Wycombe air park - accident
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, this has no relevance to this accident because, AIUI, the aircraft never actually left the ground in a meaningful sense - so the turn for noise abatement never took place.
The reason I was asking is that, at my airport, we also have very strict noise abatement procedures, which ATC enforces rigourlously, but they involve things like "no turns before XXX AGL" which is never compromising from a safety perspective.
I also fully support your attitude to let safety issues prevail in any action. It just struck me as odd that, when flying a 6 seater SE or light twin, ignoring the noise abatement procedure would almost become the de facto SOP for safety reasons. I hope this clarifies my position.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Londonish
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
proudprivate: as you asked, in my opinion (and I'm being blunt) if a bit of a turn at 200ft is a safety issue, give up flying. 200 or 2000, the aircraft knows no different, and you'll still die if you spin at 500. Simply use the footrests appropriately, and make sure you're travelling at a reasonable velocity.
Alternatively, isn't being at 200ft over a housing estate a flight safety issue? Or do you just take it on trust that everything will continue working?
wsempson is absolutely right though. You're the a/c commander, you decide - that even includes telling ATC 'unable' if you see fit.
Alternatively, isn't being at 200ft over a housing estate a flight safety issue? Or do you just take it on trust that everything will continue working?
wsempson is absolutely right though. You're the a/c commander, you decide - that even includes telling ATC 'unable' if you see fit.
Last edited by Mark1234; 4th Jun 2011 at 11:36.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Belgium
Posts: 381
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if a bit of a turn at 200ft is a safety issue, give up flying.
[...] Or do you just take it on trust that everything will continue working?
I'll try one more time before turning the page on Wycombe for good:
* I believe that under current maintenance standards the probability of an engine failure after takeoff is significantly lower than that of a mishap while manoeuvering. Both are obviously low, it's not as if every third 6 seater doing so is going to crash on the M40. And it's not as if accident statistics would make us wiser. The prevailing runway in use would be 24, not 06; And the number of 6 seater Max Gross taking off movements at Wycombe will remain in the single digits, even on a good day.
* I wondered if a possibility existed to remedy this situation taking the local circumstances into consideration, knowing fully well that I'm not from around there.
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Germany
Age: 40
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess it is a lucky thing that those houses and other obstacles weren't there, as noted in the comments on the article's page 
Grass is a whole lot softer than brick buildings and tarmac 
Aren't there regulations regarding clearance around an airport anyway?
Grass is a whole lot softer than brick buildings and tarmac Aren't there regulations regarding clearance around an airport anyway?
As a non-Brit, you may not have knowledge of the insanity of the Not In My Back Yard tendency in this country. They will (and they have the support of the law in doing this) buy a house next to a long-established airfield or school or church then complain about the aircraft or children or bells and have action taken by the local authority on their behalf. It's insane but that's how it works.
Your proposal of a fine or tax would almost certainly be described by the media in this country as bribes paid by rich people to make "ordinary hard-working families" lives a misery. (OHWF is a favourite phrase of our politicians and media)
:-) through gritted teeth!
Your proposal of a fine or tax would almost certainly be described by the media in this country as bribes paid by rich people to make "ordinary hard-working families" lives a misery. (OHWF is a favourite phrase of our politicians and media)
:-) through gritted teeth!
I was on the airfield trying to weigh an aeroplane at the time, but was unable to fuel the aeroplane because the fuel pumps had been sealed pending AAIB's arrival. Particularly if power loss was a suspected factor, quite a sharp move on somebody's part.
(Drained the tanks and weighed it empty instead).
G
(Drained the tanks and weighed it empty instead).
G
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shutting the pumps was a standard airfield management precaution given the aircraft had uplifted fuel prior to departure.
Given that dozens of aircraft (including I understand, an aircraft that was in company with (and took off before) the incident aircraft) had been refuelled that day from the same installation it is most unlikely to be a contaminated fuel induced problem. I understand that it was business as normal today at WAP.
Incidentally, any development plans that have been rumoured for Wycombe Air Park didn't include houses (or anything else) being built at the end of the runway!
The departure procedure for 06 has been in place for many, many years. With 100,000 plus movements a year at WAP, incidents are very, very few and far between. Not much point trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist....
Given that dozens of aircraft (including I understand, an aircraft that was in company with (and took off before) the incident aircraft) had been refuelled that day from the same installation it is most unlikely to be a contaminated fuel induced problem. I understand that it was business as normal today at WAP.
Incidentally, any development plans that have been rumoured for Wycombe Air Park didn't include houses (or anything else) being built at the end of the runway!
The departure procedure for 06 has been in place for many, many years. With 100,000 plus movements a year at WAP, incidents are very, very few and far between. Not much point trying to fix a problem that doesn't exist....
Fair point Steve!
It was all a bit unclear, if you weren't dealing with the emergency, what was going on. On the whole, it seemed that the chaps over the other side of the airfield had more important things on their mind than telling the rest of us, so we stayed out of the way and drank tea.
At one point I think I counted 4 police cars, 2 fire engines, 1 ambulance, 1 police helicopter and 1 air ambulance. Whatever else, the emergency services certainly took this accident seriously.
G
It was all a bit unclear, if you weren't dealing with the emergency, what was going on. On the whole, it seemed that the chaps over the other side of the airfield had more important things on their mind than telling the rest of us, so we stayed out of the way and drank tea.
At one point I think I counted 4 police cars, 2 fire engines, 1 ambulance, 1 police helicopter and 1 air ambulance. Whatever else, the emergency services certainly took this accident seriously.
G
outside emergency services have a procedure which may seem overkill to some, but covers all eventualities. c152 or c425 gets same response. (hopefully!) its better to turn excess away as un- needed than to stand around waiting for assistance that isnt coming. much police as any incident is a "potential scene of crime"
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alas GtE, I'm not Stev and not part of the Duty Crew....
The Duty Crew were at the incident site within seconds of it happening until past 1900hrs. The AAIB were then waiting to remove the aircraft to wherever - all organised by themselves.
If you wanted to know what was happening regarding the airfield state and the refuelling situation then the airfield reception was the place to go - as you summise, the Duty Crew were a tad busy!
(Edit to say that Stev in Post #31 is Stev....)
The Duty Crew were at the incident site within seconds of it happening until past 1900hrs. The AAIB were then waiting to remove the aircraft to wherever - all organised by themselves.
If you wanted to know what was happening regarding the airfield state and the refuelling situation then the airfield reception was the place to go - as you summise, the Duty Crew were a tad busy!
(Edit to say that Stev in Post #31 is Stev....)
sorry, managed to double delete my earlier post and reply to genghis
, that fuel would have been unavailable anyway due to fire duties, and that smarthawke quite correctly states, no other aircaft, of which there were many, had problems. wap fuel is 100%, as to be expected.
, that fuel would have been unavailable anyway due to fire duties, and that smarthawke quite correctly states, no other aircaft, of which there were many, had problems. wap fuel is 100%, as to be expected.
I was just curious and it was neither affecting me, nor anything I could do usefully to help. So, I took the view that everybody else was either (a) as in the dark as me, or (b) had better things to do than tell me. Pprune, as ever answered the main questions within 24 hours.
I'm very glad that nobody was injured badly. Everything after that was just nuisance value.
G
I'm very glad that nobody was injured badly. Everything after that was just nuisance value.
G
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am not sure if it was made clear in some of the posts above that the noise abatment turn at EGTB turns the aircraft away from a built up area and points the aircraft towards fields.
In my opinion as a long term user of EGTB the safety advantage of having the aircraft pointed at a clear area outweighs the performance disadvantage of a climbing turn.
In my opinion as a long term user of EGTB the safety advantage of having the aircraft pointed at a clear area outweighs the performance disadvantage of a climbing turn.
Originally Posted by proudprivate
at my airport, we also have very strict noise abatement procedures, which ATC enforces rigourlously
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Bussum
Age: 58
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash
I visited the airport on my trip from Holland to the UK and I witnessed the crash.
It was a horrible sight and I thought at first nobody would survive. I'm a grown up guy but it was one of the most awful things I have seen. I almost broke into tears expecting nobody would have survived. I have been told everybody has, which is a miracle.
Even though I saw what happened I cannot and I dont want to judge. I saw a nose up pitch and the plane had troubles to get airborne, buy everything else I would post would be sheer speculation.
Having witnessed an accident I feel I would like to make a general comment: Please be mild when judging. Until investigations are completed please refrain from speculating. Because even having witnessed a crash I do not feel I can make any useful comment other then describing my observations.
It was a horrible sight and I thought at first nobody would survive. I'm a grown up guy but it was one of the most awful things I have seen. I almost broke into tears expecting nobody would have survived. I have been told everybody has, which is a miracle.
Even though I saw what happened I cannot and I dont want to judge. I saw a nose up pitch and the plane had troubles to get airborne, buy everything else I would post would be sheer speculation.
Having witnessed an accident I feel I would like to make a general comment: Please be mild when judging. Until investigations are completed please refrain from speculating. Because even having witnessed a crash I do not feel I can make any useful comment other then describing my observations.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: london
Posts: 676
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Folberts,
This is Pprune "professional pilots RUMOUR NETWORK".
This is where pilots come to swap gossip, rumours, theories and stories. Some prove to be right, some are not.
However, it is what it is and if you don't like it, it's probably best to give it a miss.
This is Pprune "professional pilots RUMOUR NETWORK".
This is where pilots come to swap gossip, rumours, theories and stories. Some prove to be right, some are not.
However, it is what it is and if you don't like it, it's probably best to give it a miss.
G
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Surely if it was restricted to PROFESSIONAL pilots then it would be a pretty quiet forum with only you PROFESSIONAL pilots here, GtE (that is presuming you hold a PROFESSIONAL pilot's licence...)!
[Folberts - I'm pleased to here you got off home okay.]
[Folberts - I'm pleased to here you got off home okay.]