172 crash in HKY tonight

[Lopaka]

Hey people's, just got back from Hickory NC where I saw a 172 tonight getting hosed down after an instructor, his student, and his student's parents was doing a touch n go, and on the go they ended up crossing the median and taxiway and flipped over. Everyone got out ok at least.
It was amazing how many people showed up so fast: Fire trucks, cops, ambulances, half the town, and the news in no time.

Fly Safe!

 

[CitationLover]

was it a profile aviation instructor?

 

[Iceman21]

Why would you do a touch and go in a 172 with 4 people in the plane? That is just asking for some trouble. My guess would be that they were pretty d@mn close to being overweight.

 

[Wankel7]

Gee, I am glad everybody is ok! Did you catch the names?

Wankel

 

[dsee8driver]

Why would you do a touch and go in a 172 with 4 people in the plane? That is just asking for some trouble. By guess would be that they were pretty d@mn close to being overweight.

Sounds like a CNN Miles O'Brien commentary. The sad part is that it comes from a CFI.

 

[Flying Illini]

at least they didn't have the "172 chemtrail retrofit" installed yet...

Seriously, glad everyone got out OK. Let's just hope the parents and the student don't come out with negative views of flying from that experience.
Did they go off the side of the rwy and flip? Did I read that right?

 

[wms]

They also had a 210 go off the runway about a month ago. He walked away also. A little excitement at HKY.

Anyone hear about them getting airline service to replace CCAir? Would make commuting a little nicer.

 

[Iceman21]

Sounds like a CNN Miles O'Brien commentary. The sad part is that it comes from a CFI.

What is that supposed to mean? Taking ADM into account, I don't think doing touch and goes with 4 people in the plane with full fuel is smart. After doing some weight and balances a few minutes ago, it is likely that the plane was overweight, with a nice aft CG, not passed the aft limit, but around 44. I know a 172 will fly quite overweight, but you are a test pilot after that weight goes over what is stated as max gross.

All in all, I am glad everyone is alright and got out safe. But I would be doing full-stops-taxi-backs on that day.

 

[ArcticFlier]

Huh?/

........ I don't think doing touch and goes with 4 people in the plane with full fuel is smart..... But I would be doing full-stops-taxi-backs on that day.

Did I miss something? Where did it say they had full tanks? And, not knowing HKY, what's wrong with doing bumps and circuits if you have plenty of runway?

AF

 

[Iceman21]

Re: Huh?/

Did I miss something? Where did it say they had full tanks? And, not knowing HKY, what's wrong with doing bumps and circuits if you have plenty of runway?

AF

Yeah, I assumed they would have full tanks, 9 times out of 10 doing touch and goes you would have full tanks. Now to do away with the smoke screens, I simply stated my opinion that I do not think it is smart to do touch and go's with 4 people in the plane. I do not have to apologize for feeling that way, I never placed blame on anyone or pointed any fingers. I simply stated my opinion.

 

[ArcticFlier]

Well, I guess that's what you get for assuming. Why would you assume that they had full tanks anyway? Maybe they had just come back from their dual cross country and felt like doing another takeoff and landing. We don't know do we?

When I was instructing and we were doing touch and goes, I just made sure we were under weight and in the envelope. A lot of times it required half tanks. I'm not exactly my svelte self anymore. That's all you need to do, right? Touch and goes are no more dangerous than a usual takeoff and landing...............(here comes the caveat) provided you get the aircraft back in takeoff config. before you start your roll again. I guess we'll find out what happened in time, then we can judge.

As to your opinion, you're entitled to it, but opinions are like noses.............everyone has one.

AF

 

[A1FlyBoy]

Ice,

That's the same instructor who lets his student shut down and feather a prop in the seminole, for practice, with all seats full.

 

[Lopaka]

It was a X-C comming from somewhere in Virginia. On the go they supposedly ended up stalling, comming back down and then veering to the right, crossing a median and a taxiway, collapsing the nose gear, and then flipping over.
I don't think it was a Profile instructor.
But a student doing touch n go's at night in a 172 loaded down? Yeah I'll pass, don't need that.

 

[Iceman21]

It was a X-C comming from somewhere in Virginia. On the go they supposedly ended up stalling, comming back down and then veering to the right, crossing a median and a taxiway, collapsing the nose gear, and then flipping over.
I don't think it was a Profile instructor.
But a student doing touch n go's at night in a 172 loaded down? Yeah I'll pass, don't need that.

This is my point. In this situation, it seems the plane is begging to be stalled. Touch and go's are safe when done properly. Being heavy and close if not overweight leaves no margin for misexecution of returning to the air. I never said it cannot be done, but I wouldn't take that risk with a plane full of people. Full stop taxi back will do just fine.

Safety over time.

As for feathering a prop in a multi over touch and go's. Apples to oranges.

 

[siucavflight]

Everyone,
Back off of iceman. He is right four people in a 172 doing touch and goes is too much, full fuel or not. He was just stating his opinion, If one of my students comes out and wants to take their parents up with us i will usually have hime do a cross country.
Maybe we should practice stalls instead.

 

[Mickey]

Doing touch and goes in a C172 with partial fuel and four people is not a bad thing. Oh! But that at or near max weight you say is dangerous. Anyone who has taught in a C150 or C152 has done many touch and goes at or near max weight. Doing it in a C172 or larger aircraft is very important so that the student can see how the added weight affects performance. I will never forget my private student in the C182 when we were fully loaded. On take off he rotated to the same pitch attitude he had been using when we were lightly loaded. He froze when the stall horn went off. I was ready for it and we didn't bend metal. He now owns a six place aircraft that he has flown fully loaded and he knows how to handle it at different weights.
Take care!

 

[U of I Tweak]

4 people in a 172

He is right four people in a 172 doing touch and goes is too much, full fuel or not.

I managed just fine in a 172, almost full fuel, and four people out of Jackson Hole this summer. It was nearly max gross weight and a density altitude somewhere in the neighborhood of 7500'. You may be stating your opinion, but we don't know exactly what happened. It could have been a run out engine on a 1956 172, or it could be a brand new 180 hp SP. We don't know the level of student and we don't know who was flying. It's possible that they could have been overweight, out of CG etc. However, assuming that they were within the weight and balance limitations, there's no reason not to do touch and go's.

Just my thoughts, not trying to come down on anyone.

 

[siucavflight]

U of I,
Four people full fuel and 7500 ft density altitude doing touch and goes in a 172. I will be reading about your smoking hole some time no doubt. No wonder why i choose the school about 165 miles south of you.

 

[starvingcfi]

first of all, there are a lot of pu$$ies on this board. wouldn't do touch and goes with 4 pax? in a 172? really? a 172? i've watched c-130's do multiple touch and go's in nantucket...a 6000ft runway. so why not do them in a c-172? you're an idiot.

also, i didn't realize that 9 times out of 10 the tanks are full in a c-172. that's something i'll have to look up. i didn't realize that was the case. i just thought it was the pic's preference.

again, you're an idiot. don't speak unless spoken to.

 

[Iceman21]

What is so wrong with stating my d#mn opinion. Do we really want to go into the differences of a C172 and C-130 both doing touch and go's. That is rediculous, along with the rest of this thread.