Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Light plane crashes

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

  • 3WE
    replied
    El Cajon Learjet Crash:

    As much as Evan's disdain for traditional airmanship bugs me, the following things might have prevented this crash:

    1) Radar/GPS/Loran/RNAV/INS/VORADFIntegrator/terrain photo database Synthetic Vision..."You are cleared to land your plane wherever however you want as long as you don't hit anything which you have a really good, and double(triple) confirmed depiction on you windscreen".

    2. A magenta line (with altitude) generated by a little extra computer code using system 1.

    3. An autopilot that does any number of the things below:
    -Follows said magenta line from #2.
    -Controls speed and power to eliminate stalls for almost all practical purposes.

    Right or wrong- all of this stuff kind of exists now (especially speed control). Maybe we beef up speed control to almost always prevent stalls?

    Only $ stands in the way of implementation.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    From today's Top Ten List:

    And the #1 Thing You Don't Want Your Light Plane To Crash Into Is...

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10444786
    I'll take a stationary fuel truck over an incoming train at full speed.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by 3WE View Post
    #1 would be a septic tank cleaning truck
    Technically, that's a landing you would walk away from. Though not in my direction.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    From today's Top Ten List:

    And the #1 Thing You Don't Want Your Light Plane To Crash Into Is...

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10444786
    I guess it's a fuel truck, but good God, let's crop all of the information out of the photo...

    PS, I think that's #2...#1 would be a septic tank cleaning truck (containing #2...oh, the ironing).

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    From today's Top Ten List:

    And the #1 Thing You Don't Want Your Light Plane To Crash Into Is...

    https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/10444786

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Do I have to say it? One of those UBER basic things…and something practiced on your PPL check ride, the very first hour of IFR training, and probably used quite a bit in day to day operations and involved in recurrent training…

    And, a little more tricky than stall recovery, although one may have to overcome feelings for both.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

    Contraption that includes magenta lines, "confusing" autopilot modes (like VNAV vs LVL CHG vs VS) and envelope protections is not AI.
    Fixt.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post

    I can only assume that 3WE is referring to blue font AI. Like some Garmin contraption.
    Contraption that includes magenta lines, "confusing" autopilot modes (like VNAV vs LVL CHG vs VS) and envelope protections.

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Evan’s home base is amazing as ever.

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Originally posted by Gabriel View Post

    You'd be surprised... These days even the Cessna 172 has "too much AI".
    I can only assume that 3WE is referring to blue font AI. Like some Garmin contraption.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by Evan View Post
    Clearly, the Beech 58 has too much AI. Ban all AI!
    You'd be surprised... These days even the Cessna 172 has "too much AI".

    Leave a comment:


  • Evan
    replied
    Clearly, the Beech 58 has too much AI. Ban all AI!

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Here's a new one (light plane crash):

    http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2022/01/b ... fatal.html

    https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N585CK

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jM7c9IZJwc

    On the one hand, just another light plane crash.

    On another, Swiss Cheese is Swiss Cheese and can make for something of a mystery.

    Two creepy items:

    1. There is a broadcast to ATC of a guy kind of babbling about some unknown thing, which one can reasonably conclude is a person dealing with the beginnings of an oh-shit. (Fine point, there were no transmissions AFTER a steep descent began.)

    2. A doorbell 'camera' didn't catch the crash, but DID catch the classic "screaming propellors in a death dive"...unfortunately there were pilots on board dealing with an imminent death as those sounds were recorded.

    The crash:

    A fairly capable plane and professional crew takes off into weather (arguably fairly mundane weather), on a very familiar route. Things seem pretty normal, until a rather sudden 8000 ft 'dive' and rather vertical crash.

    The Dan Gryder video is interesting as he PROCLAIMS WITH CONFIDENCE that it was icing... However initial investigations of the weather, include a significant inversion and possibly no mention of ice in forecasts, and some pireps do not support icing.

    In defense of Dan-O, my ass-hat opinion is that updrafts and downdrafts and airfoils might all combine to create a little localized icing and it's certainly a good way to send a good airplane spinning during a night rainshower in the winter in mid America. Conversely, AI failure, or some other mechanical failure absolutely can't be ruled out at this point (and we may have to wait for the final report).

    The other interesting twist is that folks are pontificating "If you have doubts, don't fly" as if that was a major failure on the part of the pilots. I'm feeling that's kind of bullcrap here, professional pilots, familiar route, fairly bland weather...

    The pilots might be guilty of two things (might is a big word). 1) Could there have been something KNOWN suspect with the airplane. 2) Unfortunately, we can sit in our armchairs and keyboards and proclaim night propellor freight in winter weather is many many more times dangerous than flying an airliner (unfortunately it just IS). I still don't think that point #2 allows you to skip the flight even if your sixth sense says "risky".

    Anyway- what do we do?...Was the crew not in the right mental safety state? Should we ban all piston/propellor commercial freight? Was this ANOTHER classic foul up, or was this ANOTHER horribly INSIDIOUS crash of planes that are really really safe...but not quite as safe as an airliner?

    Leave a comment:


  • 3WE
    replied
    Originally posted by BoeingBobby View Post
    A Lear can be a handful if you let it get slow. However, flown in a conservative manner, that I have always done except in aerobatic aircraft, she's a great bird. Lear 35 is still one of the most efficient aircraft ever built.
    Thank you.

    I read Gabriel’s math exercise but he doesn’t give a target speed (other than 70 knots for a Tommahawk.)

    I’m surprisingly black and white here- maintain safe speeds… Someone suggested that biz jets should FORMALLY use a minimum maneuvering speed like airliners use. That’s a sound suggestion- and perhaps Vref is too slow for a low, cramped, tailwind, base to final turn in gusty winds and brief inattention and a little pull up. Conversely-if they just tack on 20 knots and don’t stall why not? (Acknowledged that you want an adequate length ‘final’ to slow down).

    Also, I keep asking if the stall warning shouldn’t kick on sooner, giving pilots a few more seconds and knots to correct the problems… these incidents of stall-crash keep racking up, when the recovery is…taught during your second hour of training (and repeated, and the source of so many crashes) and pretty damn basic!

    Then again, it’s been suggested that these guys were simply flying kind of slow…(and Teterboro was downright slop, ending with a pretty gross steep turn)

    Then again “circling” VFR approaches in marginal weather (where an official IFR circling approach is prohibited) might be a gross error AND SOMETHING WE HAVE SEEN MANY TIMES BEFORE.

    ATL’s comments duly noted.

    Leave a comment:


  • Gabriel
    replied
    Originally posted by kent olsen View Post
    If I read it correctly this a/c was based at Gillespie. They were returning from a quick trip up near LA. I was a flight instructor at Gillespie between 1970-1973. There's a little hill south of the extended centerline and a tall one on the north side. Couldn't tell from the report where he hit the ground.
    Well, in the video I linked in my last post you have a 3D map with terrain and satellite imagery. The airport and the 2 hills you mention are there. The 3D flight path and the crash point (next to the smallest hill) are superimposed to that 3D map. It doesn't get any better than that at showing where they hit the ground.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X