Cessna 210 incident
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeez ... will you listen to yourselves !
Surely this is simple? If he knew a lump of his wing was missing, then he was stupid for not getting back down sharpish. If he genuinely didn't know, then a lot of the "no smoke without fire" brigade on here owe the bloke an apology !
FF
Surely this is simple? If he knew a lump of his wing was missing, then he was stupid for not getting back down sharpish. If he genuinely didn't know, then a lot of the "no smoke without fire" brigade on here owe the bloke an apology !
FF
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They didn't know? Oh, please.
Apart from the fact they had hit something stronger than the wing, lost a fuel tank, lost part of the wing, lost most of an aileron, had various wires and things in trail......
Perhaps the gain of a new winglet offset the aerodynamic losses.
Perhaps they were flying in very thick cloud and couldn't see the end of the wings.....
Apart from the fact they had hit something stronger than the wing, lost a fuel tank, lost part of the wing, lost most of an aileron, had various wires and things in trail......
Perhaps the gain of a new winglet offset the aerodynamic losses.
Perhaps they were flying in very thick cloud and couldn't see the end of the wings.....
Dear Nouse and FullyFlapped,
I had the misfortune to hit a tree with an aircraft and I assure you, it is the most unmissable, unforgettable noise you will ever hear. The sound of the aircraft disintegrating around me is absolutely etched on my memory.... Not to mention the amount of aileron input he'd need to keep it straight and level. If he didn't notice the changed aerodynamic configuration , maybe he noticed the gallon of raw adrenalin pounding around his veins and the simultaneous clenching of a plane-full of buttocks. That little hiss is a sure sign that something's gone pear-shaped..
regards
TDD
I had the misfortune to hit a tree with an aircraft and I assure you, it is the most unmissable, unforgettable noise you will ever hear. The sound of the aircraft disintegrating around me is absolutely etched on my memory.... Not to mention the amount of aileron input he'd need to keep it straight and level. If he didn't notice the changed aerodynamic configuration , maybe he noticed the gallon of raw adrenalin pounding around his veins and the simultaneous clenching of a plane-full of buttocks. That little hiss is a sure sign that something's gone pear-shaped..
regards
TDD
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Ireland
Age: 44
Posts: 338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put it like this. Who out of the lot of us would fly for two hours with a severely damaged aircraft when there's a field below us?
There's no excuses to be made - it's not as though the aircraft is certified to remain flyable with 5 feet of wing missing.
Fair enough, the aircraft hit a tree - could happen to any of us, no matter how good. But to fly 300 - 400nm with a multitude of airfields below him, with the approprate emergency services available - he's broken every rule of airmanship, not to mention reckless endangerment and gross stupidity. For the record, I simulated the accident using X-Plane (which doesn't factor in the increased drag of the damaged wing), and it took full aileron just to hold it level.
Confab
There's no excuses to be made - it's not as though the aircraft is certified to remain flyable with 5 feet of wing missing.
Fair enough, the aircraft hit a tree - could happen to any of us, no matter how good. But to fly 300 - 400nm with a multitude of airfields below him, with the approprate emergency services available - he's broken every rule of airmanship, not to mention reckless endangerment and gross stupidity. For the record, I simulated the accident using X-Plane (which doesn't factor in the increased drag of the damaged wing), and it took full aileron just to hold it level.
Confab
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There has been mention of the financial aspect and if he were flying two engineers to repair a 747 in Lisbon then this sounds less like private flying but more of an air taxi flight. Certainly the onwards flight in the HS125 will be an air charter. Does anyone know more?
I notice that the Irish AAIB are interested - perhaps the other Irish regulatory bodies will be interested as well?
Anne
I notice that the Irish AAIB are interested - perhaps the other Irish regulatory bodies will be interested as well?
Anne
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: London
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry to mention this AGAIN but it all points to the guy not realising.
I imagine that the engineers onboard, if they were irish, work for either Airlingus or i think there is a big-jet maint. company in shannon airport.
So IF this was a charter flight and the pilot and passengers realised what was happening then they would have demanded he landed at nearby shannon. Their may have been 1 mad person on that plane but I doubt 4.
Sorry my little fellow investigators but everything points to him not realising. Bet he'd rather no one realised the circumstances when he landed in Jersey.
I imagine that the engineers onboard, if they were irish, work for either Airlingus or i think there is a big-jet maint. company in shannon airport.
So IF this was a charter flight and the pilot and passengers realised what was happening then they would have demanded he landed at nearby shannon. Their may have been 1 mad person on that plane but I doubt 4.
Sorry my little fellow investigators but everything points to him not realising. Bet he'd rather no one realised the circumstances when he landed in Jersey.
Nouse, you have looked at the pictures, I take it?
Apart from any subtle hints at the time (e.g. sudden unexpected yaw, an audio warning in the form of the sound of rending aluminium, etc), it's not as though there is much excuse for not noticing the lack of auxiliary fuel tank; after all, it was on his side...
Go on, call everyone "mongs" again. That makes your point far more eloquently than anything else can.
Apart from any subtle hints at the time (e.g. sudden unexpected yaw, an audio warning in the form of the sound of rending aluminium, etc), it's not as though there is much excuse for not noticing the lack of auxiliary fuel tank; after all, it was on his side...
Go on, call everyone "mongs" again. That makes your point far more eloquently than anything else can.
The Cooler King
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In the Desert
Posts: 1,703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Everything you are reacting to and making judgements about is from second-hand information or more.
Rumours abound of anything from two to seven feet of missing wing are circulating.
Some articles state that the pilot took off from Shannon. Others that he left from Brittas Bay.
Please wait for the official reports to come out before slating the pilot, or in one of your cases making libelous comments about the legality of the flight.
If you don't fly a plane - either go and get a PPL so that you can actually talk informedly about this stuff or leave the analysis to the experts. You're tuppence-worth is a waste of bandwidth.
And if you are pilots and you've mouthed off on something too soon - shame on you.....it might have been you up there.
Rant over.
Rumours abound of anything from two to seven feet of missing wing are circulating.
Some articles state that the pilot took off from Shannon. Others that he left from Brittas Bay.
Please wait for the official reports to come out before slating the pilot, or in one of your cases making libelous comments about the legality of the flight.
If you don't fly a plane - either go and get a PPL so that you can actually talk informedly about this stuff or leave the analysis to the experts. You're tuppence-worth is a waste of bandwidth.
And if you are pilots and you've mouthed off on something too soon - shame on you.....it might have been you up there.
Rant over.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,688
Received 340 Likes
on
186 Posts
Farrell, OK, I don't have a PPL, but I'll waste some bandwidth by declaring tham I am sceptical about the decision to continue rather than make a precautionary landing.
I find it inconceivable that anybody could lose a portion of wing (of whatever length) in the circumstances and not notice the impact nor the absence of a portion of said aeroplane. Have you ever seen the pic of William of Gloucester's Arrow after it hit a tree in similar circumstances during an air race? Lost rather more wing, but then so did he.
I know which of this thread's contributors I'd rather fly with...
By the way, I've always had a great affection for the C210, but this has undelined its strength and capabilities to me.
I find it inconceivable that anybody could lose a portion of wing (of whatever length) in the circumstances and not notice the impact nor the absence of a portion of said aeroplane. Have you ever seen the pic of William of Gloucester's Arrow after it hit a tree in similar circumstances during an air race? Lost rather more wing, but then so did he.
I know which of this thread's contributors I'd rather fly with...
By the way, I've always had a great affection for the C210, but this has undelined its strength and capabilities to me.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Matruh, Egypt and Belize.
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What worries me is this.
If the pilot wasn't aware he had lost part of the wing and part of the flight was conducted in VMC, then why was not this picked up on the lookout before commencing turns?
The number 1 rule of airmanship, is lookout. In a high wing A/C before a turn is initiated, the into turn wing should be "lifted" to make sure it is clear to turn. A level wing on a high wing A/C can mask a lot of airspace. So where was the pilot's lookout?
If the pilot wasn't aware he had lost part of the wing and part of the flight was conducted in VMC, then why was not this picked up on the lookout before commencing turns?
The number 1 rule of airmanship, is lookout. In a high wing A/C before a turn is initiated, the into turn wing should be "lifted" to make sure it is clear to turn. A level wing on a high wing A/C can mask a lot of airspace. So where was the pilot's lookout?
The engineers were probably fast asleep anyway. Overworked and under paid those blokes are don't you know.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Surrey UK
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The guy didn't notice????
If that is possible then it truly beggars belief. When I heard a Cessna clip the fuel bowser at a small airfield years ago practically the whole place heard the bang. Travelling at 100kts or whatever it would have made a hell of a noise.
Add to that the ongoing wind noise from the damaged wing, reduced control effectiveness, vibration and drag from the damage, not to mention loss of fuel, and the suspicious lack of wing whenever you look out the port window, it is just about impossible not to notice for several hours.
Whatever the reason this guy chose to continue, it has more to do with other human factors than non-perception!
If that is possible then it truly beggars belief. When I heard a Cessna clip the fuel bowser at a small airfield years ago practically the whole place heard the bang. Travelling at 100kts or whatever it would have made a hell of a noise.
Add to that the ongoing wind noise from the damaged wing, reduced control effectiveness, vibration and drag from the damage, not to mention loss of fuel, and the suspicious lack of wing whenever you look out the port window, it is just about impossible not to notice for several hours.
Whatever the reason this guy chose to continue, it has more to do with other human factors than non-perception!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Treadigraph
Let me say this nicely. As a PPL, with several hundred hours of normal operational experience, I would not feel qualified to make the assertion that you have made.
If John Farley, who gained years of experience as a test pilot, is reading this thread, he may feel able to give an opinion. Or Ghengis.
I think it is best if the non-qualified, including you and me, wait for the accident report and do not engage in wild speculation.
Monty's Tea Boy
Depends whether the damage was visible and without sitting in the aircraft and looking, that's difficult to know.
If it was, then there are some searching questions to be asked, but again the enquiry should consider that.
The 210 is a strutless, cantilever wing and perhaps the lack of visual references, combined with the effect of dihedral (which this model also has, unlike many other Cessna singles) made the damage less easy to perceive. IS the slight downturn of the wingtip (which if missing would be aclue) normally in or out of sight given the raising effect of the dihedral?
Also, note that the view of the right wingtip is obscured by the weather radar pod, so perhaps the pilot lacks an immediate visual comparison between the two wing tips. Also the damaged tip seems to be pointing upwards, out ouf the pilot's sightline?
You Gimboid
Extending your line of thinking, I wonder about the sudden loss of airspeed that pruning some of the wing would cause through friction (i.e. on impact), especially in a phase of flight where the airspeed is relatively low?
Presumably there would be also some impact on immediate directional control too, ie putting the ac out of balance and increasing drag. In a way, I am surprised that the aircraft still flew. Makes you wonder where the debris landed, near the field or some miles down track (was it initially weakened by an impact and departed later?)
Again, it will be interesting to see the report conclusions.
Edited to include Ghengis as a person who is qulified to speculate on whether a pilot could fail to notice the loss of ANY length of wing.
I find it inconceivable that anybody could lose a portion of wing (of whatever length) in the circumstances and not notice the impact nor the absence of a portion of said aeroplane
If John Farley, who gained years of experience as a test pilot, is reading this thread, he may feel able to give an opinion. Or Ghengis.
I think it is best if the non-qualified, including you and me, wait for the accident report and do not engage in wild speculation.
Monty's Tea Boy
Depends whether the damage was visible and without sitting in the aircraft and looking, that's difficult to know.
If it was, then there are some searching questions to be asked, but again the enquiry should consider that.
The 210 is a strutless, cantilever wing and perhaps the lack of visual references, combined with the effect of dihedral (which this model also has, unlike many other Cessna singles) made the damage less easy to perceive. IS the slight downturn of the wingtip (which if missing would be aclue) normally in or out of sight given the raising effect of the dihedral?
Also, note that the view of the right wingtip is obscured by the weather radar pod, so perhaps the pilot lacks an immediate visual comparison between the two wing tips. Also the damaged tip seems to be pointing upwards, out ouf the pilot's sightline?
You Gimboid
Extending your line of thinking, I wonder about the sudden loss of airspeed that pruning some of the wing would cause through friction (i.e. on impact), especially in a phase of flight where the airspeed is relatively low?
Presumably there would be also some impact on immediate directional control too, ie putting the ac out of balance and increasing drag. In a way, I am surprised that the aircraft still flew. Makes you wonder where the debris landed, near the field or some miles down track (was it initially weakened by an impact and departed later?)
Again, it will be interesting to see the report conclusions.
Edited to include Ghengis as a person who is qulified to speculate on whether a pilot could fail to notice the loss of ANY length of wing.
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 20th Aug 2005 at 10:47.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For whatever reason the pilot continued to Jersey. It may well have been the right decision, we don't know. Maybe he had good reason to continue the flight.
But, to "not notice" the damage is rubbish in my opinion. I am looking at the photo now, and there is no way a pilot with 4 pax onboard could not notice the damage. With over 50% of the port aeileron missing,a significant portion of the left wing off, and the un-aerodynamic properties of the damage, the fuel imbalance, it couldn't have been missed.
Maybe he hit one of those 20-lb Bustards, the birds they recently imported back from Russia to Salisbury, I don't know.
Now I'll wait for the report before continuing any speculation
But, to "not notice" the damage is rubbish in my opinion. I am looking at the photo now, and there is no way a pilot with 4 pax onboard could not notice the damage. With over 50% of the port aeileron missing,a significant portion of the left wing off, and the un-aerodynamic properties of the damage, the fuel imbalance, it couldn't have been missed.
Maybe he hit one of those 20-lb Bustards, the birds they recently imported back from Russia to Salisbury, I don't know.
Now I'll wait for the report before continuing any speculation
Guest
Posts: n/a
Englishal
I hear what you are saying, but also reflect on numerous incidents where aircraft are flown for considerable distances after incidents.
For example, the BMI bus that continued to Manchester after a severe hail encounter. Would the crew have diverted if that had seen the extent of the damage that was not visible? e.g. the radome. I don't know and I don't judge their decision either, but I do wonder.
So perhaps the issue is not whether the pilot was aware of the fact that there was some damage, but more how he assessed the nature and extent and impact of that damage on the continuation of the flight.
As always, the report should be enlightening.
I hear what you are saying, but also reflect on numerous incidents where aircraft are flown for considerable distances after incidents.
For example, the BMI bus that continued to Manchester after a severe hail encounter. Would the crew have diverted if that had seen the extent of the damage that was not visible? e.g. the radome. I don't know and I don't judge their decision either, but I do wonder.
So perhaps the issue is not whether the pilot was aware of the fact that there was some damage, but more how he assessed the nature and extent and impact of that damage on the continuation of the flight.
As always, the report should be enlightening.