Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Light Aircraft crash at Blackbushe.

Accidents and Close Calls Discussion on accidents, close calls, and other unplanned aviation events, so we can learn from them, and be better pilots ourselves.

Light Aircraft crash at Blackbushe.

Old 1st Aug 2015, 18:54
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Wales
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If its groundspeed was 149kts, what was its airspeed?


A 500 ft climb on base leg is even more than most trainee pilots would ever do, so it will be interesting to see if both front seats were occupied.
.
phiggsbroadband is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2015, 19:36
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,259
Received 89 Likes on 47 Posts
If it helps with the "did-they-attempt-a-go-around" debate (though I suspect it won't), a closer look at the data we captured shows that the final 3 position plots were approximately 65m, 680m and 850m beyond the 25 threshold, separated by gaps of 8 seconds and 3 seconds respectively.

The transmissions imply that the aircraft was airborne at each of those 3 points (our antenna can't normally detect aircraft 7nm away on the Blackbushe runway), but clearly that's not enough data to construct a deceleration profile, nor to deduce where the Phenom may have touched down and/or become airborne again.
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 1st Aug 2015, 23:15
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,503
Received 12 Likes on 6 Posts
As to 500' worth of ridge or thermic lift on base, the Phenom wing loading is some 8 times greater than a high performance single seat glider with 15 m span compared to the Phenom's 16 m.

More likely easing back on the stick and converting airspeed to altitude. Spoilers might have helped with the excess energy, but I can't see that kind of flying with folks in the back.
RatherBeFlying is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 09:04
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Axminster Devon
Age: 83
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thermic Lift

Long ago I flew Canberras in the tropics. However you define thermic lift, we got lots of it. However the effect was not lift but a lurch (or drop) in the indicated air speed.

That is for an aircraft which, at the end of a sortie as in the Blackbushe case, carried two thirds the wing loading of the Phenom 300.
rlsbutler is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 09:20
  #65 (permalink)  
The Analog Kid
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
In the southern UK, Thursday and Friday were both excellent cross-country days with big, wide, well-developed outer thermal cores averaging ~500ft/min; 1000ft/min bullets in the centres, as per my original post.

These are huge masses of rising air and, as flapassym says, if you fly into them, you're going with them unless you do something.
fyrefli is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 10:05
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 1,780
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Have the crews names been released yet?
I think it's unlikely to be a SP operation. The Saudis usually go for a cast of thousands.
I am wondering if the pilot may have been Yeslam Bin Ladin? For those who don't know, he is a qualified pilot and has owned a Lear 40 which he used to fly with a copilot. I know he was interested a few years ago in buying a Phenom 300 which would enable him to dispense with the copilot. It might explain why it was being flown single-pilot because, as you say, the family are not short of money.
Trim Stab is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 10:21
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Why the talk of thermals? Totally irrelevant. This is a perf A aircraft. Any pilot can fly level on a bumpy day in a high performance jet.
fatboy slim is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 10:29
  #68 (permalink)  
The Analog Kid
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Because of the vertical profile posted by Dave Reid on Page 2, in particular the 500ft height gain on base leg, combined with a knowledge of the conditions on the day and a look at the topography. It was just an observation, having seen that plot.
fyrefli is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 10:30
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: se england
Posts: 1,514
Likes: 0
Received 27 Likes on 11 Posts
Trim Stab

I saw the pilot-only one at the time I was there arrive and start preflighting for what I think was the outbound trip before the ill fated return. The man concerned was of Arabian appearance facially and skin tone with a fullish neat beard I think ) Also rather tall and heavier (not heavy) build compared to many Gulf/Saudi Arabs . However I left before the plane did so he could have been joined b another crew member but from the identities of the victims and the fact that they are described as three passengers would tend to point to one pilot.
Jets departing Blackbushe need clearance from Farnborough and I imagine most of them are IFR anyway so there would be a proper flight plan detailing crew and pax .

Either way its all pretty sad whoever they were and whatever was at fault when the AAIB report on it.
pax britanica is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 10:48
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Paris
Age: 59
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
@Squirell:

Don't worry about the Grauniad. Sky News described the flaperon found in Réunion as "a bit of the fuselage".
Nialler is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 11:05
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It doesn't matter one iota what the wing loading is.
If you are trimmed for level flight in an airmass and that airmass rises you WILL rise with it unless you do something about it!
Not quite so. An aircraft in level flight flying into a thermal of rising air will tend to rise, and if in the rising air for long enough will eventually rise at the rate of climb of the thermal. However, it takes time for the aeroplane to accelerate vertically and the heavier the wing loading the less quickly will it rise. Usually it will have flown right through the thermal and out the other side before it attains anything like the ROC of the thermal.

That's why a glider (low wing loading) will feel thermals as vertical 'shocks' much more than a jet transport would.

When flying though isolated patches of rising air (thermals) the heavier the wing loading, and the faster one flies though the thermal (extra speed reducing the time exposed to the rising air) the less the aircraft will rise.
Shaggy Sheep Driver is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 11:13
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Crawley
Age: 66
Posts: 175
Received 19 Likes on 8 Posts
A Phenom has greater inertia than a P/G.
nevillestyke is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 11:35
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Cambridge UK
Posts: 514
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sunday Telegraph names the pilot as Mazen Salem al-Dajah 'a Jordanian in his late 50s who was employed by the bin Laden corporation and had 25 years' flying experience'.
olympus is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 11:56
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Southwold
Age: 71
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
DaveReid's data is interesting. An average of around 145knots over the first 585metres and an average of 115 knots over the next three seconds suggests an attempt to climb away for another go. As he points out it doesn't tell us the deceleration/acceleration involved but the latter figure confirms that he certainly wasn't planning to land.
Effluent Man is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 12:23
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 536
Received 51 Likes on 12 Posts
@flapassym
It doesn't matter one iota what the wing loading is.
Really??!! Where did you pick that up from, or are you conveniently assuming so in order to claim it as a fact to pass on to us all? In fact, it most certainly does make a considerable difference.

Here's an extreme example to prove a point. In claiming that it doesn't matter one iota what the wing loading is, you are effectively telling us that both a feather and a bullet would be similarly affected in a rising airmass, which is total nonsense.

If you are trimmed for level flight in an airmass and that airmass rises you WILL rise with it unless you do something about it!
... eventually, if your wing loading is high (bullet, biz-jet), but very much faster if your wind loading is low (feather, glider). So, I say again, it has EVERYTHING to do with wing loading.

It rather sticks in the craw to be lectured - incorrectly - on a Professional Pilots' site by someone who clearly doesn't understand some fundamental principles. Please don't tell me you fly jets or I will be worried!

Oh, and before you might start suggesting either I don't fly gliders or I don't know how jets handle, I'm an ATPL who is also a competition cross-country glider pilot, so I have plenty of experience of both, and I do understand the differences between them and how they handle thermic activity.

@fyrefli follows on the nonsense
These are huge masses of rising air and, as flapassym says, if you fly into them, you're going with them unless you do something.
Just how huge are the "huge masses of rising air" you've encountered at 1,000' AGL (from the altitude AMSL and the ground elevation we've been told from the originator of the earlier graphic)? At that level thermals are barely 100m across with an even tighter core, so your tales of huge masses of rising air is fiction in this case. What might happen at 4,000' in late afternoon, when the thermals might be closer to your description, is completely irrelevant here.

Now, I don't wish to speculate, however if Ladbrokes offered even money on gaining 500' late in a tight circuit when blatting rather fast, on being down to the pilot deliberately trading speed for height (to get below gear or flap limiting speeds possibly, to get the gear or flaps down), or a 'huge thermal', I'd put my tenner on the stick back to slow down every time. Just saying...
pilotmike is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 12:40
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Hopefully, with an aircraft strapped to my backside...
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Smile

Because of the vertical profile posted by Dave Reid on Page 2, in particular the 500ft height gain on base leg, combined with a knowledge of the conditions on the day and a look at the topography. It was just an observation, having seen that plot.
For what little it's worth, I flew from Bembridge to Elstree via Farnborough in a C-150 on Friday between 1500Z and 1700Z. I experienced plenty of thermal activity along my route between 2,000 and 3,600 ft amsl, and had no trouble holding altitude to within +- 100 foot.

I'm a PPL student with 15 hours, so if I can do it in my spamcan, I'd be amazed if an experienced pilot in a much heavier, faster jet a/c would have been unable to do so.

But, just an observation from somebody with only a tiny bit of knowledge, so apologies as always if I've missed a salient point here and there

/Alex
alexgreyhead is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 12:44
  #77 (permalink)  
The Analog Kid
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Brecon Beacons National Park
Age: 57
Posts: 239
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by pilotmike
Now, I don't wish to speculate, however if Ladbrokes offered even money on gaining 500' late in a tight circuit when blatting rather fast, on being down to the pilot deliberately trading speed for height (to get below gear or flap limiting speeds possibly, to get the gear or flaps down), or a 'huge thermal', I'd put my tenner on the stick back to slow down every time. Just saying...
Whilst I might quibble with the certainty and tone of your previous paragraph, I don't particularly disagree with the above My original comment (previous to DaveReid's plot) was simply about the instability of the airmass at the end of last week, which I'm sure you agree with if you flew your sailplane in it.
fyrefli is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 12:47
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: London
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The whole approach and "landing" seems such a Horlicks that I wonder who was actually sitting in the P1 seat.

Last edited by Downwind Lander; 2nd Aug 2015 at 13:06.
Downwind Lander is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 13:01
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Hotel Gypsy
Posts: 2,821
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Being too fast can start waaaaaaay before joining the circuit when flying something slippery. It would be interesting to see whether the pilot was behind the aircraft from the outset (TOD). Trying to lose excess energy whilst keeping the G&Ts (or in this case, tea/coffee) level is far from easy.
Cows getting bigger is offline  
Old 2nd Aug 2015, 14:19
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: cornwall
Age: 77
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Sounds like a classic rushed approach, possibly forgetting the gear selection until on the base leg ( with a tail wind there I think ) .....basically what my old instructors used to say ...a good landing comes from a good approach. Well, more often than not anyway ....no guarantees in aviating !
A310bcal is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell or Share My Personal Information

Copyright © 2023 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.