Kills way more people than we know...

http://www.break.com/index/coc...-plane-crash-2356527

Density altitude was an effect, but I also see pilot error...

Clearly visible from the rear seat view at the time of
the crash, Zero flaps.

The aircraft clearly did not want to fly and seems to have been climbing, all be it very slowly then began to sink.

Did he do the whole take off ATTEMPT with no flaps or did the aircraft stop flying when he reduced the flaps to zero?

The hazards of mountain flying. They said a down draft caused them to sink into the trees. A heavy plane on a hot day taking off from a high elevation dirt strip in the mountains. Not a good combination. I'm guessing he took off into a head wind and the mountains swirled the air into an abrupt tail wind.

I'd say not enough air between him and the trees. Pilot error in it's extreme. You'd think if there was a problem, the cockpit conversation would reflect that.

Grizz

Flaps provide both lift and drag. Once airborne, you want to clean up the wing and accelerate as fast as possible.

They say airspeed is money in the bank, but altitude is money in your pocket, you can spend it right now when you need it. He barley got above ground effect.

The mistake here was taking off in what the NTSB has yet to determine but might have been an over gross airplane. Facts we know; from a strip at 6,000+ feet MSL and temp's in the 80's.

They were doomed from the start by a lack of planning. Regarding the cockpit conservation, the thee passengers had no idea how dangerous a situation they were in and the pilot was clearly in the panic mode.

That is scary. I would think I would have been landing right after that first bunch of trees. It was obvious then that the land was rising faster than the airplane.

quote:

Originally posted by f224:
Flaps provide both lift and drag. Once airborne, you want to clean up the wing and accelerate as fast as possible.

They say airspeed is money in the bank, but altitude is money in your pocket, you can spend it right now when you need it. He barley got above ground effect.

The mistake here was taking off in what the NTSB has yet to determine but might have been an over gross airplane. Facts we know; from a strip at 6,000+ feet MSL and temp's in the 80's.

They were doomed from the start by a lack of planning. Regarding the cockpit conservation, the thee passengers had no idea how dangerous a situation they were in and the pilot was clearly in the panic mode.

While flaps provide lift and drag a little flap might have gained him enough more altitude to keep him out of the trees and out of a "Hull loss accident", then again aborting the takeoff the first time it mushed back into the ground might have saved him from the crash as well.

I've been told repeatedly "Ground effect isn't , flying, like a trip to the international food court isn't an around the world cruise on the QE2"

Ground effect makes you THINK you are flying when you aren't

And that is the situation he was in.

IF he had started the takeoff with flaps he never got to a point where he should have even thought about reducing the flaps.

quote:

Originally posted by Palmer:
That is scary. I would think I would have been landing right after that first bunch of trees. It was obvious then that the land was rising faster than the airplane.

I know enough about flying that I would have been telling the pilot to abort starting at the one minute mark, because the aircraft clearly did not want to fly.


It took what seemed to me like an impossibly long time to lift off.

quote:

It took what seemed to me like an impossibly long time to lift off.

Just like driving a VW off a cliff.

That video, up unil the aircraft stops moving, should be required viewing for all student pilots. I say stop at that point because the fact they all weren't killed classifies as a near-miracle.

Here in NM my home field is at 5875 feet, and with afternoon temps right now just under 100 degrees-F, my C172 is a single seat aircraft a best. The Stinson 108-3 has just a little higher gross weight but its Franklin engine has 5 less HP than the Cessna I fly. The airport he was taking off from is 6350 ft altitude. Info I found says the high temp was around 82 degrees. A real shame to lose the aircraft but a miracle no one was killed.

Anybody do a weight and balance / takeoff distance calculation before departure? Four adult men in that aircraft and anything over half a tank of fuel would, I suspect, put you well over gross which coupled with density altitude, I think I could see the altimeter at 6,000 ft or maybe 7,000 at the start of takeoff which with summer temperatures could easily give a density altitude of 9,000 ft resulting in less than 75% of sea level power for a normally aspirated piston engine as in that aircraft.
Looked like he barely made it out of ground effect with a very minimal climb rate. As soon as he banked just a bit, lift vector less than vertical, he could not maintain altitude. There might have been some vertical air movement but probably not necessary to explain the problem. Lesson for the day: Density altitude is real and bites hard.

Glad everyone got out and, more or less, walked away. That makes it a good landing. A great landing is when you can use the airplane again the same day.

quote:

I think I could see the altimeter at 6,000 ft or maybe 7,000 at the start of takeoff which with summer temperatures could easily give a density altitude of 9,000 ft resulting in less than 75% of sea level power for a normally aspirated piston engine as in that aircraft.

Great point. I noticed while watching the video that the engine did not sound like it was making full power. It reminded me of cruise power settings where I live at 92 ft above sea level.

quote:

Originally posted by f224:
Kills way more people than we know...

http://www.break.com/index/coc...-plane-crash-2356527

If you want to read the preliminary National Transportation Safety Board Report, you can look it up under:

http://images.bimedia.net/docu...rash+NTSB+Report.pdf

Cheers, Hans

That was pretty much a worthless report.
Who knows what the passenger's qualifications are?

quote:

Clearly visible from the rear seat view at the time of
the crash, Zero flaps.

Alan is there another video because the one posted doesn't show a rear seat view? At 5:58 in the video you can clearly see that the flaps are extended to what looks like one notch. Of course that is post accident and they might well have been knocked into that position during the impact.

After flying for as long as they had, flaps were not a factor anymore. He was clearly behind the power curve unable to accelerate and most likely far over gross weight and operating at or above the max ceiling for that aircraft at that weight at that density altitude.

The only thing flaps could have done for him was slow his ground speed a bit for the collision. Here's a clue, after you've covered several miles and you still can't accelerate and climb, it ain't going to happen cowboy, something is wrong.

I've flown that model Stinson and ASSUMING this bird did not have an upgraded engine, it's an underpowered DOG. In NM where I flew it at an elevation of 6500' MSL with just me and full tanks it'd barely get out of it's own way and that was in the winter.

A hot day with four men at that elevation...Fogettaboutit!

All flaps would have done there is add to his drag and further impaired his ability to accelerate. I have thousands of hours flying light aircraft at high density altitudes. I also have a degree in Aviation safety and accident investigation. This appears to be a simple case of trying to operate an aircraft beyond it's design performance limitations.Either that or if did have a big engine conversion he had an engine problem. Because the 220 HP Franklin or the O-470 version of this bird is a whole other animal.

There's a longer version where one of the rear seat passengers also has his camera rolling and he turns his camera to the right giving a view down the length of the underside of the wing
for several seconds.

"Underpowered dog"? from the video evidence that aircraft
had no buisness at that altitude unless there is a mile of
air between the wings and the ground.

and certainly not taking off with three PAX