Pilot, 62, dies after two planes collide at Parafield Airport north of Adelaide
Thread Starter
Pilot, 62, dies after two planes collide at Parafield Airport north of Adelaide
Article with photo of the aftermath: Pilot, 62, dies after two planes collide at Parafield Airport north of Adelaide - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation)
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 1,546
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to my amateur analysis, one plane was parked, the pilot probably hand-propped the other to start it without chocking or assistance, and then he tried to stop it from taxying into the parked plane....
As nobody was in either plane and the pilot's body was found on the ground, this seems a possible explanation!
As nobody was in either plane and the pilot's body was found on the ground, this seems a possible explanation!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowing nothing more about this than what I have read, I entirely agree with Mary.
Note that when hand propping a Lycoming/Continental powered Cessna, once it's running, you're going to have to cross to the other side of the plane to get in, or access to the controls [to stop it]. For a hand propped Cherokee, it's a long walk around the wing, or a dangerous jump over it. So all being considered, simply restrain it from forward motion effectively while you hand prop it.
Also worth noting that both those planes are Lycoming powered. If a battery start was attempted and failed, there's a good chance that the starter "bendix" is still engaged, which will make hand propping nearly impossible. And, the 172RG at least would be injected, which are not easy to get running by hand propping either. For some older types, hand propping is the way to go. But really, if hand propping was not trained to you during your training on that type, it's a good idea to not attempt it unless you really know a lot about the systems of that aircraft.
But, I have to agree that if it killed him, he did get it running!
Note that when hand propping a Lycoming/Continental powered Cessna, once it's running, you're going to have to cross to the other side of the plane to get in, or access to the controls [to stop it]. For a hand propped Cherokee, it's a long walk around the wing, or a dangerous jump over it. So all being considered, simply restrain it from forward motion effectively while you hand prop it.
Also worth noting that both those planes are Lycoming powered. If a battery start was attempted and failed, there's a good chance that the starter "bendix" is still engaged, which will make hand propping nearly impossible. And, the 172RG at least would be injected, which are not easy to get running by hand propping either. For some older types, hand propping is the way to go. But really, if hand propping was not trained to you during your training on that type, it's a good idea to not attempt it unless you really know a lot about the systems of that aircraft.
But, I have to agree that if it killed him, he did get it running!
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Seattle area
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of my interesting experiences with planes was watching a guy propping a Cub with the throttle set too high and no one aboard. It took off diagonally across the runway with three people hanging onto the horizontal stabilizers, and went into a ditch. They all sort of dropped a notch in my estimation.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Timbukthree
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not that bizarre..I recall reading or hearing about hand-propping incidents at least four times in my short (62) years on this planet. I personally witnessed a near fatal hand-propping incident. In 1978, a newly landed (not saying legal) German immigrant attempted to start a ski-equipped, (straight boards), Taylorcraft on a compacted snow and light (thin) ice covered apron situated "north of 60". After a brisk series of hand propping, the unsecured aeroplane coughed to life and lurched to the right. Somewhat pleased, the pilot grasped the aircraft's port wing strut and proceeded to have the ride of his life, rotating 2 and a-half orbits until he some how managed to scramble into the cockpit and shut off the engine. Hilarious! Yet a huge learning lesson for us both.. It has served me well.
Last edited by evansb; 9th Oct 2016 at 15:10.
We had a case in Sydney that gained a measure of notoriety many years ago. Hand propping an Auster which got airborne sans pilot, and spent some time orbiting the city. Meteors were scrambled to shoot it down, as it was over water by this time. For one reason and another they failed, and the task was completed by some Navy Sea Furies.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: adelaide
Age: 77
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used to hand prop Tiger Moths for years without incident. The most tricky hand prop was my mates Cassutt race plane with the Lycoming 0-200. It was so low you had to be on your knees and try to keep your balance. My wife couldn't watch.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here's a couple of links (below) to the 30th Aug, 1955 runaway Auster story, as related by Megan. The Auster belonged to the Kingsford Smith Flying School.
This civilian Auster Archer was C/N 2072, rego VH-AET, formerly G-AIJP.
The Auster pilot was a newbie and lacking experience, and he killed the engine upon landing. Ray Bakers comments, below, elaborate greatly on the reasons for this runaway.
The newbie pilot, Anthony Thrower, braked to a halt and decided to jump out and hand-prop it, whilst apparently still on the runway.
What is even more incredible, after firing up and getting away from the pilot, the Auster apparently did a full 180 deg turn and came back towards him!
What is even more intriguing as regards the Auster story, is that Ray Baker alludes to a previously un-noted attempt to board the Auster, via the RAC of NSW's, DH-84 Dragon!
I am presuming this was an air-to-air boarding attempt, not a runway boarding attempt.
It says a lot for the Austers basic flying stability, that it took off and flew so perfectly for 3 hours.
Somewhat amusingly, upon the return of the Sea Furies successful "kill" mission, the ground crews promptly rushed out and painted the profile of an Auster "kill", each side of the Sea Furies!
HARS - The Amazing 1955 Runaway Auster
The ARGUS - The 'plane that took off by itself
Ray Bakers comments from the Auster J4 (UK) website ...
This civilian Auster Archer was C/N 2072, rego VH-AET, formerly G-AIJP.
The Auster pilot was a newbie and lacking experience, and he killed the engine upon landing. Ray Bakers comments, below, elaborate greatly on the reasons for this runaway.
The newbie pilot, Anthony Thrower, braked to a halt and decided to jump out and hand-prop it, whilst apparently still on the runway.
What is even more incredible, after firing up and getting away from the pilot, the Auster apparently did a full 180 deg turn and came back towards him!
What is even more intriguing as regards the Auster story, is that Ray Baker alludes to a previously un-noted attempt to board the Auster, via the RAC of NSW's, DH-84 Dragon!
I am presuming this was an air-to-air boarding attempt, not a runway boarding attempt.
It says a lot for the Austers basic flying stability, that it took off and flew so perfectly for 3 hours.
Somewhat amusingly, upon the return of the Sea Furies successful "kill" mission, the ground crews promptly rushed out and painted the profile of an Auster "kill", each side of the Sea Furies!
HARS - The Amazing 1955 Runaway Auster
The ARGUS - The 'plane that took off by itself
Ray Bakers comments from the Auster J4 (UK) website ...
RAY BAKER - A few comments about this (Auster Archer) incident.
The Blackburn Cirrus Minor 1 engine was susceptible to stopping during the landing roll, dependent on atmospheric conditions.
KSFS had a rigid requirement that in such an eventuality, the solo pilot should turn the aircraft to 90 degrees to the landing path, exit the aircraft, stand next to it and wait for assistance. (No radios fitted to almost all training aircraft in those days.)
The following information relates to what was considered to be the ‘probable cause’.
This individual saw fit not to follow the School’s procedure. As the engine ran down, he advanced the throttle to try and ‘catch’ the engine, but could not. Having decided to restart the engine alone, he leaned in to the cabin and pulled on the hand-brake, which, without full depression of the heel-brakes, only took up cable-slack. The brakes were not on, so did NOT fail. He then set the throttle for start, not an inch open from closed, but an inch open from full throttle, where it had been left following his attempt to prevent the engine stopping during the landing-roll.
Had the throttle been correctly set for start, the aircraft would never have been able to take-off. At worst, it would probably have rolled across the airfield until it hit something, or the boundary fence!
Also, there is more to the attempts to possibly board (yes, from the Royal Aero Club of NSW DH84 Dragon!!!) or shoot down the Archer than related here. A comedy of errors indeed. It is fortuitous that nobody was injured, although a lot of egos were.
The Blackburn Cirrus Minor 1 engine was susceptible to stopping during the landing roll, dependent on atmospheric conditions.
KSFS had a rigid requirement that in such an eventuality, the solo pilot should turn the aircraft to 90 degrees to the landing path, exit the aircraft, stand next to it and wait for assistance. (No radios fitted to almost all training aircraft in those days.)
The following information relates to what was considered to be the ‘probable cause’.
This individual saw fit not to follow the School’s procedure. As the engine ran down, he advanced the throttle to try and ‘catch’ the engine, but could not. Having decided to restart the engine alone, he leaned in to the cabin and pulled on the hand-brake, which, without full depression of the heel-brakes, only took up cable-slack. The brakes were not on, so did NOT fail. He then set the throttle for start, not an inch open from closed, but an inch open from full throttle, where it had been left following his attempt to prevent the engine stopping during the landing-roll.
Had the throttle been correctly set for start, the aircraft would never have been able to take-off. At worst, it would probably have rolled across the airfield until it hit something, or the boundary fence!
Also, there is more to the attempts to possibly board (yes, from the Royal Aero Club of NSW DH84 Dragon!!!) or shoot down the Archer than related here. A comedy of errors indeed. It is fortuitous that nobody was injured, although a lot of egos were.
Last edited by onetrack; 12th Dec 2016 at 01:27.
