Steve Fossett missing - Final NTSB Report
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Age: 77
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was a plane belonging to Baron Hilton's Flying M Ranch and was used for spotting cattle in the brush that men on horseback would then go in and herd out of the brush. It was a working plane not a cushy play thing.
The sighting at Nine Mile Ranch as it flew overhead and was later seen as a distant speck heading for Mud Flat, Hawthorne area may have been a different date. Ranch hand had no particular reason to note the plane or the day and ranch hand was on vacation when interviewed at a rodeo in Pendleton, Oregon.
It is possible his observations were correct but too much weight was given to them and not enough to the pilot's own statements of his intentions that day.
Information on throttle settings and pitch settings is from analysis of photographs of the wreckage. Whatever situation there was instinct would have been to push the throttle all the way to the firewall so as to get every bit of power when it was most needed and propeller pitch would have been all the way to climb rather than cruise since a desperate climb was needed. The only thing that is consistent with the reports of noisy operation, improper throttle and pitch settings and inverted attitude is medical impairment due to carbon monoxide. Obviously its speculative at this point in time, probably not ever going to be verifiable without body tissue and probably based on only a rudimentary analysis of the debris field.
It appears he deviated from intended IFR track (I Follow Roads) solely to take the most scenic route to a peak he would later be climbing. This shows a functioning mind at the beginning of the deviation. Which would leave insidious intoxication by carbon monoxide or bird strike as disabling features causing a flight into steeply rising terrain at an inverted attitude.
The sighting at Nine Mile Ranch as it flew overhead and was later seen as a distant speck heading for Mud Flat, Hawthorne area may have been a different date. Ranch hand had no particular reason to note the plane or the day and ranch hand was on vacation when interviewed at a rodeo in Pendleton, Oregon.
It is possible his observations were correct but too much weight was given to them and not enough to the pilot's own statements of his intentions that day.
Information on throttle settings and pitch settings is from analysis of photographs of the wreckage. Whatever situation there was instinct would have been to push the throttle all the way to the firewall so as to get every bit of power when it was most needed and propeller pitch would have been all the way to climb rather than cruise since a desperate climb was needed. The only thing that is consistent with the reports of noisy operation, improper throttle and pitch settings and inverted attitude is medical impairment due to carbon monoxide. Obviously its speculative at this point in time, probably not ever going to be verifiable without body tissue and probably based on only a rudimentary analysis of the debris field.
It appears he deviated from intended IFR track (I Follow Roads) solely to take the most scenic route to a peak he would later be climbing. This shows a functioning mind at the beginning of the deviation. Which would leave insidious intoxication by carbon monoxide or bird strike as disabling features causing a flight into steeply rising terrain at an inverted attitude.
this Decathlon must be in a different class from all the Citabrias/Decathlons I've flown, which have howling gales through the cabin at all times from the numerous ventilation holes, intentional and otherwise
It was a working plane not a cushy play thing.
Seems there is agreement that the machine was reasonably ventilated.
Re the claimed altitudes the aircraft was suposed to be flying at, and references to needing O2 - would it require much carbon monoxide to affect the pilot ? ...even allowing for the ventilated cabin.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Age: 77
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reasonable ventilation does not negate insidious effect of carbon monoxide. Hemoglobin has an affinity for oxygen but it has a 300 percent greater affinity for carbon monoxide and extra ventilation will not induce the hemoglobin to let go of the carbon monoxide and pickup oxygen instead.
Inverted??
Well there are TWO indications. Blue paint on rock as first known impact with blue paint on the top of the aircraft and orange paint on the bottom. Also engine travelled 300 feet UPhill and crankshaft fracture is consistent with inversion.
Bird strike?? Personal ID, which I originally assumed had been dispersed by animals, may have been blown from cockpit by bird strike some distance from point of initial impact. There was a fire after the crash but none of the personal items bear fire indications.
Inverted??
Well there are TWO indications. Blue paint on rock as first known impact with blue paint on the top of the aircraft and orange paint on the bottom. Also engine travelled 300 feet UPhill and crankshaft fracture is consistent with inversion.
Bird strike?? Personal ID, which I originally assumed had been dispersed by animals, may have been blown from cockpit by bird strike some distance from point of initial impact. There was a fire after the crash but none of the personal items bear fire indications.
Information on throttle settings and pitch settings is from analysis of photographs of the wreckage.
Blue paint on rock as first known impact with blue paint on the top of the aircraft and orange paint on the bottom. Also engine travelled 300 feet UPhill and crankshaft fracture is consistent with inversion
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Seattle, WA USA
Age: 77
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NTSB will be slow, ponderously so, often neglectful of certain avenues of inquiry, but above all else: slow!
I do indeed realize that much of this is speculative and second-hand, but its better than nothing.
I've had contact with two sources. Already there is confusion as to their use of the word 'plastic': plastic identification covering or plastic canopy shards?
I wish data was more readily available and more precise, but the NTSB just keeps its yap shut until the preliminary report and then waits and issues a final report when everyone but the lawyers have forgotten about the incident.
I do indeed realize that much of this is speculative and second-hand, but its better than nothing.
I've had contact with two sources. Already there is confusion as to their use of the word 'plastic': plastic identification covering or plastic canopy shards?
I wish data was more readily available and more precise, but the NTSB just keeps its yap shut until the preliminary report and then waits and issues a final report when everyone but the lawyers have forgotten about the incident.
Atleast that would be consistent with the comments about high noise levels, the probable inverted attitude at impact, the engine developing power but apparently not full power and the pitch control possibly at cruise instead of climb.
Perhaps a Decathlon pilot would care to answer in more layman terms re, How would a Decathlon fly if the pilot was incapacitaited ?
If the Decathlon was trimed for cruise, would it just fly straight and level until it ran out of fuel or rock free air ? or, would the aircraft start to wander about the sky doing progressively more aggressive 'aerobatics' ?
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the Decathlon was trimed for cruise, would it just fly straight and level until it ran out of fuel or rock free air ? or, would the aircraft start to wander about the sky doing progressively more aggressive 'aerobatics' ?
My guess is that the Decathlon would behave like any other light aircraft when trimmed for the cruise: It will either cruise straight on until running out of fuel and then descend at cruise speed until it hits terrain, or gradually bank over and go into a spiral dive.
But I cannot imagine a scenario where an aircraft would spontaneously go into aggressive aerobatics, or start to fly inverted, without a conscious and extreme control input.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never come across a "normal" aircraft which is stable in roll.
All normal ones are stable in pitch, which means they will either climb to the ceiling for that engine setting (or available output), or descend into the ground.
But all of the above will enter a spiral dive within minutes at most. My TB20 is one of the most stable types but it will be in a dive certainly within minutes. From a few thousand feet, you would hit the ground close to vertical, at well over Vne. But I doubt it would actually end up inverted.
The one thing I noticed in the photos is that the cylinders got ripped off on one side but hardly damaged on the other. Assuming a conventional flat four, this suggests hitting the terrain with the side, not upside down, and not vertically either.
All normal ones are stable in pitch, which means they will either climb to the ceiling for that engine setting (or available output), or descend into the ground.
But all of the above will enter a spiral dive within minutes at most. My TB20 is one of the most stable types but it will be in a dive certainly within minutes. From a few thousand feet, you would hit the ground close to vertical, at well over Vne. But I doubt it would actually end up inverted.
The one thing I noticed in the photos is that the cylinders got ripped off on one side but hardly damaged on the other. Assuming a conventional flat four, this suggests hitting the terrain with the side, not upside down, and not vertically either.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virtually every certified aircraft I have ever flown is stable in roll as well as pitch. AFAIK it is part of the certification requirements.
The only aircraft I have flown apart from a few twitchy permit types that displayed the symptoms IO describes were incorrectly rigged.
In smooth air my Cessna when trimmed will fly for hours in a straight line hands off.
With all due respect peter, it might be worth looking at the rigging on your aircraft if it is rolling like that as it is certainly unusual.
The only aircraft I have flown apart from a few twitchy permit types that displayed the symptoms IO describes were incorrectly rigged.
In smooth air my Cessna when trimmed will fly for hours in a straight line hands off.
With all due respect peter, it might be worth looking at the rigging on your aircraft if it is rolling like that as it is certainly unusual.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You will find with the 22 if you set the aircraft in a 45 degree bank (or whatever you like) take your hand of the side stick it will go round and round forever - well at least until it runs out of fuel or you feel sick.
Most certified aircraft are very stable in roll and pitch - after all that is what the designers want these days.
Move towards aerobatic aircraft and that of course changes. However, even things like the FA200, my namesake, is pretty stable in roll and pitch. In contrast the Extra (in which I only have a couple of dozen hours) seemed to me to be stable in neither. The Bambi (on permit) which I have also flown given that it is not aerobatic is, IMO, completly unstable, but fun. I wouldnt want one however.
(Edited to add: I suppose stability is a relative term. If you havent flown very many types an FA200 compared with say a Cessna will seem unstable in roll and pitch. If the aircraft is badly rigged (always a possibility) some one who is familiar with the type will have agood idea whether the rigging is off.)
Most certified aircraft are very stable in roll and pitch - after all that is what the designers want these days.
Move towards aerobatic aircraft and that of course changes. However, even things like the FA200, my namesake, is pretty stable in roll and pitch. In contrast the Extra (in which I only have a couple of dozen hours) seemed to me to be stable in neither. The Bambi (on permit) which I have also flown given that it is not aerobatic is, IMO, completly unstable, but fun. I wouldnt want one however.
(Edited to add: I suppose stability is a relative term. If you havent flown very many types an FA200 compared with say a Cessna will seem unstable in roll and pitch. If the aircraft is badly rigged (always a possibility) some one who is familiar with the type will have agood idea whether the rigging is off.)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One "learns" something every day
In the case of rolling motion, there is no feature of an airplane which provides static roll stability per se.
In the case of rolling motion, there is no feature of an airplane which provides static roll stability per se.
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: england
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed one should learn something every day. Lateral Stability (static or dynamic) is not normally defined with regards to rolling motion. The 'roll' is directly linked to a slip and if you bothered to read all of the document you quoted, you would note that stability in a slip (roll) can be achieved with a wide variety of methods. Also, from FAR 23:
However, the requirements of 23.177(b), static lateral stability, do not apply to to acrobatic category airplanes certificated for inverted flight. So, in this circumstance, there appears to be no legal requirement for a Super Decathalon to be statically stable. Whther it is or not, I do not know.
Sec. 23.171 General.
The airplane must be longitudinally, directionally, and laterally stable
under Secs. 23.173 through 23.181. In addition, the airplane must show
suitable stability and control "feel" (static stability) in any condition
normally encountered in service, if flight tests show it is necessary for
safe operation.
The airplane must be longitudinally, directionally, and laterally stable
under Secs. 23.173 through 23.181. In addition, the airplane must show
suitable stability and control "feel" (static stability) in any condition
normally encountered in service, if flight tests show it is necessary for
safe operation.
However, the requirements of 23.177(b), static lateral stability, do not apply to to acrobatic category airplanes certificated for inverted flight. So, in this circumstance, there appears to be no legal requirement for a Super Decathalon to be statically stable. Whther it is or not, I do not know.
The Super D is kind of normal as far as stability goes.
I agree with IO540 that indefinite hands-off stability is not the norm. In fact if you give an aeroplane too much roll stability, you get dutch roll, and as I understand it a limited degree of spiral divergence is generally considered preferable. After all the idea is not that you can fall asleep (or die) and the plane will fly until it's out of fuel, it's just to avoid what happens in the movies where the moment the pilot takes his hand of the yoke, the plane careens earthward.
If a plane is trimmed for level flight and it enters a stable bank, then the nose will start to drop and that is the departure point for a spiral dive.
My 182 will certainly fly hands off for 30 seconds or so, but then it does start to turn. I haven't left it to see what happens over a longer period, but I will next time I fly it.
Of course if you are incapacitated, especially in a plane with a stick, it's quite likely that the controls will not be free anyway.
Be all that as it may, spiral diveregence leads eventually to hitting the ground more or less vertically, which did not happen in this case.
At this point I'd say the little available evidence suggests that he found himself making a canyon turn and just didn't get it to turn tightly enough. There is very little horizontal space in the area where he crashed. Although he was an experienced pilot, I don't remember seeing that he had aerobatic experience, so (like the SR20 in New York) he may not have been comfortable making a *really* tight turn. And it's possible that in the last couple of seconds when he realised how close he was, that maybe he did pull/bank harder and enter an "unusual attitude" - maybe snapped or something - which could explain - if indeed it is the case, for which personally I have not seen convincing evidence - that he was inverted (but not vertical) when he hit.
n5296s (or maybe n452s in this case)
I agree with IO540 that indefinite hands-off stability is not the norm. In fact if you give an aeroplane too much roll stability, you get dutch roll, and as I understand it a limited degree of spiral divergence is generally considered preferable. After all the idea is not that you can fall asleep (or die) and the plane will fly until it's out of fuel, it's just to avoid what happens in the movies where the moment the pilot takes his hand of the yoke, the plane careens earthward.
If a plane is trimmed for level flight and it enters a stable bank, then the nose will start to drop and that is the departure point for a spiral dive.
My 182 will certainly fly hands off for 30 seconds or so, but then it does start to turn. I haven't left it to see what happens over a longer period, but I will next time I fly it.
Of course if you are incapacitated, especially in a plane with a stick, it's quite likely that the controls will not be free anyway.
Be all that as it may, spiral diveregence leads eventually to hitting the ground more or less vertically, which did not happen in this case.
At this point I'd say the little available evidence suggests that he found himself making a canyon turn and just didn't get it to turn tightly enough. There is very little horizontal space in the area where he crashed. Although he was an experienced pilot, I don't remember seeing that he had aerobatic experience, so (like the SR20 in New York) he may not have been comfortable making a *really* tight turn. And it's possible that in the last couple of seconds when he realised how close he was, that maybe he did pull/bank harder and enter an "unusual attitude" - maybe snapped or something - which could explain - if indeed it is the case, for which personally I have not seen convincing evidence - that he was inverted (but not vertical) when he hit.
n5296s (or maybe n452s in this case)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with n5296s. I don't know the SD but I doubt there is any common low wing plane which does not have spiral divergence. That would amount to indefinite static roll stability!! In calm air, it would fly a constant heading forever. Nice, but I would think sales of the old wing leveller autopilots would have been pretty poor 
Every Cessna or Piper I ever flew would go into a spiral dive quite happily.
Flying a banked turn (a constant orbit) is not quite the same thing as static roll stability. One could indeed fly a constant 5 degree orbit in a C152, seemingly indefinitely, if trimmed appropriately. But the same plane would always enter a spiral dive from trimmed straight and level flight, eventually.
Every Cessna or Piper I ever flew would go into a spiral dive quite happily.Flying a banked turn (a constant orbit) is not quite the same thing as static roll stability. One could indeed fly a constant 5 degree orbit in a C152, seemingly indefinitely, if trimmed appropriately. But the same plane would always enter a spiral dive from trimmed straight and level flight, eventually.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IO540
I think there is a difference between being stable in roll and eventually departing. Without having read all the previosu posts a Super-D is relatively stable in roll (from my limited experience). It is possibly less stable than a TB20, but not by much, and a great deal more stable than some other aircraft I have flown.
Perhaps your point was that eventually any aircraft will depart in the horizontal axis?
That said there is a very well documented case of the Cessna that took off without the pilot and some while later landed with no damage at all. A case of divine intervention in the horizonatal and vertical axis perhaps or proof that the big fella got his PPL.
I think there is a difference between being stable in roll and eventually departing. Without having read all the previosu posts a Super-D is relatively stable in roll (from my limited experience). It is possibly less stable than a TB20, but not by much, and a great deal more stable than some other aircraft I have flown.
Perhaps your point was that eventually any aircraft will depart in the horizontal axis?
That said there is a very well documented case of the Cessna that took off without the pilot and some while later landed with no damage at all. A case of divine intervention in the horizonatal and vertical axis perhaps or proof that the big fella got his PPL.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: UK,Twighlight Zone
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every Cessna or Piper I ever flew would go into a spiral dive quite happily.
In still air my Cessna correctly trimmed and loaded will fly in in a straight line for a very long time. And I am pretty sure it is a standard example of a 30 year old spam can.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Belgium
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spiral dive recovery is specifically demonstrated in the Bonanza Pilot Proficiency Program. In good VMC nobody will have any problem with it, but a pilot trained on say a 172 who gets his hands on a Bonanza in IMC may have more than he wanted unless trained for it.
Here is some serious reading:
Angle of Attack Stability, Trim, and Spiral Dives [Ch. 6 of See How It Flies]
At the first PPLIR meeting in Kortrijk (1997?) I gave a paper on Spiral Dive Recovery and anyone who was present will remember it, I even got email messages from enthousiastic members who tried it on the way home.
Of the dozen airplanes I'm checked out in, including the Super Decathlon, not one of them will not enter a spiral dive if left alone, never was checked out in any Cessna however.
Here is some serious reading:
Angle of Attack Stability, Trim, and Spiral Dives [Ch. 6 of See How It Flies]
At the first PPLIR meeting in Kortrijk (1997?) I gave a paper on Spiral Dive Recovery and anyone who was present will remember it, I even got email messages from enthousiastic members who tried it on the way home.
Of the dozen airplanes I'm checked out in, including the Super Decathlon, not one of them will not enter a spiral dive if left alone, never was checked out in any Cessna however.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 4,631
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bose
Is the problem that many people spend all their time with the autopilot engaged. I use to do a lot of flying in an aircraft in which I couldnt engage the autopilot - there wasnt one. Particularly in IMC once CORRECTLY trimed it would fly itself for literally miles even very often in the lumps and bumps of the clouds.
Is the problem that many people spend all their time with the autopilot engaged. I use to do a lot of flying in an aircraft in which I couldnt engage the autopilot - there wasnt one. Particularly in IMC once CORRECTLY trimed it would fly itself for literally miles even very often in the lumps and bumps of the clouds.