GA Crash from inside...
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Enroute
Age: 63
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Low speed incident
@ con-pilot:
Bang on!
The airplane was not flown into the trees, it was stalled into them.
On the other hand, the fact that the airplane fell into the trees low and slow was probably the reason that everybody was relatively unharmed after the incident.
Max
Bang on!
The airplane was not flown into the trees, it was stalled into them.
On the other hand, the fact that the airplane fell into the trees low and slow was probably the reason that everybody was relatively unharmed after the incident.
Max
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Where ever boss send me
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The aircraft did not take off, the earth fell away from it. Just happens that the hills came to meet them with trees faster than the earth was going away.
Nice see and avoid though
Nice see and avoid though
Aviator Extraordinaire
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On another website I found out some more information. To make it short, the Density Altitude that day of the accident was 8,300 feet. The engine on the aircraft, a Fairchild, was 165 horse power, normally aspirated, in other words, no super-charger or turbocharger. That couple with the fact that he was about three passengers over MGTOW for that day. It is quite surprising they got airborne at all.
Also, they took off in the direction of raising terrain, so coupled with minimal climb rate and the raising ground, well...
So it looks like my first guess was correct, guess I didn't waste my time at the NTSB Aircraft Accident Investigator's School after all.
Personally, if had been dumb enough to attempt to takeoff, same conditions, I would hope that at the 2.5 mile mark of that 5 mile long takeoff run, I would gotten smart enough have stopped.
Also, they took off in the direction of raising terrain, so coupled with minimal climb rate and the raising ground, well...
So it looks like my first guess was correct, guess I didn't waste my time at the NTSB Aircraft Accident Investigator's School after all.
Personally, if had been dumb enough to attempt to takeoff, same conditions, I would hope that at the 2.5 mile mark of that 5 mile long takeoff run, I would gotten smart enough have stopped.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Enroute
Age: 63
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some more information
Preliminary NTSB report:
http://images.bimedia.net/documents/...TSB+Report.pdf
Better quality video with coment:
A Stinson 108-3 with a 165 hp engine is definitely not designed to climb with 4 occupants at a density altitude of almost 9200 feet.
The shocking part for me is, that the pilot elected to fly into the trees after trying to gain altitude for ages over relatively flat terrain. He could have put it back onto the ground with minimal or no damage to the airplane at any time before flying it into the forest area.
http://images.bimedia.net/documents/...TSB+Report.pdf
Better quality video with coment:
A Stinson 108-3 with a 165 hp engine is definitely not designed to climb with 4 occupants at a density altitude of almost 9200 feet.
The shocking part for me is, that the pilot elected to fly into the trees after trying to gain altitude for ages over relatively flat terrain. He could have put it back onto the ground with minimal or no damage to the airplane at any time before flying it into the forest area.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: France
Age: 60
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Coincidence ?
It would appear that the fine –and lucky- gentleman flying this plane has been involved in a previous mishap, in April 2010… :
“NTSB Narrative Summary Released at Completion of Accident
The pilot reported that he intended to fly his airplane on a cross-country flight over high mountainous terrain. After takeoff, the pilot climbed to 9,500 feet mean sea level (msl) in order to fly over mountains. He subsequently descended to 8,500 feet msl, and then he attempted to climb back to 9,500 feet to clear additional mountains. This second climbing effort diminished his fuel reserve, so the pilot opted to divert to a 7,160-foot msl uncontrolled airport short of his destination. While flying over the airport to evaluate its runway's condition, the pilot noted that the runway was covered with snow. The pilot opined that because of the airplane's low fuel state, it was prudent for him to land. The pilot made a soft-field landing on the runway. During rollout, the airplane's wheels penetrated the snow-covered surface, the airplane nosed over, and both wings and the empennage broke.
NTSB Probable Cause Narrative
The pilot's encounter with soft, snow-covered terrain while executing a precautionary landing.”
(Report)
“NTSB Narrative Summary Released at Completion of Accident
The pilot reported that he intended to fly his airplane on a cross-country flight over high mountainous terrain. After takeoff, the pilot climbed to 9,500 feet mean sea level (msl) in order to fly over mountains. He subsequently descended to 8,500 feet msl, and then he attempted to climb back to 9,500 feet to clear additional mountains. This second climbing effort diminished his fuel reserve, so the pilot opted to divert to a 7,160-foot msl uncontrolled airport short of his destination. While flying over the airport to evaluate its runway's condition, the pilot noted that the runway was covered with snow. The pilot opined that because of the airplane's low fuel state, it was prudent for him to land. The pilot made a soft-field landing on the runway. During rollout, the airplane's wheels penetrated the snow-covered surface, the airplane nosed over, and both wings and the empennage broke.
NTSB Probable Cause Narrative
The pilot's encounter with soft, snow-covered terrain while executing a precautionary landing.”
(Report)
