AirWillie6475
Topic Author
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 2:50 pm

If you're flying anytime soon don't watch this video. Anyways I was wondering about the cause of this crash. Maybe the woman says it so can someone translate? Some are saying overloading but others are saying control lock problems because if you look at the ailerons and elevators they're all neutral, except for the rudder which is not controlled by the control lock.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWC2XJYgcJU
 
ArmitageShanks
Posts: 3766
Joined: Tue Dec 30, 2003 5:30 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:08 pm

I'd bet on overloading or improper takeoff procedures.

It seems it's wobbling back and forth- not an indication of control lock. If it were locked it would have just turned to one side and kept going.

Also, in my experience flying Cessna aircraft it would be near impossible not to notice a control lock in place.
 
Mir
Posts: 19108
Joined: Mon Jan 05, 2004 3:55 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:10 pm

I'd tend to go with overloading. Four people on a 172 (which is what it looks like - RG model) is really iffy unless you're light on fuel. It's Colombia, so heat and high altitude may have made that problem a lot worse. I saw an oxygen bottle in the first part of the video - did they try to take that along as well?

I don't think somebody forgot to take the control lock out - it has a metal flag attached that sits right in front of the magneto switch. You'd never be able to start the engine with it installed. That assumes, of course, that they were using the standard control lock. If they weren't, they'd still get a big warning when they tested the flight controls before takeoff (assuming they did). It's also possible that there was some sort of cable malfunction behind the panel, but I'd find that unlikely.

-Mir
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
 
KELPkid
Posts: 5247
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 5:33 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:13 pm

Seems like a lot of weight for a 182 to be handling...looks like they were doing a medical transport? Perhaps being "hot 'n high" made matters worse. Also, the pilot's directional control, well, was very poor (not that that seemed to contribute to this accident). It looks like they had trouble climbing out of ground effect.

It looks like he had ~10 degrees of flaps set, which in most Cessnas would be what you'd set for a short and/or short and soft field takeoff (a standard takeoff would be no flaps in most Cessna singles). I don't have much experience with the 182, but I seem to recall from the 210 (which I haven't flown since 1999) that a standard departure was done with 10 degrees of flaps?
Celebrating the birth of KELPkidJR on August 5, 2009 :-)
 
AirWillie6475
Topic Author
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:14 pm

I don't really agree with overloading because the plane took off normally, if it was over loaded it would have never gained the altitude that it did. What is really puzzling is that all the control surfaces are neutral, except for the rudder. Why would the pilot add that much rudder and not correct with ailerons? It's not a 182.

[Edited 2006-10-29 07:18:53]
 
FrequentFlyKid
Posts: 1097
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2001 5:04 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:48 pm

Nothing about that takeoff looked normal.
 
AirWillie6475
Topic Author
Posts: 2372
Joined: Thu Jan 27, 2005 1:45 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 3:52 pm

The actual takeoff looked normal it's just that something happened after they were airborne. The path of the aircraft is what's puzzling, that attitude would look normal if there was a strong crosswind or if the pilot was trying to slip the plane but that would require a lot of aileron and why would he slip the plane?
 
RichardPrice
Posts: 4474
Joined: Sat Apr 23, 2005 5:12 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 7:25 pm

From what I recall from previous discussions on this, the cause was the girls mother, who was sat in one of the front seats. She got panicky and turned round to try and comfort her child, jamming the controls as she did so.
 
Buzz
Posts: 694
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 1999 11:44 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Sun Oct 29, 2006 7:57 pm

Hi KELPKid, Buzz here. I don't know what a C-182 uses for flaps for a minimum-roll takeoff, but most Cessnas you want to retract 'em so you clean up the wing and can accelerate.

Looks like he took off in ground effect... needed some left rudder because he was yawing. I wouldn't be surprised if the front seat passenger leaned on one of those funny foot-rests to turn around and comfort the back seat passenger.

Taking off with that much yaw, just out of ground effect... want to guess that a wing stalled? I've been taught that slips are OK, skids are not. If you stall in a slip, the high wing comes down. We slip a lot in Champs and Cubs to lose altitude. But in a skid (yaw) if you stall in a skid, one wing has more lift than the other and over the top you go... that's how we spin for fun.

Sad story.
g'day
 
gh123
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:29 am

The further back the centre of gravity is the more unstable the aircraft. My guess is that they had to much weight towards the back of the cabin. The oxygen talk (and that was big) that man and a stretcher?!

My opinions is that there was not enough weight towards the front of the aircraft.

My guess. I may indeed be wrong.
 
EMBQA
Posts: 7798
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 3:52 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 5:42 am

Quoting AirWillie6475 (Thread starter):
Anyways I was wondering about the cause of this crash.

It's been on several times before and there are several threads on this one. The aircraft was overloaded with passengers, plus all the added medical supplies. I think in the one thread I read there were 5 people on-board plus a bunch of medical supplies. They were flying out a sick child, the parents, a pilot plus a medical aid.

[Edited 2006-10-30 21:47:17]
"It's not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog"
 
MDorBust
Posts: 4914
Joined: Fri Sep 30, 2005 10:10 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:13 am

Overloaded, short-field take off, left ground effect too soon, stalled.

I'll look for the other threads... but... the search engine.. sooooo bad.
"I KICKED BURNING TERRORIST SO HARD IN BALLS THAT I TORE A TENDON" - Alex McIlveen
 
474218
Posts: 4510
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 12:27 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 9:23 am

Very obvious, the center of gravity (CG) was too far aft. So the actual cause was "PILOT ERROR".
 
gh123
Posts: 645
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:04 am

Quoting 474218 (Reply 12):
Very obvious, the center of gravity (CG) was too far aft. So the actual cause was "PILOT ERROR".

As I stated above
 
SB
Posts: 152
Joined: Sun Aug 06, 2006 2:29 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 10:08 am

Accidents are almost never caused by a single factor  Wink

My untrained eye picks up the following:

- Rapid rotation when the aircraft was apparently going too slow to take off -> Aft C. of G. combined with an overweight aircraft.
- Left wing lifted up in quite a hurry -> Strong crosswind. (The trajectory once airborne supports this)

Then there's always the passenger input theory, plausible but unconfirmed?

I'd be interested to see the accident report if/when it's published.

S.
"Confirm leave the hold and maintain 320kts?!"
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Reason For This Crash

Tue Oct 31, 2006 12:21 pm

That guy was heavy and definately loaded aft.

Those medivac kits aren't light.
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
 
User avatar
Jetlagged
Posts: 2562
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 pm

RE: Reason For This Crash

Thu Nov 16, 2006 1:10 pm

Quoting Buzz (Reply 8):
Taking off with that much yaw, just out of ground effect... want to guess that a wing stalled? I've been taught that slips are OK, skids are not. If you stall in a slip, the high wing comes down. We slip a lot in Champs and Cubs to lose altitude. But in a skid (yaw) if you stall in a skid, one wing has more lift than the other and over the top you go... that's how we spin for fun.

Slip and skid are really the same thing. They both involve yaw (sideslip). The difference is the direction, skid is outwards from the centre of turn, slip is inwards to the centre of turn. In either case, stalling with sideslip on can cause a spin.

The safer kind of slip, as used when landing Cubs, etc. is a steady sideslip (i.e. cross control). No turning is involved either. It's a very different thing, but the name is the same.
The glass isn't half empty, or half full, it's twice as big as it needs to be.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Starlionblue, Yahoo [Bot] and 9 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos