Nepal Plane Crash
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: Uk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aileronreversal?
As a retired private pilot I am amazed having read pretty much all of this thread but found no reference to what is to me the most likely cause of this crash. Hundreds of single engine pilots over the years have died attempting to do a circuit to land after an EFATO. However many thousands of hours they might have, some are obviously not aware of the fact that IF YOU ATTEMPT A STEEP TURN WHEN FLYING LOW AND SLOW YOU ARE DEAD MEAT!
They assume (presumably due to lack of training) that they only need to apply opposite aileron to level the wings! This is intuitive but fatal. They do not realise that in this situation the drag caused by opposite aileron merely stalls the inside wing promoting a spin.
Google Fairchild B52 crash for a perfect example. You can see the pilot applying opposite aileron (spoilers) as the plane, at 90deg bank spins into the ground.
The key question with regard to the Yeti disaster is, did either the PF or the captain have recent training on incipient spins? Either on a simulator or an aircraft?
All of this assuming of course that there was no defect on the aircraft.
They assume (presumably due to lack of training) that they only need to apply opposite aileron to level the wings! This is intuitive but fatal. They do not realise that in this situation the drag caused by opposite aileron merely stalls the inside wing promoting a spin.
Google Fairchild B52 crash for a perfect example. You can see the pilot applying opposite aileron (spoilers) as the plane, at 90deg bank spins into the ground.
The key question with regard to the Yeti disaster is, did either the PF or the captain have recent training on incipient spins? Either on a simulator or an aircraft?
All of this assuming of course that there was no defect on the aircraft.
Pegase Driver
Join Date: May 1997
Location: Europe
Age: 74
Posts: 3,683
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
regardless whether procedures were in place or not, the weather on the day looked fine and any professional pilot should be able to execute a visual approach to an airport in those conditions and land safely (assuming no other factors). Also considering most airports in Nepal are VFR they should be well practised in this type of flying.
@Stevedd32 : interesting but pure speculation ,as we do not know the speed of the aircraft when it (*) starts to turn , and unlike the B52 you refer to, the initial bank we see on this video does not appear to be brutal or excessive , but we'll see what the recorders says.
Note (*) : I say " it" , as, for all we know it could have been uncommanded .
With regard to the part of your post that I quoted above (my bolding), perhaps therein lies a clue, but we simply don't know yet.
Cheers.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Here, there, and everywhere
Posts: 1,122
Likes: 0
Received 12 Likes
on
7 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stall avoidance is trained.
And, just because I'm curious, would the the "avoiding" being trained be to first reduce AoA and assure that the ball is centered? Or to add power to an already bad situation?
de minimus non curat lex
I opine that avoidance training is of very little use if you're already past avoiding, and well into it!
And, just because I'm curious, would the the "avoiding" being trained be to first reduce AoA and assure that the ball is centered? Or to add power to an already bad situation?
And, just because I'm curious, would the the "avoiding" being trained be to first reduce AoA and assure that the ball is centered? Or to add power to an already bad situation?
Going slightly off topic, the question arises as to what a student should be exposed to during training for CPL(+IR) issue.
Prior to JAR (1/7/1999) & then EASA, the UK CAP509 training included spinning & at BAeFC, Prestwick
(+ Oxford ~ OATS) aerobatics(dual) were part of the course.
Full exposure at PIK to what the delightful BRAVO AS202 (180hp VP prop) had to offer; a great confidence builder exploring ‘extreme attitudes’.
With JAR that was replaced by stall/spin awareness training, recovering no later than during the incipient stage.
Eventually, EASA introduced mandatory upset training, recognising the shortcomings of ‘awareness training’.
This tragic ATR accident, prima facie, was caused by getting too slow, and not recognising it.
Lack of situational awareness & high workload causing a distraction to the ‘aviating’ aspect of airmanship.
power pitch flags and gear. as a general rule works for just about everything.
I will never ever understand why given that stalling and spinning in on approach to landing is a common accident that spin training was removed from the PPL training.
I think it was just a commercial decision to encourage more uptake in the sport.
And for the life of me I cant understand why 3 - 5 hours upset and unusual attitude revcovery training isnt mandatory for commercial pilots every year.
I will never ever understand why given that stalling and spinning in on approach to landing is a common accident that spin training was removed from the PPL training.
I think it was just a commercial decision to encourage more uptake in the sport.
And for the life of me I cant understand why 3 - 5 hours upset and unusual attitude revcovery training isnt mandatory for commercial pilots every year.
Drain Bamaged
Maybe because it's better to tackle a problem at its root cause ---> Learn first about not getting yourself into an unusual attitude!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
power pitch flags and gear. as a general rule works for just about everything.
Does this "power pitch...." procedure advocate applying [more] power first to an airplane which already has too high an AoA, and is stalling - making lowering the nose a secondary action!?! So the nose keeps going up as power is applied/increased, and the torque from the power creates an unsymmetrical force on the whole plane, possibly inducing a spin? Why not reduce that AoA, assure the wing unstalls as the priority, then apply power to minimize altitude loss?
As a retired private pilot I am amazed having read pretty much all of this thread but found no reference to what is to me the most likely cause of this crash. Hundreds of single engine pilots over the years have died attempting to do a circuit to land after an EFATO. However many thousands of hours they might have, some are obviously not aware of the fact that IF YOU ATTEMPT A STEEP TURN WHEN FLYING LOW AND SLOW YOU ARE DEAD MEAT!
They assume (presumably due to lack of training) that they only need to apply opposite aileron to level the wings! This is intuitive but fatal. They do not realise that in this situation the drag caused by opposite aileron merely stalls the inside wing promoting a spin.
Google Fairchild B52 crash for a perfect example. You can see the pilot applying opposite aileron (spoilers) as the plane, at 90deg bank spins into the ground.
The key question with regard to the Yeti disaster is, did either the PF or the captain have recent training on incipient spins? Either on a simulator or an aircraft?
All of this assuming of course that there was no defect on the aircraft.
They assume (presumably due to lack of training) that they only need to apply opposite aileron to level the wings! This is intuitive but fatal. They do not realise that in this situation the drag caused by opposite aileron merely stalls the inside wing promoting a spin.
Google Fairchild B52 crash for a perfect example. You can see the pilot applying opposite aileron (spoilers) as the plane, at 90deg bank spins into the ground.
The key question with regard to the Yeti disaster is, did either the PF or the captain have recent training on incipient spins? Either on a simulator or an aircraft?
All of this assuming of course that there was no defect on the aircraft.
Unloading immediately at that altitude is unlikely to have saved them and it is unlikely they will have gone beyond the approach to the stall in training. Paul Ransbury from APS has a bunch of presentations about it from their UPRT sessions on traffic pattern stalls.
So being current with the skills to fix imminent stalls etc takes it from a consious mental desision making to a subconsious reaction which is much much faster, which is why people who play top class sports drill routines1000's of times.
Having said that, once the wing dropped they were far too low for any recovery.
That was my inaccurate structuring of the sentence. You can apply power and drop the nose at the same time, my bad.
I also have no concern at all using 45 degree bank in either of the SEP I own and fly. If the yaw string or ball is centered there is no hazard with steep bank angles. If you can't keep the yaw string or ball centered you are dangerous at any altitude and any bank angle with or without an engine.
Last edited by EXDAC; 28th Jan 2023 at 23:41.
Total BS! I have many many hours racked up at high bank angles in narrow core thermals, some quite close to the ground, and many very close to stall speed. I'm not dead yet. The airpane doesn't know how close to the ground it is and, absent significant wind gradient, it performs just the same at 500 ft as at 5,000 ft.
I also have no concern at all using 45 degree bank in either of the SEP I own and fly. If the yaw string or ball is centered there is no hazard with steep bank angles. If you can't keep the yaw string or ball centered you are dangerous at any altitude and an bank angle with or without an engine.
I also have no concern at all using 45 degree bank in either of the SEP I own and fly. If the yaw string or ball is centered there is no hazard with steep bank angles. If you can't keep the yaw string or ball centered you are dangerous at any altitude and an bank angle with or without an engine.
Oppps sorry, I forgot, they did try to do that and now they are all dead.
I will quite happily fly 90 degrees of bank or more, but my fully aerobatic SEP weighing 1500 lb is nothing like a 49000 lb twin turbo prop ATR 72.
Oh and increasing the bank angle increases the wing loading and that increases the stall speed, and after 45 degrees it increases it a lot faster.
I suggest you offer your services to the investigation team, to point out what the pilots were doing wrong.