Light aircraft down in Belgium - 2 fatalities
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Light aircraft down in Belgium - 2 fatalities
Het Nieuwsblad - Gemeente Hasselt: Dodelijke vliegtuigcrash in Borgworm
Fatalities instructor (possibly 53 years old) and student.
"witness" heard sputtering engine. Pics show completely crumpled aircraft, make unknown.
Crash occurred at 1430 local time, flight took off from Brustem EBST Brustem airport / Daniel Joly
Fatalities instructor (possibly 53 years old) and student.
"witness" heard sputtering engine. Pics show completely crumpled aircraft, make unknown.
Crash occurred at 1430 local time, flight took off from Brustem EBST Brustem airport / Daniel Joly
Last edited by vanHorck; 3rd May 2011 at 16:25.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TWR do you know at what part of the Syllabus they were?
I learned on the Tomahawk, and even flew it for fun later as a "throw around" but like many I disliked the incipient spin demonstration during training.
I learned on the Tomahawk, and even flew it for fun later as a "throw around" but like many I disliked the incipient spin demonstration during training.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TWR do you know at what part of the Syllabus they were?
Just like that Baron.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Belgium
Age: 46
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know what happened. Apparently there are witness reports about engine roughness and others talk about a spiraling downward motion. Anyway, if I ever have
an engine failure, I hope I have a similar field below me...
Edit: This newspaper mentions stall practice, but their source is unknown to me...
Hasselt - 'Vliegtuigcrash in Borgworm mogelijk te wijten aan stuurfout bij standaardoefening' - Hbvl.be
an engine failure, I hope I have a similar field below me...
Edit: This newspaper mentions stall practice, but their source is unknown to me...
Hasselt - 'Vliegtuigcrash in Borgworm mogelijk te wijten aan stuurfout bij standaardoefening' - Hbvl.be
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No way this accident can be a failed (controlled) emergency landing, even a stall in the flare would not create such devastation.
As this is a rumour network, perhaps some failed linkage to the horizontal stabilizer or some other structural failure in the T tail during stall training?
Surely an instructor should be able to recover from a student induced spin during stall training?
As this is a rumour network, perhaps some failed linkage to the horizontal stabilizer or some other structural failure in the T tail during stall training?
Surely an instructor should be able to recover from a student induced spin during stall training?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does look a little unusual. I guess there are a few possible scenarios here including but not limited to structural failure, wake turbulence, physical or mental impairment due to CO poisoning.
As more facts are made public it may become obvious to the pilot community what the most likely cause is. If not, then we do the usual and wait for the accident report.
It seems there have been a rash of accidents in the last couple of weeks. Can't help wondering if the great weather is drawing out the less than current pilots. (this is not intended to be speculation on the cause of this particular accident)
My condolences to those who knew those lost in this accident.
As more facts are made public it may become obvious to the pilot community what the most likely cause is. If not, then we do the usual and wait for the accident report.
It seems there have been a rash of accidents in the last couple of weeks. Can't help wondering if the great weather is drawing out the less than current pilots. (this is not intended to be speculation on the cause of this particular accident)
My condolences to those who knew those lost in this accident.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Age: 68
Posts: 1,269
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jan
I would assume the stall training (or incipient spin demonstration) to have been done at sufficient altitude....... instructor's responsibility.
Fleetflyer
I agree however this was a training accident, so this one would be the odd one out.... Is there a reason you mention wake turbulence?
I would assume the stall training (or incipient spin demonstration) to have been done at sufficient altitude....... instructor's responsibility.
Fleetflyer
I agree however this was a training accident, so this one would be the odd one out.... Is there a reason you mention wake turbulence?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The only reason I mentioned wake turbulence is that its a good way to pop a perfectly serviceable light aircraft into the ground. Its also a feasible 'gotcha' for an instructor to overlook. I think its very unlikely that the instructor was demonstrating or training incipient spins at too low an altitude to revcover should a spin develop. The Tomhawk has been discussed at length on this forum and its 'wobbly' tail in a spin has had people worried, but those worries were quashed by others who said that the tail had never actually failed in a spin. This makes structural failure seem unlikely. From a skills point of view, P1 was an instructor who presumably was competent (the Tomahawk is after all a simple trainer rather than a high wing-loading complex widow maker) This makes me believe its unlikely that the aircraft was mis-handled in some way. This path of deduction leaves only a few probable causes; That neither pilot was able to handle the aircraft (carbon monoxide poisoning). That there was some sort of altercation/sucidal student or instructor (unlikely but has happened before). That there was a structural failure (already discussed as unlikely) That the aircraft was made uncontrollable by an external factor. In CAVOK close to the ground, this may be wake turbulence. I don't know that this is likely as I don't know where the aircraft was operating, but it seems fesible. Out of all the options, I would regard the most likely as either wake turbulence or CO poisoning. I sincerely hope it was the latter.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the Tomahawk is after all a simple trainer rather than a high wing-loading complex widow maker
My 20hrs in the PA38 taught me that it is a flimsy piece of junk, about as well made as a tent from Milletts, leaks like a siv in the rain, has a crappy elevator trim which is often so bad (it sticks) that pilots don't bother using it, and if you stall it it drops a wing very fast and plummets at a few thousand fpm. You would not want to be doing stalls or anything like that in it, under a few thousand feet.
Even if you want to fly it on a normal flight, it is quite twitchy and the difficulty of trimming it properly makes it tiring to fly. Learning in them is a waste of the student's money, IMHO.
Is the area of this accident applicable to wake turbulence from jets?
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Essex UK
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How about a PFL gone wrong? Could put them close to the ground with insufficient height to recover.
I don't usually like all the speculation after an accident, but was just wondering what situation might lead to an inadvertent stall/spin accident during a training flight away from the airfield. If indeed that is what we are looking at. The disruption to the airframe seems to indicate it spun in with no horizontal speed component at all.
I don't usually like all the speculation after an accident, but was just wondering what situation might lead to an inadvertent stall/spin accident during a training flight away from the airfield. If indeed that is what we are looking at. The disruption to the airframe seems to indicate it spun in with no horizontal speed component at all.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have seen a lot of the these type of aircraft sitting around with grass growing around them. there where afew around when i was training to be a pilot. i asked my instructor what they where like. her response was they are not good for low time pilots.
And ten years on you see very few of these aircraft in training roles in Australia.
I have no idea if it was a spin. But i am sure it was not a engine failure.
Paul
And ten years on you see very few of these aircraft in training roles in Australia.
I have no idea if it was a spin. But i am sure it was not a engine failure.
Paul
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Upper Levels
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PA-38-112 Flat Spin Mode ON
Most airplanes spin with the nose pitched down below the horizon. However, if the nose of the airplane begins to rise, a flat spin may develop. FAA Advisory Circular 61-67B, "Stall and Spin Awareness Training," states that a flat spin is characterized by a near-level pitch and roll attitude and that recovery from a flat spin may be extremely difficult and, in some cases, impossible (because airflow disruptions prevent the flight control surfaces from effecting spin recovery). Section 23 221 states that it must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any use of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or during the spin. However, during the Board’s review of PA-38-112 accidents/incidents, the Safety Board learned of several incidents in which unsafe, flat spins have been encountered in the PA-38-112.
PA-38-112 Flat Spin Mode OFF
Source (NTSB)
Most airplanes spin with the nose pitched down below the horizon. However, if the nose of the airplane begins to rise, a flat spin may develop. FAA Advisory Circular 61-67B, "Stall and Spin Awareness Training," states that a flat spin is characterized by a near-level pitch and roll attitude and that recovery from a flat spin may be extremely difficult and, in some cases, impossible (because airflow disruptions prevent the flight control surfaces from effecting spin recovery). Section 23 221 states that it must be impossible to obtain unrecoverable spins with any use of the flight or engine power controls either at the entry into or during the spin. However, during the Board’s review of PA-38-112 accidents/incidents, the Safety Board learned of several incidents in which unsafe, flat spins have been encountered in the PA-38-112.
PA-38-112 Flat Spin Mode OFF
Source (NTSB)
Last edited by Robert Jan; 5th May 2011 at 10:05.