Seneca V LFAT Crash

[Beech_Boy]

I hear there was a Seneca V crashed at LFAT on sunday and just wandered if anyone had anymore information.

[john ball]

I think you will find it was on Sunday. A friend who flew there, saw it resting outside the restaurant with a fork lift under one wing and partially collapsed undercart. Apparently there was a strong 80 degree cross wind from the right on runway 31 !!!!.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wibble.gif

[Hugh_Jarse]

For those of you who aren't intimately familiar with every ICAO code in the world (or even France), this is Le Touquet ...

This post has been edited by the moderators and no longer reflects what I orginally wrote.

[Fuji Abound]

I always liked L2K is that ICAO.

[1800ed]

LFAT is a pretty well known identifier though :E

[cct]

and I thought it was the healthy yogurt
:)

[belowradar]

LFAT has a airfield / runway specified limit for crosswind landings with dry and wet runway....from memory I think 20 kts is the max wet x/w limit

Apparently there was a strong 80 degree cross wind from the right on runway 31 !!!!.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wibble.gif

[Piper.Classique]

Never did know why they closed the cross runway. However, I don't see anything about an official crosswind limit on the VAC
https://www.sia.aviation-civile.gouv.fr/aip/enligne/PDF_AIPparSSection/VAC/AD/2/1003_AD-2.LFAT.pdf
After one memorable landing with a howling crosswind I decided Abbeville was a far better bet, and cheaper, so I haven't been L2K recently. Wind was strong all over France, pretty much NE on Sunday, but at least I got a tailwind for once. 110kt g/s in a Super Cub, nice one!

[JW411]

For those of you who have been on pprune for some years, this gentleman is not the previously respected Hugh Jarse that we used to know.

He is apparently Hugh_Jarse so he is not exactly original.

Or is he?

[Saab Dastard]

Thank you for pointing that out JW411 - they are indeed 2 entirely separate accounts.

SD

[Sir George Cayley]

Any news of the Seneca's pilot and maybe pax? Were they OK? How are they?

Sorry, came over all human for a moment then. It'll pass I'm sure.

Sir George Cayley

[echobeach]

Sir George.
I know they are both ok and unhurt. I am sure they are grateful for the positive support from fellow flyers.
EB

[Pace]

Why do pilots continue to crash land senecas?

There is the famous Seneca bounce porpoise if you dont get the aircraft trimmed and land flat or nosefirst but this is all bad pilot techniques not crosswind.

I know the demonstrated crosswind component but with over 2000 hrs on the aircraft also know a five can handle 40 kts at 90 degrees.

The other gotcha is wind shear how many pilots actually adjust their reference speed for gusty conditions?

Its not the aircrafts fault but pilots who need to be pilots not passengers

Pace

[one dot right]

The trouble with senecas is Piper had a load of bits from archers/arrows etc, left over and someone said "let's build a twin".

It was never really designed, it just happened. Bloody thing generally runs out of elevator in the flare. I used to accept some forward trim load to give more elevator authority. Whatever Pace says, and if you have 2000 hrs on the thing I would hope you can land it by now, the point is they're hired out to relatively low houred ppl's and they're a pig to land with anything approaching grace.

[Sciolistes]

and they're a pig to land with anything approaching grace.
I found the original Seneca took a bit of getting used to, but the 2s or 3s where OK. Some say to land with a dribble of power :hmm:

[what next]

Hello!

I found the original Seneca took a bit of getting used to, but the 2s or 3s where OK."We" have a 3 here on our airfield that has been totalled twice in landing accidents and severley damaged in another one. As it belongs to the owner of the local repair shop, it always gets rebuilt when his mechanics have no other business to do. He also owns an old 2 that has had no landing accident so far (at least not to my knowledge.) Then, there is a V (different owner) that has had it's nosewheel smacked-in once.

And this "crash count" also reflects my experience (I have flown all three of them): The 3 is a real bitch, it simply lacks another 20 percent elevator downforce in the flare; the V is still very nose-heavy but manageable and the 2 behaves just like any other aeroplane.

But the Seneca is overall the most unpleasant aeroplane I have ever flown, so for me it would be perfectly OK if they crash-landed and scrapped the whole lot.

Regards,
max

[one dot right]

The 3 is a real bitch, it simply lacks another 20 percent elevator downforce in the flare;

This was my experience of the III. Flew it on air taxi ops for a couple of years. Piece of Cr*p!

[IO540]

I have ~ 0 experience of twins (grand total of 1.5hrs ME instruction :) ) but it's obvious that Piper recycle everything.

Isn't a Seneca a Saratoga hull, with an extra engine, and the wings longer to compensate for the wing length lost by screwing the engine partway up it?

The IMHO ghastly looking "Piperjet" is a Malibu with a jet engine screwed partway up the vertical stabiliser.

The Matrix is a Malibu with the cabin bleed valves removed.

And the PA28 family??

Keeps the tooling costs down, for sure.

[sammypilot]

The Seneca has a history of problems with the undercarriage usually due cracks in the trunnions. (I speak from bitter experience.) However I would have thought by the time they got to the Seneca V they would have cured the problem.

[youngskywalker]

I've flown 9 different types of twins but I'd easily say the Seneca I and II, were the worst, both pigs to fly and to look at. Some people love them of course.

[A and C]

Quote

Bloody thing generally runs out of elevator in the flare

It is so dishartening to see this myth continue over the years, the PA-34 would not have been given a type certificate if it did not have the correct elevator authority within the flight envelope.

This only thing I have to ask you is just how far forward of the C of G forward limit do you normaly fly the aircraft?

[one dot right]

Oh god, I was waiting for that one. Yes it may just barely have met certification standards but that doesn't stop it being a complete dog.

Many, many times I have floated this heap along a runway only to have the elevator hit the backstop and touch down on all three wheels at the same time,whether I had passengers or not. And no, before you say it, it wasn't from a height of ten feet and stalled on!

May I ask if you have flown many hrs in a III?

Oh, and in answer to your patronising question "within limits, always".

[what next]

May I ask if you have flown many hrs in a III?

o.d.r., you beat me! I would like to know as well!

Of the aeroplanes I have had the pleasure (?) to fly so far, I have hit the control stops only on two. One was the Metroliner (not really a surprise, if you compare the size of this "thing" with the size of it's control surfaces) and the other the Seneca. Always within the proper C of G envelope. BTW: Compared to a Seneca, a Metroliner is a real delight, handling-wise, and some people still claim it's the worst handling aeroplane ever built...

[one dot right]

BTW: Compared to a Seneca, a Metroliner is a real delight, handling-wise, and some people still claim it's the worst handling aeroplane ever built...

People make that claim about the shorts 360 too. Compared to the seneca it was a delight. The 330 on the other hand.....

[SFCC]

The 'Shed' ( one can only call it that if one has experience on type) may look ungainly, but is an amazing handling machine.
Off topic, granted, but I still leap to it's defence !;)

[A and C]

While the PA34 would not be the aircraft I would buy if I won the lottery (that would be the Barron) I just cant see the this worst aircraft thing.

It is not a spectacular aircraft but I have not had it run out of control in the flare, most of my PA34 time is on the 2 with some on the 3, both gave me no problems as long as loaded correctly, there is no doubt that when you have a lot of fuel and only one person in on board it will require a lot of back pressure in the flare.

For me the worst aircraft was the F27

[one dot right]

I didn't call it 'worst aircraft'. I called it a piece of Cr*p. And I stand by that.:p

Oh and it's DISHEARTENING not DISHARTENING and BARON not BARRON;)

[Fright Level]

Never did know why they closed the cross runway

One of the staff there told me it was because the mayor lived under the approach for the old runway and he wanted to sort out the noise issue once and for all :}

[one dot right]

Anyway, apologies for thread drift, this is supposed to be about a Seneca V (which I haven't flown) accident at Le Touquet. Does anyone have any more details?

[englishal]

Every single seneca I have flown with only 2 POB gave me nightmares when coming in to land. I came so close to crashing one once in Arizona due to its landing characteristics, that really scared me. Funnily enough, a couple of weeks later a FI put the nose wheel through the nose doing exactly the same...

[AmyFarr]

Golly, it is such a bad design that even the FI crashed it! Perhaps that FI had previously checked you out? Or checked your checkout instructor out, or had been checked out by your instructor?

The Seneca demands a certain level of skill and experience from pilots. It is not built by Fisher Price.

What is amusing is when those who lack that skill also lack the critical perception of their lack of skill. But if you think about it, it is no surprise that they believe they are qualified to make statements that it is the aircraft which is lacking and not themselves. It's an ego thing. Hence the old wives tales. In another era some of the mutterings on this thread would have been uttered about the Spitfire.

Workmen and tools Gentlemen. Workmen and tools.

[Pace]

I have flown A lot of Seneca Fives all over Europe Scotland and Ireland usually around FL110/120 but often up at FL200+

I have flown them in Icing conditions, severe weather, night, storms and landed one at Denham with a 90 degree 40 kt crosswind remembered by ATC as the airfield went under 6 inches of snow and was closed 30 minutes later.

With over 2000 hrs in the aircraft I have yet to be anywhere near a crash landing and have every confidence in the aircraft if they are flown in the correct way.

The Five is far from perfect but she is great engine out managing 16500 feet on one which is much more than a Baron would dream of.

High up in the high teens she will give you more than 200 kts TAS.

She will outclimb most light twins 1400 fpm at sea level and still 700-800 fpm at 20K.

She is a docile bird in the stall and as such will protect bad pilots from themselves. She will fly at just over 60 kts and as such will head airbourne off bumpy grass fields so watch her if its also gusty.

Landing put in bags of trim and as you come over the hedge wind in more for good measure. Fly the speeds accurately and she is a doddle to land.

She is no fingertip delight especially in roll but she is an economical well tried and safe aircraft. She has dealt with everything that has been thrown at her over the years I have flown them and that has often been more than I should have dared to have expected from her so I for one have every confidence in the Seneca Five and her capabilities.

Pace

[iceman36]

I was at Le Touquet on saturday and the Seneca was parked up on the south side of the apron just off the taxiway with a bent port undercarriage and propeller and was up on jacks.

[Pace]

Maybe I have been a little harsh in blaming the pilot for all landing accidents.
I did have one occasion taxiing out in Jersey. Luckely the aircraft was at a slow taxi speed but one of the main gears rotated 90 degrees due to a bolt coming loose and jumping out.

Pace

[what next]

Hello!

Pace: With over 2000 hrs in the aircraft I have yet to be anywhere near a crash landing and have every confidence in the aircraft if they are flown in the correct way.

Whatever that "correct way" may be. I have far less hours on type and never had problems landing the thing because I was taught to always sacrifice two or three hundred metres of runway and cut the power only after the main wheels are down. But that way, I never could go to real short fields, so probably it is not the "correct way".

But I remember that I once almost had a takeoff-accident in a Seneca III, when it hit a bump in the runway in gusting wind and started to bounce between nosewheel and main wheels at around 40kt. Moving the elevator in any direction had zero effect, so it was either cutting the power and continue to bounce until it stopped (with or without hammering the nosewheel in) or keeping the power applied and continue to bounce until it eventually got airborne (with or without the nosewheel hammered in...). I chose the second option and live to tell the story, but since that day I have triplicated my daily rate for flying Senecas and haven't gotten that many assignments on them any more :)

Looking at the damage history of Seneca landing gears compared to those of similar aircraft (that are all flown by exactly the same pilots, trained by the same instructors) clearly tells me that we have an aircraft problem and not a pilot problem here.

Regrads, max

[Pace]

But I remember that I once almost had a takeoff-accident in a Seneca III, when it hit a bump in the runway in gusting wind and started to bounce between nosewheel and main wheels at around 40kt.

What next

That is the seneca porpoise on takeoff. Again take the weight off the nosewheel by pulling back or back trim.

I must be superman as I have really flown these aircraft in appalling conditions without a problem and only joking as I am not superman.

I have flown many twins and most have one quirk or another. Its a matter of knowing the quirks and respecting that.

Aircraft like the Aerostar, MU2 are all aircraft which can bite if mishandled. Some are aircraft which will bite others are docile. The Seneca is more in the docile category with a few chracteristics which need a workaround.

Pace

[vanHorck]

The speed is the decider on landing the Seneca. Too fast and you'll float forever.
The heavy pitch controls during the flare are the design flaw....

Check speed to the knot, keep a little power on till in the flare, and remember she s heavy on the controls, a little backtrim to assist the holding back is acceptable, as long as you remember the out of trim in case of a go-around.

It works for me every time and my home runway is only 700m grass... Easy!

The only time i embarrassed myself with a prop strike is.... when i floated due to excessive speed coming up to the flare.....! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Seneca IV best of the Seneca's !!!!!