Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Fatal GA accident cockpit video

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Fatal GA accident cockpit video

    WARNING: The YouTube link below is an in-cockpit video taken during an accident where two persons resulted critically injured, one of them dying later at the hospital.

    While there is nothing gruesome about the video, it is very disturbing (it was to me at least).
    Discretion is advised and click at your own risk.

    Falling light aircraft recorded DVR, informs LifeNews. The camera is located in the cockpit, and recorded the flight time of the fall legkomotora. After an u...

    (If you are going to watch it for safety analysis, I advise selecting HD to be able to better see the instruments).

    The part that I am interested in is the sequence that led to the accident. I would have cut the impact itself if I was able to.

    What I see:

    The left pilot (student?) is flying the approach. You can see hes left hand on the throttle and his right hand on the stick, while the right pilot (instructor?) is monitoring and has his hands on his knees.

    The airspeed in the beginning of the sequence well inside the white arc (that goes from flaps stall speed to flaps max speed), more towards the fast end than the slow end.

    (In this other poor quality video of the same accident, you can see that some seconds before they were flying at about the fast end of the white arc
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9qxD1n9Mu4)

    As the airplane flares, you can see the airspeed indication drop in less than one second from clearly in the fast half of the white arc to clearly in the slow half. The airplane cannot slow down so fast, so that was either a tail wind gust (or sudden reduction in the headwind) or a problem with the airspeed indicator, which I would have not normally thought of.

    As the plane is about to touch down, you can see the right pilot move his left hand to the throttle and his right hand from his knee (I will assume that he grabbed the stick, although I cannot see that in the video). (Note, the left pilot keeps his both hands on the controls too during all times, which is normal for an instruction flight, where the student keeps his hands on the controls even when the instructor is flying to "follow" his movements and gain the motor skills and coordination). Then he adds full power as the plane is touching down. The airspeed by then is inside the white arc close to the stall speed, which is normal in small GA planes when the plane is touching down.

    As they start the go-around, there is another abrupt drop in the airspeed indication and the plane banks left (did they stall and lose lateral control?). Could there have been a wingtip strike at this stage, perhaps causing some damage?

    However, the plane keeps flying and very quickly gains airspeed which goes back well within the white arc. They level the wings and start what seems to be a nice climb, with a healthy airspeed and climb rate.

    Because they had veered left during the previous sequence, they are no heading towards trees at the side of the runway, but it doesn't seem that they would have problems to climb above them or turn back right towards the runway, which they actually start to do when they bank a bit right.

    But then they (it looks to me that it was the left pilot) pulls back on the throttle during some 3 or 4 seconds, I have no idea why he would do that in these circumstances. They don't lose much airspeed in the process but they do lower the nose a bit causing a reduction in climb rate which momentarily approaches to zero.

    When they add full power again they still have a speed clearly above (but close to) stall speed, but they are flying very close to tree tops.

    They bank a bit left (don't know why) and fly extremely close by a tree top. While there is no obvious evidence in the video, perhaps they contacted that tree top with the left wing.

    But they finally seem to clear it and to start to climb back to safety.

    Except that now they pull up too much and start to loose airspeed again.

    They start to bank left again (again I don't know why, I would want to keep my wings level in that circumstances) and, when the airspeed reaches the stall speed, not surprisingly the left roll increases out of control.

    In what was perhaps the last fatal move, they seem to move the stick right and back (when there was no more performance to extract by pulling back).

    They roll inverted and the rest is history.

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  • #2
    His final move as you point out, the stick right and back, is most likely the most common problem you have with students isn't it and the reason you introduce stall recovery with lots of altitude in the bank? That primal urge to pull back to get away from the ground and back to where it's nice and safe with nothing solid to hit ... you pull back on the stick to go up. I think it just weather cocks around and that turn to a downwind leg was just too premature; agree that he should have held his ((base leg), heading for sure.
    Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Gabriel View Post
      1)

      ..(did they stall and lose lateral control?). Could there have been a wingtip strike at this stage, perhaps causing some damage?...

      2)
      ...But then they (it looks to me that it was the left pilot) pulls back on the throttle during some 3 or 4 seconds, I have no idea why he would do that in these circumstances...
      1) Indeed- it does look strange...OR an alternative is that this dude is a new student and/or having a bad day...an old fashioned sloppy go-around and slow on the right rudder.

      2) Concur- the power reduction makes no sense- With all that crappy controlling, you'd think they want to climb away and get some breathing room and regroup....

      2A) Largely unsubstantiated parlour talk: I wonder if something goes amiss with the engine and they are "playing with" the throttle in an attempt to find a sweet spot or take the benefit of an acceleration primer thing....

      3) It appears to me that the final stall occurs with almost no control input- with the "pull up" being a reaction to the bottom falling out...

      As Gabriel likes to say and I paraphrase in partial agreement- I guess it's better to crash into trees under control than tumbling out of control....

      But, my main point here is 2A...something seems wrong here other than "hey, student pilot who just did an ugly touch and go...let's skim tree tops with minimal airspeed"
      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

      Comment


      • #4
        ...then again, there's a whole other direction you can take this.

        1) Just the act of installing the GoPro camera would seem to be a contributing factor...

        1a) ...that is further enhanced by, "let's strap in the Go-Pro and go film some exciting footage"...

        I have to say, that a full power, straight ahead climb would be some crappy photography...just a bunch of poorly-lit, gray sky.
        Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

        Comment


        • #5
          It was a hell of an exercise but for loss of power we were taught to fly it into the trees versus letting it stall in during a flawed short field (corn or hay), landing. The instructor urging you to "aim for the light spots" (that's where the trees aren't), before he put the throttle back on at what seemed like the last moment.

          Here in the US we have a "reality show" on aircraft repossession men and one of the crusty old pilots can be seen tearing the cameras the Discovery crew has mounted on control surfaces and other dumb places. Cameras and wires flying this guy was no fool.
          Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by guamainiac View Post
            ...cameras the Discovery crew has mounted on control surfaces and other dumb places...
            Discovery must be paying those guys quite well...

            Here they ACT like they are sneaking around- but there's camera shot after camera shot, and there has to be a big crew- two guys filming and a ANOTHER guy mounting cameras...(acknowledged that some of the filming is "B-roll stuff" filmed before/after/elsewhere to fill in the gaps)

            But the huge crew and multiple go-pro mountings are one hell of a crappy low-profile sneak-and grab...

            I especially like it how they always sneak in, but then go steal a loud tug and raise a hangar door and rearrange a couple planes and then do the full, two minute engine start on anything turbine powered...yeah, security wont notice that...

            ...and the 'fake embellished reality' is taking it's toll...some of the things they do are making no sense...There was a show where they took 3 twin otters (or was it two triple otters) and it would appear they just left the one gal totally behind to fend for herself with the third plane after assigning her to go make the folks chase her...

            ...of course what the writer thinks happened (or thinks will sell) usually does differ from reality.
            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

            Comment


            • #7
              3WE, there is a caveat they post that it has "enhanced footage" and it's pretty obvious that many are from the recollections of the recovery boys. There are some very talented people out there who are amazing. My glider instructor for instance held virtually every certificate like A&P, aviation attorney and his day job was as Delta's check pilot for the L-1011, fighter instructor for the Air Force and who knows what else. We were alone at the airport one day only to find a tow plane with a flat tail wheel and I commented that I would change it but who would do the sign off and he did just that. Over lunch he started (not bragging) to list what he was checked out in and it was truly humbling, he was just one of those special people. lt Pretty funny because on one of the UK auto sites (Wheeler Dealers), the guys on a car site I used to frequent were all warm and fuzzy over the genius of the "restorations" never realizing that even their web site indicates they each one and the sale of the car are all staged "but could happen" and you can buy the cars from their list. Anyone who has ever wrenched could see how poor the quality was and the costs were way off yet many of the forum swore they were "Real Dealers".

              You mentioned the Otter sequence and the show is loaded with scenes like that where it's just disjointed and falls apart when it comes to someone who is a bit aviation savvy.

              The final footage of this video reminded me of the B-52 crash when the pilot had induced way too much bank, just the way it falls in sideways to a roll.
              Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by guamainiac View Post
                ...The final footage of this video reminded me of the B-52 crash when the pilot had induced way too much bank, just the way it falls in sideways to a roll...


                Splitting hairs with you here (hangar talk context, not argument).

                With the B-52 I see a very aggressive deliberate roll and then a strange 'deliberate' maintained extreme bank and sideslip into the ground.

                With this light plane incident I see the wing falling off in an unintended stall/incipient spin with minimal control input until the roll is underway.

                Of course, I also wonder if Gabriel isn't trying to pull a trick here.

                There's a few similarities to this and the 747 wing-wave deal...and if you could trick someone into condemning these guys for not climbing out straight ahead, yet previously they said the 747 guys were OK...
                Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Oh, I was just commenting on what that wicked slip must have felt like (I know it's not a true cross controlled slip), but just that feeling when it's beyond recovery. It hit a visceral nerve the first time I watched the video. The moment of horror. Sad and frightening.

                  I thought the 747 crew was dancing about the edges. You always hear that the most critical phases are the transitions from ground to flight and flight to ground but then, I tend to be perhaps too conservative and not a lot of fun.
                  Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by 3WE View Post


                    Splitting hairs with you here (hangar talk context, not argument).

                    With the B-52 I see a very aggressive deliberate roll and then a strange 'deliberate' maintained extreme bank and sideslip into the ground.

                    With this light plane incident I see the wing falling off in an unintended stall/incipient spin with minimal control input until the roll is underway.

                    Of course, I also wonder if Gabriel isn't trying to pull a trick here.

                    There's a few similarities to this and the 747 wing-wave deal...and if you could trick someone into condemning these guys for not climbing out straight ahead, yet previously they said the 747 guys were OK...
                    No I am not, but you are sort of making a point here.

                    The B-52 you don't see a strange "deliberate" maintained extreme bank and sideslip. What you see is a slow speed high bank maneuver that puts the plane at the boundary of the stall (or beyond) and leaves the plane without roll-control authority.

                    That B-53 accident, the C-17 accident (both videos linked in the 747 thread) and this small GA accident have one a few things in common: stall and that they all crashed with full (and fully ineffective) anti-bank roll input.

                    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
                    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by guamainiac View Post
                      Oh, I was just commenting on what that wicked slip must have felt like (I know it's not a true cross controlled slip), but just that feeling when it's beyond recovery. It hit a visceral nerve the first time I watched the video. The moment of horror. Sad and frightening.
                      Concur.

                      As much as I love my meager flight time, I hate roller coasters, I hate falling and the thought of whacking a tree at anything greater than 10 MPH is disturbing.

                      And here you are- flying and happy and the wing falls and worse yet- you try to rectify it with your controls and they just don't work and time slows while you you really just sit there and ride.

                      There's that other 'Go-Pro' youtube of a Cessna 150 that zooms over a power line and gets too nose high and too slow for their altitude...nightmare material.

                      On the one hand, it seems a bit unhealthy to see this stuff. On the other hand, it instills just how quickly a little harmless fun (that should not really be that big of a deal) can bend expensive aluminum and kill people and ask the critical question: Could that be me...me with a little bad luck...me without the grace of God...
                      Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Agree, it's way better to see the reality of how fast these things will unfold since it defies description.
                        Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Gabriel, I realize this involved some ho-de-ho airstrip probably far from commercial traffic, but doesn't this show us that these rodeo-style go-arounds should be culturally discouraged if not made federally illegal? Shouldn't there be a stated 'climb to xxxx (safe manuevering altitude) on runway heading before initiating a turn' or risk losing your ticket kind of regulation? Or is there already? It seems to me that there is no real regulation on GA VFR procedures—unless I'm wrong about that—and that seems kind of nuts.

                          This one might have been unintentional (although it certainly looks intentional) and I guess I don't care much about what goes on far enough away from yours truly and anyone else with a stitch of common sense (or helpless students), but still, this is where you begin building an entry-level piloting culture which is either rooted in safety or rooted in risk-taking.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Evan View Post
                            1)

                            ...made federally illegal? Shouldn't there be a stated 'climb to xxxx (safe manuevering altitude) on runway heading before initiating a turn' or risk losing your ticket kind of regulation?

                            2)

                            ...Or is there already?...

                            1) No. I once made a totally legal takeoff towards a 75-ft tall tree line from a 2500 ft grass strip. It was very similar to what we viewed in the film and had the engine had big hiccups it might have been more similar (although I think I would have held off on the stall until I contacted something). However, my for my takeoff we calculated weight and temperature and things and consulted the charts and added safety factors found it would work quite well, and maintained Vx quite nicely (Vx>Vso by the way) and I'm here today posting about it with no nightmares.

                            To be clear- Indeed we climbed straight ahead- but were in a very similar energy state of the plane in the film...The act of climbing straight ahead did NOTHING to make my situation better than the guys in the film...Instead it was power and airspeed and attitude maintenance that distinguishes my situation from theirs.

                            Also, there's airports where a turn is required...hills in the way, etc.

                            And, your regulation would also shut down the important business if aerial application. or require more exceptions and open up conflicts.

                            To lay out a concrete regulation just doesn't work where there's tons of gray areas- YOU MUST climb 400 ft straight ahead here, but you don't have to here and here and here and here and here.

                            2) For most folks besides you, it is indeed prohibited already. It's the currently existing rules against flying recklessly and crashing.

                            Yes- my recurrent bottom line:

                            A broad, overlying, fundamental rule to maintain healthy airspeeds and attitudes will prevent all sorts of crashes across all sorts of aircraft types and all sorts of situations, and don't be grossly wreckless/negligent covers ton's of other situations.

                            The instructor there had plenty of knowledge and regulation to prohibit him from crashing. Something went wrong with the engine or the bio-FMS...not the regs.
                            Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Evan keep in mind that when an aircraft is weather cocking which may have set this crash into motion, the "turn" to a different heading is not voluntary and flying along to stay on the center line with the rudder to the stops (at which point he's probably in excess of the numbers for a safe take off), isn't a good idea.

                              Also be it from mechanical failure or wind shear, you can legislate numbers but they have suddednly become quite academic at that moment.
                              Live, from a grassy knoll somewhere near you.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X