Exactly PKPF68-77, and well elucidated.

I for one have thought about carb icing, airframe icing, the carbon monoxide detectors in the aircraft I fly and all manner of other threats to the safety of my daily flying activities as a result of thinking about possible causes of this accident. Those who say they haven't are fooling nobody but themselves and what is more, miss a vital opportunity to draw a positive from a negative but hey, this is the internet and if someone thinks I'm a fool then more fool them. I have worked everyday with light aircraft for the best part of ten years and accidents are a genuine working hazard, always a possibility day in/day out, which I naturally have some degree of knowledge about and a deep desire to prevent occuring.... but each to their own. If one false theory espoused here can help prevent a future accident then who can really complain? A better way to salute those lost I cannot find.

VFE.

A very sad start to the year.

The trouble with a PA28-140 is that it can catch the unwary - I owned one for several years and have instructed on the type for many years.

Although it has 4 seats, it is by no means a 4-seater. More sensibly a 2+2.

It would be almost certainly over-weight with 3 on board and full fuel (pictures on the Web show it parked outside - so maybe it still was and with full fuel to reduce the chance of water contamination). It will DEFINATELY be over-weight (and possibly uncontrollable in certain situations) with 3 on board if operating in the Utility category (that is, carrying out certain manoeuvres, such as spinning). There was another sad accident some years ago when two very experienced airline pilots and instructors crashed in the sea after spinning a -140 off the Fylde Coast. The aircraft was over-weight for the exercise and CG out of limits.

As an example, I have flown the -140 with 3 on board and 3/4 tanks and 4 on board with (just) 1/2 tanks. Any more with average weight males on board and you are outside the envelope. It is probably one of the trickiest aircraft in common use in this respect and is not tolerant to over-loading. I checked the weight and balance carefully if I went flying with more than 2 on board (which was quite often as I used it for flying family and friends and hours building at the time).

No speculation about the cause of the crash, just sadness that a enjoyable day out should end in tragedy.

KR

FOK

Well posted FOK.Keeping it real instead of who said what and who never.:D

Sad day for GA

R.I.P

CF

The most interesting on this subject so far - Thanks FOK.

I am a PPL and look here out of wanting to know why this sad accident happened and to learn from it. Despite what others have said, I do find even some of the more far fetched theories, good, as reminders of what could and can happen when flying.

My condolences to family and friends.

Paul-S

FlyingOfficerKite

I think and correct me if I am wrong but the 140 with a rearward C of G had a problem coming out of a spin.

This appears to be a high speed almost vertical dive into the ground which would not indicate a spin to the ground.

In a spin the vertical descent speed is relatively low and stabilises

Maybe an initial spin followed by a dive coming out of it or even a spiral dive but I would question this as a spin to the ground as it appears it was too fast and at very high speed.

Pace

The amount of height required to climb out of a dive is increases massively with the speed of the aircraft. Could this be a case of a too-fast dive (caused for whatever reason) from which the pilot was too low to recover?

Pace

I don't want to speculate about the cause of the accident - but yes it's the rearward CofG which tends to put the aircraft out of limits. I would have to check the figures carefully, but it is not always the weight, per se, that causes the problem but the CofG issue.

Weight and balance is the one element of flight training I have always rammed down the throats of my students.

For some reason it is always the bete noire of flying training with students. Either they can't be bothered due to an over-eagerness to 'get flying' or for some bizarre reason think it only applies whilst they're training!

I'm not speculating on this accident, but if this Thread can serve a flight safety purpose by reminding people of some Golden Rules regarding loading of light aircraft then, perhaps, some good can come of it?

Remember if you're flying a '4-seater', it will be unusual to get 4 people and full fuel in the tanks and still be within weight and balance limits.

ALWAYS get a copy of the Loading Schedule from the Flight Manual or CURRENT Weight and Balance Schedule for the aircraft you intend to fly. Copy it and use it (as a rule) if you intend flying with more than 2 persons on board. As a general rule 4-seaters will not be overloaded with 2 persons on board and full fuel - but don't take my word for it -CHECK!!!

I always gave my students a copy of the weight and balance schedule and/or graph as a part of a type conversion course and explained the potential dangers to them of an incorrectly loaded aeroplane.

A simple method (particularly if you fly the same aircraft regularly) is to do a 'residual' weight and balance calculation. In other words work out how much 'spare' capacity there is after taking into account the weight of the aircraft prepared for service, full fuel and your own weight PLUS BAGS ETC. Then you will see what is left. Do a calculation of CofG and that will give you a means of assessing the allowable weight of any additional passengers. Alarm bells should start to ring if you suspect you will be over the limits - but ALWAYS do the final calculation and check - it takes 5 minutes and could cost you a lifetime if you don't!!!

Read the CAA Safety Safety leaflets - safety is not an accident!!!

I have had one of two 'near do's' in my flying career due to weight issues. Not because I was over-weight but because the aircraft did not respond as expected. One experience was grass airfield, no wind, hot day (27 degrees in the UK!) and three on board a Piper PA28-140. We just got airborne by the end of the runway - even after all my calculations - and nearly wiped out myself and my mother and father. If I had crashed the accident would have been hard to explain because, technically, nothing was wrong. With hindsight and several thousand more flying hours under my belt I hope I would have aborted the take-off if it happened now. Back then with only a couple of hundred hours I pressed on - because after all I'd checked the weight and balance AND the performance and the aeroplane MUST fly. Well it almost didn't. Another 'I Learn't About Flying From That' incident!

Always plan for and expect the unexpected.

Fly safely

KR

FOK

At the risk of being "flamed" the cause is more likely to be a stall/spin accident but hey, patience, the AAIB report is more likely to produce a more accurate assesment of the cause of the crash! As has been mentioned here on this thread, 140's are easily overloaded and a stall and resulting spin is not entirely unheard of!

Indeed. Welcome to my killfile Zworst! :ok:

The passengers have been named as Nick and Emma O'Brien, a married couple with 2 young children.

My thoughts are really with the families at the moment, especially the children.

I would suggest the steep nose down into the ground may be a sign of a stall after attempting to stretch the glide to clear the railway lines.

There is a little application for the iPhone called "FlightPlan" which does Weight and Balance calcs as well as many others (Weather, Navigation, Conversion).

In a developed spin the airspeed is low but the rate of descent is high (typically a few thousand feet a minute depending on type etc).

Not so, I believe experienced investigators can glean much from the wreckage as to what the aircraft was doing at the time.

Stalling or spinning into the ground is invariably fatal although I am not saying this is what happened in this case.

Did many hours in the Cherokee 140 - great little a/c if flown within the limitations.

Thoughts and prayers with the bereaved.

You could always use the weight and balance charts in the tech log, a pencil and a ruler.

Call me old fashioned.

"You're old fashioned"

(So am I).

Thank you Seagull.

thats a good idea, carrying a carbon monoxide detector. Which model do you use to avoid the silent killer?

I have a CO gaurdian, it is fitted as an Instrument and also does, density alt, battery volts timer etc. Miles better than those little plastic thingies.