Engine quit late downwind at Bankstown 6/6/09
After looking through five pages of mostly utter rubbish from entirely unqualified persons, let me ask a couple of minor questions.
1. How many of you have actually done a forced landing for real, in a real live aircraft, any type or model, apart from Microsoft Flight Simulator and had a succesful outcome?
2. How many of you actually have a licence of some sort and have flown in the real world?
3. If you have flown in the real world and managed to land an aircraft without power, in a confined space, with very few options, put up your hand.
4. Otherwise, why don't you give the pilot his due, he had a big problem, he landed, he and his wife walked away, and all your stupid carping about possible angle of attack and angle of bank, as you judge it from a five second video is just a complete ego trip. Go back to your toys children.
1. How many of you have actually done a forced landing for real, in a real live aircraft, any type or model, apart from Microsoft Flight Simulator and had a succesful outcome?
2. How many of you actually have a licence of some sort and have flown in the real world?
3. If you have flown in the real world and managed to land an aircraft without power, in a confined space, with very few options, put up your hand.
4. Otherwise, why don't you give the pilot his due, he had a big problem, he landed, he and his wife walked away, and all your stupid carping about possible angle of attack and angle of bank, as you judge it from a five second video is just a complete ego trip. Go back to your toys children.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(puts hand up)
3 in lighties (all successful), if you count out-landings in gliders, around 180.
All of the 3 involviing powered light aircraft worked, but they weren't perfect and all could have been improved upon (as we determined later in the bar).
3 in lighties (all successful), if you count out-landings in gliders, around 180.
All of the 3 involviing powered light aircraft worked, but they weren't perfect and all could have been improved upon (as we determined later in the bar).
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Oz
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1 in a lighty about 10 years ago. Had a rather catastophic failure, piston punched through cylinder/engine case (I have a pre-digital age photo of it somewhere, will see if I can find it) However I was already on final and engine was at idle. I have always sought old (and sometimes bold!) pilots for my instructors and I was doing a nice tight circuit and a nice glide approach with the engine at idle, so I just dead sticked it in with no real change in attitude, aimpoint or airspeed. However it was the very first time I had seen a prop stopped in flight, that was different!
So unlike others here and the subject of this thread I was not tested at all.
Never did get to find out what caused it as I left the area shortly afterwards and the school I hired the aircraft from closed down (maybe this had something to do with it?).
Cheers
CB
So unlike others here and the subject of this thread I was not tested at all.
Never did get to find out what caused it as I left the area shortly afterwards and the school I hired the aircraft from closed down (maybe this had something to do with it?).
Cheers
CB
I'm with flywatcher,
Touch wood, I have never had an Engine failure.
Well done, GOOD landing...
Plank Bender, just a word of advice, small industry this flyin stuff, probably much smaller than the one you were previously in. Not advisable to insult people the way that you did, (ie get some more training for your pax sake), people who may in future be able to help you up the ladder, or piss on you from above. How you behave will determine how wet you get...
j3
Touch wood, I have never had an Engine failure.
Well done, GOOD landing...
Plank Bender, just a word of advice, small industry this flyin stuff, probably much smaller than the one you were previously in. Not advisable to insult people the way that you did, (ie get some more training for your pax sake), people who may in future be able to help you up the ladder, or piss on you from above. How you behave will determine how wet you get...
j3
Guest
Posts: n/a
j3, not sure why you thought that was an insult, I am genuinely concerned about a fellow aviator and in no way wanted to have this understood as a personal attack. If indeed it should have come across that way I apologise unreservedly!
I think we all have a collective responsibility, no matter what our position, seniority, or level of experience, to make the skies the safest place we can.
Would I speak up in a similar way (of course trying my best not to be insulting or putting anyone down, especially in front of others) if I worked with someone who I thought had a lack of understanding in some area that could compromise his ability to react correctly in an emergency? Absolutely. Do I think that anyone just shutting up about or otherwise ignoring a safety related matter should have their head examined? You bet! Remember, that someone could be compromising your own safety down the road, and you might just close that particular hole in the cheese by having a chat..
Tony Kern put this very succinctly in the CASA Error Management Roadshow that is currently going through the country, and one of the videos he used sticks in my mind: The very touching story of the wife of the B52 Fairchild crash co-pilot Mark McGeehan recounting how her husband had tried to convince his superiors that captain Holland was being unsafe in his flying of the B52. The investigation into Holland's flying was underway at the time of the crash, and the co-pilot was so concerned that he had ordered members of his team not to fly with this captain, and had taken it upon himself to be in the RHS, and on that fateful day McGeehan's wife and his young sons watched in horror as Holland stalled the machine in a steep turn close to the ground, killing all on board. Nuff said!
I think we all have a collective responsibility, no matter what our position, seniority, or level of experience, to make the skies the safest place we can.
Would I speak up in a similar way (of course trying my best not to be insulting or putting anyone down, especially in front of others) if I worked with someone who I thought had a lack of understanding in some area that could compromise his ability to react correctly in an emergency? Absolutely. Do I think that anyone just shutting up about or otherwise ignoring a safety related matter should have their head examined? You bet! Remember, that someone could be compromising your own safety down the road, and you might just close that particular hole in the cheese by having a chat..
Tony Kern put this very succinctly in the CASA Error Management Roadshow that is currently going through the country, and one of the videos he used sticks in my mind: The very touching story of the wife of the B52 Fairchild crash co-pilot Mark McGeehan recounting how her husband had tried to convince his superiors that captain Holland was being unsafe in his flying of the B52. The investigation into Holland's flying was underway at the time of the crash, and the co-pilot was so concerned that he had ordered members of his team not to fly with this captain, and had taken it upon himself to be in the RHS, and on that fateful day McGeehan's wife and his young sons watched in horror as Holland stalled the machine in a steep turn close to the ground, killing all on board. Nuff said!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Here's a link for you, XXX: Holland with all his knowledge and experience may have just gotten a little complacent about how well he really understood and applied the basics of how and when an aerofoil stalls. Sound familiar? I sense a similar attitude in some of the postings here, and hell I certainly know very little compared to some of the posters here in some areas, but does that mean I shouldn't speak up and try to further my and everyone else's knowledge by having a spirited discussion? You tell me!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not Plankbender and (as far as I am aware) all I know about him is what he posts on this forum. My use of the term "critique" is appropriate.
Is making a "sharp turn" (as the person in the video states and what we observe) that close to the ground in a glide approach what we are taught by our instructors in a forced landing? What are the exceptions to not being wings level that close to impact? If the aircraft was wings level at the start of that video and landed straight ahead what would it have hit?
Is making a "sharp turn" (as the person in the video states and what we observe) that close to the ground in a glide approach what we are taught by our instructors in a forced landing? What are the exceptions to not being wings level that close to impact? If the aircraft was wings level at the start of that video and landed straight ahead what would it have hit?
could compromise his ability to react correctly in an emergency?
Here's what we can establish from the video footage and the radio transmissions:
1. Aircraft lost power
2. Aircraft made a SUCCESSFUL landing on the field
3. Occupants walked away with no injury or injury to anyone else.
That's all. Nothing else.
I'll ask again - how EXACTLY did he not react correctly?
Whether it "looked pretty", whether anyone else would have done it differently or whether anyone else could have done it better is not the issue neither is whether it stalled or could have sustained damage. He put the aircraft sucessfully back on the ground in the least worst place.
Please, tell me exactly how you would have achieved a "BETTER outcome"
Guest
Posts: n/a
Atlas, you're quoting me out of context, the comment about speaking up when one sees something pertaining to safety was a general one, note the earlier part of the sentence you quote saying 'if I worked with someone'.
However, I agree with you that the outcome here was certainly a good one, which is ultimately what matters for the pilot in question.
In how far said pilot's actions just before the sudden arrival on the deck contributed to that outcome is a different matter, however, and therein lies the merit of this discussion.
We're trying to learn from the events, dissect the video evidence and draw conclusions as to what happened and how it might have been possible to have better control over the outcome.
Would it have been preferable not to bank the aircraft steeply close to the ground, not to stall it, and fly it in a controlled manner to the ground? I certainly think so.
Was the pilot extraordinarily lucky that the stall happened exactly where it did and the wing and nose drops planted the wheels on the ground when and where they did? Again, I am convinced.
Does the video evidence suggest strongly that the aircraft was out of control for the last few seconds of its flight? Unless someone shows me convincingly that my analysis of the video is fundamentally flawed, I stand by that opinion.
And can we learn from this that it would have been vastly preferable not to enter said steep bank and just fly it level to the slowest safe speed, flare, and set it down on the level ground that was ahead of the aircraft before the bank (unless there's something ahead before the bank we've missed or cannot see in the video)? Again, I am totally convinced, and I haven't heard anything in this thread making a good case otherwise.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I would have been quicker in my thinking or would have made a better decision or better control inputs in those very short last few seconds of that flight, but I think that a few of those reading this thread, me certainly included, will take away something that just might come in handy should the fan noise ever stop on one of us!
However, I agree with you that the outcome here was certainly a good one, which is ultimately what matters for the pilot in question.
In how far said pilot's actions just before the sudden arrival on the deck contributed to that outcome is a different matter, however, and therein lies the merit of this discussion.
We're trying to learn from the events, dissect the video evidence and draw conclusions as to what happened and how it might have been possible to have better control over the outcome.
Would it have been preferable not to bank the aircraft steeply close to the ground, not to stall it, and fly it in a controlled manner to the ground? I certainly think so.
Was the pilot extraordinarily lucky that the stall happened exactly where it did and the wing and nose drops planted the wheels on the ground when and where they did? Again, I am convinced.
Does the video evidence suggest strongly that the aircraft was out of control for the last few seconds of its flight? Unless someone shows me convincingly that my analysis of the video is fundamentally flawed, I stand by that opinion.
And can we learn from this that it would have been vastly preferable not to enter said steep bank and just fly it level to the slowest safe speed, flare, and set it down on the level ground that was ahead of the aircraft before the bank (unless there's something ahead before the bank we've missed or cannot see in the video)? Again, I am totally convinced, and I haven't heard anything in this thread making a good case otherwise.
Don't get me wrong, I am not saying I would have been quicker in my thinking or would have made a better decision or better control inputs in those very short last few seconds of that flight, but I think that a few of those reading this thread, me certainly included, will take away something that just might come in handy should the fan noise ever stop on one of us!
Grumpy
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 35-21 South 149-06 East
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Plank Bender
Give it a break.
Trying to draw conclusions from pictures and/or videos is fraught with risks. Angles can be exaggerated - speeds deceptive - and what you think you see may not be what actually is happening.
Very good result. Leave it up to the pilot to decide what he could have done differently (not necessarily better.)
Give it a break.
Trying to draw conclusions from pictures and/or videos is fraught with risks. Angles can be exaggerated - speeds deceptive - and what you think you see may not be what actually is happening.
Very good result. Leave it up to the pilot to decide what he could have done differently (not necessarily better.)
PB,
The guy was not even stalled, he just had a high sink rate due to being low and slow after the turn (which wasn't even steep, more than likely less than 30 degree AOB, a steep turn by my definition is exceeding 45) with the resulting hard landing from a high sink rate.
If he had of raised the nose, yeah it would have stalled but from my comfy chair he just had a high sink rate as he ran out of energy extending the glide.
Remember this is the Professional Pilot Rumour Network, in order to obtain that distinction you must earn money for your vocation. After earning money and making plenty of mistakes over the years you learn from those mistakes and can apply what was learnt when in that situation again. This is called experience and to answer your question about when a Pilot finishes his training, it's not a number or a benchmark, even crossing a magical line in the sand, but rather when you have significant experience in various areas of aviation, from GA to Airlines, meat bombing, to floats, ag to water bombing flight instructing to a FIO - and in your case you have none.
If you ever want to work as a commercial pilot you had better pull that attitude into check real quick or else you'll be chewed up and spat out in your first GA company.
The guy was not even stalled, he just had a high sink rate due to being low and slow after the turn (which wasn't even steep, more than likely less than 30 degree AOB, a steep turn by my definition is exceeding 45) with the resulting hard landing from a high sink rate.
If he had of raised the nose, yeah it would have stalled but from my comfy chair he just had a high sink rate as he ran out of energy extending the glide.
Remember this is the Professional Pilot Rumour Network, in order to obtain that distinction you must earn money for your vocation. After earning money and making plenty of mistakes over the years you learn from those mistakes and can apply what was learnt when in that situation again. This is called experience and to answer your question about when a Pilot finishes his training, it's not a number or a benchmark, even crossing a magical line in the sand, but rather when you have significant experience in various areas of aviation, from GA to Airlines, meat bombing, to floats, ag to water bombing flight instructing to a FIO - and in your case you have none.
If you ever want to work as a commercial pilot you had better pull that attitude into check real quick or else you'll be chewed up and spat out in your first GA company.
Plank,
You are drawing a very very long bow comparing the B52 crash the was a result of deliberate, consistent dangerous flying and guys that have been flying commercially for 2000 hours and who you think don't know the definition of a stall.
Holland was not complacent, he was a rogue, dangerous pilot. Knowledge base and complacency had nothing to do with it. Holland repeatedly and on a regular basis exceeded the aircraft limitations, this is evidenced in previous flights prior to the accident flight, the formation photo shoot with the A-10's over the ridge was a prime example. How you then compare this attitude to Commercial pilots and even the accident pilot defies belief. You say you apologise and then draw comparisons like this??
Concerned about a fellow aviators safety??? No, I'm sorry Plank, until you get your CPL and a few commercial hours under your belt, just worry about the safety of the other weekend warriors, ok.
Just reading your post in a previous thread regarding overloading. If you were to step on board my aircraft and question my W&B, I'd tell you where to go, and thats back in the terminal. We used to have guys like you all the time in my old job, "The C208 is just like a PA-28, only a little big bigger" they'd say "I brought my headset, can I sit upfront?" And then they criticise you on your landing in 30 knots of cross onto 600m at MLW, telling you how your technique needs work. Criticism is a good thing, but in order to give it, you have to have some experience in what you are talking about, practical experience, not theoretical.
You have a lot to learn Plank.
Atlas, I agree whole-heartedly
j3
You are drawing a very very long bow comparing the B52 crash the was a result of deliberate, consistent dangerous flying and guys that have been flying commercially for 2000 hours and who you think don't know the definition of a stall.
Holland was not complacent, he was a rogue, dangerous pilot. Knowledge base and complacency had nothing to do with it. Holland repeatedly and on a regular basis exceeded the aircraft limitations, this is evidenced in previous flights prior to the accident flight, the formation photo shoot with the A-10's over the ridge was a prime example. How you then compare this attitude to Commercial pilots and even the accident pilot defies belief. You say you apologise and then draw comparisons like this??
Concerned about a fellow aviators safety??? No, I'm sorry Plank, until you get your CPL and a few commercial hours under your belt, just worry about the safety of the other weekend warriors, ok.
Just reading your post in a previous thread regarding overloading. If you were to step on board my aircraft and question my W&B, I'd tell you where to go, and thats back in the terminal. We used to have guys like you all the time in my old job, "The C208 is just like a PA-28, only a little big bigger" they'd say "I brought my headset, can I sit upfront?" And then they criticise you on your landing in 30 knots of cross onto 600m at MLW, telling you how your technique needs work. Criticism is a good thing, but in order to give it, you have to have some experience in what you are talking about, practical experience, not theoretical.
You have a lot to learn Plank.
Atlas, I agree whole-heartedly
j3
PlankBlender,
You would be well served to spend a day or so reading some of the enlightening posts by Chimbu Chuckles who has probably forgotten more about aviation than you or I or anyone else on these boards combined will ever know. He has given some fascinating details of one or two of his emergency situations, one of which from memory of a similar incident although with some power lines thrown into the mix as well.
Then, come back and tell us what you would have done in exactly the same situation.
Not what you think he would have done, or could have done differently, what YOU would have done, sparing us the armchair analysis.
You would be well served to spend a day or so reading some of the enlightening posts by Chimbu Chuckles who has probably forgotten more about aviation than you or I or anyone else on these boards combined will ever know. He has given some fascinating details of one or two of his emergency situations, one of which from memory of a similar incident although with some power lines thrown into the mix as well.
Then, come back and tell us what you would have done in exactly the same situation.
Not what you think he would have done, or could have done differently, what YOU would have done, sparing us the armchair analysis.
Guest
Posts: n/a
GG, if you explain to me for example the rapid left roll just before the landing I'll consider taking your experience seriously, otherwise you're just like Martin trying to pull rank as you've run out of arguments.
And BTW, professional is an attitude, commercial is a license class that allows you to fly for reward.
And BTW, professional is an attitude, commercial is a license class that allows you to fly for reward.
GG, if you explain to me for example the rapid left roll just before the landing I'll consider taking your experience seriously, otherwise you're just like Martin trying to pull rank as you've run out of arguments.
And BTW, professional is an attitude, commercial is a license class that allows you to fly for reward.
should the fan noise ever stop on one of us
You, I suspect, are yet to learn what happens and most importantly just how YOU will react.
All of the theory and YouTube videos in the world will not be anywhere near enough to save your arse.
Mate, this isn't virtual reality. You can't rewind it, and start again. It is real and it kills people. It is inherently insane; dashing about in an aluminium tube a few miles above the surface of the earth at 400kts. Never take it for granted and never think you've got it sorted because just when you do, it WILL bite you on the arse.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
a steep turn by my definition is exceeding 45)
The guy was not even stalled... he just had a high sink rate as he ran out of energy extending the glide.
Yes a stall can drop a wing but not very violently in a clean nil flap situation, you would more than likely get a slight nose drop that is easily corrected by increasing AS
PlankBender
Don't waste your time mate. I can see you mean well but arguing with some on here is just not worth the use of your brain cells. If it helps at all, you'd be more than welcome on my flight deck, at least you are thinking and you are demonstrating a far more professional approach to safety than some of the allegedly professional pilots you are arguing with. Your best bet is to avoid, throughout your training, the idiotic "they made it so nothing else matters" rationale on display here - a classic GA attitude. Some people just don't want to learn.
Quote:
a steep turn by my definition is exceeding 45)
It is defined by everybody else as exceeding 30 degrees.
a steep turn by my definition is exceeding 45)
It is defined by everybody else as exceeding 30 degrees.
Although we call bank angle to the PF anything over 30 degrees which is where you may have got that from.
Quote:
The guy was not even stalled... he just had a high sink rate as he ran out of energy extending the glide.
Yeah... that's called a stall...
The guy was not even stalled... he just had a high sink rate as he ran out of energy extending the glide.
Yeah... that's called a stall...
You can have a high sink rate without being in a stalled condition, I'm sure you have been there many times before along with myself
Quote:
Yes a stall can drop a wing but not very violently in a clean nil flap situation, you would more than likely get a slight nose drop that is easily corrected by increasing AS
I'm not sure whether that is a complete misunderstanding of what a stall is, or just really bad technique... please explain how you correct a "nose drop" by increasing airspeed...
Yes a stall can drop a wing but not very violently in a clean nil flap situation, you would more than likely get a slight nose drop that is easily corrected by increasing AS
I'm not sure whether that is a complete misunderstanding of what a stall is, or just really bad technique... please explain how you correct a "nose drop" by increasing airspeed...
If you're in a glide and have the height, lowering the nose will of course suffice!
Back to the crew bus matey, you're holding up the skipper
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: back of the crew bus
Posts: 1,312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although we call bank angle to the PF anything over 30 degrees which is where you may have got that from.
So when you hear "sink rate" in that lovely american accent, it really should be saying "stall" right?
You can have a high sink rate without being in a stalled condition, I'm sure you have been there many times before along with myself
You can have a high sink rate without being in a stalled condition, I'm sure you have been there many times before along with myself
Unless of course you are in turbulence/microburst/windshear...
Power off stall recovery: "ease forward", "airspeed increasing", "raise the nose", passing the horizon "full power" and "regain lost height".
If you're in a glide and have the height, lowering the nose will of course suffice!
If you're in a glide and have the height, lowering the nose will of course suffice!
Back to the crew bus matey, you're holding up the skipper