Small plane (RV-14) crashes near Palmdale airport

[Daleandee]

Seems to me to be a "good landing" by most accounts ...

Small plane crashes near Palmdale airport

The small aircraft landed about eight miles east of the runway.

www.foxla.com

 

[Zeldman]

Happy to see no injuries and no deaths on this accident, so going off on a tangent here...

I know a lot of folks think the RV planes are the greatest invention since the original Wright flyer, but if the above pictured plane had ended with being upside down and on fire, how would a person egress the plane.??

edit:
Oh shoot, just saw the RV-12 in Florida. I guess getting out is not a viable option.

 

[Skyrys62]

but if the above pictured plane had ended with being upside down and on fire, how would a person egress the plane.??

Quickly or not at all?

They have the pointy tool hammer things or punches if the plexiglass doesn't break on it's own. But not a situation I'd want to be in for sure.
Although a RV-14 would be awesome. I think @Jim K is going to build me one for practice.

 

[kyleb]

Happy to see no injuries and no deaths on this accident, so going off on a tangent here...

I know a lot of folks think the RV planes are the greatest invention since the original Wright flyer, but if the above pictured plane had ended with being upside down and on fire, how would a person egress the plane.??

edit:
Oh shoot, just saw the RV-12 in Florida. I guess getting out is not a viable option.

There are canopy busting tools. After you crack the plexi, you kick your way out.

Lots of aircraft with sliding/tipping canopies (Ercoupes, AA series, some Navions, P-51's, Spits, and a whole bunch more WWII stuff including AT-6's) have similar issues.

That said, ending up with the airplane upside down and on fire is a bad deal but fairly low on the list of probable outcomes.

 

[Jim K]

Happy to see no injuries and no deaths on this accident, so going off on a tangent here...

I know a lot of folks think the RV planes are the greatest invention since the original Wright flyer, but if the above pictured plane had ended with being upside down and on fire, how would a person egress the plane.??

On the 14 at least, there's a canopy hinge release. The rollbar is the structure the canopy latches to in the rear, so in theory, the weight of the plane shouldn't really be on the canopy and you could kick it out of the way. Realistically an escape hammer is probably a wise thing to have mounted within arms reach.

I think you'd have issues with most low wing ga planes if you wind up oily side up. A little crunch of the cabin or leaning the wrong way and you're not getting that door open. I like that the lance has doors on both sides, and I'm pretty confident I could kick either one open pretty easily so long as it's not obstructed. The back one falls off on its own sometimes

If you're on fire though, i think you're screwed if you're upside down in anything.

Although a RV-14 would be awesome. I think @Jim K is going to build me one for practice.

Plan on it.

Id like to remind you though that I only take payment in gold nuggets.

Or Denver Nuggets.

Maybe chicken nuggets.

 

[skyking3286]

And all the canopy busting ideas assume you haven’t broken your good arm or are even conscious.

 

[Jim K]

And all the canopy busting ideas assume you haven’t broken your good arm or are even conscious.

But again, that's no different than any other plane.

Pilot posted on VAF... sudden engine seizure with no obvious cause. 400 hour IO-390 from a well respected builder. Plane is destroyed, in spite of the pictures. Fuselage buckled at wing roots and landing gear ripped off.

 

[asicer]

 

[Daleandee]

View attachment 136004

Or a chute that we could pull ...

 

[hindsight2020]

Happy to see no injuries and no deaths on this accident, so going off on a tangent here...

I know a lot of folks think the RV planes are the greatest invention since the original Wright flyer, but if the above pictured plane had ended with being upside down and on fire, how would a person egress the plane.??

edit:
Oh shoot, just saw the RV-12 in Florida. I guess getting out is not a viable option.

For sure, and something I've given a lot of thought as I look for an RV-6a as my retirement airplane. The answer for me is slider with a homebrew means to jam the side rail prior to impact, similar to the old jam a boot on the door of the spam can prior to touchdown. Unlocking is insufficent, as the slider would slam forward and shut upon deceleration.

There's no provision for jettison on the sliders, though EAB I guess one could be fabricated. I've thought about jettisoning the canopy on tip ups and gambling on the convertible landing, but oof, that's a gamble all on it's own when it comes to surviving tree lines, power lines, or the inversion itself. It's not an insignificant concern, RVs end up pole vaulting on the flimsy wire hanger nose gear with relative regularity.

 

[Daleandee]

For sure, and something I've given a lot of thought as I look for an RV-6a as my retirement airplane. The answer for me is slider with a homebrew means to jam the side rail prior to impact, similar to the old jam a boot on the door of the spam can prior to touchdown. Unlocking is insufficent, as the slider would slam forward and shut upon deceleration.

There's no provision for jettison on the sliders, though EAB I guess one could be fabricated. I've thought about jettisoning the canopy on tip ups and gambling on the convertible landing, but oof, that's a gamble all on it's own when it comes to surviving tree lines, power lines, or the inversion itself. It's not an insignificant concern, RVs end up pole vaulting on the flimsy wire hanger nose gear with relative regularity.

I can't speak to RV aircraft but reportedly a Sonex is remarkebly difficult to handle if the canopy departs. On short final that may be the least of the worries ...

 

[Ed Haywood]

Mid and low wing aerobatic aircraft have the same issue.

Last year an Extra pilot overran the runway at St Augustine, wound up inverted in a marsh, and drowned as the aircraft slowly filled with water. She was on the radio with her fiance the whole time. He was prevented from assisting her by emergency services. Patty Wagstaff had some pretty strong words about that.

 

[hindsight2020]

I remember that accident. Egress deaths frustrate me, I have specific deviations to the boilerplate actions we brief at work, that deal with egress considerations the book answer does not tackle with more scrutinity. Our young guys don't really think much about it (everybody knows you're immortal before age 30, duh), which is why I make a point to always brief everybody I encounter. I find it comical we still brief the existence of the canopy breaker tool as a bona fide COA, I think the entire thing is placebo to a fault.

Back to that accident case study, the piano hinge canopies are a no-go for me in rec life. You have no choice but to jettison those prior to impact, if you're concerned about flipping over. Once you flip over, it's too much of a low percentage play for my liking. This is recreation for me at the end of the day. TETO of course, we all have our personal threshold.

 

[wanttaja]

Speaking as the owner of a homebuilt type with one of highest fatality rates, and an occasional tendency to do this...

...The survivability in accidents does cross my mind, occasionally.

Here's a chart from one my accident presentations. It shows the fatal accident rate (e.g., what percentage of accidents produce at least one fatality) for a number of common homebuilt types:

As I've mentioned when previously discussing this, the common element among the best-scoring aircraft is NOT being a low-wing. And the common element (except for one case) for the highest-scoring aircraft is higher performance (e.g., they will probably hit the ground going faster). But then, there are few high-performance high-wing homebuilts. The Aerocomp is one, but it doesn't reach my 50-accident threshold.

[Edit] More food for thought...


Ron Wanttaja

 

[Ed Haywood]

Speaking as the owner of a homebuilt type with one of highest fatality rates, and an occasional tendency to do this...
View attachment 136017
...The survivability in accidents does cross my mind, occasionally.

Here's a chart from one my accident presentations. It shows the fatal accident rate (e.g., what percentage of accidents produce at least one fatality) for a number of common homebuilt types:
View attachment 136018
As I've mentioned when previously discussing this, the common element among the best-scoring aircraft is NOT being a low-wing. And the common element (except for one case) for the highest-scoring aircraft is higher performance (e.g., they will probably hit the ground going faster). But then, there are few high-performance high-wing homebuilts. The Aerocomp is one, but it doesn't reach my 50-accident threshold.

[Edit] More food for thought...
View attachment 136019

Ron Wanttaja

Fantastic data and presentation, as always!

The Lancairs are clear outliers. Hot planes?

 

[Jim K]

Fantastic data and presentation, as always!

The Lancairs are clear outliers. Hot planes?

Very. Vref on some of them 85-90 knots.

 

[Skyrys62]

For fun, I'd like to see the Cirrus numbers from 2017 to date. It just seems the BRS has been more successful in recent years...or maybe that's just what info is getting spread around.
But, if it's stall/spins causing the most crashes, the BRS won't be much of a factor.

 

[wanttaja]

The Lancairs are clear outliers. Hot planes?

I get that a lot.

So much, in fact, that here's a chart from a bit later in the same presentation. Basically, you have to understand that the Lancair IV has the same performance envelope as a front-line WWII fighter...and no one expected such planes to baby the pilots.

About three years back, I worked with someone from the Lancair Owners and Buyers Organization (LOBO) characterize the accident rate further. LOBO includes training programs for new Lancair owners, and believe that those who had taken the training had a reduced accident rate. They shared their list of people who had taken training, and I attempted to establish which accidents had occurred to LOBO-trained pilots.

I don't recall my methodology in detail, but looking at my report, I see that I concluded that the LOBO training resulted in a ~20% reduction in accident rate.

Whether it was due to the LOBO training or not, I did note that the accident rate for the Lancair IV had been decreasing over the years.

Of course, keep in mind that the mindset of a pilot who doesn't THINK they need the special training might also lead to a higher accident rate.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[kyleb]

For sure, and something I've given a lot of thought as I look for an RV-6a as my retirement airplane. The answer for me is slider with a homebrew means to jam the side rail prior to impact, similar to the old jam a boot on the door of the spam can prior to touchdown. Unlocking is insufficent, as the slider would slam forward and shut upon deceleration.

There's no provision for jettison on the sliders, though EAB I guess one could be fabricated. I've thought about jettisoning the canopy on tip ups and gambling on the convertible landing, but oof, that's a gamble all on it's own when it comes to surviving tree lines, power lines, or the inversion itself. It's not an insignificant concern, RVs end up pole vaulting on the flimsy wire hanger nose gear with relative regularity.

A couple of points:

1) Do we really want to jettison the canopy? Post-crash fires happen, but playing the probabilities, I think I'd rather have 1/4" of plexiglass protecting my head in the event of a rollover than nothing. If you get knocked out in the crash, your egress is severely compromised, fire or not. I think that bubble offers some protection.

2) I think the nosegear rollover issues are (mostly, not exclusively) a nosewheel bearing issue. The stock bearing setup (IMO) is prone to binding in a hard landing, and a locked nosewheel is a bad thing... Now, if you land it on sand or plowed earth, all bets are off. Even the tailwheel aircraft frequently turn turtle in those conditions.

 

[wanttaja]

For fun, I'd like to see the Cirrus numbers from 2017 to date. It just seems the BRS has been more successful in recent years...or maybe that's just what info is getting spread around.
But, if it's stall/spins causing the most crashes, the BRS won't be much of a factor.

My Cirrus database now runs through 2022. Here's a quick summary of the fatal accident rate.

Here's a similar plot of successful Cirrus CAPS activations:

Two of these involved deaths among the occupants of the aircraft. One was activated too low, the other one doesn't give any details on the death of the pilot (the instructor survived) and does seem to indicate normal activation of the CAPS (CEN22FA111).

Of the 59 total CAPS deployments, about a quarter (14) were initiated outside of the nominal CAPS envelope. Of the ones that were in-envelope, 36 were initiated due to loss of engine power, three each were due to disorientation and airframe icing, the the rest are due to pilot incapacitation and aircraft control issues.

Ron Wanttaja

 

[hindsight2020]

A couple of points:

1) Do we really want to jettison the canopy? Post-crash fires happen, but playing the probabilities, I think I'd rather have 1/4" of plexiglass protecting my head in the event of a rollover than nothing. If you get knocked out in the crash, your egress is severely compromised, fire or not. I think that bubble offers some protection.

2) I think the nosegear rollover issues are (mostly, not exclusively) a nosewheel bearing issue. The stock bearing setup (IMO) is prone to binding in a hard landing, and a locked nosewheel is a bad thing... Now, if you land it on sand or plowed earth, all bets are off. Even the tailwheel aircraft frequently turn turtle in those conditions.

All valid inputs.

RE #1, that's why I said I prefer the slider setup with a jamming-in-open-position mechanism. I do not agree with the risk of post crash fire being low enough to accept canopy entrapment, which I rate at a pretty much certainty in these RVs when dealing with unprepared surface touchdowns, both trikes and taildraggers alike. I don't disagree with your sentiment canopy jetisson is a lousy setup for forced landing in areas with tree lines and power lines. Again, another plus for the slider setup, which has a fwd canopy bow in addition to the roll bar behind the pilot nugget.

Re#2, I'm not planning on having my engine fail when I go fly, but it happens (ask me how I know). Which is to say, I not trying to buy the thing to "don't STOL me BRO!" it, I intend to operate out of paved runways exclusively. But, this affair involves 99% flying over unprepared/obstacle encumbered surfaces, so it's simply an inclusive consideration.

Don't take this as gratuitous shade against RVs. It's really no different than why I don't fly Lancs or Glas-3s. It's not they're too hot for me when the prop is pulling, it's that when it's no longer, those planforms deny me options (controlled kinetic energy dissipation) other contraptions afford me.

I need a chute to properly hedge my bets on the latter types. I don't in an RV (they land slow), which is why I consider them. I do need to compensate for the fact they're on their backs too frequently for my taste, in absolute terms. And since I'm a working poor (for this hobby, not for gen pop), a rubber bumper on the rail is cheaper than a chute. Life is an eternal compromise.

 

[Jim K]

Do we really want to jettison the canopy? Post-crash fires happen, but playing the probabilities, I think I'd rather have 1/4" of plexiglass protecting my head in the event of a rollover than nothing. If you get knocked out in the crash, your egress is severely compromised, fire or not. I think that bubble offers some protection.

I was playing with that same thought experiment. I came to the conclusion that trying to jettison in flight is a bad idea unless you have a chute and intend to bail. If you you do it up high, that's a lot of wind to deal with. if you try to do it at the last minute, you're already mentally and physically overloaded, and adding a bunch of wind won't help. You also run the risk of damaging a control surface before you're done with it. Then once you're on the ground, you're dealing with dirt and potentially branches/grass/etc in the face, and hopefully you're still somewhat in control at that point. I don't think the plexi adds a lot of impact protection, but maybe some. On the other hand, it also tends to break into sharp corners & edges, so it's definitely a double edged sword.

Looking at the drawings, it looks like the canopy side of the hinge sits in between two plates on the fuselage side on a -14, so it would have to move out an inch or so before it could go sideways. Not very likely if you're upside down. A legit crash axe might be in order.

 

[Racerx]

The extra crash in st Augustine has to be one of the worst ways to go. Ends up inverted in a marsh. Able to communicate with atc. Not sure any means of egress would have helped.

 

[Ed Haywood]

If you try to do it at the last minute, you're already mentally and physically overloaded, and adding a bunch of wind won't help.

Based on my extensive experience of one engine out forced landing, I can confirm this. Things happen really fast. You will focus 100% on maneuvering the aircraft to a soft spot. All those good idea checklist items will likely go undone.

Plus, the last thing you want while performing the most difficult and important landing of your life is an 80mph wind in your face, causing your eyes to water and drowning out the stall horn.

 

[FormerHangie]

Quickly or not at all?

They have the pointy tool hammer things or punches if the plexiglass doesn't break on it's own. But not a situation I'd want to be in for sure.
Although a RV-14 would be awesome. I think @Jim K is going to build me one for practice.

I'm not sure the rescue hammer would be any help. A small pointy object, poked with force into a tempered safety glass window instantly turns it into pebbles. That same hammer on a laminated automobile windshield will only put little chips in the glass. I suspect it would be similarly useless against an acrylic canopy.

There are canopy busting tools. After you crack the plexi, you kick your way out.

Lots of aircraft with sliding/tipping canopies (Ercoupes, AA series, some Navions, P-51's, Spits, and a whole bunch more WWII stuff including AT-6's) have similar issues.

That said, ending up with the airplane upside down and on fire is a bad deal but fairly low on the list of probable outcomes.

You're hanging upside down from your seatbelt, how would you get turned around to kick anything, especially in the small cockpit of an RV? The only way I can see the occupants getting out would be with outside assistance.

 

[Skyrys62]

I'm not sure the rescue hammer would be any help. A small pointy object, poked with force into a tempered safety glass window instantly turns it into pebbles. That same hammer on a laminated automobile windshield will only put little chips in the glass. I suspect it would be similarly useless against an acrylic canopy.

Yeah..not a situation I'd want to be in.
But, somewhat depends on the canopy apparently.
All the more reasons to keep your favorite CCW close to your heart

...

 

[Jim K]

Yeah..not a situation I'd want to be in.
But, somewhat depends on the windshield apparently.
All the more reasons to keep your favorite CCW close to your heart

...

Thank you...I was trying to find that but couldn't come up with it.

 

[brcase]

For sure, and something I've given a lot of thought as I look for an RV-6a as my retirement airplane. The answer for me is slider with a homebrew means to jam the side rail prior to impact, similar to the old jam a boot on the door of the spam can prior to touchdown. Unlocking is insufficent, as the slider would slam forward and shut upon deceleration.

There's no provision for jettison on the sliders, though EAB I guess one could be fabricated. I've thought about jettisoning the canopy on tip ups and gambling on the convertible landing, but oof, that's a gamble all on it's own when it comes to surviving tree lines, power lines, or the inversion itself. It's not an insignificant concern, RVs end up pole vaulting on the flimsy wire hanger nose gear with relative regularity.

I agree several advantages to the slider vs tip up canopy.

1. Separate windshield so you can fly with the canopy open.
2. if you jettison the canopy you still have a windshield to protect you from the wind.
3. If the windshield bow is designed well it should also act as a roll bar keeping the airplane higher off the ground and easier egress in a roll over event.

I was involved with the design of the Windshield Bow on the Thunder Mustang. It was more critical than the RV since there is no rollover structure behind the cockpit.
I am aware of one roll over accident at the Reno/Stead airport. I recently reviewed the NTSB report and noted it appear the Windshield bow appeared to be made of Carbon Fiber and had fractured during the event.
I suspect this was a modification by the builder as I recall the we supplied an autoclaved fiberglass windshield bow as we determined it was less likely to fracture in a roll over accident.
Carbon Fiber is very strong but is less tolerant of overloading or impacts than fiberglass or Kevlar. Kevlar would have probably been a good choice as well but I think we were able to source a premade fiberglass plate to make the bow from that was stronger than anything we could get in Kevlar.

So far I don't think the fiberglass bow has ever been involved in a roll over on the Thunder Mustang.

Brian