And another one, this must be at least 4 in the past year

[piperboy84]

http://patch.com/california/losalamitos/2-injured-catalina-plane-crash
http://patch.com/california/losalamitos/2-injured-catalina-plane-crash

Why do people keep flying spam cans into the cliff below the threshold at Catalina ? the runways about 3000ft.

Just plain crazy

[n5296s]

He didn't actually fly it INTO the cliff, or there would be no survivors. He must have been a LOT low. Maybe he had some kind of engine problem?

[piperboy84]

He didn't actually fly it INTO the cliff, or there would be no survivors. He must have been a LOT low. Maybe he had some kind of engine problem?

The other guy that crashed at Catalina the same day had engine problems but fortunately was fished out the water by a nearby boater.

[DeltaV]

Maybe by getting caught out by a downdraught over the near end of the runway?
Dunno. Just speculating.

[Flying Lawyer]

Why do people keep flying spam cans into the cliff below the threshold at Catalina ? the runways about 3000ft.I suspect one reason may be that landing there has a number of unusual features which can catch pilots out.

The threshold of 22 is at the edge of a 1500' cliff.
There's usually a strong down-draught.
You have to be prepared for the possibility of a sudden loss of altitude during short final.

On approach, there are none of the usual visual cues for height reference so it's particularly important to keep the picture focused on the numbers, monitor altimeter and ignore peripheral vision. (Except, of course, for normal look-out purpose.) There's a reason Avalon is known as 'the Airport in the Sky'.

The flare also needs extra care because it's on an uphill slope which can be deceptive.
Just as you touch down, much of the runway disappears. (It's about 3000' but there's a hump.)

Most flying clubs/FBOs require that renters' first landing is with an instructor or local pilot familiar with the unusual features.


http://img48.photobucket.com/albums/v146/FlyingLawyer/Catalina_approach.jpg




Challenging the first time and extra care needed every time but good fun and, having landed, you can treat yourself to a buffalo burger in the airport cafe. :)

.

[TheOddOne]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7CdagqzUiBE

This can be quite amusing in a strong Easterly...

TOO

[Fly4Business]

What weather condition was at the time of crash?
I remember strong downdrafts on short final Avalon - if wind blows direct runway direction, it will produce quite a squalldrum on the cliffs edge.

[RatherBeFlying]

FL's photo makes me nervous. A shallow approach to a runway ending in a dropoff can get you too close to downdraft and rotor.

A steep approach keeps you above that nasty stuff.

[Flying Lawyer]

RBF

I agree a steeper approach is better, or a slightly higher approach and landing slightly long - there's plenty of runway.
Much depends upon the wind on the day, and the aircraft.

I found the photo on the internet some years ago and used it in a thread about Catalina in 2004 to show how close the threshold is to the edge of the cliff.
It doesn't entirely capture the reality but was the best I could find at the time.

[Genghis the Engineer]

There's an interesting psychological principle there, known as "boundary avoidance tracking".

It works like this - if I ask you to ride a bicycle down a white line in the road, staying always within 6" of the centre of the line, you probably won't find it very difficult.

However, if I ask you to ride a bicycle along the top of a 12" wide wall, 10ft high - whilst technically it's the same task, for a couple of psychological reasons you'll find that extremely difficult.

This runway (which I'm sorry to say I've never landed on - I had planned to, but conditions conspired against me that week) is a bit like the 12" wide 10ft tall wall. Pilots are likely to fixate on the boundary *which they do not wish to cross* (the edge of the cliff, and once in a while this creates a tragedy.

If wind, runway slope, length, width, etc. were all the same - but it was surrounded by grass, I'll bet that nobody would ever miss the runway.

G

[Broadlands]

I assume it is the same principle when riding a motorbike - if you look at the pot hole you will hit it

[Genghis the Engineer]

Something similar.

The idea was developed by the USAF academy when trying to understand the psychology behind flying formation accurately and safely.

G

[Shaggy Sheep Driver]

Broadlands - not quite the same maybe. It is true that on a motorcycle, where look is where you'll go. So always look as far into the 'vanishing point' of a bend as you can, never at the hedge bordering the bend.

I once got caught out at Alderney in a PA38 approaching over the cliff edge. The wind was down the runway so I was expecting a mighty downdraught on final (so made a high slightly fast approach) but completely underestimated its strength. Retracting the last stage of flap and applying lots of power got us safely to the runway, but I was shaken by the incident as I HAD been expecting it - but hadn't been expecting anything as strong as that.

[9 lives]

My experience does not include Catalina Island, though I have landed on several plateau or mountain top runways which have characteristics similar to those depicted in the photo FL provided. One of the techniques I have applied where performance, distances and traffic permit has been to avoid an approach over the "cliff" at all, favouring a curving final so as to remain over the more level ground, and thus avoid the transition.

In every case I have done this, I have chosen this technique because the rather strong winds down the runway, which I suspected would create the descending air off the "cliff" also enabled a nicely controlled shorter curved approach. I won't claim great expertise in mountain flying, but I can say that taking a moment to visualize where the air may be moving, and considering non standard approach paths can help to avoid challenging conditions.

I quite appreciate GtE's observation about boundary avoidance tracking, and can see it's applicability in such a case. So I would add "avoidance" as a tactic for dealing with it!

[Baikonour]

It's a well known phenomenon...

E.g. I went here last year:

http://www.ryfylke.com/ImageVaultFiles/id_5406/cf_6/Hanne_Sundb-.JPG

And although anyone would quite happily stand on the edge of a carpet on the floor - I struggled to get myself to go close enough to the edge to look down.
(‎604 m - 1,982 ft. Sheer drop at the top - although towards the bottom, it it doesn't quite go straight into the water.)

B.

[Chesty Morgan]

I once got caught out at Alderney in a PA38 approaching over the cliff edge. The wind was down the runway so I was expecting a mighty downdraught on final (so made a high slightly fast approach) but completely underestimated its strength. Retracting the last stage of flap and applying lots of power got us safely to the runway, but I was shaken by the incident as I HAD been expecting it - but hadn't been expecting anything as strong as that.

Excellent. But have you not heard of a unstable approaches and go arounds? :rolleyes:

[rans6andrew]

it seems to me that this is one of those approaches that is always going to be difficult if you are accustomed to the low angle "drag it in on the back of the drag curve" approach that I so often see. In those situations you are closer to the ground (and used to seeing the ground close to you) and you are then juggling the throttle to adjust the vertical speed to keep the runway in view. You can easily end up lower than the runway (but with it still in view) without realising it and a massive increase in power is required to climb up over the threshold once it becomes clear that you are too low. If you always do a full glide approach and come in much steeper then as long as the glide speed is kept correct the sight view will quickly tell you if you are at the wrong height. Runway sliding up the runway = undershoot, runway sliding down the runway = overshoot. Glide speed good, threshold view at correct part of windscreen and throttle closed then you must be (correctly) above the threshold height. I haven't been to the place in the thread but it sounds a bit like Bembridge (coming in over the sea), where a high glide works for me.

I hope my explanation is clear.

Tin Hat ON.

[charliegolf]

S'ovius innit- no QFE:E

CG

[Flying Lawyer]

I haven't been to the place in the thread but it sounds a bit like Bembridge (coming in over the sea)

Perhaps a little bit.
Not really. ;)

(I'm not challenging the technique you recommend.)

[westhawk]

Apt description FL.

One other thing about the up-sloping runway at AVX is that the majority of final approaches observed from the restaurant patio (Mmm, Buffalo burgers :ok:) will appear to be well below a normal glidepath angle due to the "upslope illusion". A properly conducted approach will appear to be quite steep from the perspective of the cockpit while appearing normal from the ground. The cockpit view in the above image is likely a bit on the low side because it appears normal! Runway slope is something that should really be briefed ahead of time. Even at airports with a PAPI for vertical guidance, the urge to fly a flat approach to an upsloping runway can be quite strong. Catalina reminds me allot of Aspen, CO (2 deg. up and the Roaring Fork river just short of the rwy) in that respect.

[Maoraigh1]

The flat approach to an up-hill runway problem has been solved at Knockbain strip by 2 powerlines near the threshold.:O

[piperboy84]

I'll be landing on Catalina today, I'll video the steep low power technique and see if I get it right. Scores out of 10 welcome !!

[Flying Lawyer]

westhawk
Catalina reminds me allot of Aspen, CO (2 deg. up and the Roaring Fork river just short of the rwy) in that respect.

I agree,
although I can understand why (weather permitting) most landings are on the upslope.

Although Aspen doesn't have a cliff at the threshold, there are (as you know) other complications. As well as the surrounding mountains, significantly reduced performance - almost 8000' amsl, with density altitude considerably higher even in the winter months.
A challenging airport but fun with appropriate caution - and stunning local scenery. :)

I have a vague recollection that for GA VFR ops, the PiC must have completed at least one take-off or landing in the preceding 12 months but that may apply only to night VFR.

A similar rule elsewhere led to an interesting dispute with insurers following the aircraft over-running the runway on landing.
Satisfactorily resolved, although insurers didn't think so. ;)

[piperboy84]

Today's approach to Catalina low power, high, glide approach vid


https://onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=1EDF911B882D2AC5!3094&authkey=!AI2xDJ_trh2vgqo&ithint=video%2cmp4

Talked to the guy in the tower at Catalina today, I guess the guy that crashed at the weekend stall/ spun it in on short final, there was a crew there today cutting up the plane. Poor buggers.

[Silvaire1]

Talked to the guy in the tower at Catalina today, I guess the guy that crashed at the weekend stall/ spun it in on short final, there was a crew there today cutting up the plane.

http://cdn.patch.com/users/22880692/2016/04/T800x600/2016045714678af0acc.jpg

I don't know anything about the plane spinning in other than what's accessible on this thread, but it looks to me that the above photo from the news link on that subject was taken short of the non-cliff (west) end of the runway. Was there a Santa Ana (east) wind on the weekend?

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/75/Santa_ana_winds.jpg/300px-Santa_ana_winds.jpg