larjeet Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I found this video a first person pespective of a plane crash http://cnn.com/video/data/2.0/video/us/2012/08/09/vonat-watch-crash-from-plane-point-of-view.nathan-williams.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kaphias Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Being an armchair pilot here. Looks like the plane was overloaded for the altitude it was flying at. I find it disturbing that the pilot had so much space to set down in if it was clear that he wasn't gaining altitude... and that he never used it. Would like to know what was going through his head there- maybe he wasn't trying to gain altitude? But you think he would have noticed that something was up.All said, I'm glad that everyone seemed to make it though the crash alive... was amazing to watch the prop chew through those trees. Image what could have been if one of them would have pierced the cockpit... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ryancz Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Density altitude. Also, weight. The plane was full.The pilot should have known to set it down early. He had lots of space to abort. And he was a commercial pilot. Official report- http://images.bimedia.net/documents/Plane+Crash+NTSB+Report.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eaglewing7 Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 The weight was only a secondary issue. The primary issue was the extreme risk being taken playing roulette with high density altitude.If the density altitude is above strip elevation (especially seeing how the strip is around 6000 feet or so MSL), your going to be fighting adverse conditions on takeoff and climb. The fact that he was flying a tail dragger (what was a beautiful Stinson 108) afforded him all kinds of opportunities to save his sorry ass. Anyone could have noticed the exorbitantly long takeoff roll, then to add insult to injury, the touch and go after the first hop/takeoff. At that point, no, at the point in which he had travelled greater than half way down the strip (who's condition had no affect on the accident), he should have rejected the takeoff. As he continued to saunter down the strip slowly, and painfully, gaining airspeed, he barely leaves the ground as he reached the end of the prepared surface. From there on for almost the entire duration of the flight (until the trees), there was ample opportunity to make a forced/precautionary landing (again I stress the great advantage afforded to him by flying a tail dragger - where you can actually land on an unprepared surface and have a good chance of not only surviving but also causing fairly minimal damage to the airframe). The end of the strip, most of the way to the trees, had ample space to set the aircraft down.Of course, our valiant fool pushed on, until he nears the trees, at which point he makes a couple of mistakes. First of all, he turns away from the clearing, and heads towards the thick stand of trees (which is stupid for all kinds of reasons I don't feel like getting into), and he continues towards the rather menacing mountains (which by the way you can't see more than a quarter of the way up!). Then of course the aircraft struggles to maintain a climb, the nose rises more and more, until the aircraft hits either mechanical turbulence, or a downdraft, rolls over in mushing stall, and plummets into the trees nearly on a knife edge turn.If your going to fly in the mountains (which I will admit that I only have limited experience doing so - but I have flown in them, so...) you better make sure you've got plenty of options, and escape routes/plans. If your going to fly into a valley, or towards rising terrain, make sure you can get above the terrain before you try and head over/towards it.And, from what I've read/been told, if your going to crash/force land into a wooded area, your best bet is to keep the wings level, and gently raise the nose before impact to almost stall into the canopy. Which will hopefully allow the airframe to mush into the trees, and gently decelerate and descend into the canopy. Of course, he didn't have much of a canopy to descend into, but the principal still applies.The guy is an idiot, and frankly, he is the reason why general aviation gets blasted every time anything happens. Because there are just too many idiots out there trying to kill themselves, and everyone around them. I will still maintain that flying is extremely safe, because the cost is exorbitant, so not every idiot can get a pilot's license, but there sure are enough idiots out there, kind of like the roads, where anyone can get a driver's license, but I digress... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicola_M Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 Ah, Eaglwing, I think you're being too kind to the pilot...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateFlier Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 On the national news this morning they called it:Family Survives Tragic Mechanical Failure and Lands in TreesWhat it should be:Stupid Pilot Wrecks Perfectly Good Plane and Injures 3 Others and Himself because he is an Idiot 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris k Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 I thought they all looked like this:- CK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UltimateFlier Posted August 10, 2012 Report Share Posted August 10, 2012 And I thought they all looked like THIS: 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.