Cranfield crash, 5 June 2013
 

BBC reporting a light aircraft down

BBC News - Two hurt in Cranfield Airport light aircraft crash

Looks like G-BGBN

http://www.abpic.co.uk/images/images/1403987M.jpg

Two airlifted to hospital after light aircraft crash in Cranfield - Local - Milton Keynes Citizen

http://www.miltonkeynes.co.uk/webima.../667841091.jpg

Rumour has it its one of Pilot Flight Training (Cranfield) owned by Chris Alexander.........

I was about Cranfield today.

It is PFT, it is a PA38, it wasn't Chris Alexander. Seems to have been an instructor and their student, there were reports that they made a radio call about a rough running engine, and the impact site was somewhere around the 21 threshold. I understand that nobody has died, but both are in hospital and very unwell. AAIB are attending.

That's as much as I know, other than there were a great many emergency vehicles on site.

Thoughts and hopes with the two people in hospital that they make a full and speedy recovery.

P

Sad about BN, had many hours flying on it. Just a note however, the engine always had a problem with plug fouling and one had to be cautious about taxiing rich. It always liked a bit of lean to keep the plugs clean. Worse on hot days too!
So sorry for the people hurt, but there may have been something lacking in the process somewhere. Experience and knowledge of each individual aircraft's foibles is vital.

Sad to hear of this.
I hope that the two on board make a swift recovery.

How sad! I fly out of Cranfield and this has really hit home. Would hate to speculate but here are some facts regarding the school/aircraft:

1. PA38 used to be owed by Bonus (went into administration last September)
2. PA38 in question was getting towards the end of its life. Apparently bought in auction for £7000 ish
3. PFT headed up by Chris Alexander

ZF

Any idea how the two on board are doing now?

Somebody close to the school told me this afternoon - seriously injured, in hospital, but the injuries are no longer judged to be life threatening.

G

Thanks very much for the information. I am glad to hear that they are not in a life threatening state now. I hope they make a swift recovery.

The other side seem to have already picked up on the owner's past!

Out of curiosity, what is the relevance of the owner or his murky past to do with the crash?

An opportunity for salacious gossip?

I am more interested why an Instructor would attempt a low level turn back. The cardinal sin in my mind. It's called the impossible turn for a reason.

Thankfully they have lived to learn from the mistake. Wishing them a speedy recovery.

Oh Bose, did you really have to kick off that discussion? :eek:

IMHO, don't turn back unless you have planned it, in detail. Yes, there are a huge number of variables which can increase or decrease the chances of success but how many pilots are competent/current enough to do it?

Whenever this discussion takes place, I always point people towards this accident report which has some significant personal interest. Not exactly the same circumstances but indicative of how a professional can get it wrong.

Bosex,


I think that the guys murky past didn't go down to well at Cranfield with plenty of guys opposing down there.

Who said that the instructor tried the impossible turn? I haven't heard any such thing as yet.

ZF

Wind at Cranfield 040/08. Report says: landed short of the 21 threshold.. QED?

Depends which way the aircraft was pointing

It does beg the question just how long our beloved 'spam cans' will survive?

Maybe there are only so many times you can replace the 'broom and handle' before it's time to throw it away?

KR

FOK :confused:

Red Chillie, 'short of the 21 threshold' is either on the runway (if taking off from 03) or trying to land back on 21 with a significant tail wind, which you wouldn't normally do out of choice.. Implying a turn-back.

Of course I have assumed that they were using 03 - with wind at 040 I can't imagine otherwise.

We don't have enough info at this stage, could have been a normal take off followed by immediate engine failure which would put the aircraft at the 21 end of the runway, no turn back required.

Let's leave it to the AAIB.

I trained at Cranfield a fair number of moons ago (using Bonus) and flew the aircraft in question numerous times.

Hope they recover ok.

Eyewitness reports are an attempted turn back, stall and spin.

This is what I'm hearing from many different sources. Might be interesting to read the report as to why the engine failed/rough run............

Yes, will read that with interest.

Their last rate on those tomahawks was £75 per hr wet.. Not much profit it that...

Edit: on good authority, not Hinton mogas

They use Mogas or UL91?

rumour is all ac grounded as of yesterday ( sun)

fact
no phones were being answered

[QUOTE][Mind you, they never uplift at CFD and make you land at Hinton for mogas /QUOTE]
Only fuel at hinton is 100LL
There was a couple of movements at hinton late yesterday afternoon, but thats all..

Link to the latest from the Beds on Sunday, what passes for a "newspaper" around here. It predictably contains the usual imbecilic spoutings of expert local residents and the compulsory boll eaux about annihilating schools.

It seems the flying school has indeed had its licence pulled.

Crashed plane's owner defends safety record | Bedfordshire Local News, Local News Headlines in Bedford | Bedfordshire Newspaper Online

"Mind you, they never uplift at CFD and make you land at Hinton for mogas"

That's an interesting statement, I was under the impression that mogas could only be used if a) the aircraft has the appropriate STC and b) is not being used for 'aerial work'. I assume flight training constitutes aerial work in this context - have the rules changed?

I'll qualify that a bit...

In the same sentence, we were told that they "use Mogas".

Again, assumption made that they had be refuelled elsewhere as Cranfield only supply 100LL and JetA1.

Thanks for the clarification, but the last time I flew into Hinton the one and only fuel pump was AVGAS.

So where does the MOGAS come from, you'd need up to 25 Imp gallons to refuel a Tomahawk?

First of all my thoughts are with the people involved in the accident and their families wishing them both a speedy recovery, I have rented PA-38's from Hinton since February and flew G-BGBN four weeks ago. Prices I have been paying are £85/hr wet during winter and £100/hr wet during summer with all hours paid for in bulk, not quite sure where the £75/hr comes in or about the mogas statement either as Hinton is 100LL.

No idea if they used it, but one of PFT's bases is now Sywell, and Sywell have mogas. Mogas is legal for flight training - Brooklands at Sywell put it in their AT3's.

tesco's?;)

As something of an aside - and not wishing to cast asperions - what is the legal situation regarding negligence and liability from the perspective of the instructor in this accident?

The 'impossible turn' - if that is what it was proved to be - is well-known and not something an instructor would be expected to execute in an EFATO situation.

I do not know of any circumstances where liability has been proven and civil action taken against a flying instructor?

It is appreciated that this subject has been discussed in other Threads over the years, but no clear opinion seems to have been decided?

A difficult subject to broach in view of the injury to the occupants, but nevertheless potentially of interest to all pilots and instructors.

KR

FOK

The possible "impossible turn" has featured here in the past.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct...t6L2dblTop1v3A

Jetblu, indeed, and more recently here:

http://www.pprune.org/private-flying...turn-back.html

SD

For info of anyone with bookings, PFT's office at Cranfield is closed. They have a note advising anyone with bookings to contact one of their other bases (closed until 20th June).

A few people have mentioned the aircraft owner. Well if you Google/Bing "alexander kirk chris maurice" and you will see the beginnings of a story about 2 of the most intriguing characters in General Aviation!

iRaven

Rob
 

If you are correct PFT are in for a big payday by taking the newspaper to court for libel, much more profitable that aviation.

PFT Cranfield crash victims named
 

The Milton Keynes Citizen newspaper has now identified the two victims of the Cranfield crash as instructor Sam Lyons (24) and student Roger Kingsley. Sam Lyons is described as being the manager of PFT Cranfield.