Haydock Races Ground Incident

[jayteeto]

Just been seen by my mum. Light aircraft has porked it’s landing and hit a parked aircraft. Quite a bit of damage but no obvious injuries. Narrowly missed a helicopter as it spun around

[compton3bravo]

Yes just seen it on ITV Racing, a bit scary and very fortunate no injuries but substantial damage to a parked aircraft.

[ETOPS]

Firstly, here's a link to the news article

https://www.racingpost.com/news/rich...haydock/345295

Looks like this particular PA-32 has been "in the wars" before.

https://www.gov.uk/aaib-reports/aaib...32r-301t-n88na

[jayteeto]

Its uphill when you land that way and the ground was very very very very wet on Saturday. The weather was absolutely pants in the local area to the NW of Barton

[Filterphil]

The picture of the Baron is not a stock shot but, in fact, taken at the end of the incident. The PA32 was the innocent party; the damage was the result of being clipped by the Baron which veered left at some point in the ground roll (I didn't see the touch down point), hit the PA32 and did a ground loop which is when the photo was taken. There was no obvious damage to the Baron although the mark on the fuselage could be caused by the impact. I didn't see the collision as it was obscured by an advertising hoarding (as per ITV Racing's footage).
I walked some of the ground run and the ground didn't seem too bad although it was a few hours after the worst of the rain. It was fortunate that the the Baron managed to miss the heli in the background otherwise things could have been a whole lot worse.

FilterPhil

[Saab Dastard]

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news...ourse-15127626

Further to Filterphil's post - the article has pictures of both aircraft immediately after the incident.

[750XL]

You Tube

[flyerj]

Much too wet

I can't understand why they were allowing aircraft to land with so much water on the strip, the powers that be should have decided to close it, then they are under pressure from the racing community who want to fly in.
The CAA will undoubtedly have something to say about operations there, let's hope they don't stop it or that could be the end of landing on race courses.

[Mike Flynn]

There have been several accidents with jockey positioning aircraft on racecourses over the years,

The quote from one of the passengers in the Barron ,Richard Hannon, says it all.

It was horrible. The runway wasn't suitable – we slipped and skidded. But we're all okay, and that's the most important thing.

"I feel sorry for the pilot [Brian Hamilton] as he's a very good pilot who doesn't take chances. We've been using him for years and he's top class.

"It's waterlogged there, it's very dangerous. We don't need to take chances like that. I don't think the planes are in very good nick now, but we're all right and

The pilot mentioned is very experienced and to quote from his website is a UK CAA ATPL, class rating examiner, PPL flight examiner, QFI, CAA airworthiness test pilot, FAA ATP, CFI, CFI instrument and multi-engine instructor.

The pressure is on to move them between rides at racing events.

Sometimes against the odds. https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2000/...vivekchaudhary

[flyerj]

Not blaming the pilot but what this does show is that somebody needs basic training on how to assess the strip on race days as to being suitable or not.

its impossible to talk to anybody on the phone at Haydock on race days, it needs the guy that mans the radio to have a mobile number available for pilots to contact him. He also needs a short course on assessing the strip and being able pass that information on.

With that amount of standing water on the runway, as seen in the photos and video, even a metal surfaced runway would be closed due to contamination.

[Flyingmac]

Unfortunately that's the third mangled Saratoga in a row for the same pilot. One mangled in forced landing near York. Replacement mangled on Fair Isle. Replacement for that one mangled while the poor guy was in the stands having his lunch.

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=199170

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=211094

[Barcli]

Quite surprised it was rebuilt after the Harrogate one......

[ETOPS]

Quite surprised it was rebuilt after the Harrogate one......

Don't think it was. First aircraft was N414AG effectively destroyed in Aug 2017 and thus to have repaired and reregistered as N515FD by Spring 2018 doesn't sound plausible. The Haydock aircraft was N88NA which I've already noted has having been damaged before at Waltham.

[treadigraph]

N414AG and N517FD have different C/Ns.

N517FD Fair Isle AAIB report is in this month's digest.

Owner must be on first name terms with the accident inspectors!

[Jhieminga]

...and the sales representatives at Piper.

[Mike Flynn]

Originally Posted by flyerj

Not blaming the pilot but what this does show is that somebody needs basic training on how to assess the strip on race days as to being suitable or not.

its impossible to talk to anybody on the phone at Haydock on race days, it needs the guy that mans the radio to have a mobile number available for pilots to contact him. He also needs a short course on assessing the strip and being able pass that information on.

With that amount of standing water on the runway, as seen in the photos and video, even a metal surfaced runway would be closed due to contamination.

The approach and letdown to such a short strip in those conditions must have been interesting for the passengers.

[meleagertoo]

Originally Posted by flyerj

Not blaming the pilot but what this does show is that somebody needs basic training on how to assess the strip on race days as to being suitable or not.

It is a fundamental part of every pilot's training to asess whether the runway offered is suitable for use. It's nothing to do with anyone else, let alone some geezer with a radio.
I am really surprised there is any doubt as to where the cause of this incident lies. A pilot landed on waterlogged grass and groundlooped. How can the radio man have any part to play in that?
A description of their necessarily home-made IMC approach into Haydock would be interesting too, I expect.

[rolling20]

I have given up flying into race meetings. People walking along the strip on final approach, taking off at dusk after an evening meeting and having another aircraft trying to land on the same heading, vehicles parked on the strip and finally a wet and long grass take off which added about another 30% or so to the t/o run on what was a very short runway and it should have been closed before arrival. I agree with other posters on here, it needs to be policed better

[Pilot DAR]

It is the responsibility of the pilot to assure that the runway proposed for use is suitable, aircraft type, and conditions considered. Information from "the ground" can be helpful, though sometimes has originated from a source which may be more enthusiastic, than formally familiar. The pressure a pilot might feel to "get to the event" can be an influence in decision making, but, at the end, it it still the pilot's responsibility go operate the aircraft safely, and within any limitations. It is correct that generally, there is little to no performance data for GA aircraft for unusual grass or very wet runways. That does not prevent operation from these surfaces, but certainly imposes upon the pilot an added layer of decision making, perhaps with less than ideal data with which to make that decision. Then, the familiarizing ends up happening in a small, congested area. Would the pilot take that aircraft and practice on a waterlogged runway just to gain skill? For myself, a waterlogged runway is a big AVOID for most aircraft types I fly, as the water spray/splash from the nosewheel into the prop(s), can be very damaging to the prop(s). Though not as damaging as losing control of the plane could be! Sometimes, saying "not today" is the decision which is better in the big picture.....

[rolling20]

Originally Posted by treadigraph

N414AG and N517FD have different C/Ns.

N517FD Fair Isle AAIB report is in this month's digest.

Owner must be on first name terms with the accident inspectors!

Having read that report and from my own experience of going into short fields and I am not criticising, just making observations. He would still have been heavy 6 up on landing. The distance of 489m doesn't leave much room for error. Why did he raise the flaps?