Flying after bumping the wing during taxi
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flying after bumping the wing during taxi
I am a heli pilot so know nothing of aeroplane flight / safety.
At Redhill yesterday I witnessed a small GA aircraft taxi along and its right wing hit a parked van. The van must have been a couple of inches taller than the clearance under the wing. The machine tipped up visibly to go over the roof, and then dropped sharply as it finally cleared the rear. So one part of the wing ran along the corner of the roof of the van. I expected the pilot to stop (I thought he must have noticed that!) but he made to line up 18.
My friend called the tower to tell them of the impact and warn the chap, and subsequently he reversed course and pulled up. Then he exited the machine and inspected his wing. He walked back to the van, and took a good look at the floor around about (he did not seem to pay much attention to the van itself). Then he got back into his machine, fired up and lined up 18 for departure.
I went down to the white van, which had red paint from the wing scraped along the roof edge; so the impact was enough for that at least.
Now, being a helicopter pilot whose machine performs public transport work I would have needed an engineer to sign-off that my machine was safe to fly if I bumped anything at all.
Was this pilot's actions really all that is needed to go flying in a non-public transport aircraft?
At Redhill yesterday I witnessed a small GA aircraft taxi along and its right wing hit a parked van. The van must have been a couple of inches taller than the clearance under the wing. The machine tipped up visibly to go over the roof, and then dropped sharply as it finally cleared the rear. So one part of the wing ran along the corner of the roof of the van. I expected the pilot to stop (I thought he must have noticed that!) but he made to line up 18.
My friend called the tower to tell them of the impact and warn the chap, and subsequently he reversed course and pulled up. Then he exited the machine and inspected his wing. He walked back to the van, and took a good look at the floor around about (he did not seem to pay much attention to the van itself). Then he got back into his machine, fired up and lined up 18 for departure.
I went down to the white van, which had red paint from the wing scraped along the roof edge; so the impact was enough for that at least.
Now, being a helicopter pilot whose machine performs public transport work I would have needed an engineer to sign-off that my machine was safe to fly if I bumped anything at all.
Was this pilot's actions really all that is needed to go flying in a non-public transport aircraft?
Last edited by John R81; 20th May 2012 at 18:35. Reason: Removed "club" as I don't know that it is
'wot Jock said.
The leading edge of an aeroplane wing is both structurally and aerodynamically utterly critical to safety. As reported, this idiot was endangering his life and that of anybody in or under the aeroplane. It needs reporting PDQ in case anybody else tries to fly it before this is inspected and if required, rectified.
Report it, quickly.
G
The leading edge of an aeroplane wing is both structurally and aerodynamically utterly critical to safety. As reported, this idiot was endangering his life and that of anybody in or under the aeroplane. It needs reporting PDQ in case anybody else tries to fly it before this is inspected and if required, rectified.
Report it, quickly.
G
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAIB might be a good shout as well. The MOR's are about 3 months before anyone looks at them last time I heard. Or whistle blowers might work.
how the hell does an aircraft get within striking distance of a van anyway?
how the hell does an aircraft get within striking distance of a van anyway?
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: THE NORTH
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GTW, do you have a link or any other info on the a/c that crashed following hay damage, I have heard about it before but cannot find any other details on it.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Last edited by JUST-local; 20th May 2012 at 17:10.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to admit I was stunned that anyone would take-off after that. I was not sure if that was more a "helicopter" thing, or more a fact of my machines flying public transport so subject to tighter rules.
I was also suprised that he thought it was OK not to find the van owner and let him know he had hit it - though the red paint will likely T-Cut out.
As posted, the event was reported to ATC at Redhill. That is a full, qualified ATC service and I would hope that ATC is required to report any collision happening on their watch. My understanding is that the Pilot is required to file a report with CAA (Mandetory Occurance Report?). So that's 2x reports. If you think it would be helpful for me to also report, to whom do you suggest?
I was also suprised that he thought it was OK not to find the van owner and let him know he had hit it - though the red paint will likely T-Cut out.
As posted, the event was reported to ATC at Redhill. That is a full, qualified ATC service and I would hope that ATC is required to report any collision happening on their watch. My understanding is that the Pilot is required to file a report with CAA (Mandetory Occurance Report?). So that's 2x reports. If you think it would be helpful for me to also report, to whom do you suggest?
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air Accidents Investigation: Contact Us
Try phoning them and ask them who you should contact.
It more for the poor sod that flys it next than anything else.
By rights if there is an airside prang and ATC know about it they have to get the police in. Its actually quite serious.
Try phoning them and ask them who you should contact.
It more for the poor sod that flys it next than anything else.
By rights if there is an airside prang and ATC know about it they have to get the police in. Its actually quite serious.
Last edited by mad_jock; 20th May 2012 at 17:22.
Guest
Posts: n/a
JUST-local
Think this is it..
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...pdf_500558.pdf
If another is being referred to though I'd like to read about it too.
Think this is it..
http://www.aaib.gov.uk/cms_resources...pdf_500558.pdf
If another is being referred to though I'd like to read about it too.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it was true that the aircraft was not his then it sounds likely that he hoped no one would notice especially the owner and he could walk away as if nothing had happened.
The aircraft should be inspected for anything but the slightest touch as you cannot see what damage may have been done.
It would not be nice for the owner or someone else to find out later that there had been damage at their peril.
I hope someone gave a note to the owner telling him what occurred
Pace
The aircraft should be inspected for anything but the slightest touch as you cannot see what damage may have been done.
It would not be nice for the owner or someone else to find out later that there had been damage at their peril.
I hope someone gave a note to the owner telling him what occurred
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 20th May 2012 at 17:26.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 1,289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well you could call the CAA, Monday morning, file a CHIRP, get ATC to lodge an MOR, I assume everyone has the reg detail??
Few years ago a clown took out the fence on departing Glenforsa, and was last seen heading to Edinburgh with barbed wire, and a large post trailing behind the aeroplane
A PA28. Pilot well known.
So the story goes, the next morning, takes the blue and white tape off said aircraft, and flew it to another airfield for repairs. Totally astonishing.
He kept his licence. It truly amazes me that there are still individuals who put their own life, and others at risk by doing things that seem extraordinary when you witness it.
Nah, report him asap
Few years ago a clown took out the fence on departing Glenforsa, and was last seen heading to Edinburgh with barbed wire, and a large post trailing behind the aeroplane
A PA28. Pilot well known.So the story goes, the next morning, takes the blue and white tape off said aircraft, and flew it to another airfield for repairs. Totally astonishing.
He kept his licence. It truly amazes me that there are still individuals who put their own life, and others at risk by doing things that seem extraordinary when you witness it.
Nah, report him asap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MJ - I emailed AAIB from the site link. Reg included.
Aircraft was a Rans-S6E SD. so you will appreciate that a Peugeot pannel van is not going to fit under the wing!
John
Aircraft was a Rans-S6E SD. so you will appreciate that a Peugeot pannel van is not going to fit under the wing!
John
Last edited by John R81; 20th May 2012 at 17:38.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 10,815
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would give them a ring as well and just ask. Its more to make sure some poor sod doesn't take the aircraft up to do stalling or steep turns tomorrow morning before everyone gets there poo together and starts clearing out the mail boxes.
They might not be interested and want you to call someone at the CAA.
I would definatley call then after you have put the type in.
If it was a C172 I wouldn't be that worried, they are built like brick poo houses and I have flown one after an engineering inspection with 2/3 of the leading edge battered by a bird strike. But at least its only a single seater so no one will be training tomorrow in it.
They might not be interested and want you to call someone at the CAA.
I would definatley call then after you have put the type in.
If it was a C172 I wouldn't be that worried, they are built like brick poo houses and I have flown one after an engineering inspection with 2/3 of the leading edge battered by a bird strike. But at least its only a single seater so no one will be training tomorrow in it.
Last edited by mad_jock; 20th May 2012 at 18:17.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Plumpton Green
Age: 79
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But at least its only a single seater so no one will be training tomorrow in it.
Yes, I know, the owner(s) can receive training in it, but then he probably believes he has received all the training he needs
Is the Rans not a permit aircraft, and as such maintenance can be done by the owner, and an inspector does the permit renewal?
I am not for one moment saying what the pilot did was good practice, but under the permit scheme can the owner not sign off his own repairs etc.?
I am just curious if legally as pilot/owner he can claim he examined the aircraft for damage, and is authorised to deem it fit to fly with no further duplicate inspection?
Any PFA/LAA inspectors On here able to tell me the procedure?
I am not for one moment saying what the pilot did was good practice, but under the permit scheme can the owner not sign off his own repairs etc.?
I am just curious if legally as pilot/owner he can claim he examined the aircraft for damage, and is authorised to deem it fit to fly with no further duplicate inspection?
Any PFA/LAA inspectors On here able to tell me the procedure?
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: In the South !
Posts: 196
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Aviation side aside - having caused damage to a parked vehicle and then leaving without leaving his details has he not committed a criminal offence??
Last edited by ATCO Fred; 20th May 2012 at 18:35.
Some years ago, a couple of my instructors went over to the maintenance aerodrome, so that one could pick up an aircraft after a 50 hr service....
Despite being warned by his colleague, the PIC hit a fence post with the wing tip whilst trying to turn round. His colleague suggested that they should leave the aircraft at the maintenance aerodrome and fly the other one back. But no, the PIC decided to fly back to our home aerodrome, whereupon he told me "I've had a bit of a bump"...
I went to look at the aircraft and immediately grounded it. Then we had to arrange for the maintenance people to drive over and check that it was OK to fly it, so I could fly it over to the maintenance aerodrome to have it repaired.
It was pronounced safe, so I flew it over and did a low speed handling check on the way - to find a slight wing drop at the stall. Handy to know that as the maintenance aerodrome had rather a short RW. I then waited whilst they repaired it, but we decided to leave the repair in primer until the next 50 hr was due.
A completely avoidable taxying incident. But even worse was the fact that the FI couldn't accept that his decision to fly it back was unsound. Plus it cost us 2 x road journeys for the maintainers, 2 x transit flights to take it over for repair - and I had to hang around for a few hours so wasted my own time.
We docked the price of the repairs and the maintainers' road mileage from the FIs pay, but waived the 2 transit flight costs. Had he just left it at the maintenance aerodrome in the first place, I'd have been more lenient. But his stupid decision and pig-headed reluctance to learn from the error of his ways didn't impress me. I was very close to advising him that we no longer required his services.... But I was conscious of the fact that he had no other regular source of income.
I also made him read that Robin / haybale accident to which reference was made earlier.
Before it may be flown, an aircraft must be checked by licensed maintenance personnel following even the slightest ground collision.
Despite being warned by his colleague, the PIC hit a fence post with the wing tip whilst trying to turn round. His colleague suggested that they should leave the aircraft at the maintenance aerodrome and fly the other one back. But no, the PIC decided to fly back to our home aerodrome, whereupon he told me "I've had a bit of a bump"...
I went to look at the aircraft and immediately grounded it. Then we had to arrange for the maintenance people to drive over and check that it was OK to fly it, so I could fly it over to the maintenance aerodrome to have it repaired.
It was pronounced safe, so I flew it over and did a low speed handling check on the way - to find a slight wing drop at the stall. Handy to know that as the maintenance aerodrome had rather a short RW. I then waited whilst they repaired it, but we decided to leave the repair in primer until the next 50 hr was due.
A completely avoidable taxying incident. But even worse was the fact that the FI couldn't accept that his decision to fly it back was unsound. Plus it cost us 2 x road journeys for the maintainers, 2 x transit flights to take it over for repair - and I had to hang around for a few hours so wasted my own time.
We docked the price of the repairs and the maintainers' road mileage from the FIs pay, but waived the 2 transit flight costs. Had he just left it at the maintenance aerodrome in the first place, I'd have been more lenient. But his stupid decision and pig-headed reluctance to learn from the error of his ways didn't impress me. I was very close to advising him that we no longer required his services.... But I was conscious of the fact that he had no other regular source of income.
I also made him read that Robin / haybale accident to which reference was made earlier.
Before it may be flown, an aircraft must be checked by licensed maintenance personnel following even the slightest ground collision.
Last edited by BEagle; 20th May 2012 at 18:50.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: England & Scotland
Age: 63
Posts: 1,413
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fred - No, I don't think so.
On a UK road then it is an offence for a person being the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle and owing to the presence of that vehicle on the road or other such public place an accident having occurred whereby damage or injury was caused did fail to stop and give his name and address and identification marks of the vehicle.
Road Traffic Act 1988 s 170 (2)
If there are reasons for leaving without contacting the owner fo the vehicle then the accident should be reported to the Police within 24 hrs. Technically, there could still be a prosecution but if it is a non-injury accident it is not typical for that to happen.
However, this was on an airfield which has a gate and controlled access. Hence I don't think it qualifies as part of the public road (which would be the case in, say, the car park of Burger King).
John
On a UK road then it is an offence for a person being the driver of a mechanically propelled vehicle and owing to the presence of that vehicle on the road or other such public place an accident having occurred whereby damage or injury was caused did fail to stop and give his name and address and identification marks of the vehicle.
Road Traffic Act 1988 s 170 (2)
If there are reasons for leaving without contacting the owner fo the vehicle then the accident should be reported to the Police within 24 hrs. Technically, there could still be a prosecution but if it is a non-injury accident it is not typical for that to happen.
However, this was on an airfield which has a gate and controlled access. Hence I don't think it qualifies as part of the public road (which would be the case in, say, the car park of Burger King).
John
Last edited by John R81; 20th May 2012 at 18:51.