Incident at Orange Airport 15/1/14
Thread Starter
Incident at Orange Airport 15/1/14
Noticed this on NSW Police Media
Media Release Archive - NSW Police Online
Wednesday, 15 January 2014 08:11:18 PM
Two men had a lucky escape when their light plane ran off a runway at Orange Aerodrome this afternoon.
The incident happened about 4pm (Wednesday 15 January 2014), when a light plane was conducting a training exercise.
The plane landed heavily on the runway then slid 50m off to the side, causing significant damage to the undercarriage.
A 25-year-old trainee pilot, from Marrickville, and a 64-year-old instructor, from Mittagong, escaped injury.
Local police, Fire & Rescue NSW, the Rural Fire Service (RFS), State Emergency Service (SES), and Orange City Council personnel attended the scene. Further investigations will be undertaken by Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB).
The crash scene was cleared and there was no disruption to other services.
Media Release Archive - NSW Police Online
Wednesday, 15 January 2014 08:11:18 PM
Two men had a lucky escape when their light plane ran off a runway at Orange Aerodrome this afternoon.
The incident happened about 4pm (Wednesday 15 January 2014), when a light plane was conducting a training exercise.
The plane landed heavily on the runway then slid 50m off to the side, causing significant damage to the undercarriage.
A 25-year-old trainee pilot, from Marrickville, and a 64-year-old instructor, from Mittagong, escaped injury.
Local police, Fire & Rescue NSW, the Rural Fire Service (RFS), State Emergency Service (SES), and Orange City Council personnel attended the scene. Further investigations will be undertaken by Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB).
The crash scene was cleared and there was no disruption to other services.
I wonder if this one might have anything to do with the apparently little known 'fact' that the nosewheel steering of the Pipers - connected to the rudder pedals - is always connected, and moves always, with rudder input.
Unlike the Cessna variety, where the nosewheel leg slides into a 'groove' and is not operative until the oleo is depressed - i.e. the aircraft is actually running on the lowered - and 'centered' - nosewheel.
I had an occurrence some 50 or so years ago, where in a strong x/wind at Tamworth, I 'drove' the aircraft onto the ground, holding 'off' rudder as the nosewheel touched.....and 'away' we went - a big arc to the left which ended up in the grass with a tyre fairly well scrubbed.
The instructor was 'suprised' - but no more than I - he hadn't told me about this 'feature' of Pipers....in, and those days of 'endorsements' - neither had anybody else.....
We sometimes have to 'live and learn'....apparently.
Cheers
Unlike the Cessna variety, where the nosewheel leg slides into a 'groove' and is not operative until the oleo is depressed - i.e. the aircraft is actually running on the lowered - and 'centered' - nosewheel.
I had an occurrence some 50 or so years ago, where in a strong x/wind at Tamworth, I 'drove' the aircraft onto the ground, holding 'off' rudder as the nosewheel touched.....and 'away' we went - a big arc to the left which ended up in the grass with a tyre fairly well scrubbed.
The instructor was 'suprised' - but no more than I - he hadn't told me about this 'feature' of Pipers....in, and those days of 'endorsements' - neither had anybody else.....
We sometimes have to 'live and learn'....apparently.
Cheers
I found PA28s (of any variety) the easiest aircraft to land in a crosswind the only real limit on them is when the bank angle gets to the point you risk ground strike on the wing tips. Crosswinds up to the flight manual limit of 17kts crosswind should not be difficult. It was easy to teach pre-solo students how to handle crosswind early on so that they could even first solo in reasonable crosswinds.
The PA28R especially the T-tail variety are only a handfull if the speed was too slow on approach. Then control during the round-out became difficult and high descent rate can occur suddenly, at reasonable approach speed this was not a problem.
The nosewheel steering system should, if correct crosswind technique is applied, always bring the nose out of wind opposing any weather-cocking on the ground so does not present any real issue.
The student should know that rudder-pedals are used to keep the aircraft aligned with the landing surface. Whether they move the tail or nosewheel makes no difference, move the pedals to achieve desired outcome (don't use them as foot rests).
The PA28R especially the T-tail variety are only a handfull if the speed was too slow on approach. Then control during the round-out became difficult and high descent rate can occur suddenly, at reasonable approach speed this was not a problem.
The nosewheel steering system should, if correct crosswind technique is applied, always bring the nose out of wind opposing any weather-cocking on the ground so does not present any real issue.
The student should know that rudder-pedals are used to keep the aircraft aligned with the landing surface. Whether they move the tail or nosewheel makes no difference, move the pedals to achieve desired outcome (don't use them as foot rests).
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Bathurst NSW AUS
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From what I understand a heavy landing broke the left hand main gear resulting in the aircraft slewing off the runway.
Knowing the conditions on the day, the thermal activity over the threshold may have found them high and slow during the hold off.
Noticed the same issue myself around midday the same day at BX. Gained an extra 30ft crossing the threshold and needed to add power to fly it back down to the runway.
Knowing the conditions on the day, the thermal activity over the threshold may have found them high and slow during the hold off.
Noticed the same issue myself around midday the same day at BX. Gained an extra 30ft crossing the threshold and needed to add power to fly it back down to the runway.
short flights long nights
Well you learn something every day, after 22000 hours and several thousand hours on Pipers (albeit many many years ago), I never knew about the nose wheel / rudder thing. It is interesting the things you find out.
Locking nose
wheels
I mentioned something about this on an instructor renewal and the ATO nearly started humping my leg.
Well you learn something every day, after 22000 hours and several thousand hours on Pipers (albeit many many years ago), I never knew about the nose wheel / rudder thing. It is interesting the things you find out.
What an amazing statement !! Lousy flying (and deficient instructors knowledge) techniques are not, it seems, anything new.
A few of us can cast our collective minds back to the NW corner of YSBK in the 1960's, when 11/29 was still gravel --- and it was nicknamed "Cherokee Corner" --- in (dis) honour of all the "wheelbarrow" incidents due to entirely excessive approach and touchdown speed in various PA-28.
A concerted campaign, at the time, to follow the speeds in the "then" DCA Flight Manual, ie: fly the bleeding aeroplane, went a long way to curing the problem.
Tootle pip!!
Last edited by LeadSled; 20th Jan 2014 at 04:04.
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crosswind Limits
Hi all,
Wrt crosswind limits published in Pilots Operating Manuals, etc, don't forget that the given number, in this case 17kts (thanks 43Inches), is the maximum amount of uncorrected crosswind that the undercarriage can withstand without damage when landed while 'crabbing' into the crosswind. The limit is calculated on the ability of the wheels/tyres/undercarriage legs to withstand the twisting force applied to them in that scenario.
Hence, landing in crosswinds of greater than the published limit is possible (within reason LOL) providing the amount of crosswind uncorrected by rudder/into-wind-aileron doesn't exceed the limit. Eg, landing a PA-28 in a 25-kt crosswind is technicallly possible (although I haven't tried it myself!), as long as at least 8kt of the drift is corrected.
Flapless or half-flap landings are recommended in crosswinds to provide a higher stalling airspeed and greater control authority at touchdown.
Thanks for reading!
Bye for now,
G
Wrt crosswind limits published in Pilots Operating Manuals, etc, don't forget that the given number, in this case 17kts (thanks 43Inches), is the maximum amount of uncorrected crosswind that the undercarriage can withstand without damage when landed while 'crabbing' into the crosswind. The limit is calculated on the ability of the wheels/tyres/undercarriage legs to withstand the twisting force applied to them in that scenario.
Hence, landing in crosswinds of greater than the published limit is possible (within reason LOL) providing the amount of crosswind uncorrected by rudder/into-wind-aileron doesn't exceed the limit. Eg, landing a PA-28 in a 25-kt crosswind is technicallly possible (although I haven't tried it myself!), as long as at least 8kt of the drift is corrected.
Flapless or half-flap landings are recommended in crosswinds to provide a higher stalling airspeed and greater control authority at touchdown.
Thanks for reading!
Bye for now,
G
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Perth, WA
Posts: 326
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think Griffo's question is a reasonable one, partly because in my observation (and flying training experience a long time ago) the business of transitioning between ground run and flying - both takeoff and landing - is often one of the least logically presented areas of training. Coming from a physics and engineering background, I did work it all out and, to be fair, the PA28 and Cessna steering characteristics had been explained well enough to allow me to do so.
The thing that I recall started my thinking was reconciling the technique needed in landing (out of necessity) with a moderate quartering tailwind, versus the wisdom of where the controls in the C150 should to be during taxying with the same wind at the end of the ground run. It's not rocket science of course but it surprised me just how little the flying manuals had to say on this and similar situations. I had a great instructor and never wanted for good demonstrations and, significantly, excess approach speed was never tolerated - a disdain that's stayed with me for life.
All this has came back to me in middle age as part of acquainting myself with LSAs having varying nosewheel steering arrangements, rudder authorities and power/weight ratios.
The thing that I recall started my thinking was reconciling the technique needed in landing (out of necessity) with a moderate quartering tailwind, versus the wisdom of where the controls in the C150 should to be during taxying with the same wind at the end of the ground run. It's not rocket science of course but it surprised me just how little the flying manuals had to say on this and similar situations. I had a great instructor and never wanted for good demonstrations and, significantly, excess approach speed was never tolerated - a disdain that's stayed with me for life.
All this has came back to me in middle age as part of acquainting myself with LSAs having varying nosewheel steering arrangements, rudder authorities and power/weight ratios.
Wrt crosswind limits published in Pilots Operating Manuals, etc, don't forget that the given number, in this case 17kts is the maximum amount of uncorrected crosswind that the undercarriage can withstand without damage when landed while 'crabbing' into the crosswind. The limit is calculated on the ability of the wheels/tyres/undercarriage legs to withstand the twisting force applied to them in that scenario..,
Where ever did you get that idea??? References, please!! I will give you one thing, that is a wonderfully imaginative description, even if it is total (naughty word deleted).
I "respectfully suggest" that you look up the FAA web site for Part 23, and the related Flight Test Guide, and inform yourself as to what that number in a POI/AFM actually means and how it is derived/demonstrated.
excess approach speed was never tolerated - a disdain that's stayed with me for life.
You certainly did have a good instructor, sadly now a rarity.
Ridiculously high approach speeds are amongst the most common contributors to landing accidents and incidents.
Tootle pip!!
Oh come now Leadsled.
Everyone knows if it's a bit turbulent you add 5 knots just to be safe.
...and if there might be windshear, you add about 5 knots to be sure.
...and if there's a crosswind you add about 5 knots just to be safe.
...and with such a long runway it doesn't matter so much if you're 5-10 knots too fast.
Why shouldn't you approach in a Cherokee at 85 knots? Surely with all the safety margins above built in, nothing could be safer!
Everyone knows if it's a bit turbulent you add 5 knots just to be safe.
...and if there might be windshear, you add about 5 knots to be sure.
...and if there's a crosswind you add about 5 knots just to be safe.
...and with such a long runway it doesn't matter so much if you're 5-10 knots too fast.
Why shouldn't you approach in a Cherokee at 85 knots? Surely with all the safety margins above built in, nothing could be safer!
