Crashes in the News - Thread

Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum

Help Support Homebuilt Aircraft & Kit Plane Forum:

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,500
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
Last night's TV news had a quick video of a straight tail 172 landing on a city street, reportedly out of gas. It rolled to the right 20 degrees at about 20 feet altitude and wrecked the airplane but nobody got hurt. You can't tell whether he stalled one wing accidentally or was turning to not land on a car. Near Orlando somewhere.

The wing drop may have been because it hit the light pole. Don’t know just heard a comment.

My old time CFI emphasized the importance of picking a field over the road that “looks like a runway but it is not”.

I expect to see a rash of “road landings” with some serious fires and multiple deaths. Modern CFIs accept the road landing alternative because no one is allowed to complete the road landing and the maneuver ends at 1,000 feet AGL. Compounding that is the overlying Class B airspace that forces pilots to a low altitude over densely populated areas.
 

Fred C

Active Member
Joined
Apr 18, 2022
Messages
28
Both pilots made appropriate radio calls, but the C-340 pilot apparently didn't comprehend/appreciate what he was hearing. I.E. "There's a small plane in front of me and I don't see it."
I'm all for keeping comms brief and keeping the frequency open, but it doesn't cost a nickel to say "Watsonville, Cessna 340 on final. I don't have the 152 in sight, I am breaking off my approach, will climb to 1200 feet on runway heading." Or something similar (and briefer, better).

There are at least two grieving families wishing that these two guys had communicated better (among other things). In the final analysis, it hardly matters who was "in the right."
With all due respect, briefer is not better. If you have thousands of hours godd for you that you understand everybody. If your going into a "hub" with a tower. You may used to "briefer is better". Into a non tower airport, clear concise and a tad slower would be better. The "jibberish" I hear is awful. Make it clear. YOUR LIFE, probably depends on it.
 

Richard6

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2010
Messages
748
Location
Plymouth, MN USA
I had a situation where I was approaching a non-toward airfield in a rural area, I announced my intention to land on runway XX. When at pattern altitude, and on the down wind part, another aircraft announced that he was on a long final. I responded that I did not see him, so I ask him to let me know when he landed and was clear of the runway.

I have no idea how far out he was on his "long final", but it seemed like 10 minutes. I never did see his aircraft, but he did announce that he landed and was clear of the runway.

I then made my base and final approach and landed.

There maybe a lesson here, but I'm not sure !
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
Into a non tower airport, clear concise and a tad slower would be better. The "jibberish" I hear is awful. Make it clear. YOUR LIFE, probably depends on it.
I will agree that there are too many rushed, unclear transmissions, which are hardly better than none at all.
If there's trouble or an unusual situation, key the mic and say what needs to be said.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
I have no idea how far out he was on his "long final", but it seemed like 10 minutes. I never did see his aircraft, but he did announce that he landed and was clear of the runway.


There maybe a lesson here, but I'm not sure !
Another nearby airfield with the same runway numbers on the same CTAF freq? I've noticed sometimes pilots don't start with the name of the field, particularly if they are following a transmission somebody just made regarding that same field.

Or, you just didn't see him. It happens.
 
Last edited:

4redwings

Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2020
Messages
19
Location
Virginia, USA
This is the exact thoughts and behavior that causes pattern friction. "I said it first so I've got Priority" in that just b/c you call final doesn't mean squat when your 10 miles away and everyone else is in the pattern. That's a IFR tactic and everyone was VFR so I don't buy it.

I hear it all the time at DVO, someone in a Pilatus calls 10 mile final for 31 and everyone in the pattern says, wait your turn like the rest of us. Same for 069, I hear calls "3 mile right base" which means they are not in the pattern nor even on the West side of the range to be seen or see the airport.

These are just asshole moves at best, no authority nor right away is obliged, smaller planes are just typically more considerate to say the least is the reality.
Could not disagree more. You want a Pilatus in your 80 mph box pattern!? High performance airplanes are safer doing a straight-in and getting on the ground and out of the way.

As far as this, "Traffic in the pattern has the right of way over a straight in at an uncontrolled (no tower Class E or G) airport," what is the source? Not Part 91.

As far as comments on class distinctions and stereotypical attitudes, that's pure nonsense. The 340 pilot made excellent radio calls, including the 10-mile call, and legally had priority on final. He said he did not see the aircraft on base (probably because the 152 was turning final by then and still descending!) If you're in the box pattern and you hear any aircraft on final that could be a factor, you stay at TPA and go around the circuit again. That's the system.

Calling a long base is a different matter entirely. Pretty much an a-hole move in a busy pattern of similar airplanes.

As far as the speeds go, no way he was at those ADS-B speeds if he was fully configured. I personally prefer that a high performance airplane hurry up and get on the ground but then again I'm not the guy pissed off about "professionals and twin pilots" interrupting my fifth touch and go.
 

Hephaestus

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2014
Messages
2,493
Location
YMM
Could not disagree more. You want a Pilatus in your 80 mph box pattern!? High performance airplanes are safer doing a straight-in and getting on the ground and out of the way.
I dunno if the cirrus qualifies as high performance...

But no - I've stopped straight in at uncontrolled. It confuses too many - because it's a deviation from the norm they're expecting. The usual pattern work crowd get confused - it's much safer to just follow their expectation than try to save <5min. I don't think situational awareness training has gotten the emphasis in the past couple decades it used to.
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
I don't think situational awareness training has gotten the emphasis in the past couple decades it used to.
Slightly off topic, but about situational awareness: "In the old days", one skill that came with learning to fly on instruments using steam gauges was learning to construct a moving 3D map in your head that contained the primary information about where you are, where you are going, the location of your navaids, fixes, the general layout of the selected instrument approach and its major attributes, etc. I say "in the old days" because I believe many folks trained in the last 15 years (IFR and even VFR) have come to rely on the (excellent) graphical electronic moving map displays for much of this.
If you've got the map in your head and are used to referring to it, it doesn't take much additional effort to evaluate info you hear on the radio and mentally track info on possible traffic conflicts. The pilot dependant on a computer screen may have more trouble integrating that info if it's not automatically added to his screen.

I guess that when ADSB-Out becomes mandatory and pilots stop looking out of the windows entirely that things will be "better."
 
Last edited:

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
As far as the speeds go, no way he was at those ADS-B speeds if he was fully configured.
I don't know if the C-340 was configured for landing, but it was apparently travelling quite fast on this approach. The ADSB data showed 180-193 kts ground speed on the approach. If we don't trust the ADSB data, we can do a crude time-distance on his position reports. According to Juan Brown, it was 2 minutes between the pilot's 10 mile call and his 3 mile call (=210 kts ground speed). Also, in real time it was 30 seconds between his 3 mile call and his 1 mile call (=240 kts). Obviously, position report location and radio call timing aren't highly precise, but there seems little doubt that this plane was well above the typical approx 95 kt approach speed we'd expect.

So, was it really a high speed low approach (despite the pilot's declaration of a full stop landing)? Would a high speed low approach be a prudent course of action at a field with aircraft working the pattern? Why do it? And why not tell folks in the pattern what you are doing? That 152 pilot might have done things differently if he'd known the speed and intentions of the C-340 pilot. The C-340 did have a passenger aboard, perhaps that was a factor in all this. We'll maybe know more when the investigation is concluded.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
8,764
Location
Rocky Mountains
Slightly off topic, but about situational awareness: "In the old days",
Not qualified to comment directly on this thread - it has been over 2 years since I've been off the ground :(

But..........This is a skill that seems to have gone down in general, not just for pilots. The produce section of the grocery store is probably a good training site for flying into an uncontrolled field? It is a dangerous place - and more so now that we also have to coordinate with the pickers for delivery orders. They are kind of like a DC-3 at an ultralight field.
 

Wanttaja

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2013
Messages
2,269
Location
Seattle, WA
I don't know if the C-340 was configured for landing, but it was apparently travelling quite fast on this approach. The ADSB data showed 180-193 kts ground speed on the approach. If we don't trust the ADSB data, we can do a crude time-distance on his position reports. According to Juan Brown, it was 2 minutes between the pilot's 10 mile call and his 3 mile call (=210 kts ground speed). Also, in real time it was 30 seconds between his 3 mile call and his 1 mile call (=240 kts). Obviously, position report location and radio call timing aren't highly precise, but there seems little doubt that this plane was well above the typical approx 95 kt approach speed we'd expect.
According to an article on Avweb, the C-340 has a "pitiable" gear extension speed... 140 knots. Even the flap extension speed is 160 knots. The plane never slowed down to either of these speeds.

Despite making a radio call claiming to be making a full stop landing, the 340 pilot obviously didn't intend to land. Either he was going to make a low approach, or he intended to buzz the 152 pilot on the runway because the 152 cut him off. Instead, concerned about the conflict, the student in the 152 did a go-around and he wasn't where the 340 pilot expected him to be.

Ron Wanttaja
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
It is a dangerous place - and more so now that we also have to coordinate with the pickers for delivery orders. They are kind of like a DC-3 at an ultralight field.
I am trying to see the silver lining to the presence of the pickers in the supermarket. I have found 2:
1) If they are simultaneously pulling groceries for 4 orders, that's 4 people that aren't in the store blocking the aisles with their carts while they read the ingredient label on a can of beans. ("They are BEANS!! Put the can in your cart and move along!")
2) The pickers know where everything is, better than anyone else in the store. I'm not bashful about asking them questions and they've been very willing to help.

Making lemonade of the lemons...
 
Last edited:

TFF

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2010
Messages
17,967
Location
Memphis, TN
The original grocery store was picker only. The first pick your self was in 1916, and it got a patent for it. For the price they charge to pick the groceries around where I lived most of my life, which just happens to be the place of the first self serve, they started ten years late.
 

Rik-

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2019
Messages
551
Location
San Rafael, California
Could not disagree more. You want a Pilatus in your 80 mph box pattern!? High performance airplanes are safer doing a straight-in and getting on the ground and out of the way.

As far as this, "Traffic in the pattern has the right of way over a straight in at an uncontrolled (no tower Class E or G) airport," what is the source? Not Part 91.

As far as comments on class distinctions and stereotypical attitudes, that's pure nonsense. The 340 pilot made excellent radio calls, including the 10-mile call, and legally had priority on final. He said he did not see the aircraft on base (probably because the 152 was turning final by then and still descending!) If you're in the box pattern and you hear any aircraft on final that could be a factor, you stay at TPA and go around the circuit again. That's the system.

Calling a long base is a different matter entirely. Pretty much an a-hole move in a busy pattern of similar airplanes.

As far as the speeds go, no way he was at those ADS-B speeds if he was fully configured. I personally prefer that a high performance airplane hurry up and get on the ground but then again I'm not the guy pissed off about "professionals and twin pilots" interrupting my fifth touch and go.

Oh, sorry. Show me the FAR where anyone has a "Legal Priority" to land and can run over anyone in the pattern. I think an insurance company also would like to see that FAR.
 

jedi

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 8, 2009
Messages
3,500
Location
Sahuarita Arizona, Renton Washington, USA
In post # 5,707 4redwings asked “As far as this, "Traffic in the pattern has the right of way over a straight in at an uncontrolled (no tower Class E or G) airport," what is the source? Not Part 91.”

As stated in post # 5,686 that was quoted “Not according to my local DPE who is very much in the know. The 340 should have given way to the Cessna on base and closer in. He should have slowed and or gone around, even more so if he did not have the traffic in sight. Traffic in the pattern has the right of way over a straight in at an uncontrolled (no tower Class E or G) airport. This is opposite the typical practice at a Class D airport where the controller has the “big picture”.”

This was at an FAA promoted FAA Safety Team | Safer Skies Through Education wings program where the DPE is speaking for the local FSDO. This was an official interpretation of FAR 91.113(g) which says in part “When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.”

I expect a C 150 on base would be lower and closer in than a Cessna 340 on a 10 mile final. If the 340 were lower and closer in the C 150 never would have been able to catch him.
I suspect 4redwings is looking at the initial statement made in FAR 91.113(g) “(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach.”

Notice the difference between the aircraft referenced in the first sentence and second sentence in 91.113(g); other aircraft in flight versus for the purpose of landing. Aircraft landing have right of way over other aircraft as in not landing or not in the pattern to land. Aircraft entering the traffic pattern do not have right of way over aircraft established in the traffic pattern for landing.

The aircraft on a 10 mile final is not in the traffic pattern. Exactly when he enters the traffic pattern if on a straight in is up for debate but whenever that is the aircraft established in the pattern have the right of way and the aircraft on the straight in needs to give way and "enter the pattern". The aircraft on the straight in final leg may adjust speed to space himself between traffic or give way and go around. Generally the straight in traffic can merge on the up wind or cross wind leg to enter the traffic pattern. In some instances, traffic permitting, the entry can be made from an overhead crossing to enter the traffic pattern at the standard midfield entry point on downwind from the side opposite traffic entering midfield downwind on the standard 45 degree entry.

CFR 91.113(g) for reference.

Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface, except that they shall not take advantage of this rule to force an aircraft off the runway surface which has already landed and is attempting to make way for an aircraft on final approach. When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft.

If this is not clear or agreed, this conversation can be continued via personal message.
 
Last edited:

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
8,449
Location
US
91.113(g)?
I'd be interested in an authoritative take on how we should interpret the various provisions of that guidance in this instance. My take: The section of the guidance that seems most applicable:

"When two or more aircraft are approaching an airport for the purpose of landing, the aircraft at the lower altitude has the right-of-way, but it shall not take advantage of this rule to cut in front of another which is on final approach to land or to overtake that aircraft."

A typical C-152 pattern (IIRC) has the aircraft begin its descent from TPA just before the turn to the base leg. It seems likely the C-152 was always below the C-340, and certainly so once both planes were on final.

More fundamentally:

"(g) Landing. Aircraft, while on final approach to land or while landing, have the right-of-way over other aircraft in flight or operating on the surface,.... "

The C-152 was on final approach for landing. There's clear room for doubt that the C-340 pilot, overflying the threshold at 180kts, had any intention to land. If he was doing a low approach (not a landing), then the C-152 had priority.
 

addaon

Well-Known Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
2,342
Location
Kanab, UT
I think the question is whether, by 91.113(g), the C-152 should have turned final or should have extended his downwind. The first "on final" call from the C-340 came when the C-152 was on downwind, before he turned base. At that point the C-152 is not "on final approach", "landing", or "approaching the airport".

The problem with this interpretation is that the first "on final" call came 10 miles out, and treating that as giving priority would really screw up how we actually fly in the pattern. Still, I don't see much ambiguity in the rule as written.

I fly around KSGU quite a bunch, which is untowered with commercial flights coming straight-in at high(-er) speed. If I'm on downwind when they announce, I tend to either just extend (even if it's a pain), or I'll say something like "less than one minute from base turn, okay if I sneak in before you?" They'll usually answer with "estimate six minutes to touchdown, you're fine" -- or sometimes "that'll be close, your discretion" in which case I extend. It's a radio, we're allowed to use it for communication!
 

4redwings

Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2020
Messages
19
Location
Virginia, USA
First: The aircraft established on final has priority. Period. It's the reg.

Second: No way this guy kept his speed up from 5 miles out to dust off a 152 he wasn't even yet aware was going to be a conflict and never saw. That's ridiculous. And buzz the field? Where did you get that? Was he a known field buzzer or was this going to be his first?

Third: My key takeaway from this accident is not who was at fault. The point is that you have to be prepared for that one time in your life that you have to take a drastic action to save your life. Doing what you've always done is the brains's default to a surprising fast-developing situation. You have to be mentally prepared (chair fly these kinds of situations) to get out of the rut and do the bold, non-standard, take charge, I've-had-enough-of-this move. It's evident from the comm that both of these guys saw a conflict problem yet they both stayed in the rut and continued on the glide path.
 
Top