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

Two killed on beach when aircraft makes emergency landing.

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.

Two killed on beach when aircraft makes emergency landing.

Old 4th Aug 2017, 18:54
  #61 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,961
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
The instructor made the radio call saying he was going for the beach and that's what he did.

Looking at the flaps and the way he was aligned in relation to the sea he had no intention of getting his feet wet.

Had he pulled it off then the aircraft could have been flown out or pulled to a safe place to remove the wings.

I suspect they were both arrested as the student has important info for the forthcoming trial.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 4th Aug 2017, 21:35
  #62 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Jay Sata
The instructor made the radio call saying he was going for the beach and that's what he did.
Yes, but in the radio call he said he was going for another (quieter) beach, 200m from where he landed.
patowalker is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 04:33
  #63 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Originally Posted by patowalker
Yes, but in the radio call he said he was going for another (quieter) beach, 200m from where he landed.
I don't know where that beach were in relation to the touch down point though we do have a wind sock of sorts.
Far right of screen, at time :37
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=GGNAn2p5BJc

Note: For the non aviation people, wind sheer near the ground can make a big difference to the planned un-powered aircraft touch down point.

.

Originally Posted by Tigger4Me
Video of the approach here:

https://goo.gl/pDddjg
Video at link wont work on me iPad for some reason.

YouTube link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qf0zh8EUJDA

.
Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 07:54
  #64 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,961
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by patowalker
Yes, but in the radio call he said he was going for another (quieter) beach, 200m from where he landed.
Which confirms he was planning a beach landing instead of putting it down in the water well clear of people.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 13:13
  #65 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Yes, but as I said, the Cova do Vapor beach did not have many people on it, so the chances of hurting someone there were much lower. I can't tell from the pictures or reports if he overshot the chosen beach or didn't reach it.
patowalker is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 15:32
  #66 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Solely based on looking at local maps, it looks like he overshot.
runway30 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 16:16
  #67 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: U.K
Posts: 90
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Someone once said and it may have been Yeager or someone else who knew about these things, hearing of the pilot wrestling with the controls to miss the school and the children was total bolo'
You do not see the children and probably not even the school you focus on the spot that will save your own skin.
The only people who should be criticising are the ones who have been in that situation, water landing and a Cessna is not a good option!
simmple is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 17:02
  #68 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by simmple
The only people who should be criticising are the ones who have been in that situation...
No. I have never been in the situation of the president either yet I can criticise him as much as I want.
The accident pilot was an instructor. He should know how to execute a forced landing. He should know and apply the concept of FORDEC/DODAR or whatever they call it this year.
And he should be familiar with one of the most basic rules of visual flight, now contained in SERA Europe-wide, but a pillar of every national aviation law before that:

SERA.3101 Negligent or reckless operation of aircraft
An aircraft shall not be operated in a negligent or reckless manner so as to endanger life or property of others.
SERA.3105 Minimum heights
Except when necessary for take-off or landing, or except by permission from the competent authority, aircraft shall not be
flown over the congested areas of cities, towns or settlements or over an open-air assembly of persons, unless at such a
height as will permit, in the event of an emergency arising, a landing to be made without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.
Ditching is not an option in a high-wing Cessna? So don't get yourself in a position where ditching is the only way to avoid harming people on the ground.

NB: This website here looks at the statistics of known ditching events. As usual, statistics derived from a (luckily) small number of samples are not too reliable, but it holds some surprises, especially ones concerning high-wing aircraft: http://www.equipped.org/ditchingmyths.htm
what next is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 20:30
  #69 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 341
Received 14 Likes on 5 Posts
Slightly puzzled having looked at the video; that appears to be a downwind landing. At what height did the engine failure happen ? - to my thinking unless it was at very low height, attempting a downwind landing seems odd, unless the beach is far too crowded or stops to the upwind side.

An unusually nose high attitude too, though the aircraft had not touched down by the time it went out of sight.

I was always told that if any chance & control existed we should ensure our accidents don't involve other folk; that was part of the risk we took. Sadly it looks very much from that short piece of video as if the pilot thought he saw a safe spot which in fact didn't exist. (Or possibly overshot, as someone else said. Easy to do if attempting downwind.)

It all smacks just a bit of panic, not the cool thinking we'd all like to believe in and hope we'd be capable of.

A very sad event.

Last edited by biscuit74; 6th Aug 2017 at 16:19. Reason: Add overshoot comment
biscuit74 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 21:16
  #70 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The accident happened under the Lisbon TMA, which starts at 1000' agl there.
patowalker is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 21:18
  #71 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Cardiff
Posts: 639
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
If you look on the map, there is a lot of sea and river. If he was over water trying to make land, he may not have been able to turn into wind because that would have taken him back over deep water. I also know from the few times that I have had to land with a significant tail wind component, touching down at a precise point in a confined space would be impossible.
runway30 is offline  
Old 5th Aug 2017, 22:03
  #72 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: S.E.Asia
Posts: 1,961
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by simmple
Someone once said and it may have been Yeager or someone else who knew about these things, hearing of the pilot wrestling with the controls to miss the school and the children was total bolo'
You do not see the children and probably not even the school you focus on the spot that will save your own skin.
The only people who should be criticising are the ones who have been in that situation, water landing and a Cessna is not a good option!
Would that be saving your own skin or risking others?

As a committed low wing pilot of over 35 years experience that is one reason I have very low hours on Cessna's.

The odds are the instructor knew the fuselage would be submerged and escape would be a challenge.Once out of the door then it is a clamber under the wing to get to the surface.

As I have mentioned before ditching in the sea would also have destroyed the airframe.

You can make your own mind up.
Mike Flynn is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 06:54
  #73 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,509
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes on 14 Posts
Damned if yer do and damned if ya don't. If the pilot in command (PIC) had landed out in the ocean as some have suggested and the pax/student were killed then the PIC would be blamed for not using the clear bit of beach available - which were apparently what he aimed for though missed.
I wonder how much engine off performance training the PIC received or was required to receive. On many light aircraft a windmilling prop gives a speed brake effect where-as a stopped prop gives better glide. None of my 'forced' glider landing experience has been in a 150 type aircraft so i carn't opinion on this incident.
Nice to have an accident report to consider first...


Anyway, here's a drone shot of apparently the same beach: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sCFGks46IPU

Note at time 1:10 the hard to see people walking the beach. The drone is almost on top of them before they are identifiable as people.

At time 1:56 note the many beach umbrellas. Relavence is the pilot in command may be used to seeing from the air a large number of beach brollies that have few to no people around.

At time 2:50 note the sand 'island' just off the beach. Much the same is visible in the actual aircraft approach vid and is likely similar to the pilot view of approach.





.
Flying Binghi is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 09:49
  #74 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If there are grounds for criminal liability for the tragic deaths, then you can bet your bottom dollar a prosecution will follow.

As a former lawyer and flying instructor I would rather die myself than risk killing innocent members of the public. I justify this stance both ethically/morally and from a criminal liability standpoint.
Crosswind Limits is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 14:06
  #75 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 770
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes on 2 Posts
There are many posts on this thread that I find quite disturbing. Unless we know the cues and information presented to and recognised by the crew then we cannot decide upon the possible courses of action that were available to them and, with hindsight, consider which was the best course that they should have taken. If their course of action was not what retrospectively was considered to be the one that would have had the best outcome then we would then need to try to ascertain why they took the course of action that they did. There will be many potential human factors considerations that may exonerate the crew totally. At the other end of the spectrum the actions that they took could have been reckless and constitute manslaughter. Both pilots are still alive and could give witness statements. However, to understand the reality of their actions such statements must not be admissible as self-incriminating documents.

In situations such as this workload is very high and spare capacity for assessing external cues and decision making is reduced. I find it very scary that so many who have posted on here are judge and jury and, frankly, appear to have very little understanding of human performance and limitations with respect to operating aircraft.
LOMCEVAK is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 14:44
  #76 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by LOMCEVAK
In situations such as this workload is very high and spare capacity for assessing external cues and decision making is reduced.
Certainly. Therefore a thorough briefing is required before commencing such a flight covering possible emergencies and how to deal with them. Especially so in the training environment. I looked the area up on the chart and unless they flew a wide detour through the backcountry they had to cross some expanse of water (the Tejo estuary) between their departure and the location of the crash. Airspace constraints - unless they got permission to fly higher - would hold them down low, as low as 1000ft along part of their trip. In such an environment - sea and basically unlandable terrain, especially to the north of the Tejo mouth and only a couple of kilometers of gliding distance avaiable - one has to have a plan about how to deal with an engine failure and a plan B as well.

Originally Posted by LOMCEVAK
I I find it very scary that so many who have posted on here are judge and jury ...
I do not see any postings where someone poses as judge and jury. "We" (and I assume that I am considered to be one of those because my understanding for the actions of that instructor is marginal) only "work" from what we have been informed about by the media: An "experienced" instructor reported an engine failure to ATC and announced his intention to force land on an empty stretch of beach. Somehow he misses this part of the beach. From that moment on we have video evidence that shows him continuing his approach on the original track, thereby killing two persons on the beach. Unless there were (so far unreported) control problems or unexpected weather phenomena (windshear?) a real good explanation is required why he did not turn away from the populated part of the beach.

Originally Posted by LOMCEVAK
... frankly, appear to have very little understanding of human performance and limitations with respect to operating aircraft.
We are not talking here about some low-time PPL holder who flies once every two months. This would make it a lot easier to understand those human limitations. Instead we talk about an "experienced" (as the media reported) instructor who is based locally. And no, repeating your sentence, in this respect I have no understanding for the kind of human performance limitations shown here.
what next is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 17:17
  #77 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: U.K
Posts: 90
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Would all the critics be playing a different tune if there was 3, 5, 10 or pick a number in the aircraft instead of 2?
simmple is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 18:11
  #78 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: France
Posts: 153
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
[QUOTE=Crosswind Limits;9853614]If there are grounds for criminal liability for the tragic deaths, then you can bet your bottom dollar a prosecution will follow.

.[/QUOTe

Following prosecutions have a habit of being derailed over there. Dépends on the interest. One of the really bad ones was the death of some children in a water park.
I lived there from '75 to '04 and I hope the law has tidied up a bit...It tended to favour the better off.
DownWest is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 18:40
  #79 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Near Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 1,106
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by simmple
Would all the critics be playing a different tune if there was 3, 5, 10 or pick a number in the aircraft instead of 2?
No. You can't sacrifice any number of uninvolved persons in order to save those onboard, no matter how many there are. They climbed on board an aeroplane knowing there is a risk involved. That was their decision alone and they alone must bear the consequences. Not sunbathers on the beach.
what next is offline  
Old 6th Aug 2017, 21:20
  #80 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: EU
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
"what next" - So what about the Student pilot? Wasn't he also innocent?
We know nothing about this case yet, was this maybe the Students first flights? Who knows. But he was in the care of the PIC too.

Nobody deliberately lands wanting to kill someone.

I have had similar discussion regarding similar situation during night flight with SEP, if people would try to land on a motorway instead of into a black hole in the ground.

Not all are born Kamikaze pilots, most people have a survival instinct, and aim is to survive for all.
Video shows pitch on aircraft was pretty high, so they would not have had good vision ahead.

We don't know exactly what happen, if people was unlucky when they tried moving away, and they was at the wrong place at the wrong time, tragic I agree. In aviation we sometimes will be faced with difficult situations, with little time to decide what to do, and maybe plan A did not work out, plan B or Plan C, might not have been ideal, as people got killed.

What would people have said if Captain Sully had hit a boat as he tried landing in the Hudson? Once he committed there was a chance something unexpected could have happen, he could not have worked out all scenarios.
Or had the aircraft broken up and people died, people would have said he should have tried returning to the runway.
BusAirDriver is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.