PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Accidents and Close Calls (https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls-139/)
-   -   PA-28 on A429 at Kemble 4/8/22 (https://www.pprune.org/accidents-close-calls/648161-pa-28-a429-kemble-4-8-22-a.html)

treadigraph 4th Aug 2022 12:11

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.

trevelyan 4th Aug 2022 13:20


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.

I wonder if the engine quit on the climb out and ran out of runway to put it back down on. Overshooting a 1972m runway in a PA28 takes some doing in the traditional sense. I hope the occupants are all ok.

treadigraph 4th Aug 2022 14:21

Bloody hell!

You can see a video here, I don't seem to have the Tweet posting knack...

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/281096

trevelyan 4th Aug 2022 14:28


Originally Posted by treadigraph (Post 11272937)

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.

Hotel-Mama 4th Aug 2022 14:36

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.

trevelyan 4th Aug 2022 14:36


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.

Looks like the video has been pulled already!

treadigraph 4th Aug 2022 14:39

It has indeed!

Kilcott 4th Aug 2022 14:49

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.

DaveReidUK 4th Aug 2022 15:39

AAIB en route.

wub 4th Aug 2022 16:21

Video on BBC News website https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-62424848

pasta 4th Aug 2022 18:05

Wowsers! The report for that one's going to make interesting reading...

Peter Fanelli 4th Aug 2022 23:30

The video is still on youtube.

henra 5th Aug 2022 10:39


Originally Posted by Peter Fanelli (Post 11273131)

Wow! What a ride!

SimonPaddo 5th Aug 2022 11:30

Hope they are OK after that - will be interesting notes in the logbook for that arrival

OldLurker 5th Aug 2022 17:26


Originally Posted by SimonPaddo (Post 11273371)
Hope they are OK after that - will be interesting notes in the logbook for that arrival

Hope so indeed – thanks to cleverly avoiding the line of parked aircraft – almost avoiding it, that is, as the starboard wingtip can be seen to contact the nose-gear of the Red Wings aircraft.

DaveReidUK 5th Aug 2022 18:55


Originally Posted by OldLurker (Post 11273575)
as the starboard wingtip can be seen to contact the nose-gear of the Red Wings aircraft.

It's hard to be sure, given the poor video resolution, but it looks as if the Cherokee's yaw to the right started just after the wing had passed the A321's NLG. I'm not sure there was any contact.

DuncanDoenitz 5th Aug 2022 20:27

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.

Fostex 5th Aug 2022 21:10

The insurance claim will be big, it could have been a lot lot lot bigger....

DaveReidUK 5th Aug 2022 23:03


Originally Posted by Fostex (Post 11273648)
The insurance claim will be big, it could have been a lot lot lot bigger....

I can't see many insurers paying out for damage to an airliner that is about to be broken up anyway.

DIBO 6th Aug 2022 16:43


Originally Posted by DaveReidUK (Post 11273687)
to be broken up anyway.

I think that for the valuable parts, like the landing gear, dismantling is the more appropriate verb :)

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

airsound 23rd Mar 2023 14:17

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.
airsound

First_Principal 23rd Mar 2023 19:56

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.