PA-28 on A429 at Kemble 4/8/22
Looks quite a heavy impact, hope occupants escaped without injury. May have been a trip through the fence it seems.
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.u...irport-7420631 Edit: precautionary trip to hospital, hopefully all ok. |
Originally Posted by treadigraph
(Post 11272837)
Looks quite a heavy impact, hope occupants escaped without injury. May have been a trip through the fence it seems.
https://www.gloucestershirelive.co.u...irport-7420631 Edit: precautionary trip to hospital, hopefully all ok. |
Bloody hell!
You can see a video here, I don't seem to have the Tweet posting knack... https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/281096 |
Originally Posted by treadigraph
(Post 11272937)
Bloody hell!
Seem to have trouble posting tweets... https://publish.twitter.com/?query=https%3A%2F%2Ftwitter.com%2FOTweeter%2Fstatus%2F15551 75705201283072&widget=Tweet |
As is often the case, the media have got it wrong. The accident site is 400 m to the side of the runway, nearly abeam the midpoint. It is conceivable that they were going around, or in old-money doing an "overshoot", and that is a term the media heard and misinterpreted. It would not be the first time the media have portrayed a go around as "overshooting the runway". I suspect that misinterpretation of the term is one reason the terminology has long since changed.
|
Originally Posted by trevelyan
(Post 11272944)
So that's taken from the CCTV camera in the yard at Oaksey Garage, bloody hell indeed! That is now even more peculiar assuming it was landing on 26.
|
It has indeed!
|
PA 28 Kemble 4/8/22
The aircraft is in a ditch on the A 429 well south of R/W 08/26; the only useable runway.
It is adjacent to the main road entrance, hangars & many parked airliners. Difficult to see how it got there without hitting a building or a parked airliner. |
AAIB en route.
|
Video on BBC News website https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-62424848
|
Wowsers! The report for that one's going to make interesting reading...
|
The video is still on youtube.
|
Originally Posted by Peter Fanelli
(Post 11273131)
The video is still on youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkMPEqNLoSk&t=11s |
Hope they are OK after that - will be interesting notes in the logbook for that arrival
|
Originally Posted by SimonPaddo
(Post 11273371)
Hope they are OK after that - will be interesting notes in the logbook for that arrival
|
Originally Posted by OldLurker
(Post 11273575)
as the starboard wingtip can be seen to contact the nose-gear of the Red Wings aircraft.
|
Pretty sure there is contact with the Red Wing's NLG; immediate right yaw, possibly a corresponding change in heading, and definitely liberation of some visible debris (an aileron?).
Jeepers. |
The insurance claim will be big, it could have been a lot lot lot bigger....
|
Originally Posted by Fostex
(Post 11273648)
The insurance claim will be big, it could have been a lot lot lot bigger....
|
Originally Posted by DaveReidUK
(Post 11273687)
to be broken up anyway.
Compensating the little topic drift, albeit not that spectacular an info, anyone doubting whether the Airbus NLG was hit, here you can see chunks of the RH wingtip flying around and one getting lodged into the NLG. The NLG-hit, certainly prevented the Piper from striking the fence and the parked cars. https://cimg1.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....5472089657.jpg |
Report out
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/a...nt=immediately Brief conclusion A go-around was mishandled as a result of a confused handover of control between student and instructor. The go-around actions were not effectively instigated, and the aircraft diverged from the runway at low height and speed. The aircraft had insufficient performance to climb away, struck a parked airliner, exited the airfield, crossed a public road and collided with some trees. |
Thanks for the link.
I was interested to know how a 'confused handover' had occurred (wanting to learn something from this) so read the entire report rather than just the summary. This was illuminating: "The instructor noticed that the student was continuing to make control inputs. He described using explicit language to encourage the student to fully relinquish control." and "despite an improvement in the continuity of instruction, his progress remained slow. The student had repeated difficulties in the circuit with control of the approach and landing." Drilling down it would seem the instructor was faced with a difficult situation in which the less than stellar student wouldn't let go of the controls when he (the instructor) stated "I have control". He possibly then said something like "let go the effing yoke!", to no avail. One could read implied criticism in the report that he didn't repeat the standard phrase "I have control". While I understand the importance of consistency in training, particularly with phraseology, I also have some sympathy with the instructor whom, when faced with hell going into a handbasket quicksmart, probably resorted to a very clear and direct instruction. At that point I'm not sure repeating the previous polite statement would have made any difference? What is missing from the report, to my mind reducing its usefulness, is the student's age (and possibly their occupation), and exactly what the instructor said. The instructor was a 24 y.o. with 500-odd hours and if the student were say a 40 y.o. army officer one could imagine a reverse command gradient. And if the instructor simply said 'eff off', that's probably not going to be effective either. All surmise of course, but sometimes sanitised reports don't quite convey the full story sufficiently well. FP. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:47. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.