Plane wreck in FLL?

[SCT]

Fox News just showed a Piper that wrecked onto the top of a building in Lauderdale, FL. Reports are 3 dead. Anyone know?
The paint scheme was base white w/ blue on the tips.

 

[SCT]

It is a single Piper. It looked like an Archer w/ a tapered wing and new style wheel pants. It was pretty tore up.

 

[Rolling-Thunder]

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/local/southflorida/sfl-623aircrash,0,2279258.story?coll=sfla-home-headlines

 

[Swass]

Ouch...too bad he wasn't able to land flatter.

 

[Snakum]

Make that a double .


Minh

 

[Super_Cub_2414P]

The article says they took off lost the engine and the pilot tried to turn and make it back to the airport, from the pictures it looks like he stalled it or spun. It's not that hard to not stall an airplane when the engine quits, one of the passengers was a teenage girl, and she didn't make it, poor little girl.

 

[dseagrav]

I remember reading a quite extensive article once that said it was impossible to return to the strip on the event of an engine failure during climb-out. They had a lot of math and I was too young to understand (or remember all of it) but I remember the best-case scenario for a low-wing aircraft was -20 feet altitude at 100 degrees into the turn.

 

[ShawnC]

At the ASF seminar I went to I was surprised that the presenter said that unless you are a pattern altitude, you best bet for an engine failure on climb out is to aim at the best field within 30 degrees of your heading.

Which came as a surprise to me since in gliders I was trained that you can return to the field in as little as 200 ft, I didn't think that airplanes had that bad of an L/D.

 

[FN FAL]

At the ASF seminar I went to I was surprised that the presenter said that unless you are a pattern altitude, you best bet for an engine failure on climb out is to aim at the best field within 30 degrees of your heading.

Which came as a surprise to me since in gliders I was trained that you can return to the field in as little as 200 ft, I didn't think that airplanes had that bad of an L/D.

If you stall at 800 feet, it doesn't matter where the airport is in relation to your turn.

 

[Whirlwind]

At the ASF seminar I went to I was surprised that the presenter said that unless you are a pattern altitude, you best bet for an engine failure on climb out is to aim at the best field within 30 degrees of your heading.

Which came as a surprise to me since in gliders I was trained that you can return to the field in as little as 200 ft, I didn't think that airplanes had that bad of an L/D.

Gliders have as much as 10 times the glide ratio as light single engine airplanes do.

The Cessna 172 has about a 7-to-1 ratio and it takes about 700ft in ideal conditions to return to the departure runway in my experience.

I make a point to demo this to all my private students so they don't try it if it really ever happens to them. Anything less than pattern altitude, take your best spot in front of the plane and accept it.

 

[Jedi_Cheese]

I have always been told @ 500 ft, you can make it back to the runway in a single (thus why you check your engine instruments and then start to turn crosswind at that point). That assumes best pilot skill, realizing the engine failure instantly, and hitting the numbers exactly (which isn't realistic but you got to start somewhere).

 

[Super_Cub_2414P]

It doesn't matter what you do, just keep the god dam nose down and you won't stall or spin, at least if you crash it will be controlled verses spinning strait in and killing your teenage little girl.

 

[trip]

My Instr. had me do a turn back to the field from 400 agl in the 172. It made it using a teardrop like turn. If it really barfed the engine and started windmilling instead of idle you might need a couple hundred feet more. Plus another hundred for yourself to sit there and say wtf over?? Food for thought!!

 

[:-)]

My Instr. had me do a turn back to the field from 400 agl in the 172. It made it using a teardrop like turn. If it really barfed the engine and started windmilling instead of idle you might need a couple hundred feet more. Plus another hundred for yourself to sit there and say wtf over?? Food for thought!!

Your instructor is an idiot. I'm glad that you realized that you need more altitude.

 

[DenverDude2002]

Heres how my instructor has taught me for our preflight briefing before each flight:

0-500 Feet AGL: Put back down on runway if Possible (our airports main strip is 9000 ft, with the secondary being 7000)

500-1000 Feet AGL: 30 degrees each direction off of the nose

1000+ Feet AGL: do a 180 and attempt to land on the runway

 

[huncowboy]

Sad news.

I've been wondering about this a lot since I have first heard about it in my private course.

Today we were doing steep spirals in a 172RG which is not that great of a glider. We lost 2500' in 3 complete 360 turns and we were doing them at 80KIAS which is not even our best glide. Granted we were doing them with gear up. Still if you do the math it seems a 180 turn costs about 425-450' (with gear up). I sure would not try to turn around in the 172RG at 450', but it is kind of interesting to crunch the numbers. This all makes me wonder about the gear as well. Would you try to lower the gear and land on a house, or keep up the gear and make the 180 and may be make the airport boundary but have no time to lower it. I guess it all depends on the situation and the area you have around you.

Another thing that made me wonder is why don't we all take off and climb Vx so we gain the most altitude while we are still relatively close to the runway. You would be higher in a short time with Vy, but you would be farther from the runway in case you need to turn back. Anyone with more experience cares to comment?

 

[Mmmmmm Burritos]

Simple. Vx is usually a lot lower than best glide speed. If you lost your engine at Vx, you had better heave the yoke forward if you want a chance. Lots of induced drag there.

 

[huncowboy]

Simple. Vx is usually a lot lower than best glide speed. If you lost your engine at Vx, you had better heave the yoke forward if you want a chance. Lots of induced drag there.

so with Vy you minimize the time at low altitude... makes sense, thanks

 

[Jedi_Cheese]

This all makes me wonder about the gear as well. Would you try to lower the gear and land on a house, or keep up the gear and make the 180 and may be make the airport boundary but have no time to lower it.

People survive gear up landings all the time. I would think that hitting the house isn't as survivable if you get my drift.

 

[UnstableAviator]

There are so many factors in turning back that landing straight ahead is ALWAYS the best option when below 1000' AGL. Obviously maintaining control and landing in the best spot you can find will always be better than the classic stall/spin. Same as engine failures at altitude, find something straight ahead (if there are options of course) rather than manuever all over the place just to end up overshooting your field/landing area anyway.

I've tried turnbacks with the power idled with my students several times, and in a calm wind situation you can make it at 800' AGL. We'd idle the power, wait 4 seconds (oh Sh!t time), then begin a turnback. If there was a stiff headwind, we'd fly over the 5600' runway and would've landed with a tailwind in lousy areas. If there was a nice crosswind as we were tracking centerline, we could easily turn into it and make it back. (Decreased turn radius, plus it is pushing you towards the runway)

If there had been a parallel runway more than 1000' or so apart, we could have turned back with less altitude since we only needed a 180.

Once you turn crosswind at 700' AGL (300' below pattern alt) and have changed heading those crucial 90 degrees you've got it made.

And finally, food for thought, when flying in VMC and there is no ODP to adhere to, why not track away from the centerline of the runway so a turnback could be safely done with less altitude? I guess old habits die hard and I'm not one to try to change it or teach this to my students.

 

[C601]

FLL Crash

If he had flown straight, he could of easily landed on I-95 its been done many times before with out anyone getting killed, or worst case the railway tracks. Why oh why he decided to turn around makes no sence at all, i guess his pax where frightened which did not help is problem.

 

[trip]

Your instructor is an idiot. I'm glad that you realized that you need more altitude.

My Instr had several thousand hours in piston A/C at the time (early 90s),
and is still instructing at the FBO he owns. I think he was not the idiot you proclaim but was S.H. and new what an airplane was capable of. After thousands of hours myself, I am glad he taught that way.

Every T/O is different and requires some thought and planning as to what your going to do when the stuff hits the fan. This is called the T/O brief at the airline I fly for. Many guys just out tooling around the pattern instructing or joyriding whatever probably are not thinking about this stuff after the fourth touch-an-go, so when it gets quiet they are not as prepared as they could be.

Cold ocean dead ahead? residential area? Tall buildings? Whatever the choice dont Stall it because then it does not matter anymore right?

 

[Snakum]

I was always taught to look 30 degrees right or left of the nose and take the best shot, to NEVER try to make the turn if the engine quits on climbout. In the pattern at altitude, it is usually a different story, of course. But I always wondered whether I'd have the guts to do to the smart thing if it quit on climbout, or if the 'homing instinct' would be too strong to ignore and I'd wind up spinning in, like most do who try it.

Shortly after my solo (third one since 1995, I kept having to stop training) I had a small taste of what it must feel like. On climbout in a C152 from the small strip I trained at the engine started missing so badly it felt like it was gonna vibrate out of the airframe. I truly felt it was gonna stop completely any minute and since there was nothing but woods all across the nose I just held it straight and was prepared to stall it out just over the trees and drop thru, which is what one of my friends (a CFI) had told me to do. Even scared sh!tless, I knew there was no way I'd make it back. I was just to low to even contemplate it. As it happens, whatever was causing the miss began to clear (albeit slowly) and I was able to start climbing again and turn back. But I was fully prepared to trust that stalling it out and dropping thru the trees was my best option.

According to what I was told, a few months later in Chapel Hill, NC a CFI and student actually did that and both walked away with bruises and soiled underwear.

How would you guys suggest to take it into the trees, assuming there was no road or flat land, etc. within a 60 degree arc of the nose and this was the only option you had?

Minh

 

[FN FAL]

Another consideration in a crash such is this, may not have anything to do with the skills neccesary to return to the runway at 800 feet in a dangerously tight turn...but whether or not the fuel valve was on or whether all items neccessary to ensure saftey of flight were checked prior to lift off.

While it is true that simple and catastrophic engine failures do occur, most likely the engine failure type crashes are a result of pilot error.

 

[Pilotbob3]

i hope those wonderful German automobiles are OK

 

[crash-proof]

If he had flown straight, he could of easily landed on I-95 its been done many times before with out anyone getting killed, or worst case the railway tracks. Why oh why he decided to turn around makes no sence at all, i guess his pax where frightened which did not help is problem.

I'm guessing he was too low to make it to I95, he probably would have crashed INTO it (just speculation). He might have panicked, afterall from FXE (not FLL, mind you) I can't think of any clear field or road in sight, it's a heavily populated area and a lot of industrial parks too. Commercial Blvd is always jammed with traffic too. I'll bet he wasn't even at 400 ft when he lost power.

 

[Duke Elegant]

One day a few of us pulled two pilots (ten thousand hours between them) out of the wreck of a Cessna L19 that we had seen crash here at our home airport.


I recall that they had drained LOTS of water from the fuel tanks , had run the engine and became satisfied and decided to take off.

At about 4-500 feet the engine quit and we saw an immediate turn back to the airport. I was amazed at the rate of descent , or more appropriately , plummet. It crashed a couple of hundred feet short of the threshold and a hundred or so off to one side.

One day , we had a student pilot on his third solo who had a very rough engine on climbout. He lowered the nose and landed in a field and touched down about a third of the way down. The aircraft was fixed and flown out that day.
I was a VERY strong advocate on "landing straight ahead +/- thirty degrees in the event of a failure.

Finally , one day , there were two young , brand new commercial pilots sitting at the coffee bar bragging about how they had gone up in the C182 and simulated an engine failure after take off and could make it back through 180 degrees from a mere 400 feet.

Oh they were such easy prey. I exploded upon them. Idiots! If you have a failure and initiate a steep turn left and roll out at 180 degrees you are only parralel to the runway and it will require another 45 degree turn left and yet another 45 degrees to the right to line up with the runway. That's 270 degrees!

When I saw the L19 bank left , it was chilling to see the corresponding increase in rate of descent...... it didn't look right.