Learjet loses elevator
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 490
Likes: 15
From: USA
Learjet loses elevator
A mid-air collision, or what?
NTSB Identification: LAX07TA051
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Friday, December 01, 2006 in San Diego, CA
Aircraft: Learjet 36, registration: N26FN
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Friday, December 01, 2006 in San Diego, CA
Aircraft: Learjet 36, registration: N26FN
Injuries: 3 Uninjured.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On December 1, 2006, about 1030 Pacific standard time, a Lear 36, N26FN, sustained an in-flight loss of the right elevator while maneuvering off the coast of San Diego, California. L-3 Communications Flight Capital LLC was operating the airplane under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91. The airline transport pilot certificated pilot, the commercial second pilot, and one passenger were not injured; the airplane sustained substantial damage. The local public-use flight departed North Island Naval Air Station, San Diego, about 0930. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan had been filed.
The operator reported that the airplane joined up with another airplane, and was doing a cross under maneuver. The pilot lost sight of the other airplane due to sun glare, and turned away. When the pilot reacquired his visual acuity, he discovered that the airplane was in a 70-degree angle-of-bank to the right and 50 degrees nose low. He reduced power, and leveled the wings. After the airplane returned to base, a post flight examination revealed that the right elevator was gone, and the left elevator had permanent deformation.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 490
Likes: 15
From: USA
Joined: Apr 2000
Posts: 413
Likes: 47
From: FL, USA
"what?" would be my story if I lost some parts while trying to keep up with other Navy aircraft with powered flying stabilators with a airplane that had essentially a 1950's designed manual elevator made for pedestrian use.
It would be a neat trick to collide with a Lear elevator without including the stab in the mix.
It would be a neat trick to collide with a Lear elevator without including the stab in the mix.
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 4,581
Likes: 0
From: flyover country USA
Not so lucky:
NTSB Identification: LAX07FA012
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, October 18, 2006 in Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: Piper PA-42, registration: N121CS
Injuries: 5 Fatal.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On October 18, 2006, at 1347 mountain standard time, a Piper PA-42 (Cheyenne III), N121CS, was destroyed when its tail section separated in flight while maneuvering about 16 nautical miles northeast of Prescott, Arizona. The airline transport pilot and four passengers sustained fatal injuries and the airplane was destroyed. The airplane was operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91 as an aerial photography flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and a flight plan was not filed for the local flight that departed the Ernest A. Love Field, Prescott, about 15 minutes before the accident.
The intent of the flight was to take aerial photographs of a MiG 21 airplane (N21UT). The pilot of the MiG 21 indicated that he and the Cheyenne pilot discussed the photo flight the day of the accident, and had established 2,500 to 3,000 feet above ground level (agl) as their minimum altitude and 200 knots as their minimum airspeed...
... On departure, he experienced a problem retracting the landing gear and noted that only the nose landing gear successfully retracted. He recycled the landing gear handle from up to off and back to the up position, and received a successful gear retraction indication. He notified the Cheyenne pilot of the landing gear problem, but informed him that he believed the landing gear was retracted. The Cheyenne pilot indicated that they would join up with the MiG, look it over and check-out the landing gear, and let the MiG pilot know what they saw.
The MiG pilot flew the airplane at 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl) in a 30-degree right-hand turn at 200 knots with approach flaps selected (approximately 25 degrees). He continued to circle in that configuration to allow the Cheyenne to rendezvous with the MiG. The MiG pilot reported that he observed the Cheyenne meet up at his 5 o'clock position about 300-400 feet behind him about the same altitude. The MiG pilot looked forward and when he looked back to the Cheyenne, he could not see it. About 30 seconds later, he heard the Cheyenne pilot comment about the right landing gear or gear door, but the statement was not completed. The MiG pilot waited to hear back from the Cheyenne pilot, but when he did not receive any additional information, he asked the Cheyenne pilot to repeat because he didn't understand the last transmission. The Cheyenne pilot did not respond and the MiG pilot never received additional information...
NTSB Identification: LAX07FA012
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, October 18, 2006 in Prescott, AZ
Aircraft: Piper PA-42, registration: N121CS
Injuries: 5 Fatal.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On October 18, 2006, at 1347 mountain standard time, a Piper PA-42 (Cheyenne III), N121CS, was destroyed when its tail section separated in flight while maneuvering about 16 nautical miles northeast of Prescott, Arizona. The airline transport pilot and four passengers sustained fatal injuries and the airplane was destroyed. The airplane was operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 CFR Part 91 as an aerial photography flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and a flight plan was not filed for the local flight that departed the Ernest A. Love Field, Prescott, about 15 minutes before the accident.
The intent of the flight was to take aerial photographs of a MiG 21 airplane (N21UT). The pilot of the MiG 21 indicated that he and the Cheyenne pilot discussed the photo flight the day of the accident, and had established 2,500 to 3,000 feet above ground level (agl) as their minimum altitude and 200 knots as their minimum airspeed...
... On departure, he experienced a problem retracting the landing gear and noted that only the nose landing gear successfully retracted. He recycled the landing gear handle from up to off and back to the up position, and received a successful gear retraction indication. He notified the Cheyenne pilot of the landing gear problem, but informed him that he believed the landing gear was retracted. The Cheyenne pilot indicated that they would join up with the MiG, look it over and check-out the landing gear, and let the MiG pilot know what they saw.
The MiG pilot flew the airplane at 9,000 feet mean sea level (msl) in a 30-degree right-hand turn at 200 knots with approach flaps selected (approximately 25 degrees). He continued to circle in that configuration to allow the Cheyenne to rendezvous with the MiG. The MiG pilot reported that he observed the Cheyenne meet up at his 5 o'clock position about 300-400 feet behind him about the same altitude. The MiG pilot looked forward and when he looked back to the Cheyenne, he could not see it. About 30 seconds later, he heard the Cheyenne pilot comment about the right landing gear or gear door, but the statement was not completed. The MiG pilot waited to hear back from the Cheyenne pilot, but when he did not receive any additional information, he asked the Cheyenne pilot to repeat because he didn't understand the last transmission. The Cheyenne pilot did not respond and the MiG pilot never received additional information...
Joined: Mar 2000
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 3
From: Arizona USA
Ntsb Lax07fa012
With regard to the Cheyenne, it is now believed that after inflight photos were nearly completed, and the Cheyenne maneuvered very closely behind the Mig, afterburner was apparently used for a breakaway shot, and the tail was torn completely off the Cheyenne as a result.
NOT good.
NOT good.
Thread Starter
Joined: Feb 2006
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 490
Likes: 15
From: USA
Either way, the outcome was extraordinarily lucky.
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 1,324
Likes: 156
From: Here, there, and everywhere
With regard to the Cheyenne, it is now believed that after inflight photos were nearly completed, and the Cheyenne maneuvered very closely behind the Mig, afterburner was apparently used for a breakaway shot, and the tail was torn completely off the Cheyenne as a result.
NOT good.
NOT good.
Do you mean just the jetblast ripped off the tail?
