Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
AF1624
Posts: 504
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 6:57 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 5:16 pm

Quoting U2380 (Reply 49):
My apologies AF1624.

Ah, no worries, it wasn't very clear in my post I was referring to the second video  

In the first video though, I think the "controlled crash" comes down to luck. He didn't stall but his AoA was very high and he could have stalled at any moment.
Cheers
 
shankly
Posts: 1406
Joined: Tue Jan 11, 2000 10:42 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 5:35 pm

Quoting Lemmy (Reply 41):
Quoting georgewall42 (Reply 38):
4.) The pilot did make one good decision: at least he didn't pull back on the stick when the trees started to get closer. The video does show that a controlled crash, while not a good thing, is at least a survivable event. Whereas a power-on stall at 50 feet almost always leads to a non-survivable crash.

Exactly. For all of the blame placed on the pilot (justified, it seems), at least he didn't spin in

Firstly, glad these guys walked away

Agree with Lemmy. The guy did one thing right...he did not attempt a turn back....that would have resulted in a stall/spin with no survivors.
L1011 - P F M
 
rcair1
Posts: 1147
Joined: Wed Oct 28, 2009 8:39 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:21 pm

Quoting my235 (Reply 29):
Something tells me this guy took off with a tail wind

No
A tail wind could explain the long take off roll, but not the lack of climb performance.
Quoting my235 (Reply 29):
or too much weight

Yes
Quoting jayspilot (Reply 40):
without seeing a weight and balance and some performance charts for that plane (as i've never flown one) its impossible to say if they were within weights (under max gross)

What is obvious is that the plane did not have the performance to fly with the load on board at that density altitude. Whether it was due to overloading (likely) or lack of power due to a mechanical issue (unlikely), there is no way that takeoff and flight should have continued.
rcair1
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:50 pm

Here's a quote from the pilot's son:

"I knew that the takeoff took a little longer than normal," Tol Gropp told Boise's KBOI-TV. "But the runway was so long that once we got up in the air I wasn't concerned about it."

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow...it-wilderness-idaho-195341487.html
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
Type-Rated
Posts: 3901
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 1999 5:18 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 10:58 pm

Quoting FighterPilot (Reply 4):

Looks like an over gross aircraft struggling to stay airborne.

Or the carb heat was left on, or the engine was not developing full horsepower.

This guy flying had plenty of chances to abort and save the airplane as well as preventing injuries. Most of that land after the runway ended looked pretty level and clear of debris until you get to the stream. This is a trap that a newly minted private pilot may fall into, certainly not a guy with a commercial ticket. Most of the time in airplanes if things start off bad they usually don't get any better later on.

I kept looking at that ridge ahead and tried to figure out how is the heck is he going to get over that?

That story in the NTSB report about a downdraft was B.S. It was a rising tree line that got him. The trees just got taller and taller as he progressed.

I did find it very strange that nobody said a word from the time he applied take off power until the time they crawled out of the wreckage. I do know in plane crashes people tend to freeze but you would think that somebody would say at least one word!
Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
 
Type-Rated
Posts: 3901
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 1999 5:18 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Thu Aug 09, 2012 11:08 pm

Additionionally, this model Stinson had the following specs.

The 108-3 introduced a taller vertical fin with a rudder featuring a straight trailing edge. Larger fuel tanks (50 U.S. gallons (190 L; 42 imp gal) versus 40 U.S. gallons (150 L; 33 imp gal)) were also incorporated into the wings. The -3 has a higher gross weight than its predecessors of 2,400 lb (1,089 kg), allowing full fuel, four 170 lb (77 kg) occupants, and 50 lb (23 kg) baggage allowance, 1759 built.

This model Stinson came from the factory with either a 150hp or 165hp engine. Many owners have upgraded them to 235hp engines over time. At 2400lbs, it's about the same size as a 172.
Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
 
AA777
Posts: 2361
Joined: Thu May 20, 1999 7:07 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 2:11 am

Ugh. These videos always make me excited to fly. *sarcasm* Obviously there's a big difference in experience, power and safety equipment on a modern jet liner.... but still. While its definitely important to learn from the errors of this pilot.... I'm just happy everyone turned out to be ok.
 
yvphx
Posts: 110
Joined: Fri Jul 24, 2009 11:35 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:19 am

I see all the comments, but if you check out the passengers view of the crash, I don't see any flaps being used. Now, maybe they were used for takeoff, but retracted at another time?

If flaps were seen and visible during the last 1 minute of the clip, could have have helped the climb a bit at least? I know here in FFZ, doing my training, flaps 10 in a Cessna 172 was recommended during hot temps (105-120 degrees) for added height, given there are some multi-million dollar homes at the end of runway 22
 
Type-Rated
Posts: 3901
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 1999 5:18 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:57 am

Quoting AA777 (Reply 56):
While its definitely important to learn from the errors of this pilot...

Exactly. People who are pilots should pay attention to videos and NTSB crash reports like this. Because if it happened to somebody else, it definitely could happen to you. If something isn't right while taking off, it's always better to abort and check it out rather than wishing you were back on the ground instead of up there with an airplane in trouble.
Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
 
User avatar
EK413
Posts: 5658
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2003 3:11 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:58 am

Quoting FlexJetOKC (Thread starter):

That's one scary experience for anyone... Certainly appeared to be struggling from the beginning...

Happy to see all onboard have survived to tell speak about the daunting experience...

EK413
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. We are tonight’s entertainment!
 
Max Q
Posts: 8959
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 4:48 am

I'm surprised no one has mentioned whether the Pilot leaned the mixture for best power prior to take off.


I just watched the clip on CNN and saw the mixture control appeared to be all the way forward (full rich)



Leaning the mixture prior to take off in a high temperature / high density altitude environment can yield a notable increase in power (a few hundred rpm's) Quite possibly enough to have made a difference here.


That engine may well have been choking on a far too rich mixture.


Many pilots think the mixture control is only something to operate in the air, big mistake. And i'm afraid this technique is not commonly taught.


At a density altitude of say 9000 feet this was almost a fatal mistake.

[Edited 2012-08-09 21:51:08]
The best contribution to safety is a competent Pilot.


GGg
 
maxpower1954
Posts: 1067
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 1:14 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 5:52 am

Not leaning the mixture for best power at that elevation would be a loss of about 150 RPM. Enough to make a difference.

I owned a Stinson 108 about 20 years ago. It's a wonderful old airplane, but like any fixed pitch, fixed gear basic four place airplane it doesn't have any excess performance. Mine had a 150 hp Franklin, the 108-3 in this accident probably had the 165 (the extra 15 hp comes from a higher rated take-off RPM) but the gross weight increase with the -3 takes care of any performance gains. For mountain flying, especially in the summer a Cessna 180 or 182 is much better choice.
 
MD-90
Posts: 7836
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2000 12:45 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:02 am

Quoting yvphx (Reply 57):
If flaps were seen and visible during the last 1 minute of the clip, could have have helped the climb a bit at least? I know here in FFZ, doing my training, flaps 10 in a Cessna 172 was recommended during hot temps (105-120 degrees) for added height, given there are some multi-million dollar homes at the end of runway 22

Probably not a good idea according to these Stinson pilots:

http://www.stinsonclub.org/newBB3/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=32
 
mika
Posts: 2810
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2000 7:53 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 12:58 pm

Holy crap! Never seen anything like it...


Glad everyone got out more or less unscathed.
 
User avatar
c172akula
Posts: 826
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2001 1:53 pm

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 1:45 pm

Quoting Roseflyer (Reply 53):
Here's a quote from the pilot's son:

Here's another quote from the son in that article:

"I honestly believe my dad saved our lives by the way he continued to fly the plane through the trees and making sure he didn't give up or try and pull out of it too hard,"

I know he's your dad and all, but you know what have been even better than properly crashing into the trees? Aborting the freaking takeoff when it took longer to get airborne than an A343 on a good performance day.

And before you think I'm piling on this pilot, this is his second crash, check out the report of the first one:

"NTSB Narrative Summary Released at Completion of Accident

The pilot reported that he intended to fly his airplane on a cross-country flight over high mountainous terrain. After takeoff, the pilot climbed to 9,500 feet mean sea level (msl) in order to fly over mountains. He subsequently descended to 8,500 feet msl, and then he attempted to climb back to 9,500 feet to clear additional mountains. This second climbing effort diminished his fuel reserve, so the pilot opted to divert to a 7,160-foot msl uncontrolled airport short of his destination. While flying over the airport to evaluate its runway's condition, the pilot noted that the runway was covered with snow. The pilot opined that because of the airplane's low fuel state, it was prudent for him to land. The pilot made a soft-field landing on the runway. During rollout, the airplane's wheels penetrated the snow-covered surface, the airplane nosed over, and both wings and the empennage broke.

NTSB Probable Cause Narrative

The pilot's encounter with soft, snow-covered terrain while executing a precautionary landing."

So we have this most recent accident where I think it is almost 100% safe to assume that no pre-flight performance calculations were done, and a prior accident where one could argue there was minimal to no pre-flight planning since the flight encountered a low fuel state (can't fault him for the precautionary landing, at least he did that right).

The Transport Canada Aviation Safety Letter has that wonderful line of "Learn from the mistakes of others, you'll not live long enough to make them all yourself.". This guy can't even learn from his OWN mistakes, and this time endangered the lives of others including his own son. Unreal, careless and stupid.
 
roseflyer
Posts: 9602
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2004 9:34 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 3:58 pm

Quoting C172Akula (Reply 64):
And before you think I'm piling on this pilot, this is his second crash, check out the report of the first one:

"NTSB Narrative Summary Released at Completion of Accident

The pilot reported that he intended to fly his airplane on a cross-country flight over high mountainous terrain. After takeoff, the pilot climbed to 9,500 feet mean sea level (msl) in order to fly over mountains. He subsequently descended to 8,500 feet msl, and then he attempted to climb back to 9,500 feet to clear additional mountains. This second climbing effort diminished his fuel reserve, so the pilot opted to divert to a 7,160-foot msl uncontrolled airport short of his destination. While flying over the airport to evaluate its runway's condition, the pilot noted that the runway was covered with snow. The pilot opined that because of the airplane's low fuel state, it was prudent for him to land. The pilot made a soft-field landing on the runway. During rollout, the airplane's wheels penetrated the snow-covered surface, the airplane nosed over, and both wings and the empennage broke.

NTSB Probable Cause Narrative

The pilot's encounter with soft, snow-covered terrain while executing a precautionary landing."

So we have this most recent accident where I think it is almost 100% safe to assume that no pre-flight performance calculations were done, and a prior accident where one could argue there was minimal to no pre-flight planning since the flight encountered a low fuel state (can't fault him for the precautionary landing, at least he did that right).

I was trying not to be too critical of the pilot, but it sounds like this guy does no preflight planning at all. Crashing because he had to divert because of low fuel reserves is another planning mistake. I can understand burning more fuel than planned if you are diverting around unplanned weather/etc, however if you are that close on your fuel calculation, you should have an alternate in mind and know its status before taking off.

Old timer small plane pilots scare me personally. Experience is great, but with it sometimes comes carelessness and sometimes they break conventions and rules. I’ve seen an old timer execute a circle to land approach at an uncontrolled field with three planes in the pattern. I don’t care how many years you have, that’s not safe. Neither is ignoring performance calculations and taking off overweight. Just because you can get off the ground, does not mean you are safe to fly, especially in mountain flying.
If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
 
spacecadet
Posts: 3582
Joined: Thu Sep 20, 2001 3:36 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:18 pm

Quoting dashman (Reply 37):
Summer mountain flying is no place for amateurs.

The NTSB report says he is a commercial pilot - which I realize does not mean he flies for a large airline, but he is at least no "amateur". He does this for a living. That's part of what makes this so shocking.
I'm tired of being a wanna-be league bowler. I wanna be a league bowler!
 
tdscanuck
Posts: 8573
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 7:25 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 6:28 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 66):
The NTSB report says he is a commercial pilot - which I realize does not mean he flies for a large airline, but he is at least no "amateur". He does this for a living.

"Commercial pilot" is a rating. It speaks to the level of training, not what you actually do for a living.

Tom.
 
Type-Rated
Posts: 3901
Joined: Sun Sep 19, 1999 5:18 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Fri Aug 10, 2012 9:37 pm

Quoting spacecadet (Reply 66):
The NTSB report says he is a commercial pilot - which I realize does not mean he flies for a large airline, but he is at least no "amateur". He does this for a living. That's part of what makes this so shocking.

Yes, a commercial ticket is a rating, but what it really does is allows you to be paid for your pilot services. If you are a private pilot all you can do is collect a proportionate amount to cover operating costs only, but none for your services. A commercial ticket allows you to be paid.

And of course there is more emphasis on flying skills to get the rating and more hours of flight time. It's now been 40 years since I got my commercial ticket!
Fly North Central Airlines..The route of the Northliners!
 
User avatar
Aaron747
Posts: 14947
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2003 2:07 am

RE: GA Plane Crash In Idaho -Cockpit Video- *Graphic*

Sat Aug 11, 2012 1:56 am

Quoting C172Akula (Reply 64):
This guy can't even learn from his OWN mistakes, and this time endangered the lives of others including his own son. Unreal, careless and stupid.

Humorous reaction to those words aside, I am inclined to agree. I also second the above comments about the ridgelines in all directions of the field - if you can barely get out of ground effect, how are you ever going to clear the terrain in the distance? This is mountain flying 101.

It was a beautiful day - just spend another night in that gorgeous wilderness, use up more of the expendables, and leave in the morning at lower weight and temperature. Sheesh.
If you need someone to blame / throw a rock in the air / you'll hit someone guilty

Who is online

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