Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Yet another Airshow Incident

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Yet another Airshow Incident

Old 29th Aug 2015, 14:58
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Carmel,NY
Age: 82
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Older low level aerobatics

Sean Tucker, despite being in wonderful physical shape, is no youngster but continues to perform near miraculous aerobatics, including ribbob cutting inverted etc.
Petercwelch is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 15:35
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: England
Posts: 1,389
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Perhaps investigators should look again at this one. The cause was weather related but still..

http://www.caa.co.za/Accidents%20and...ports/9281.pdf

They found "all four corners" at the crash site (so ruled out an inflight breakup) but...

"The horizontal and the vertical tailplane, including the tail wheel assembly, were entangled in a tree near the impact position.
while..
The impact sequence indicates that the aircraft was in a vertical nose-down attitude when it crashed in bushy terrain (Figure 15). The nose section, including the propeller, was embedded in a crater approximately one m in depth (Figure 16). The fuselage, which consists mainly of a composite type of material, shattered in a substantial number of pieces.
cwatters is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 17:22
  #23 (permalink)  

Aviator Extraordinaire
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma USA
Age: 76
Posts: 2,394
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ATPMBA
Seems like Low-Level aerobatics catches up with everyone.

There are old pilots and low-level aerobatic pilots but there are no old low-level aerobatic pilots.
Never heard of Bob Hoover?
con-pilot is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 17:46
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Seattle
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Seems like Low-Level aerobatics catches up with everyone.
More like composite construction catches up with everybody.

It's also a problem with sailing yachts, with composite rudders, masts and hulls failing from time to time. Inspection for damage is much more involved than looking for dents or creases in aluminum. Sadly, the consequences of composite failure are a lot more serious in aviation.
EEngr is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 18:00
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 3,325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There are old pilots and low-level aerobatic pilots but there are no old low-level aerobatic pilots.
Brian Lecomber is one of the best, and he's knocking on a bit now.
Shaggy Sheep Driver is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 19:51
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Wor Yerm
Age: 68
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There is no lower limit to attempt to use a parachute. 700-800 feet is perfectly sufficient for an old fashioned chute with a spider. Modern rig with a "donut" would probably work at 500' or less. And even if you haven't fully decelerated, as long as you live...

PM
Piltdown Man is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 23:12
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Ormond Beach, FL USA
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
How could they conclude a glue bonding failure so quickly?
flyguyfl is offline  
Old 29th Aug 2015, 23:47
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Avon, CT, USA
Age: 68
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Quote:
Never heard of Bob Hoover?


Ever hear of The French Connection? husband & wife team?
ATPMBA is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 00:18
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by flyguyfl
How could they conclude a glue bonding failure so quickly?
He was referring to the accident from back in 2001.
hamster3null is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 01:51
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by A Squared
Using the time in the control bar of the video in the above linked article it looks like about 10-11 seconds from tail separation to impact. Not sure where the 24 seconds comes from.
I get 12 seconds from losing the first piece to impact. And it may have taken a few seconds to realize that the aircraft is damaged beyond hope (the pilot can't even see that the tail is gone).

Even if he realized that he had a problem, actually getting out of the aircraft may have been a challenge. He needed to unbuckle, lose the canopy, climb out, all in the matter of 10 seconds or less.

On top of that, G202's canopy is plagued by failure problems, and this very guy had an incident just last year when his canopy separated in flight because of the lever failure. He was a big fan of wire-rim aviator sunglasses (he has them on in every single video on the web site), so he would have been rendered near-blind by wind buffeting without the canopy. That past experience was probably a strong deterrent from any attempt to bail out. I wonder if he even got the canopy open. There's no sign of it being ejected in the video (though it's mostly transparent and could be easily missed.)

These aircraft should really be equipped with ejection seats. Yes, they are expensive and a hassle to maintain, but they greatly improve pilot's odds of survival in the event of a major low-altitude malfunction.
hamster3null is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 03:35
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Not far from a big Lake
Age: 81
Posts: 1,454
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
These aircraft should really be equipped with ejection seats. Yes, they are expensive and a hassle to maintain, but they greatly improve pilot's odds of survival in the event of a major low-altitude malfunction.
While I am a great fan of ejection seats, they are not practical in this class of aircraft.
An aircraft parachute like the BRS incurs a much lower weight penalty, however the BRS would probably need some adaptation to handle the speed range of aircraft like the G202. It is not impossible to do this, it just requires some engineering.

Fractions of a second count at low altitude. While in flight training in the Navy, I sat across the mess table and heard the story from another student who was the sole survivor of a midair between two training aircraft at pattern altitude. He bailed out and survived because his parachute opened over a hollow.
If you have never practiced your bailout routine, you are going to waste a lot of time and make errors that may be critical to survival.
Machinbird is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 04:18
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: California
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Machinbird
While I am a great fan of ejection seats, they are not practical in this class of aircraft.
An aircraft parachute like the BRS incurs a much lower weight penalty, however the BRS would probably need some adaptation to handle the speed range of aircraft like the G202. It is not impossible to do this, it just requires some engineering.
Good idea. BRS does have a couple of models that can handle G202's speed. And they are fairly reasonably priced. The problem (judging from their web site and specs) is that their high-speed models seem to require internal installation, they are fairly bulky (size of a big suitcase), and I'm not sure if there's any room left inside a G202 to stick in the parachute unit.
hamster3null is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 06:19
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Canada
Age: 46
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
https://youtu.be/jgfG2DfPB6I?t=120

While not being a modern zero/zero Martin-Baker, a BRS gives you a much better chance than a "backpack" or "seat" type parachute.

g.
Avro_Arrow is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 08:27
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hamster3null

These aircraft should really be equipped with ejection seats. Yes, they are expensive and a hassle to maintain, but they greatly improve pilot's odds of survival in the event of a major low-altitude malfunction.
Or, we could just accept that people will occasionally die?

Is that such a big deal?
Tourist is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 08:42
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: The wrong time zone...
Posts: 841
Received 48 Likes on 21 Posts
Or, we could just accept that people will occasionally die?

Is that such a big deal?
Yeah, nah. Apparently it might be a "big deal" to this bloke's family, friends and other loved ones. Really, I'm not into knee-jerk "we need to fit all aircraft with ejection seats" but I think your comment and its timing is pretty heartless.
josephfeatherweight is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 10:01
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The person taking the risk is responsible for the trauma caused to their family if it all goes wrong, not me.

Fitting ejector seats to toy aircraft is moronic.

Part of the attraction of high risk sports is the risk itself. Remove the risk and the people will just move on to something else.
Tourist is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 10:34
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 6,546
Received 5 Likes on 5 Posts
These aircraft should really be equipped with ejection seats. Yes, they are expensive and a hassle to maintain,
Yes they are, and as you might be aware they are also potentially lethal if mishandled and I'm not sure they would be compatible structurally with many smaller aircraft....
wiggy is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 10:58
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Reading, UK
Posts: 15,801
Received 198 Likes on 91 Posts
Apart from the multitude of practical problems, it's hard to see how an ejection seat would have saved this pilot.

Given that he was inverted when he lost his tail, banging out would simply have meant he hit the ground faster and sooner ...
DaveReidUK is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 11:25
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: eastcoastoz
Age: 76
Posts: 1,699
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
... and an ejection seat (plus mounting) would probably weigh as much as the airframe itself.
Not to mention any weight/balance considerations.

Surely, a BRS for an aircraft of that size and weight would not have to be 'large suitcase' sized.
Many aircraft in the recreational/sport category use ones that are considerably less bulky and streamlined as well.
Stanwell is offline  
Old 30th Aug 2015, 11:33
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by flyguyfl
How could they conclude a glue bonding failure so quickly?
Actually this BEA report does not relate to a true adhesive bond failure, it relates to a fibre to resin failure. This indicates that the adhesive bond is stronger than the resin to fibre bond. This would indicate to me that there is a potential issue of incompatible resin and fibre materials selection, or inadequate storage management of the pre-preg materials prior to cure (maybe the resin was stored in a manner that advanced the cure to the extent that the resin failed to form adequate chemical bonds to the fibres?). In contrast, if the process did not use pre-preg materials, then there may be issues relating to the storage of resin components, mixing issues, methods for application of the resin, environment in which the materials were used, etc.

I have real issues with "kit" composite aircraft. I know of one case down under where the kit pre-pregs waited on the wharf for an extended period for the distributor to collect the kit, despite the horrendous shelf-life issues associated with the delay.

I would be interested to see the results of this investigation, but I stress that the BEA report was NOT actually a bonding issue.

Regards

Blakmax
blakmax is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.