should an aviation crash be any different? Again it may sound callous but I personally can't make the connection that you are demanding towards people I have never met which is why I refrain from offering thoughts and condolences because it strikes me as hollow and false if I can't also react the same way to every death on the planet.

I am however always curious to see if there are lessons to be learnt from any incident that may save another life in the future.

Just something to think about.

[vabsie]

Thanks Bose-X I take your point, and no, of course my thoughts cannot go out to everyone out there, but, I am passionate about aviation (althought not nearly as experienced as probably most of you). Perhaps my slight fear of flying means I feel more for those involved in an air accident and the people around them. So, from my point of view when someone on the Forum says their thoughts go out to the families involved I take it as just that and unlike cessna-kevin don't see any reason to read more into it. I personally cannot see any reason to try and score brownie points from anybody on an Internet Forum - Again maybe because I don't fully understand this business like some of you do.

[Phil Space]

Let's just get back to speculation.

Low wing PA28 offering poor views downstairs.

So perhaps a steep tight turn that goes wrong?

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Round about Srl 94, icing was being discussed. A serious question regarding AAIB forensics: supposing an aircraft is flying safely and stably and the windscreen suddenly ices over at the same instant the static vent, and perhaps also the pitot head, blocks with ice, how would the AAIB detect that the condition ever existed?

[IO540]

They can't....

But was there a risk of entry into IMC, in this case?

[Genghis the Engineer]

A small proportion of AAIB reports over the years have said something like "here's the evidence, here's the possibilities - we don't really know, but the least likely explanation is..."

Much as we'd like it, you can't know everything. Providing the ability to know everything after an accident, might well price GA out of existence, so shouldn't necessarily be pursued.

G

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Genghis the Engineer. Copied; many thanks.

IO540. In my hypothetical case, VMC but becoming "instant IMC" once the windscreen frosts over. I have vivid memories of last Autumn, landing on a runway heading 270 just before sunset. It was CAVOK but may as well have been IMC through the fly spattered windcreen.

Sorry for the thread drift.

[beatnik]

Pilotmike

I was tempted to ignore the two posts you addressed to me, as inflamatory words like "voyeuristic" and "ghoulish" hardly help support any rational argument. But I found your last post speculative and bombastic, so in an attempt to set the record straight, let me assure you that there was nothing more sinister in my actions than Nutloose has correctly surmised.

Here's what happened. I read Nutloose's post. I thought his suggestion that the pilot's address be (temporarily) removed from the CAA website was a good one, and simply wanted to see if it had been done.

I was disappointed that it hadn't, but was even more surprised that, instead, someone had found the time to update the details in the way I described. Perhaps my use of the word "Speechless" was a bit sensationalist and for that I am happy to apologise.

You have, however, surmised the following (I don't know how to do the "quote thingies"):

"By contrast, beatnik has done the complete opposite by:
1 Going to look specifically for information about the victim
2 Checking for changed status to deceased
3 posting the information here, drawing its availability to a wider audience
4 expressing shock at OTHER people's actions!"

1 - False : I wasn't specifically looking for info on the victim - I have no interest in that information - as explained, I was following up on Nutloose's post to see if the info had been removed to protect the pilot's family from unwanted press intrusion.
2 - False : I wasn't checking to see if the status had been changed to deceased (I didn't even know the CAA do that) - I was just shocked that it had, and at how quickly it had been done, all on a Sunday.
3 - I accept your point on this one - but I gave no further details as to existence of the site than others on this forum have previously presented.
4 - To quote Nutloose again, it was a case of me being "appalled at the CAA's uncaring response". It has nothing to do with someone doing their JOB, because I find it hard to believe that it is someone's job to go in and update this type of information without forms being filled in, before changes are made to the website - which is why I take some offence to your comment that "It was his breathtaking hypocrisy with his self-righteous indignation at the CAA doing their job". I'll use an absurb example to try and make my point: I own a plane, and then decide to move house. News of my move and my new address (for some reason) is reported on Sky News. Would someone in the CAA go in and change my address details? No - I don't think they would.

Pilotmike, I have no further wish to perpetuate this argument, and so I can only hope you understand what prompted me to post my comment in the first place. If not, I'm afraid we'll have to agree to disagree.

[Mikehotel152]

Hmmm, I don't 'buy' any of the theories so far belched up by the assembled wise men and women of Pprune. There's just too little to go on, especially when bearing in mind the dangers of relying on so-called witness evidence.

Aerobatics at low-level is hardly new, but in this case, no. I imagine the media would have picked up on any 'show-of' style flying. Misty or iced up windscreen? If I had one I wouldn't be flying at low level. Would you? Would the poor deceased? We don't know. Let's wait for the AAIB.

I'm not particularly bothered by ghoulish investigations though. Some people do it; others just think it. Hardly new on Pprune anyway. I've learned to ignore it and look for the sensible posts.

I don't think expressing condolences is offensive either. I've cried many a tear on Remembrance Sunday and I don't know anyone who died on the Somme or last week in Helmand Province. It's still very sad and deserved more comment than is routinely dished out by the Celebrity-obsessed Media.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

'Instant IMC' can occur (GBZ I know what you mean, although you state VMC).

Years ago I had been on a training exercise at relatively high level and then descended the cold soaked aircraft into more humid conditions. The canopy immediately froze over and visibility was zero. The instructor explained the situation and flew on instruments until the frost melted in warmer air lower down.

So this could be a possibility.

After all cold soaked jet aircraft can have ice on the wings in sunny Spain during turnaround if the conditions are conducive to icing, so it's not a wild assumption. Just depends on the conditions - which at the time of this accident I'm not aware?

There can be no proof, as other people have stated, just a possibility.

I can't help but think that the outcome of the enquiry will be just that - a list of possibilities, maybe exacerbated by the state of the aircraft at the time.

KR

FOK

[LH2]

supposing an aircraft is flying safely and stably and the windscreen suddenly ices over at the same instant the static vent, and perhaps also the pitot head, blocks with ice, how would the AAIB detect that the condition ever existed?

That's a good point actually. A not entirely unlikely scenario (variations thereof one has already come across in incident reports involving commercial air traffic in the guise of ADC failures), and good of you to point it out--regardless of the primary subject of this thread, that's a good reminder of a kind of situation we could find ourselves in someday.

Out of interest, what would your actions be (assuming pilot capable of IR flight)? Pitot heat on, alt. static, fly power settings if needed until speed and alt indications reliable, and get vectors for a safe descent below the freezing level?

[Gertrude the Wombat]

Out of interest, what would your actions be (assuming pilot capable of IR flight)? Pitot heat on, alt. static, fly power settings if needed until speed and alt indications reliable, and get vectors for a safe descent below the freezing level?
Ouch! - I wouldn't have thought of the alt static. I would now.

[IO540]

It would take an awful lot to block up the static vents with ice. They are not "in" the airflow as such.

And GPS altitude would be perfectly fine, in place of the altimeter, for getting back down somewhere. I've got a yoke mounted Garmin 496; this has four corners and in each you can have a user configurable parameter, and I selected altitude to be one of these. Very handy as a gross error check on the altimeter QNH setting.

Also, your horizon (AI) is not going to stop working so together with the altimeter one can still fly the plane.

Anyway, I am not sure how this is applicable to the incident flight, which appears to have gone wrong at a very low level.

[Pace]

Reading a few comments here are a few points :)

Yes people die every day of the week on the roads and hardly get more than a couple of lines in the local press, or a few bunches of flowers attached to the nearest street lamp.

In numbers we are a minute group compared to motorists and compared to a road crash an aircraft crash is news.

As pilots we are a small bunch in a small world and our hearts go out to a fellow aviator.

Its more than that. We are vulnerable and any fatal aircraft crash highlights that vulnerability.
We all want to know that our fellow pilot was an accident waiting to happen, that his aircraft was a heap of junk waiting to fall apart.

The last thing we want to know is that a good pilot in a good aircraft crashed and died because then we think that could be us on our next jolly.

That is a deep tucked away fear that lies with us all.
Any tragic accident brings that fear boiling up to the surface.
We have to talk about it, disect it, anylyse it and put it right in our minds so that those fears can be tucked away and we can carry on doing what we love doing.

As to this accident dont expect the AAIB to come to a conclusion an answer.
The wreck site was a pile of dust so intense was the impact. There is hardly likely to be enough bits to determine an airframe failure. So they like us are likely to come up with "possibilities" or a stringed together list of known events which allows you to come to a conclusion.

They will look at all the witness reports to see how they each tie in with one another and hopefully come to some sort of answer but maybe by then we will all have tucked that fear away and wont be that interested anyway.

Pace

[IO540]

By the time the report comes out, this accident will be all but forgotten.

Presumably there will be a radar track; I hope the plane was Mode C equipped. This may give a clue to what they were generally up to before the crash.

The last thing we want to know is that a good pilot in a good aircraft crashed and died because then we think that could be us on our next jolly.I don't think I'd worry about that at all, myself. A working plane with a working pilot isn't just going to suddenly plummet vertically downwards. Something very weird happened here. I bank on getting an engine failure one day - hopefully not in one of the inconvenient places where I sometimes find myself - and on any number of instrument or other system failures, but a plane just suddenly plummetting? Not really. Not in VMC for sure. This one is weird.

Incidentally, was the pilot one of the two parents who died, or were the parents the passengers?

[Pace]

10540

I refer back to the Biggin Hill Citation crash an aircraft that I have flown and which crashed with a pilot I knew.

Why should such an aircraft with a capable pilot come down with an engine out from literally a cruise situation when I have gone around on test flights on one engine with gear and flaps hanging down on a simular aircraft with no problems. The Citation can handle an engine out with ease.

At one point there was talk of a multiple bird strike. Okay that made sense a one off not likely to happen again. That Theory was discounted, heart drops :( and so on.

We as pilots want to know because it makes no sense and we want to make sense of non sense.

With the PA28 Pilot if he was doing something stupid or fooling around then thats OK because we can easely avoid the same?

If this guy was found to be doing low level semi aerobatics then in our minds thats ok we can avoid it.

If It was a failure to a good pilot in a good plane then thats harder to come to terms with. We want to know that cannot or will not happen to us. Its as simple as that.

The Bravado, the joking, the finger pointing, the chest beating happened all the time in the second world war to fighter pilots.
It was a coping method used by pilots who knew their chances of coming back were not good.

In our day when we are unlikely to be shot out of the sky we want to know what can shoot us out of the sky and its not guns.

This was NOT an iced up screen, this was not a spin to the ground. It was a high speed high rev dive into the ground which was either pilot error, airframe/control failure or pilot incapacitation.

Whatever my heart goes out to the poor guy at the controls and the other occupants of that aircraft because their joyous flight turned into a nightmare for them and their relatives and friends with tragic consequences.


Pace

[soay]

Thanks Pace, you've perfectly summed up the value of such speculation.

[AMEandPPL]

Incidentally, was the pilot one of the two parents who died, or were the parents the passengers?

Believe the recently married parents of two kids were the passengers.
Have not yet seen any report on where they were sitting (back or front).
Reference has been made to weight and balance; could this be relevant ?

[Pace]

Reference has been made to weight and balance; could this be relevant ?

AMEand PPL

It could be relevant had the aircraft gone into a flat spin which it didnt recover from or had it been overloaded structurally.

The high speed dive doesnt indicate a flat spin but more a dive or spiral dive which the aircraft didnt recover from.

Pace

[S-Works]

As I said before, I more inclined to believe some sort of problem leading to a possible stretching of the glide and stall with subsequent nose down descent into the ground.

[Pace]

As I said before, I more inclined to believe some sort of problem leading to a possible stretching of the glide and stall with subsequent nose down descent into the ground.

Bose

The witness who seemed quite a serious calm sort of guy reported a sharp wing dop followed by an almost vertical dive into the ground. Another witness reported the engine sounding like a high speed drill which for a non pilot was quite an accurate description of the sound of a high rev diving aircraft.

There were no radio calls made in ref to a rough engine or engine failure and subsequent attempted off field landing. Tricky one!

Pace

[S-Works]

Which would indicate a stall and probable spin entry. So back to my point about the cause rather than the visible symptom?

[execExpress]

"Which would indicate a stall and probable spin entry."

FWIW thats the best sense I can make of the reports so far.

"So back to my point about the cause rather than the visible symptom?"

Cold day, lots of cabin heat, cracked exhaust, carbon monoxide poisoning of the PIC is a leading potential scenario. Wouldn't be the first time. Sadly, won't be the last. It doesn't happen often, but does happen.

Small electronic CO2 detectors with audible alarm are available - can go back in the flight-bag or be left in the aircraft after flight.

Is the CO2 risk worth some outlay on a detector? Like having a liferaft after leaving a ditched aircraft - if it happens to you - there is no question - it is worth it. I am not sure there is a better way of mitigating this risk.

[Pace]

Bose

It could indicate a whole host of possibilities!
Really depends on what height it occurred. A nasty wing drop could have taken the pilot by surprise leading to an over recovery, he could have entered a spiral dive mistaken it for a spin and not recovered from the resulting dive. He may not even have been at the controls ie incapacitation. Something could have broken or seized?

His passeneger in the right seat may have contributed? The list goes on.

The height at which the witnessed episode commenced would be very telling. If indeed it was 100 to 200 feet then a stall stretching the glide could be the reason.
If the witnessed episode commenced much higher then its unlikely.

The shear destruction of the airframe into unrecognisable fragments would indicate a very high speed impact from altitude as would the high speed drill sound of the engine/prop but like you I am only guessing.

Lets hope the AAIB manage to piece together enough from this tragic accident to get a likely cause.

Pace

[S-Works]

The 415kv lines that the aircraft seemed to have hit could have been a likely contributor to the scale of devastation.

Sometimes the simplest scenario provides the simplest answer. Looking at the history of accidents in this type their is a recurring theme that seems to come to my mind at least.

Reading the comments about the pilot it strikes me that he was a safe and conscientious aviator who would not have been show boating low level. So looking at other reasons for them to end up so low over a railway track leaves me with a mechanical failure that the pilot was doing his best to salvage.

My gut feeling is a possible power problem, attempt at a forced landing, poor choices to put down, an attempt at stretching the glide to clear the railway tracks and subsequent stall spin.

[172driver]

My gut feeling is a possible power problem

And all witnesses report a high-revving engine ??

[S-Works]

My wife thinks the engine on my cessna sounds high revving at idle. If the engine was running it could sound 'high revving' to the untrained ear. This would not preclude there being a power problem that prevented the aircraft maintaining height.

I have an open mind to any other possibility but as I said quite often the simplest answers are usually not far from the reality.

It is interesting as an Instructor to see how people struggle with flying accurate PFL's during the 2 year review flight. Just because it is a skill that is rarely practised by most. It is very easy to get on the back of the curve during practice so think about it during a real emergency?

[Pace]

My concern too was the high revving engine a stall low level into power cables and you would expect a lot of large pieces of wreckage rather than the powder remains. The cables were destroyed which also indicates a high speed collision with them too.

The high speed electric drill sound reported by a non pilot did it for me because that is exactly what a high rev high speed dive sounds like.

We are all guessing so lets hope the AAIB have more.

Pace

[S-Works]

Pace, I would expect quite the opposite. Hitting 415Kv lines would have caused an explosion and intense fire in my experience. When I worked for railtrack we had to do a 'person' course that would allow us trackside and one of the videos showed a van bringing down the high voltage cables. It was flash incinerated in seconds.

The TV images remind me of this video acclerated by the Avgas I suspect.

[vanHorck]

i don't know the location where the crash happened.

If he was higher up when the problems began, surely he would have made a call, as pushing that talk button does not preclude any simultaneous action in the cockpit, I think it would be second nature to do so.

In that case the question is natural, to ask if he was on an approach to a field.

Carbon Monoxide poisoning could explain descending (at increasing speed) without a call and perhaps the sharp wingdrop at the first contact with the powerlines.

The alternative of flying low (without being on an approach) and slow and stalling when trying to avoid the powerlines would be awful indeed

[Pace]

Van Horck

As far as we know there was no call made of any problems. The Pilot was in his mid sixties. For all we know it could have been pilot incapacitation with the passenger not even knowing how to use a radio or how to fly an aircraft.
It is all guesswork and as such important to keep an open mind.

Pace

[S-Works]

Or it could just have been that he was non radio(by non radio I mean not talking to anyone) and the incident arose so quickly that his priority was to aviate before communicate.

I hardly turned my radio on in the last week with no one to speak to.

[west lakes]

Hitting 415Kv lines


Gents sadly they hit the 25,000V West Coast main line power cables & catenary. From memory these can take something in the region of up to 1000 amps before disconnecting, so apart from the energy of the crash you may be looking at something like 25MW (million watts) of electrical power dissapation as well.

[IO540]

On a short circuit, the circuit breaker up the line would have tripped in a small fraction of a second.

At a descent rate anything like that reported by the witnesses, the time between slicing the power cables and hitting the ground would be so short that the power cables would not have made any significant difference to their trajectory, which was apparently more or less straight down.

[vabsie]

For my own benefit - Does Pilot Incapacitation mean heart-attack?

[S-Works]

On a short circuit, the circuit breaker up the line would have tripped in a small fraction of a second.

IO, it does not work like that on the railway power grid or the national power grid for that matter.

I have the exact details from the course somewhere but it is something to do with the way power is drawn by the engines that would cause a CB to trip out all the time. Even when severed it is possible for the lines to remain live. The lines are also capable of generating their own electricity from static accumulation.

[Pace]

For my own benefit - Does Pilot Incapacitation mean heart-attack?

It can mean a heart attack but could mean any condition where the pilot was unable to fly the aircraft.

Pace

[AMEandPPL]

For my own benefit - Does Pilot Incapacitation mean heart-attack?

Yes, it certainly could do, but, as Pace says, it could also mean anything whereby normal control of the aeroplane by the pilot is reduced or prevented. The list could be almost endless . . . . . . .

Heart attack, stroke, epileptic fit, poisoning ( CO, food);
even anything which, due to severe pain, is totally distracting, eg renal colic.

And we all remember the pilot who was struck blind late last year . . . . .:sad:

[Pace]

I am tending to lean towards incapacitation of either the pilot or airframe /controls bar the pilot doing something stupid aerobatic wise.

But doing something stupid aerobatic wise could lead to airframe /control problems.

The pilot was fairly old mid sixties so unlikely to be a tearaway hot rod although you do get some.

He was experienced in an aircraft he had flown for years. That would mean it fitted him like a glove. He would know every twitch or burp it made.

The PA28 140 had the old slab wing which was the most stall resistant and docile wing used even today on the seneca twins.

I dont think there are any indications to show an engine failure, glide and stall spin.
unlikely to a pilot who knew the aircraft so well.

No radio calls would indicate something abrupt in either the pilot or the airframe. The vertically down and destruction in the accident site to me means from altitude.

Incapacitation / airframe control problems / possible semi aerobatics? which is quite a wide spectrum of possibilities. But hey my instincts might be totally wrong.

Pace

[dont overfil]

I have twice in (newer) PA 28s discovered excessive movement in the "stablator" bearing. When pointed out to the engineers the AC was grounded immediately.
Is it possible that it could fail completely? Does the 140 have the long counterbalance, which I believe was subject to an AD?
DO

[vanHorck]

i am aware of a PA28 who's ailerons failed (plane landed safely after lining up with rudder only), due to manufacturing error (years after manufacturing). Structural failure of the elevators (trim system?) or similar is not common but not impossible

[AMEandPPL]

The pilot was fairly old, mid-sixties

Excuse me, mid-sixties is NOT old ! ! Actually he was only 59.

Sorry, back to the serious stuff.

[Lister Noble]

I knew a remarkable lady who rode to hounds into her nineties and drove the horsebox.Mind you ,you wouldn't want to meet her coming the other way in the horsebox.
Played tennis into her eighties until she injured her arm.
She lived until 104 and at her 100th consumed enough bubbly to gently fall over ,caught gracefully by a guest.
She had been out in Africa before the war and knew all the people in Happy Valley,when I asked her what they were like she said
"An absolute waste of time ,my dear"
They don't make too many like that!

A lady friend lives down the lane,90 years old,had her first flying lesson a couple of months ago.
Lady friend of my wife ,in case you had other thoughts.

Sorry thread wander,happens when you get old.;);)

[Pace]

PPLandAME and Lister Noble

My apologies for incorrect use of old :) Mature Pilot rather than 20 year old Hot Rods who would beat up any bit of railway line . And yes I do know a few "Mature" pilots who pull a few loops and barrel rolls ;) I hope he wasnt one of them.

Pace

[FlyingOfficerKite]

dont overfil

The stabilator control system is a valid topic, in my opinion.

One of the important pre-flight checks on the -140 is to look down inside the fuselage from the rear of the stabilator to ensure the control jack and cable are in working order.

I understand that the cable can come adrift from the screw jack, but I have never heard of this in practice. Maybe our engineering friends can shed some light on this issue?

With the aircraft being over 40 years old and the CofA within a couple of months of expiring, I wonder if this was a consideration? It is the only structural/control failure I can think of which is a known possibility and for which one always checks.

The accident is certainly baffling at the moment, as so many people have already pointed out.

KR

FOK

[Lister Noble]

I was thinking along these lines a couple of days ago but did not post.
I do the pre-flight as best I can on the L4 and take my time ,a very simple craft although there are hidden cables for all the major controls.
We have the annual and 25 and 50 hr checks but some of these sytems will not be inspected for a whole year.
Not speculating on this accident,but it does make one think about what goes unckecked.
Lister

[IO540]

The thing is that, with a good pilot, the total loss of any one of

- aileron control

- elevator control

- elevator free movement

- elevator trim

- rudder control

is not a problem unless it happens in the middle of an aggressive maneuver (an unusual attitude, basically). If it happens in more or less level flight, the plane isn't going to plummet. You still have control, due to secondary control surface effects (rudder for roll/turn, elev. trim for pitch, etc).

If the elevator falls off, the plane will plummet allright but the witnesses did not suggest this happened.

There have been (rare) light jet accidents where an engine disintegration shredded control cables to the tail, resulting in a loss of control. Could this have been the Biggin Hill Citation one, recently? But that isn't likely in this case - the engine is up front.

[172driver]

FWIW

I have not flown a PA-140 in quite a while, but did my initial training in -161/-181s. One of the things we always checked during preflight was the integrity of the bolts that limit the stabilator travel. If they fail, you can totally overcontrol the a/c. However, you would of course only be in danger of doing so by moving the control surface (stabilator) to its limits.

This is really a weird one. My guess is human factors of one kind or another....

[Spitoon]

No radio calls would indicate something abrupt in either the pilot or the airframe. I'm puzzled, perhaps you can help out. How do you know there was no radio call? Who was the pilot speaking to on the ground?

[Pace]

I'm puzzled, perhaps you can help out. How do you know there was no radio call? Who was the pilot speaking to on the ground?

Spitoon

Read it in one of the numerous tabloid press articles so maybe false but that is all we have to go on at present as well as the witness statements.

If there was radio communication chances are that whatever the problem would have been broadcast or picked up from one source or another. ie it would have already leaked out to the media.

"Mayday Mayday Mayday xyz has a rough engine or Pilot unwell request vectors to nearest airfield".

The fact that no one is the wiser would indicate that the press were correct in their statement and that whatever happened was abrupt.

Flying VFR they may not have been talking to anyone or may have been on an FIS with a ground station who probably were not that interested in them anyway. A Mayday call would have drawn attention but unless someone knows otherwise no such call was forthcoming.

Pace

[smarthawke]

This has got to be one of the most ridiculous cases of amateur accident investigation ever seen on the internet.

'Elevators not seen coming off a PA28, stabilator control jacks and cables visible in the rear fuselage from the back on a pre-flight, no radio call was made because it said so in tabloid newspapers, over control the aircraft because of a missing limit stop, aircraft was nearly due an Annual etc etc etc'.

Sounds like some of you should progress beyond the I-Spy book of aircraft and then you might know a little bit more about what you are putting into print. Hope the media don't believe you and you wonder why the press get things wrong!!

Give me strength....!

[S-Works]

Pace, No offence, but I am sorry I think you are giving the pilot a level of skill in dealing with an in-flight emergency that I have rarely seen in GA. When practising PFL's with students 99.9% of them do not even think of a radio call let alone have the mindset to actually tune the thing to an appropriate frequency and make a call all at the same time as choosing a field, getting best glide and going through drills. Not to mention the fact that this was the middle of the holidays with most places shut. I hardly even turned my radio on during the break let alone talked to anyone. I am more likely to give credit that the guy was attempting to aviate following a failure and just ran out of options.

As smarthawke has said this really is getting beyond the realms of belief.

And as I have said a couple of time before, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

[Pace]

Bose

We none of us know what happened to cause that tragic accident it is all speculation.

SmartHawke

This is a pilot forum. IMO it is healthy for pilots to discuss and disect the possibilities of why an accident occurred. It can happen to any of us here.

The more we discuss the more aware we become of not only the accident in question but of other potential threats to our safety.

IMO it is only when these awful things happen that we take stock and realise our own vulnerability and hence learn and no we are not the media but a pilot forum.

Pace

[vanHorck]

I am with you Pace.

Yes the most obvious reason is the likely one, but not always.

Either way, us all wrecking our brains to think of potential scenario's is a good thing for all of us. And sharing them helps our brain working.

Thinking of scenario's without hurting the ones left behind unduly (respect) is what this forum is about. The ever recurring discussion as to post or not post is just a side annoyance coming from new members and a few die-hards

[dont overfil]

OK smarthawke. What was the AD on the counterweight about?
DO.

[Fuji Abound]

All we know about this accident is the aircraft was destroyed in a high speed impact.

Almost every scenario you can dream up is a possibility, and about the only scenario that can probably be eliminated is the accident was not weather related.

A discussion about what you would do if an aileron failed would be informative and worthwhile. Flag the thread as such and it will attract attention.

Second guessing hypothetical accident scenarios and half debating each is probably the best way of disconnecting from most readers on this forum.

Sorry, but you have almost nothing to go on, and this has just become another utterly pointless “what if” debate.

However, don’t let me stop you, debate on, that is what this forum is about, in the same way that I simply wanted to explain why I didn’t join in.

.. .. .. and to answer the last post, if you want to excercise your brains (which I would agree is probably a good thing) then as I suggested earlier go start dedicated threads along the lines of "the thread on X-XXXX got me thinking, what would you do if .. .. .. ). :)

[modelman]

I have no problem with all the speculation being expounded here but with what appears to be the total destruction of the aircraft compounded by the subsequent fire,is it possible that the AAIB would be able to provide a definite cause with so little to go on?

The AAIB appear to be an extremely thorough organisation but I imagine there is very little physical evidence for them to analyse/test.Maybe this will remain a mystery forever.

MM

[Pace]

Second guessing hypothetical accident scenarios and half debating each is probably the best way of disconnecting from most readers on this forum.

Fuji

This thread has had 22500 hits compared to 1000 to 2000 usual hits on most threads. I think that states the level of interest that the thread has generated.

Any thread will have its life. It then naturally comes to a halt. Usually portions of the thread are informative,some are rubbish, some portions are antagonistic some develop into outright war, but ride through that and the conclusion is normally beneficial and sensible.

Pace

[mm_flynn]

The AAIB appear to be an extremely thorough organisation but I imagine there is very little physical evidence for them to analyse/test.Maybe this will remain a mystery forever.

MM

The AAIB will actually have a reasonably large set of information to go on. Not the least will likely to be
1 - An actual radar track (maybe with altitudes) which will answer many questions about the flight leading up to the incident.

2 - Pieces of rotating machinery (blades etc) which will either show evidence of damage from rotation or impact (i.e. was the engine generating significant power)

3 - A presence or absence of debris removed from the main debris field (i.e. evidence of any pre-impact failure)

4 - There may be radio or history of flight information that helps inform the conclusion (including W&B, and intentions of the flight)

these will all help to rule out many of the speculated causes. Whether they can narrow down to a probable cause or several possibilities will need to wait for their conclusions.

[Fuji Abound]

Pace

It is a bit like a motorway accident - everyone stops and looks, that is the way we are.

However, please tell me in an instructional sense what the average forumite will take away from this thread in terms of the discussion about this accident being a specific "learning experience".

In many accident scenarios we have a reasonable idea of what happened (particularly in the commercial world). Such accidents provide a useful learning scenario. We recall the discussion about the events and take measures to ensure we dont end up playing out the same set of events. No message can be taken from this debate, or if it can, it is so far burried as to be of little value.

I dont know if you read Flying (the American publication) - but the monthly article Aftermath I think it is titled is well worth reading and demonstrates the value of discussing an accident where there is a reasonable amount of evidence to suggest the causes. If we can have a discussion along these lines I think it is worthwhile, if we have almost nothing on which to base our speculation that I remain firmly unconvinced of its value.

Speculate as you wish, but you have almost nothing on which to base your speculation, so for me at any rate it is a pointless excercise.

[smarthawke]

Pace

I am well aware this is a pilots' forum - and I speak as a pilot of 30 years and as an engineer for nearly as many. My point was that if you are going to post about possible problems with a particular aircraft type then learn a little about it before going into great depths.

Here's some examples:
1. PA28s don't have elevators so it's unlikely one fell off this particular aircraft.
2. You can look inside the tail cone of a PA28, not the rear fuse. The cable drum you can see operates the stab trim. There is no 'control jack'.
3. If the primary limit stop bolts were missing then what happens is the horizontal stab (in this case) would go a few degrees further (if that) until the secondary stops are contacted (which happens under the instrument panel). Full scale stab deflection during flight on a PA28 is not going to be good, stops there or not.
4. Aircraft don't fall to bits just because it's Annual inspection time.
5. PA28 stab is controlled by cables onto the balance arm inside the rear fuse. There is an Airworthiness Directive on certain PA28 models to check for cracks on the balance arm mounting holes where it bolts to the stab spar (200hr repetitive inspection).

AD is here: EASA Airworthiness Directives Publishing Tool (http://ad.easa.europa.eu/ad/2005-0034#download)

I'm sure the AAIB will have enough to go on to have a good idea of what tragically happened.

I don't want to comment too much more or I'll find myself agreeing with Bose and one does have a reputation to uphold after all...

[FlyingOfficerKite]

smartarse

I asked if any of our engineering 'friends' could offer any advice.

I was not looking for a 'smart alec', sarcastic response.

You will not uphold your reputation if you ridicule the responses of those who make comments in good faith and who may not have a bone dome as large as yours.

FOK

[vanHorck]

ouch.....


now lets get back on track and stop acting like babies

[FlyingOfficerKite]

Indeed ... and the simplest explanation is ...?

KR

FOK

[oscarisapc]

In answer to the questions others have posed - Well a lot actually - so far I have been reminded about control issues with three up and I have confirmed my personal rule that I never offer to take flying at the same time both parents of young children. I have heard some theories about why this aircraft crashed some of which I hadn't thought of and may come to mind when I do my go/no go check before my next flight. I have also read a masterly exposition of why we are all so interested in this issue.

The last thread I read on a crash which inspired exactly the same debate about whether speculation should take place or not was the incident in Ireland killing a whole family. I was particularly interested because I had also considered flying that day and had decided against it on the grounds of weather, so I can remember vividly what the conditions were like. Whether the crash was caused by pilot incapacitation, aircraft malfunction, loss of control in IMC or just excessive turbulence or something else altogether I have no idea and we will have to wait for the investigation. But it was high in my consciousness because it could have been me flying. I have since given a lot of thought to the safety margin accompanying that flight - right down to a comment some contributor made about waves in the Irish Sea being so high that a successful ditching would have been unlikely had an engine failure occurred over water. In whatever interval it takes for an AAIB report to come out, I will have forgotten what it was like that day.

We need to keep on speculating whilst things are fresh in our minds, not attribute blame until we know the facts, and not criticise others for voicing their honest opinions even if we disagree with them. The critics don't need to read the thread.

[smarthawke]

Ah the old name calling game. Excellent grown up response, well done.

I wasn't actually being sarcastic, I was merely pointing out some inaccuracies in previous posts which some people may not have realised were actually taken from Enid Blyton's 'Tales of Aircraft Accident Investigation'.

So sorry if the truth hurt. Enjoy.

[FlyingOfficerKite]

Frankly I'm not really interested whether it's a screw jack, control jack, rear fuselage or tail cone.

The crux of the matter is to try and determine what may have happened and to try and invoke some positive safety arguments to help ensure other, perhaps, less experienced pilots gain something from the airmanship issues in question here. If that can be achieved then much has been gained from this Thread.

Speculation is just that. If it is ill-informed or 'amateurish' then don't mock those with less knowledge than yourself. Try and put the misconceptions right in a humble and informative manner.

KR

FOK :)

[vanHorck]

For some reason pedant is apparently part of the PPL syllabus , although it may be an exam for 1.000 hrs + PPL-ics

Can we get back to being humble, free to voicing our opinions and respect for others?

[PompeyPaul]

Can we get back to being humble, free to voicing our opinions and respect for others?

Wait, when did that happen on pprune ?!? I can't believe I missed it...

[vanHorck]

Can we work towards being humble, free to voicing our opinions and respect for others?
:)
:ugh:
:ok:

[BRL]

I hope so or it gets locked.

[Fuji Abound]

The crux of the matter is to try and determine what may have happened and to try and invoke some positive safety arguments to help ensure other, perhaps, less experienced pilots gain something from the airmanship issues in question here. If that can be achieved then much has been gained from this Thread.

I disagree.

How can you determine what has happened from the facts we have?

As is so often the case with threads such as this we are doing nothing more than speculating -wildly.

The accident may have been caused by:

Pilot incapacitation,

An overloaded aircraft,

Mechanical failure,

An unsuccessful forced landing,

and a dozen or more other scenarios we might dream up.

We simply do not know. We have so little evidence on which to go.

We do know the pilot was experienced. We can reasonably assume he knew his aircraft well because he was the owner. In the absence of any information to the contrary it seems to me disingenuous to speculate the pilot had overloaded his aircraft - whilst clearly it is possible.

Forgive me for repeating myself but I do genuinely get concerned when we resort to such wild speculation. For those that do, come on chaps, set out in clear terms the evidence on which you are relying to reach the conclusion you are promoting so at least we can determine whether there is a reasoned argument behind the proposition.

Having been involved with the AAIB it is indeed the case that even in an accident such as this a great deal of evidence can be gathered about the factors which may have been contributory. For example, almost certainly the AAIB will be able to prepare a post flight loading sheet which will probably be fairly accurate. However, it is fair to say that whilst in most cases they may be fairly confident of the likely cause, some will remain a mystery.

We justify our speculation on the grounds that others might learn. I think there is some merit in this argument. An accident secures a morbid audience who will be attracted to the thread. However the discussion often ends up wide ranging and without focus in cases where there is so little evidence. I still cannot help feeling we would do better to take one thread of speculation and debate this as a matter in its own right.

Finally I didn’t think the comments about the mechanical aspects of the aircraft were sarcastic. They came across to me as being a factual disposition of the mechanical elements of this aircraft. Is it really the case that we are so keen to ignore the facts for want of speculation? I would far rather acknowledge that based on the evidence we can eliminate certain possibilities.

As pilots I think one of the most important lessons we can learn is to approach a problem - any problem, in a quantitative way. If we cant do that we will have failed in our ability to assess any problem with which we may be confronted in the air. There are so many accidents which only occurred because the pilots chose to ignore the evidence which was available to them at the time or because they failed to analyse the evidence correctly. I would suggest we make the same mistake in our analysis of accidents in some of these threads for want of any evidence of the cause and reveal ourselves as lacking the methodical analysis that we should expect from pilots.

[vabsie]

Will the AAIB (or Police) also talk to friends of the pilot to determine if the pilot was in good health both mentally and physically?

I've been going through the safety briefings on pilotworkshops lately and something that was mentioned was buzzing a house? Not suggesting that this was the cause as I don't even know if there are any houses in the area.

But it brings me onto my next thought.

Professionalism should in threory always prevail But - As a pilot I guess you might sometimes naturally try to make the flight for your passengers a little more "interesting", maybe by flying a little lower and slower so that they can see what's happening on the ground .. and then possibly to be caught out by the extra weight?

My amateurish and in-experienced 2 cents and apologies if something similar was mentioned before but I can't be asked to read through all the posts again.

[vanHorck]

Fuji

We all learn from each other. I learn from you, just the way you write and analyze. I learn from Bose's point of view, I learn from IO540's great power to challenge, I learn from the questions of the PPL student, I learn from many people here

Thats why I keep coming back here.

I get upset by the petty nagging at each other, where the one feels he's better than the other. Well f*ck me ( i learned this from a BBC cooking program), none of us are any better than others so be grateful you can afford to fly and feel free! Many people will never even get close to what we're given in life, we're the lucky ones!

Keep up the good work! I wanna keep learning!

[Pace]

Fuji

From previous accident posts of yours it is clear that you are opposed to discussions on accidents. While I respect that and enjoy your contributions your comments regarding accidents come from a biased position.

I personally welcome discussion. The reason for that is not to work out the AAIBs work for them! You are missing the point.

Any accident could be to any of us here. We are a small fraternity and when these accidents occur it pulls us up and makes us realise our own vulnerability. " There for the Grace of God go we".

By purely discussing possible causes we are at least thinking about the accident and making ourselves more aware of what could go wrong. It is a natural human instinct to talk about worries a cleansing of the soul.

There are most definately benefits to such discussion. One poster said that he reconsidered a flight to Ireland over water because of the discussions regarding flying over water in winter to Southern Ireland. The discussion highlighted for him other threats in undertaking such a flight for an inexperienced pilot which he was not aware of. Yet this discussion revolved around the Ireland accident.

When an accident occurs we are shocked and hence more open to taking in information a year plus down the line when the AAIB results come out the accident is a distant memory.

The Biggin Hill Citation crash happened to an aircraft that I had actually flown and to a pilot I had years ago flown with. I was shocked more than most and wanted to know what could possibly have brought that aircraft and that pilot down. In a way I needed to talk about it!

Now months later still no word from The AAIB, still no definative reasons but the accident no longer shocks. It is becoming a distant and forgotten memory.

Bose you are opposed to any discussion. Be honest with yourself you made that clear in previous posts for reasons which are commendable. We are not a branch of the AAIB looking for results but pilots expressing our own deep fears.

Pace

[Pace]

I am well aware this is a pilots' forum - and I speak as a pilot of 30 years and as an engineer for nearly as many. My point was that if you are going to post about possible problems with a particular aircraft type then learn a little about it before going into great depths.

SmartHawke

If you are an engineer and notice any innacurate postings in any thread never mind this one, It is your duty to correct it.
Many pilots come here for information whether they are techical or flying related and the information has to be accurate.

Pace

[tmmorris]

Smarthawke,

Don't let it get to you. I fly PA28s almost exclusively (can't afford anything better :-) ) and have 250hrs or so on them, yet there were things there that I didn't know about the PA28. So thanks for your comments.

Tmi

[Fuji Abound]

Pace

From previous accident posts of yours it is clear that you are opposed to discussions on accidents. While I respect that and enjoy your contributions your comments regarding accidents come from a biased position.

By definition any view we hold (dear) is biassed, mine no more or less than yours.

However, for clarity sake, I am not opposed to discussion.

As I have said previously, I am dubious of the merit of discussing accidents where we have almost no evidence on which to base our discussion. This accident is a good example in that as I indicated earlier it is almost impossible to eliminate any cause (other than weather). By definition the discussion is hence almost wholly hypothetical.

In contrast, consider the discussion that took place recently about the Cirrus. We had good reason to believe the weather was a factor. This was subsequently confirmed by friends of the pilot. In consequence an interesting and well informed discussion ensued about the risks of airframe icing.

There is a morbid fascination in accidents - they attract interest, whether it be on here, in the press or those rubber necking as they drive past. That morbid fascination will almost certainly attract more people to read this thread. They may in consequence “learn” something from the thread about scenarios that lead to accidents and thus avoid replicating the same set of circumstances - clearly a good thing.

However, equally the discussions can often become so wide ranging and so speculative that they cover just about every scenario and leave us more confused than when we started. In short if you want an exposition of what can cause an aircraft to crash, don’t bother with Wickapedia, just read one of these threads.

There is also the issue of the distress we cause to relatives. I accept this is moot. However I am in no doubt that relatives and friends are frequently distressed by some of the ill informed discussion that takes place. In this case it has been suggested the aircraft was overloaded or the aircraft was performing aerobatics - both are serious allegations, which call to account the very legality of the flight. So far as I am aware there is barely a shred of evidence to support either hypothesis.

As a community we have a responsibility to analyse events in a methodical way - that is what we do to avoid accidents occurring in the first place and what we do to avoid a single manageable event escalating into something more serious. More than for any other reason I worry when we absolve ourselves of that responsibility as a community and debase ourselves to ill informed and wide raging speculation about the causes of an accident in circumstances in which we have so little evidence on which to base our hypothesis.

All said and done, perhaps the issue I have is that these threads seem to attract the best and worst in us. We desperately want answers, we desperately want to allay our own fears that it couldn’t happen to us, but sometimes life is just not like that - sometimes we will never know why, only that it was.

[Fuji Abound]

It is simply idealistic to believe that unpleasantness can be avoided in the kind of debates held on Internet forums. You would need to have a forum where entry is strictly controlled in some way, no?

People are free agents, ultimately if sufficiently determined they will do as they wish be it here or elsewhere - it is just a bit easier on an anonymous forum.

However, those who keep an open mind may be persuaded of the merits of a particular line of argument and take a different tack in consequence. If enough do so I think we would end up with a more informed and more constructive debate on threads such as this. I also think we might avoid jumping to potentially distressing conclusions unless we could support our conclusions by reference at least to circumstantional evidence.

[Pace]

All said and done, perhaps the issue I have is that these threads seem to attract the best and worst in us. We desperately want answers, we desperately want to allay our own fears that it couldn’t happen to us, but sometimes life is just not like that - sometimes we will never know why, only that it was.


Fuji

As you rightly posted we may never know. Not even the AAIB always come up with a definative answer. For all we know maybe the passenger had a panic attack, grabbed the controls and froze on them. I had that happen to me years ago. While very unlikely to be the cause of this accident a discussion on how to deal with such a passenger may serve a purpose for someone in the future.

The main point of an accident for pilots is the shock and reality that what we get so much pleasure from can turn around and bite hard with serious consequences. Not only to the pilot but to his passengers family and friends.

It is when such an accident is fresh that we are more open to examine our own behaviour and to take in what other pilots are saying. Some is rubbish, some maybe a million miles away from what actually happened but some are gems. There can be gems in the million miles away category too. Sometimes you have to sift through a lot of rubble to find the gems but you wont find them without looking or stifling conversation that leads to them.

As long as the discussions are not personal or statements of fact but the accident is used as a launch pad for discussion there is no reason why any relatives or friends should be upset.

Yes there are thrill seekers who plod the forums looking for fights, self importance trips or morbid excitement but there are many who are genuinely concerned not only about the accident and people involved but their own safety now and in the future.

Pace

[Fuji Abound]

I had that happen to me years ago. While very unlikely to be the cause of this accident a discussion on how to deal with such a passenger may serve a purpose for someone in the future.

I agree (on both points).

However, ever thought about a thread entitled "Mad girl grabs the controls".

It would probably attract just as much attention, would be subject specific and equally as informative. In fact a sort of PPRuNe ILAFFT.

[Mad Girl]

ever thought about a thread entitled "Mad girl grabs the controls".

Yeah?? And what if I did?? ;)

[IO540]

I don't understand why people have to get emotional. Why cannot accidents be discussed neutrally / technically?

[Fuji Abound]

Yeah?? And what if I did??

That was quick. :)

I did wonder if you would be along.

[Pace]

Fuji

I always attract Mad Girls :)

Pace

[Nibbler]

Is it Lynx or some other personal odour?

[Mad Girl]

I always attract Mad Girls http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/smile.gif

Do I know you?? :E




Could we get back to the thread please... I've still got lots to learn and consider..

[Sir George Cayley]

You see, we're all getting along again now, bit o' humour, bit o' understanding and genuine desire to learn:ok:

Bit like life eh?

Sir George Cayley

[DX Wombat]

For all we know maybe the passenger had a panic attack, grabbed the controls and froze on them. I had that happen to me years ago. While very unlikely to be the cause of this accident a discussion on how to deal with such a passenger may serve a purpose for someone in the future.

Somewhere in the back of my mind I seem to remember being told of an accident to a perfectly serviceable aircraft in lovely weather, which initially appeared inexplicable. If I recall correctly, the pilot was flying his toddler of about 2 years and his father. The aircraft, I think, spun into the ground.Very careful examination by the AAIB concluded that the grandfather had reached back to the child and in doing so pushed the control column forward and the aircraft entered an unrecoverable spin. The conclusion was based on hand and fingerprints and their location within the aircraft......crash happened to an aircraft that I had actually flown and to a pilot ......
Now months later still no word from The AAIB, still no definative reasons but the accident no longer shocks. It is becoming a distant and forgotten memory.
Pace, I can understand that as I too knew the pilot of an aircraft which crashed earlier in the year and although there is probably less of a mystery concerning the cause no report has yet been made. It may well be there were factors as yet unrevealed to us.
Whatever the eventual conclusion to any accident the only sure thing is that somewhere there is a least one family which is suffering the loss of a member. In this case it is even more sad as two young children have ben left without their parents and one of those is too young to be able to have any real memories of them.

[Pace]

Pace, I can understand that as I too knew the pilot of an aircraft which crashed earlier in the year and although there is probably less of a mystery concerning the cause no report has yet been made. It may well be there were factors as yet unrevealed to us.
Whatever the eventual conclusion to any accident the only sure thing is that somewhere there is a least one family which is suffering the loss of a member. In this case it is even more sad as two young children have ben left without their parents and one of those is too young to be able to have any real memories of them.

DX Wombat

I flew that Citation 500 aircraft before she was sold on to them. Lovely aircraft and well maintained. I have heard Rumours but nothing solid PM me if you know something I dont.

Your last bit about two young kids loosing both parents in the PA28 crash is especially awful, makes you realise what a huge responsability flights in light aircraft are. More reason why we should discuss and discuss and be aware of not only our limitations but the aircrafts.

Pace

[DX Wombat]

Not the same event Pace, but I have sent you a pm to clarify what I was talking about.

[theavionicsbloke]

Will the AAIB (or Police) also talk to friends of the pilot to determine if the pilot was in good health both mentally and physically?


AAIB will wish to interview selected people that had personal contact with the pilot within the proceeding 24 to 48hrs hrs prior to the flight under investigation or at any other relevant time. This may provide evidence regarding human factors relevant to the incident.

Police may wish to conduct interviews to collect relevant evidence to any subsequent 'Inquest'

Physical / medical factors will normally be established by Post Mortem examintion of the deceased, scene examination and from relevant medical records as required.



Now months later still no word from The AAIB



AAIB report will only be published when accuracy and completeness can be guaranteed. This can typically take up to in excess of 12 months to achieve.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

For Info: http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/Piper%20PA-28-140%20Cherokee,%20G-AWPS%2010-09.pdf

The sensational version is at BBC NEWS | UK | England | Failed stunt 'caused air crash' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/8296167.stm)

A plane crashed onto a railway line killing three people because the unlicensed pilot may have been attempting an aerobatic stunt.

[Phil Space]

The BBC and national press pretty much summed up what happened for readers who do not fly light aircraft.

If you read the report in detail the guy was an accident waiting to happen.

Several times a year we get similar scenarios in the AAIB reports.

When the accidents happen there are all the bystanders who come on here and pour the crocodile tears and condolences.

The truth is we have all met one or more of these reckless types.

It's ok taking your own life through stupid actions.

To take non flyers who trust your pilot skills is another matter.

No doubt I'll be banned for telling the truth.

[gasax]

It is all very well getting all righteous about irresponsible pilots. What do you suggest - compulsory physometric testing with no appeal if you 'fail'?

A free helpline where anyone can call in and state that 'so and so is irresponsible and should be banned from flying'?

We have an unforgiving hobby which punishes carelessness. That 'works' better than any legislation.

This guy was 'mature' and had a reasonable level of experience - a few seconds of incompetence and it was all over - what practical measure - beyond better education and awareness is going to achieve anything?

[ShyTorque]

This guy was 'mature' and had a reasonable level of experience - a few seconds of incompetence and it was all over

A few seconds? He wasn't competent or mature enough to take on board that he should have stopped flying as soon as his medical expired in 1997.

[Captain Stable]

Having read the AAIB report, it is clear that he bu99er all respect for any rules or regulations - probably considered that they were for other people to obey.

The AAIB report is ample condemnation and chilling reading. There is no record of this, no record of that, no evidence of the other. Maintenance was thoroughly dubious, no apparent approval of operation on mogas, maintenance conducted in an illegal fashion, logbooks not properly kept for either the pilot or the aircraft, and suspicions in my mind that his pilot logbook was actually falsified.

He KNEW his licence was invalid. He KNEW his medical had expired. He has robbed two children of their parents. I hope his estate is sued for everything it has to pay for their future upbringing, care and education, as the insurance company won't pay out a bean.