Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Non-Airline Forums > Accidents and Close Calls
Reload this Page >

Tiger Moth Down - Compton Abbas

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.

Tiger Moth Down - Compton Abbas

Old 26th Aug 2017, 10:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Bournemouth, UK
Posts: 66
Tiger Moth Down - Compton Abbas

Sad news:
http://http://www.bournemouthecho.co...Compton_Abbas/
Knife-Edge is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 12:28
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hadlow
Age: 56
Posts: 587
That link isn't working. Two killed.

Two men die after Tiger Moth crash at Compton Abbas near Shaftesbury (From Bournemouth Echo)
Super VC-10 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 14:18
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Berkshire, UK
Age: 75
Posts: 8,283
Very sad news. Condolences to their families.
HEATHROW DIRECTOR is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 15:46
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lechlade, Glos.UK
Posts: 679
Crash east of Compton Abbas

BBC just giving reports of a light aircraft crash east of Compton Abbas. Two killed. No further news yet. RIP.
sharpend is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 17:39
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Age: 62
Posts: 50
awful - sad news 2 chaps killed
my local airfield -

another tiger moth went down near wimborne a few years back 2011?
rog747 is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2017, 20:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: South Somerset
Age: 74
Posts: 3
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
berksboy26 is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 02:19
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West Coast Canada
Posts: 3,503
Did they try to turn back ?
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 14:59
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Miles away
Posts: 54
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever View Post
Did they try to turn back ?
Never works - 30 degrees either side is the only 'safe' way to go - or into any cross wind.
Procrastinus is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 15:57
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: 350/3 Compton
Age: 71
Posts: 240
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.
Mogwi is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 16:14
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 487
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!
H Peacock is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 16:30
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Brexitland
Posts: 1,112
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.
Arfur Dent is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 16:53
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Lechlade, Glos.UK
Posts: 679
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.
sharpend is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 17:42
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 89
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.
NorthernChappie is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 18:46
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Warks
Posts: 69
Originally Posted by sharpend View Post
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.
Compton is not that small as grass strips go BUT it is on top of a hill which makes it very high risk to turn back at low altitude. If you are the slightest bit short it is going to be unfriendly uphill terrain.
skyrangerpro is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2017, 19:40
  #15 (permalink)  
Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Ontario, Canada
Age: 58
Posts: 4,204
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...
Pilot DAR is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2017, 01:40
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: nowhere
Posts: 2
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
JammedStab is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2017, 02:43
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: CYYC (Calgary)
Posts: 4,913
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.
India Four Two is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2017, 05:23
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 945
Good job practicing the turnback maneuver at 3,000 AGL! If more pilots did that, there would be fewer sad events.
westhawk is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2017, 06:57
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 228
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.
Homsap is offline  
Old 28th Aug 2017, 08:08
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Away from it all
Posts: 56
EXCEPT IN VERY EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES IN EFATO YOU SELECT AN AREA AHEAD AND 40 DEGREES EITHER SIDE.
Well said, sir!
Philoctetes is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.