BK crash today
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: sydney
Age: 39
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what i heard was he had hard bouncing touchdown on first landing and went around, and on upwind reported emergency saying aircraft was shaking badly and crashlanded on second attempt. i suspect he had prop strick on first landing.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One hurt in Bankstown light plane crash
December 8, 2008 - 11:01AM
Sydney's Bankstown airport was closed for 80 minutes after a light aircraft crashed on a runway.
The single-engined plane was attempting to land on the airport's southern runway at 10.20am (AEDT) Monday when it crashed and flipped onto the centre runway, an airport spokeswoman said.
Emergency services were called immediately and the airport was closed while ambulance workers attended to the male pilot, who was taken to hospital with minor injuries.
He was the only person on board the plane.
The wreckage was cleared and the airport reopened at 11.40am (AEDT) Monday.
December 8, 2008 - 11:01AM
Sydney's Bankstown airport was closed for 80 minutes after a light aircraft crashed on a runway.
The single-engined plane was attempting to land on the airport's southern runway at 10.20am (AEDT) Monday when it crashed and flipped onto the centre runway, an airport spokeswoman said.
Emergency services were called immediately and the airport was closed while ambulance workers attended to the male pilot, who was taken to hospital with minor injuries.
He was the only person on board the plane.
The wreckage was cleared and the airport reopened at 11.40am (AEDT) Monday.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the look of the aircraft wreckage, it is a right-off. The pilot is quite lucky not to have been as well - apparently just a broken leg or something along those lines. Like everyone I'm sure, I was glad to hear it wasn't another fatal accident.
That's pretty much along the lines of what I heard too.
Makes you wonder though, would a more traditional aircraft like a 152 have handled the initial wheelbarrow and hard landing better, and would it have been easier to repair. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new aircraft, but at the same time, I tend to wonder whether the design pendulum has swung too far towards performance from durability...
TT
what i heard was he had hard bouncing touchdown on first landing and went around, and on upwind reported emergency saying aircraft was shaking badly and crashlanded on second attempt. i suspect he had prop strick on first landing.
Makes you wonder though, would a more traditional aircraft like a 152 have handled the initial wheelbarrow and hard landing better, and would it have been easier to repair. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for new aircraft, but at the same time, I tend to wonder whether the design pendulum has swung too far towards performance from durability...
TT
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We live in a throw away society. bend it and chuck it. thats what insurance is for. I would prefer a new one to a bent and repaired one......add into that equation the performance factor you speak of and its all looking good for the newer design.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Undercarriage would have bent, nose wheel torn out, engine mounts probably torn out and wings failed downwards....... or no damage at all. depends on impact forces. 
This story of the prop strike , its not a recount of one of the other 3 accidents so far? I know one bent the prop the other week, attempted a go around, made it to maybe 500 ft , reported the problem, completed a circuit and 'somewhat' more successful landing on the 2nd attempt.
There was another prop strike at Bathurst.
The fatal in the training area.
Now this one.
Least the poor bugger is ok.
There was another prop strike at Bathurst.
The fatal in the training area.
Now this one.
Least the poor bugger is ok.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The simple fact is ultralights are not as durable when it comes to ab initio training. They are better suited to private use (which is what they are really designed for). But they are cheap.
Having said that, I did my ab initio training in ultralights.
Having said that, I did my ab initio training in ultralights.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wherever seniority dictates
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of finger pointing always surrounds accidents like these. I suppose it's fair to say any accident has multiple causing factors and in the case of most of these bigger BK schools the chances are they'd include
- Inexperienced instructors who 'don't know what they don't know'
- Overseas students under pressure to finish quickly (not necessarily at a high standard)
- Less opportunity for students or instructors to learn from 'hangar talk'
- New aeroplane types which may be less forgiving than those which the instructors learnt on, and nobody around to show them the 'right way'
My suggestions would be to do something about improving the flight safety magazine and really making it a good read (and learning tool) for both new and old pilots - not just CASA propaganda.
I also reckon it's too easy to gain solo-sending privelliges as an instructor. With how busy some of these bigger schools are, new instructors don't have to hang around long before they have enough hours for their first upgrade, and CFIs are usually under financial pressure to get them out of the valuable supervision stage ASAP. Should be a minimum calendar time imposed upon instructors with less than a certain amount of total aeronautical experience. The value of this exposure to the aviation industry is heavily underrated.
Note that my comments are general and don't relate to this particular incident specifically, as I don't know anything about it. However, I do think most of the key issues surrounding all these prangs are basically the same.
I also think it'd be a big shame to blindly throw blame on new aeroplane types, because these are what GA in this country needs.
- Inexperienced instructors who 'don't know what they don't know'
- Overseas students under pressure to finish quickly (not necessarily at a high standard)
- Less opportunity for students or instructors to learn from 'hangar talk'
- New aeroplane types which may be less forgiving than those which the instructors learnt on, and nobody around to show them the 'right way'
My suggestions would be to do something about improving the flight safety magazine and really making it a good read (and learning tool) for both new and old pilots - not just CASA propaganda.
I also reckon it's too easy to gain solo-sending privelliges as an instructor. With how busy some of these bigger schools are, new instructors don't have to hang around long before they have enough hours for their first upgrade, and CFIs are usually under financial pressure to get them out of the valuable supervision stage ASAP. Should be a minimum calendar time imposed upon instructors with less than a certain amount of total aeronautical experience. The value of this exposure to the aviation industry is heavily underrated.
Note that my comments are general and don't relate to this particular incident specifically, as I don't know anything about it. However, I do think most of the key issues surrounding all these prangs are basically the same.
I also think it'd be a big shame to blindly throw blame on new aeroplane types, because these are what GA in this country needs.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The simple fact is ultralights are not as durable when it comes to ab initio training.
TT
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't know anything about the liberty, but from the couple of 'lights I've flown (sportstar / CTsw), I'd agree they're probably not as durable (fortunately not tested that), however, I think the critical bit is that they're far less forgiving, you're actually far more likely to have a heavy arrival.
Both the examples I've flown are capable of approach paths that rival / beat the old 150/flaps 40 in terms of steepness, and have relatively little inertia. They get bounced around more on approach, and are all too keen to loose energy at any point during the approach and stop very quickly during the flare. Not a problem if you can fly accurately, however the average GA trainer will let you have a bit of a balloon, or a very drawn out, gentle flare, and still have airspeed to put it on nicely. In the lighties you're very likely to find yourself 10ft up out of speed and ideas. Throw in some akward and unusual throttle locations/systems, and...
That's not to say they're bad, just different - and require some careful attention. Personally I'd be inclined to avoid for ab-initio, but it might breed sharper pilots
Both the examples I've flown are capable of approach paths that rival / beat the old 150/flaps 40 in terms of steepness, and have relatively little inertia. They get bounced around more on approach, and are all too keen to loose energy at any point during the approach and stop very quickly during the flare. Not a problem if you can fly accurately, however the average GA trainer will let you have a bit of a balloon, or a very drawn out, gentle flare, and still have airspeed to put it on nicely. In the lighties you're very likely to find yourself 10ft up out of speed and ideas. Throw in some akward and unusual throttle locations/systems, and...
That's not to say they're bad, just different - and require some careful attention. Personally I'd be inclined to avoid for ab-initio, but it might breed sharper pilots
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
of the "ultralight" aircraft in a training environment, the Tecnam, and sportstar are proving a little on the light side, but the Jabiru series are proving to be pretty much indestructible!
i remeber posting here some years ago, that our school operated a Jabiru, and the response was quite large, telling me th aircraft is a weak Ultralight and it wouldn't last, well, its now been in ab initio service now for well over 6000 hrs, and rapidly approaching its 10,000th hour, and it still flies as fast and as well as the day it was built.
I have seen Tecnams and Liberties have hard landings and require a truck to remove them from the runway, but the little Jabs are as reliable as the old Cessna 150's and 152 in the training environment.
im sure the price of a Liberty could have purchased 2 Jabiru J230s, with glass cockpits, and have a much lower maint and running costs. not to mention locally built.
i remeber posting here some years ago, that our school operated a Jabiru, and the response was quite large, telling me th aircraft is a weak Ultralight and it wouldn't last, well, its now been in ab initio service now for well over 6000 hrs, and rapidly approaching its 10,000th hour, and it still flies as fast and as well as the day it was built.
I have seen Tecnams and Liberties have hard landings and require a truck to remove them from the runway, but the little Jabs are as reliable as the old Cessna 150's and 152 in the training environment.
im sure the price of a Liberty could have purchased 2 Jabiru J230s, with glass cockpits, and have a much lower maint and running costs. not to mention locally built.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
And if you do manage to break them, like a thread posted recently proved, they are very repairable for a low cost!
Sure they are not a Bonanza, or C185, or even a C172...... but bang for buck they are damn good value!
J
Sure they are not a Bonanza, or C185, or even a C172...... but bang for buck they are damn good value!
J
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
im sure the price of a Liberty could have purchased 2 Jabiru J230s, with glass cockpits, and have a much lower maint and running costs. not to mention locally built.
TT, can't resist asking "Is a right-off any different to a left-off", or are they both the same as a "Writeoff"?
TT
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wherever seniority dictates
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"im sure the price of a Liberty could have purchased 2 Jabiru J230s, with glass cockpits, and have a much lower maint and running costs"
I think you'll find the same company who operate the more expensive Liberties bought them to replace largest fleet of J230s and 160s on the VH register.
There seems to be a consensus that these newer/lighter types are less forgiving, and from my very limited experience of that category of aeroplane, I would agree. However, it is important is to work out what they are less forgiving of. Is it inexperience? Poor roundout/holdoff technique? Mishandling at low speed? Incorrect airspeed maintenance?
As I alluded to in my previous post, I think blaming new aeroplane types (whether it's Jabiru, Liberty, Tecnam or whatever) is one thing, but to really move forward we have to find solutions and they are going to be found in pilot and instructor training.
I suppose one of the problems with the venerable 152 etc is they are so well designed and so forgiving of almost all types of mishandling that they have inadvertently allowed pilots (who are now instructors) to slip through the cracks with less than adequate handling skills.
Instructor training to be conducted on Winjeels and Chippies maybe
I think you'll find the same company who operate the more expensive Liberties bought them to replace largest fleet of J230s and 160s on the VH register.
There seems to be a consensus that these newer/lighter types are less forgiving, and from my very limited experience of that category of aeroplane, I would agree. However, it is important is to work out what they are less forgiving of. Is it inexperience? Poor roundout/holdoff technique? Mishandling at low speed? Incorrect airspeed maintenance?
As I alluded to in my previous post, I think blaming new aeroplane types (whether it's Jabiru, Liberty, Tecnam or whatever) is one thing, but to really move forward we have to find solutions and they are going to be found in pilot and instructor training.
I suppose one of the problems with the venerable 152 etc is they are so well designed and so forgiving of almost all types of mishandling that they have inadvertently allowed pilots (who are now instructors) to slip through the cracks with less than adequate handling skills.
Instructor training to be conducted on Winjeels and Chippies maybe