View Full Version : Fatal accident near Saint-Christophe-sur-Avre on 26.02.2011?
Two people died in an accident near Saint-Christophe-sur-Avre in France on Saturday.
Quite apart from the tragic loss of lives, it is disconcerting to note from the photographs and the reports in French media that the aircraft apparently came apart in the air, shortly after take off (at least the engine and one wing were found far away from the main wreckage).
Media reports mention a "two-seater Cessna", but that doesn't match with the photographed engine (a six cylinder engine with a turbocharger).
I find catastrophic mid-air structural failures worrying. Does anyone know which type of aircraft it was?
WWW.CRASH-AERIEN.AERO • Afficher le sujet - Deux morts après le crash d'un Cessna dans l'Eure (http://www.crash-aerien.aero/forum/deux-morts-apres-le-crash-d-un-cessna-dans-l-eure-t18272.html)
Crash d’un avion de tourisme: début des expertises - eure - France 3 Régions - France 3 (http://haute-normandie.france3.fr/info/crash-d-un-avion-de-tourisme-debut-des-expertises-67561201.html)
I didn't bother to google-translate all the French text but it mentions a Cessna 210 and this pic (http://www.paris-normandie.fr/diaporama/crash-dun-avion-de-tourisme-un-cabinet-de-kines-incendie-un-week-end-de-faits-divers?idx=0#top-diapo) is a 6-cyl Conti (I think) turbocharged engine.
You can break any plane if you pull back really hard at/above Vne, and while there are some (few) types out there which have never or almost never been broken, you can most definitely break a high wing Cessna, or any low-wing Piper.
But why shortly after takeoff? How shortly after takeoff? Loss of control in IMC can take you to Vne in tens of seconds or less.
patowalker
2nd Mar 2011, 08:08
the aircraft apparently came apart in the air, shortly after take off
About 50m away.
werewolf
2nd Mar 2011, 08:21
Aircraft F-GMGF
the accident (N 48° 42' 08" E 000° 50' 06") occured 50 miles away from the departure airport (Rouen LFOP).
Supposedly in-flight break-up.
50m after takeoff is incredible.
Possible explanations would be severe corrosion, vandalism, or some previous structural damage.
SNS3Guppy
2nd Mar 2011, 09:21
Possible explanations would be severe corrosion, vandalism, or some previous structural damage.
You forgot aliens from Mars, a man-portable surface to air missile, spontaneous human combustion, good Catholics that encountered the Rapture, the possibility that the sound barrier exists and someone finally hit it, an angry prehistoric bird, flatulence, swamp gas, the fact that it was France, and of course tire spiders.
Ya gotta love speculation. Any more wild ideas?
Yes ! The fact that is was a pressurized aircraft makes me believe it just blew itself up like a balloon and then burst ! :8
N707ZS
2nd Mar 2011, 10:16
Interesting to see that there are no obvious pieces of the engine mount in the photograph of the engine. It may be mangled underneath, so lets see what the crash investigators find.
eharding
2nd Mar 2011, 10:20
The wife just got back from work (ATC) and told me one of her colleagues got a call from a C210 saying they had autopilot problems. He then watched the SSR show a decent of 8000ft in two turns of the radar.
L'aigle in Normandie. Both pilots killed sadly.
ETA It took off from Rouen and was cruising IFR at FL160 when they ran into trouble.
Assuming this is the same incident, doesn't seem to tally with the reports of a structural failure immediately after take-off?
SNS3Guppy
2nd Mar 2011, 10:29
Interesting to see that there are no obvious pieces of the engine mount in the photograph of the engine.
The engine in the Cessna 210 mounts to the airframe differently than other aircraft with which you may be familiar. The engine sits in a cradle formed inside the cowl area, above the nosegear.
Assuming this is the same incident, doesn't seem to tally with the reports of a structural failure immediately after take-off?
Forget about the accident happening after TKOF, it clearly happened 50 NM away
from the departure aerodrome. This has been officialy confirmed by the departement of justice. There was never a report of a failure after TKOF, at least not a French one...
OK, I took 50m as 50 metres :)
In that case it is back to the "usual" causes.
whiterock
2nd Mar 2011, 16:56
From the photographs of the engine at its crash site, IMO the engine was not turning at impact. Hardly surprising if it separated from the airframe whilst airborne. The propeller blades show no signs of rotational damage and it appears the engine landed back end first - the spinner looks unmarked.
Diaporama | Crash d'un avion de tourisme, un cabinet de kinés incendié : un week-end de faits divers | Paris Normandie (http://www.paris-normandie.fr/diaporama/crash-dun-avion-de-tourisme-un-cabinet-de-kines-incendie-un-week-end-de-faits-divers?idx=0#top-diapo)
N707ZS
2nd Mar 2011, 17:43
Thanks SNS3Guppy I have never worked on larger singles than a Cessna 182. I couldn't find any decent engine bay photos on the net of a 210.
SNS3Guppy
2nd Mar 2011, 18:00
While many airplanes use a mount that attaches at the rear of the engine and connects the engine to the firewall, the Cessna 210, and many other light airplanes, use mounts under the engine; the airframe forms a reinforced cradle beneath the engine and it's actually bolted down to the frame on shock mounts, rather than using a tubing frame assembly behind the engine.
The installation gives very little clearance beneath the engine for changing oil or doing anything involving the oil pan area, and it's a pain in the butt when dealing with a leak or spilled oil. The whole engine assembly is fairly tightly cowled on the 200 series Cessnas (except the 208, of course). There's not much room behind the engine when working, either, which can lead to spills when changing the oil filter, and so forth. Where some light airplanes have a lot of space inside the nacelle or cowling, the 210 doesn't.
Plasmech
2nd Mar 2011, 20:18
Is it true that high wing Cessna's are generally not as strong as say for example a low wing Mooney?
You an say a lot about Cessnas, but NOT that they are weak.
They are truly the equivalent of an SUV. Especially the ones with
the additional wing struts...
SNS3Guppy
2nd Mar 2011, 22:32
Cessna products aren't any stronger or weaker than other aircraft designed to the same normal and utility category load limits. They're just another aircraft.
The wings have been pulled off a number of 210's when they've been flown beyond their limits into convective weather, or have been put in high load conditions such as a graveyard spiral in a spatial disorientation situation. Either by vertical gusts or pilot overstress, the airplane can be broken.
There's a reason that Cessna 210's and Beech Bonanzas have become known as Doctor and Lawyer killers. They're more expensive products that were typically purchased by more affluent individuals, and generally the incidents involving both types have been preventable.
It's worth noting that Scott Crossfield, a contemporary of Chuck Yeager, was killed in his Cessna 210 while attempting to cross a line of thunderstorms. It broke up in flight. Crossfield was flying a Cessna 210A, which had wing struts.
No light airplane is a "SUV." They're all weak. Always bear that in mind.
Plasmech
3rd Mar 2011, 01:07
Are the wing struts on a Cessna made of aluminum or steel? I what you see an outer aerodynamic sheath covering a steel rod or is what you see the actual structural member?
doubleu-anker
3rd Mar 2011, 03:33
SNS3Guppy
Good posts.
Did quite a lot of time on C210's myself and the way I was able to assist in keeping the speed under control in convective conditions was to lower the gear and keep it extended until it got smooth.
I use to bare in mind the fact that the C210 was quite happy to shed it's wings if the speed/loading got too high.