Doug Larsen crashed near Moab
 

Though plenty of media report this as 02 Oct 2023 I have not seen any discussion on PPRUNE ?

Paywall

I became more conscientious after learning of the 1974 WENELA C54E crash whilst serving in Malawi; this was further re-enforced operating with VIP flights and seeing the Fueler's sample being sealed and held by the policing authority on some airfields (most notably in India).
Without that, the syringe used to draw kerosene through a water sensing capsule was a good sniff test piece; the old style litmus test paper was left at the bottom of the testing jar..
When uplifting demin water I would taste a sample from the bowser, as most airfields at that time served demin and water methanol from similar browsers.
This crash happened post a refueling stop and that is the only reason I mention the above experiences.

A twin (King Air?) was in a fatal crash after taking-off there and failing to outclimb the terrain. Two ridges can prevent a turn if an early low turn is not made. That crash, with a professional pilot, wiped out a medical team.

According to the recently updated Wikipedia article about Canyonlands Regional Airport, the King Air crashed about a mile south of the airfield but the Piper 15 miles to the north.

Preliminary Report
 

s30121.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/Report_WPR24FA002_193168_11_3_2023-1_29_10-PM.pdf

http://s30121.pcdn.co/wp-content/upl...1_29_10-PM.pdf

The pilot did not turn on the pilot-activated runway lights. A "black hole" departure. Loss of control.

Even if the PCL had been activated, visual reference still would have degraded to a black hole shortly after rotation. The more significant action is the steep 180 at low altitude after clearing the runway. Such a maneuver both induces SD and drastically degrades climb performance in an already performance-limited aircraft. Perhaps a chandelle-type situation where upon rolling out post-180, the pilot realized he was very low on airspeed and pitched down to recover, but in an area where he could not afford to lose any altitude in trade for airspeed.

Larsen certainly successfully executed this type of maneuver under similar conditions in his Army Black Hawk many times. But that would have been with two pilots, a much more powerful machine with different flight characteristics, better cockpit instrumentation, and better flight planning.

Always best to get on the dials asap at black hole departures . Never rush the taxi instruments checks and brief the departure even if single pilot .

A PA-28-140 always was an underpowered airplane and may have run into field density issues. Occupants were the pilot's wife and children and it was evening, so maybe not a contributing factor.

The low 180 turn was necessary to avoid being trapped towards rising ground, as happened to the King Air.

According to a POH found online the gross weight climb at 4,500' density altitude would be a bit under 400'/min yielding a climb gradient of about 270'/mile at 89 mph cas, subject to actual loading, leaning, temperature and wind. How much terrain clearance would he have over the next 4 miles climbing straight out to 1,000' over runway elevation before turning?

The preliminary report notes a moonless night. It would be interesting to hear from local pilots of similar aircraft how they handle departures.

From FAA departure procedures (for instrument conditions), Rwy 21 departure requires initial climb rate of 456 ft/nm, probably not attainable in that aircraft. I did see in some report that the plane was modified with a 180hp engine, that would help performance to a degree. Though the pilot didn't fly that route, so he may have been planning a VCOA type of departure, circling above the field to gain altitude. It was clear weather, so, legally VFR, but as posted above, a classic black hole departure is really fully instrument conditions, runway lights or not. In any case, the aircraft didn't really make it far enough for the departure route climb gradient to matter. RIP

XXX
MOAB, UT CANYONLANDS RGNL (CNY) TAKEOFF MINIMUMS AND (OBSTACLE) DEPARTURE PROCEDURES AMDT 4 03JAN19 (21056) (FAA) TAKEOFF MINIMUMS: Rwys 15, 33, NA - Runway Surface. Rwy 3, std. w/ min. climb of 405’ per NM to 6100 or 5000-3 for VCOA. Rwy 21, std. w/ min. climb of 456’ per NM to 6100 or 5000-3 for VCOA. DEPARTURE PROCEDURE: Rwy 3, climbing left turn to 6700 on OAB R-298, thence... Rwy 21, climbing right turn to 6700 on OAB R-298, thence... ...Climbing right turn to 10000 direct OAB VOR/DME. Continue climb in holding to 10000 at OAB VOR/DME (northwest, left turn, 118° inbound) before proceeding on course. VCOA: Rwys 3, 21, obtain ATC approval for VCOA when requesting IFR clearance. Climb in visual conditions to cross Canyonlands Field at or above 9400 before proceeding on course.
XXX

In a situation like this, the questions that jump into my mind are instrument flying experience(real instrument flying and preferably the kind where you transition to the equivalent of all windows being painted black after rotation as compared to cruising through a few clouds), instrument and pilot general competency, and how good were those instruments on that actual aircraft from serviceability to installation. Usually, we don't find out much of this unless it is from an acquaintance willing to gossip.

"Larsen certainly successfully executed this type of maneuver under similar conditions in his Army Black Hawk many times."
From the photo, it does not look like a dive or spin-in, but a level impact. If the aircraft had a 180 hp engine fitted, it should have adequate climb performance.
How old were his kids? The AUW might not be that high.
​​​​​​​