Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Plane Crashed Into Building In Phoenix  
User currently offlinemckvakk From Norway, joined Mar 2010, 81 posts, RR: 0
Posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 20179 times:

http://www.abc15.com/dpp/news/region...crashes-near-north-phoenix-airport

PHOENIX - A plane has crashed near Deer Valley Airport in north Phoenix this morning.

Scott Walker with the Phoenix Fire Department said the plane crashed into City Wide Pest Control, near Deer Valley Airport in the area of 19th Avenue and Deer Valley.

Firefighters can be seen putting out the flames that engulfed the aircraft.

Walker said there are no reports at this time of any injuries.

--- End Quote----

[Edited 2010-08-04 06:40:43]

39 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline0NEWAIR0 From United States of America, joined May 2007, 939 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 20119 times:

From the title I assumed that someone had purposefully crashed a plane into a building in Phoenix.


"The future belongs to those who believe in the beauty of their dreams."
User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 2, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 20030 times:

Quoting 0NEWAIR0 (Reply 1):
From the title I assumed that someone had purposefully crashed a plane into a building in Phoenix.

I really hope that's not the case, it wont take much for the general public to want to nail the coffin on general aviation.



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6728 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19930 times:

Quote:
Walker said the pilot was killed in the crash. It is unclear if any more people were on board the plane at the time of the crash.

No mention of an high rise building, so it looks like an accident with no clear land to put it down. If I understand correctly the map I'm looking, he was flying over the city.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 4, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 19866 times:

Quoting Aesma (Reply 3):
No mention of an high rise building,

Well the one in Texas where the guy went after the IRS earlier this year was only a 3-4 story building and the little plane did quite the number on it...



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineKPHXFlyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 413 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 19707 times:

The Deer Valley Airport is in a relatively dense suburban area of Phoenix. There's not an abundance of clear land near the airport. What clear land there is, its usually a mountain park.

FWIW, this is the second crash this year from a plane at Deer Valley. In January or so, there was a student pilot killed when she crashed her plane on approach to DVT. She landed about 150 yards from a trailer park. "http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/4693170"

Would the NTSB or the FAA scrutinize the flight academies at DVT if it turns out to be a similar case?


User currently offlinewr70beh From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 37 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 19546 times:

It's all over CNN right now, with shots of flames and smoke from the low-rise building. The way the headlines read, and if you didn't have the sound turned up, it would make you think that something deliberate happened. Sounds like putting a little fear into the public to me over something accidental.

User currently offlinerikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1661 posts, RR: 1
Reply 7, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 19472 times:

Fair Use from the ABC article:

"....The witnesses also said they heard sputtering and there was possibly smoke coming from the plane prior to the crash."

Doesn't sound very intentional. But of course, it's always a good laugh seeing how CNN spins it...



AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlinerikkus67 From Canada, joined Jun 2000, 1661 posts, RR: 1
Reply 8, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 19223 times:

I also must add, on a more serious note, that I hope there was no more than the one fatality.

RIP to the pilot.

[Edited 2010-08-04 08:21:57]

[Edited 2010-08-04 08:22:17]


AC.WA.CP.DL.RW.CO.WG.WJ.WN.KI.FL.SK.ACL.UA.US.F9
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 9, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 19211 times:

Its a random warehouse looking building this was not intentional. Looks like engine trouble on takeoff the worst situation you can have. Saw videos pretty big fire for a small plane. The pilot did die.


"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineKPHXFlyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 413 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 19060 times:

They are saying the plane is a Cirrus SR22 on the Arizona Republic website. So far only the pilot is confirmed dead. RIP.

The building that was hit is a pest control building. That might explain the bigger than expected flames.


User currently offlineDiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1572 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18896 times:

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 4):
Well the one in Texas where the guy went after the IRS earlier this year was only a 3-4 story building and the little plane did quite the number on it...

Your kidding right? If you really think a light GA aircraft will do anything to a building, you need to look at the 2002 incident in Tampa Florida. Kid put a 172 into a highrise building, and it basically bounced off. Physics say that a small plane isn't going to do much damage, let alone take a building down.


-DiamondFlyer


User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 12, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18886 times:

Quoting KPHXFlyer (Reply 10):
They are saying the plane is a Cirrus SR22 on

If this is correct I wonder what the problem was that happened so quick that made the pilot not deploy the parachute system. Is it standard on all planes or is it an option?
Anyone who fly's a C-22 know when a pilot would deploy the system?



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18843 times:

Yup, another Cirrus-SR22. I wonder how many hours the pilot had?

When will people learn that if you don't have altitude you don't turn back to the airport? Just try to look forward (180 degrees) of your position to set down. So many times pilots do this and end up in a stall/spin. Even if the area is congested there is always a highway, street, alley or something to shoehorn a plane as small as a Cirrus into.


User currently offlineRL757PVD From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4694 posts, RR: 11
Reply 14, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18721 times:

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 11):
Your kidding right? If you really think a light GA aircraft will do anything to a building, you need to look at the 2002 incident in Tampa Florida. Kid put a 172 into a highrise building, and it basically bounced off. Physics say that a small plane isn't going to do much damage, let alone take a building down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Da..._complex_from_2010_plane_crash.jpg



Experience is what you get when what you thought would work out didn't!
User currently offlineflymia From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7213 posts, RR: 9
Reply 15, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18692 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 13):
Yup, another Cirrus-SR22. I wonder how many hours the pilot had?

There seem to be a lot of accidents in these planes, wikipedia (yes i know not great source) reports 48 fatal accidents since 2002. Obviously is a light GA plane with a lot of low time pilots so thats the main reason however with the chute system how can you mess this up? Are there certain parameters that the chute does not work in.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6728 posts, RR: 12
Reply 16, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 18628 times:

Isn't the chute there in part because the plane can't recover from a stall/spin ?

It's a nice plane but you don't want to be slow in it.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineBMI727 From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 15781 posts, RR: 27
Reply 17, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18497 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 15):
Obviously is a light GA plane with a lot of low time pilots so thats the main reason however with the chute system how can you mess this up?

That sort of thinking probably contributed to the deaths of a few of the pilots.



Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
User currently offlinetype-rated From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18497 times:

I think that you have to be at a minimum altitude for the chute to work.

Quoting Aesma (Reply 16):
It's a nice plane but you don't want to be slow in it.

I think you are on to something, a lot of the SR-22 accidents involved stall/spin problems.

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/Response2.a...p19=&p20=&p21=&p22=&p23=&p24=SR-22


User currently offlineKPHXFlyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 413 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 18411 times:

Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 14):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Da..._complex_from_2010_plane_crash.jpg

While the fire damage appears to be significant, the impact damage isn't. Also, the building is still standing with no collaspes other than immediately around impact damage. IMHO, it's closer to the Tampa Cessna 172 incident than not.

As for the incident this morning in Phoenix, there's already photo showing a blackened asphalt and superficial damage to the masonry building but no collaspes. Fortunately and not minimizing the tragedy, it appears that the pilot appears to be the only fatality.

Photos and video here:
http://www.azcentral.com/community/n...00804phoenix-plane-crash-0804.html


User currently offlineJBirdAV8r From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 4491 posts, RR: 21
Reply 20, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 16452 times:

Quoting type-rated (Reply 18):

I think you are on to something, a lot of the SR-22 accidents involved stall/spin problems.

Even the Cirrus factory guys don't want to let you take it to a full power-on stall. It's relatively docile in the power-off stalls, but IMHO it's not an airplane to stall for fun, or for initial pilot training.

Quoting flymia (Reply 15):
Obviously is a light GA plane with a lot of low time pilots so thats the main reason however with the chute system how can you mess this up? Are there certain parameters that the chute does not work in.

It's been awhile since I've flown the Cirrus, but I'm thinking the minimum parachute deployment altitude is 400 feet...doesn't give you a whole lot if your engine fails on initial climb. Also the Vpd (max parachute deployment speed) is 133 knots. Anything faster than that--even "just a little bit," as sadly evidenced by a few accidents--can rip the chute right off the airframe.

My personal feelings toward the 'chute are that it offers a false sense of security. It's hard to teach someone, especially a low-time pilot, that when they pull that chute they are GOING TO CRASH. It's just a matter of how they're going to do it.



I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
User currently offlineJpax From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 1018 posts, RR: 0
Reply 21, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 14952 times:

Quoting flymia (Reply 12):
Anyone who fly's a C-22 know when a pilot would deploy the system?

Depends who you ask. I have some 30 hours of time in a SR-22. The only time I would pull it would be a mid-air collision, if I had a severe medical problem and I was on the verge on unconsciousness, or lost all instruments in IMC and couldn't get out in a timely manner. Basically, any situation in which a totally uncontrolled parachute ride to the ground would be a better option than a controlled landing. There are others who seem to follow the mantra, "pull early, pull often." ...these types pull from inadvertently entering a puffy cumulus on an almost severe clear day, to any other premature issue you could think of.

It's a topic of great debate, and often turns sour very, very quickly.


User currently offlineetherealsky From United States of America, joined Apr 2010, 328 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 14295 times:

Quoting DiamondFlyer (Reply 11):
Physics say that a small plane isn't going to do much damage, let alone take a building down
Quoting RL757PVD (Reply 14):

I don't think we can generalize about this sort of thing; every building is different, and the point of impact surely makes a large difference in the damage caused. To be fair though, the damage in the Texas photo looks like it was mostly caused by the post-crash fire, not the impact itself.

Quoting JBirdAV8r (Reply 20):
It's hard to teach someone, especially a low-time pilot, that when they pull that chute they are GOING TO CRASH. It's just a matter of how they're going to do it.

I agree; while the chute has saved many lives so far, I don't think a Cirrus is an appropriate plane for fresh, low-time pilots. Safety devices are never a substitute for airmanship and good stick-and-rudder skill.

Quoting type-rated (Reply 18):
I think that you have to be at a minimum altitude for the chute to work.

According to an AOPA article [here],

Quote:

The POH notes that the minimum demonstrated altitude loss for a CAPS deployment is 920 feet from a one-turn spin, and pilots are cautioned not to "waste time and altitude trying to recover from a spiral/spin before activating CAPS."



"And that's why you always leave a note..."
User currently offlineDiamondFlyer From United States of America, joined Oct 2008, 1572 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 13984 times:

Quoting etherealsky (Reply 22):

I don't think we can generalize about this sort of thing; every building is different, and the point of impact surely makes a large difference in the damage caused. To be fair though, the damage in the Texas photo looks like it was mostly caused by the post-crash fire, not the impact itself.

That was exactly my point. The majority of the damage came from the fire, not the impact. If someone really wants to take a building down, there are many, many methods that are easier than using a light aircraft. You'd basically have to pack one completely full of some sort of high explosive. Doing so might just happen to draw attention no matter where the airplane is.

-DiamondFlyer

[Edited 2010-08-04 14:44:53]

User currently offlineKPHXFlyer From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 413 posts, RR: 1
Reply 24, posted (4 years 2 months 3 weeks 1 day 14 hours ago) and read 13824 times:

Quoting etherealsky (Reply 22):
I don't think we can generalize about this sort of thing; every building is different, and the point of impact surely makes a large difference in the damage caused.

I'm not sure the point of impact makes a large difference in the damage caused to the building when you're talking about relatively slow, relatively small general aviation aircraft. If the Austin aircraft hit the 3rd floor rather than 1st/2nd, I'd be surprised if the damage didn't look similar. The Tampa aircraft is the same story as it hit 2/3's height of the hi-rise tower. This one today in Phoenix looks like it hit the vehicle yard and the resulting fire blackened but didn't penetrate the building.

IMO, the larger determinent in damage would be an increase in mass or speed or both.


25 GAIsweetGAI : I think I read somewhere (AOPA Pilot?) that a lot of pilots were apprehensive of the fact that They want to save the plane instead of trashing it and
26 av8rphx : it never amazes me how many people stall and enter a spin trying to return to the field after some sort of engine failure...that said, I wasnt there,
27 Post contains images JBirdAV8r : Hehe. This is going to turn into one of those epic hangar debates, I'm sure. My personal feelings are "screw the plane...I'm worried about 1) innocen
28 Post contains links ak : On this video with :56 seconds left, http://www.azfamily.com/news/local/P...-Deer-Valley-Airport-99934759.html it appears that the parachute rocket co
29 GAIsweetGAI : And injured is better than dead. When I looked at stats a long time ago, I saw only one case where the pilot got killed after pulling the chute. Happ
30 atct : Low timed pilots flying advanced *cough* airplanes. Glad to see this was a hijacked thread.... Anywho RIP dude/dudette who crashed in Phoenix...sad.
31 Airportugal310 : Agreed...and its starting to pop up more and more at flight schools around the country for basic training. Ill stick to the C172 G1000-equipped aircr
32 etherealsky : That's interesting, why do you say that? (Never flown one myself, so it's neat to hear from someone who has) Now here's another one; how about the ge
33 WNwatcher : The SR-22 had to have the CAPS system in order to be certified due to the extreme difficulty of pulling out of a spin. My Flight instructor took a de
34 Post contains images Airportugal310 : I know of one school that moved toward them, and this is what happened: Student pilots abused airplanes, airplanes couldn't take that kind of abuse,
35 ThirtyEcho : Correct me if I'm wrong but hasn't the C22 taken over the "Doctor killer" title? I've never flown one but those who have tell me that it is a hot ship
36 Jpax : That's total bollocks. The aircraft has excellent manners even at a lower airspeed. It is still very stable and responsive with no signs of airframe
37 swiftski : It's standard. Spin, not stall. And it can recover, it did recover in testing, but not quick enough to get certified. I have 140hours Cirrus and had
38 Airportugal310 : What sort of control problem? I know one of the earlier accidents in which a pilots used CAPS involved an aileron that came unhinged during flight...
39 Jpax : My apologies to you for your long jail sentence. Luckily it didn't turn into something worse!
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
N-registered Plane Crashed In Austria posted Sun Dec 14 2008 09:53:44 by Futurestar68
Plane Crashed In ZRH, Any Info? posted Wed Oct 22 2008 07:42:09 by DALCE
TAM Plane Crashed In CGH Part 6 posted Thu Aug 2 2007 22:32:23 by AC320
TAM Plane Crashed In CGH Part 4 posted Fri Jul 20 2007 16:07:30 by PanAm_DC10
TAM Plane Crashed In CGH Part 3 posted Thu Jul 19 2007 11:20:44 by PanAm_DC10
TAM Plane Crashed In CGH Part 2 posted Wed Jul 18 2007 14:05:38 by BNE
TAM Plane Crashed In CGH posted Wed Jul 18 2007 00:19:08 by LipeGIG
Small Plane Crashed In McAllen. posted Thu May 3 2007 05:12:33 by XAAPB
Small Plane Crashed In Steubenville, Ohio posted Wed Jul 12 2006 04:46:15 by F9fan
Plane Crashed In Berlin Near Reichstag posted Fri Jul 22 2005 22:03:21 by OE-LDA