Tiger Moth Down - Compton Abbas
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bournemouth, UK
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 60
Posts: 597
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That link isn't working. Two killed. 
Two men die after Tiger Moth crash at Compton Abbas near Shaftesbury (From Bournemouth Echo)
Two men die after Tiger Moth crash at Compton Abbas near Shaftesbury (From Bournemouth Echo)
awful - sad news 2 chaps killed
my local airfield -
another tiger moth went down near wimborne a few years back 2011?
my local airfield -
another tiger moth went down near wimborne a few years back 2011?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South Somerset
Age: 78
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
moth crash near compton
According to an overheard conversation at Henstridge this PM, it suffered an engine seizure at 300' and spun in.Not sure how they knew as Compton was reportedly in lock down pending the AAIB investigation - the non arrival of expected aircraft from Compton was (we were told) because of fog?! and was closed.Very very sad RIP
Did they try to turn back ?
Actually it will work BUT you need to react immediately, know your parameters exactly, fly very accurately and AVOID THE STALL!!!
Not an evolution for an inexperienced or unpractised chap or chapess.
Not an evolution for an inexperienced or unpractised chap or chapess.
A turnback will work IF you have enough energy (speed/height). Therefore, in theory the turnback option switches from 'No' to 'Available' at a set point in the climb out. Once 'Available' you do need to ensure you react promptly, turn the correct way (wind dependant) and as Mogwi highlights - avoid the stall. If you're not sure, don't risk turning too tightly too near the ground.
Unless over 'inhospitable' terrain, a correctly handled engine failure should result in nothing more than injury and not death, even if the airframe is never going to fly again!
Unless over 'inhospitable' terrain, a correctly handled engine failure should result in nothing more than injury and not death, even if the airframe is never going to fly again!
The change of attitude required when going from the full power 'climb' to the no power 'glide' is more than most folks realise. We don't practice 300' engine failures (much) because it's obviously more dangerous than 500-750' ones. Throwing a turn back into the mix is demanding a very high level of skill and zero errors - don't do it from 300ft! Terrible news nonetheless and condolences to the Families.
I have survived a turn back after an engine failure, but as is stated, it all depends on energy. Interestingly enough, I have practiced it many times and what comes out is not just energy; wind and runway length play a part. If the wind is light and the runway short, if the engine fails at 600 feet, one loses about 500 feet in the turn-back which puts you a long way from the runway. If the runway is long and/or the wind strong, one reached 600 feet even before the end of the runway. Hence one rolls out of the turn-back over the upwind threshold at circa 100 feet. Of note is the angle of bank required; about 45 deg is optimum. But that requires a lot of speed to avoid a stall/spin and thus a very steep nose down attitude. Mind you, though a good wind helps with the turn-back, it will seriously increase your ground speed on landing. If you have a long runway like Kemble, that may be ok. A small grass field like Compton Abbas will be problematic. If conditions are not right or you are relatively inexperienced, landing ahead is the only option. Better than a spin/crash. Sorry, off subject, and mega condolences to the families concerned in this terrible crash.
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The change of attitude required when going from the full power 'climb' to the no power 'glide' is more than most folks realise. We don't practice 300' engine failures (much) because it's obviously more dangerous than 500-750' ones.
On my EFATO skills test, the throttle was pulled at around 200 feet. Only option was a 30 degree turn left to a small field to which I headed. I passed. It could not have been more than a few micro-seconds. No matter how much you plan for it, there is precious little time. My examiner was is one of the best. So sorry for the outcome of this one.
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Warks
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have survived a turn back after an engine failure, but as is stated, it all depends on energy. Interestingly enough, I have practiced it many times and what comes out is not just energy; wind and runway length play a part. If the wind is light and the runway short, if the engine fails at 600 feet, one loses about 500 feet in the turn-back which puts you a long way from the runway. If the runway is long and/or the wind strong, one reached 600 feet even before the end of the runway. Hence one rolls out of the turn-back over the upwind threshold at circa 100 feet. Of note is the angle of bank required; about 45 deg is optimum. But that requires a lot of speed to avoid a stall/spin and thus a very steep nose down attitude. Mind you, though a good wind helps with the turn-back, it will seriously increase your ground speed on landing. If you have a long runway like Kemble, that may be ok. A small grass field like Compton Abbas will be problematic. If conditions are not right or you are relatively inexperienced, landing ahead is the only option. Better than a spin/crash. Sorry, off subject, and mega condolences to the families concerned in this terrible crash.
Moderator
Though I have no idea of the circumstances of this sad event, Sometimes pilots climb away at a more slow airspeed after takeoff, sometimes that speed can be slower than a relaxed glide speed. That means that in the case of an engine failure, it could actually be necessary to dive to accelerate to glide speed. Couple that with the fact that the Tiger Moth is not streamlined - it does not carry its energy well after reducing power.
My last flying in a Tiger Moth was the maintenance check flying following a ten year restoration project, the possible need to glide was always on my mind during those flights, and I stored energy the best I could in the 'Moth...
My last flying in a Tiger Moth was the maintenance check flying following a ten year restoration project, the possible need to glide was always on my mind during those flights, and I stored energy the best I could in the 'Moth...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Turn backs can work in certain aircraft. I have practiced it at 400 feet. But....I would not recommend this in a Tiger Moth or similar aircraft with its huge amount of drag. Maximum concentration should be spent on just lowering the nose significantly just to prevent stalling(plenty of pilots have stalled a Tiger even without an engine failure).
A Tiger at a museum I fly at had a loss of power at a couple of hundred feet(or so) and stalled it in because his action was to go for the fuel selector instead of lowering the nose. Fortunately....no one was in the front seat.
While the Tiger in this video had extra drag due to a wingwalker, it shows what can happen in a turnback.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFWMBT1zDlI
A Tiger at a museum I fly at had a loss of power at a couple of hundred feet(or so) and stalled it in because his action was to go for the fuel selector instead of lowering the nose. Fortunately....no one was in the front seat.
While the Tiger in this video had extra drag due to a wingwalker, it shows what can happen in a turnback.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFWMBT1zDlI
I saw this thread about this sad accident this morning, shortly before heading to my gliding club for a towing shift. It reminded me that I had been meaning to practice some EFATO turn backs.
The aircraft was a lightly-loaded C182 (me plus half tanks). I lined up on a straight road at about 3000’ AGL (density altitude 7000-8000’), flying at 70 mph, with 20 degrees of flap.
I then closed the throttle, raised the flaps while lowering the nose to increase speed to 80 mph and rolled into a 45 degree banked turn. I lost 500’ while turning through 180 degrees and then another 300’ while lining up on my “runway”!
After that experience, I shall definitely not try a turn back.
The aircraft was a lightly-loaded C182 (me plus half tanks). I lined up on a straight road at about 3000’ AGL (density altitude 7000-8000’), flying at 70 mph, with 20 degrees of flap.
I then closed the throttle, raised the flaps while lowering the nose to increase speed to 80 mph and rolled into a 45 degree banked turn. I lost 500’ while turning through 180 degrees and then another 300’ while lining up on my “runway”!
After that experience, I shall definitely not try a turn back.
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Westhawk ;;;;; You are quite right the turnback needs to be practiced at height, afterwhich you will probably conclude it is not a good idea. Having said that, a number of years ago an ex RAF pilot who was an instructor on instructors seminars was promoting the turnback. This technique is more approprate to say a high energy aircraft such as a Hunter at large military airfield.
A turnback at low level in a light aircraft is on the whole simply madness at low level, because of obstructions, tailwind, tightening of the turn and in general pilots not knowing what the height loss will be.
Infact I asked what the instructor who was promoting the turnback what height loss would be. He quoted to height loss for a bulldog. Not only did he quote the wrong height loss for a 180 degree glide turn but failed to understand that in order to land on the recipricol runway you need to turn through 210 degrees.
EXCEPT IN VERY EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN EFATO YOU SELECT AN AREA AHEAD AND 40 DEGREES EITHER SIDE.
A turnback at low level in a light aircraft is on the whole simply madness at low level, because of obstructions, tailwind, tightening of the turn and in general pilots not knowing what the height loss will be.
Infact I asked what the instructor who was promoting the turnback what height loss would be. He quoted to height loss for a bulldog. Not only did he quote the wrong height loss for a 180 degree glide turn but failed to understand that in order to land on the recipricol runway you need to turn through 210 degrees.
EXCEPT IN VERY EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN EFATO YOU SELECT AN AREA AHEAD AND 40 DEGREES EITHER SIDE.
