Grumman electrical failure. Crashes into Cessna on runway.

Ed Haywood said:
My POH says emergency procedure for electrical system failure is "land as soon as practical if electrical power needed for continued flight."
Click to expand...
My "POH" is the limitations card. FWIW, the FAA doesn't appreciate it if you laminate it.
 
Racerx said:
That's the excuse I used when I slept in class.
Click to expand...
I had a few classes like that. Required classes where I had to attend, but could do other things instead of pay attention and still get 100% grades.

One math teacher called me on it. Told me that if I was going to take a nap, I could teach math. So, I taught the rest of the class. The next day he gave me a pass so I didn't have to attend class, just see him for tests.
 
JackL-3J said:
I had a few classes like that. Required classes where I had to attend, but could do other things instead of pay attention and still get 100% grades.

One math teacher called me on it. Told me that if I was going to take a nap, I could teach math. So, I taught the rest of the class. The next day he gave me a pass so I didn't have to attend class, just see him for tests.
Click to expand...
My wrestling coach who I couldn't stand for wrestling reasons (need to cut 4 pounds in 2 hours cuz he forgot to tell me I was 130 not my normal 135. Made weight. They didn't have anyone at my class) taught speech class or public speaking. I don't do homework if it's not getting graded. What's the point. Plus I missed a ton of time racing. Needed to pass the final to graduate early. Needed a B minimum on the final. Got 1 wrong. Mic drop. Peace.
 
Ed Haywood said:
My POH says emergency procedure for electrical system failure is "land as soon as practical if electrical power needed for continued flight."
Click to expand...
Well, "Electrical" and "Engine" both start with "E". Maybe he was looking for "Electrical Failure" in the POH and accidentally turned to "Engine Failure".
 
Even though it was a "rear ender" how come no one seems to ask on the ATC recording if anyone is hurt?
 
"...the pilot of the AA-5 did not appear to make an attempt to...avoid the 182T while rolling on the runway"

Nonsense! He had that steering wheel hard over!
 
ssscomp said:
Even though it was a "rear ender" how come no one seems to ask on the ATC recording if anyone is hurt?
Click to expand...
There's no "ATC recording" here. It was an uncontrolled field. What you're listening to is the CTAF.
 
asicer said:
Well, "Electrical" and "Engine" both start with "E". Maybe he was looking for "Electrical Failure" in the POH and accidentally turned to "Engine Failure".
Click to expand...
Perhaps his Emergency Checklist (Pseudo Emergency Checklist) was stored in the cloud . . . and with his phone dead . . . and connected to a charging port . . . and a dead airplane battery . . ..

I was taught that accidents are only rarely the result of a single bad decision, or a single broken part. More usually, there is a tracable line of failures, mental, mechanical, or both, that lead to the end result.
 
AvNavCom said:
"...the pilot of the AA-5 did not appear to make an attempt to...avoid the 182T while rolling on the runway"

Nonsense! He had that steering wheel hard over!
Click to expand...
And was laying on the horn. :rolleyes:
 
AvNavCom said:
"...the pilot of the AA-5 did not appear to make an attempt to...avoid the 182T while rolling on the runway"

Nonsense! He had that steering wheel hard over!
Click to expand...
To be fair... The Grummans have castering nosewheels, and thus need to have some level of braking effectiveness to steer enough that it'd be perceptible to those outside the aircraft. At the speed it happened I'm not sure he was really there yet.

That said, I've been wondering why, knowing he was close behind another aircraft, he decided to go toward the side of the runway with all of the exits, since that's where the plane in front of him would be going. Stay on the other side and go in the grass if you have to.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
I've been wondering why
Click to expand...
No way to know what was going on in his head, but the best guess is he panicked. Once panic is in control, there’s no accounting what will happen. Crashing to the other airplane could have been his best choice (in his head) given the “emergency.” Or he may have even been blind to it being there.

Going to the side with the exits could have been nothing more than the common landing left of centerline many pilots do because of parallax.
 
Last edited:
Sounds as if some folks commenting here need to run for school board.
Unhappy with education in your district? Change it.
 
well obviously if he had no electrical he wouldn't be able to taxi so he was just trying to have enough momentum to get off the runway. sheesh guys...........
 
"According to the pilot of the AA-5, the airplane had to be jump started before departing from
Sholes International Airport (GLS), Galveston, Texas. About five minutes after departure from
GLS, the airplane lost all electrical power. As a result of the electrical failure, the pilot was not
able to communicate over CTAF or extend the airplane’s flaps. The pilot reported that he was
able to navigate to LVJ using an iPad and ForeFlight "

GLS-LVJ looks to be about 15 minutes so the pilot should have had a good 10 minutes to calm down and formulate a plan.

"While approaching LVJ, the pilot made visual contact with the 182T and followed it to
runway 32. The pilot estimated that he was about 1/4 to 1/2 mile behind the 182T while in the
traffic pattern."

1/4-1/2mi is a bit close, isn't it? I was taught to continue on the downwind until traffic to follow is abeam on final, which would be 0.75-1.0mi.
 
StraightnLevel said:
Backwards - the incident happened on A3, which only exits on the left side of Rwy 32. The FBO, fuel farm, and open tie-downs are all left of Rwy 32. There are some hangar areas that exist to the right, but you'd have to land REALLY short to exit on A2 or G. When the rumman swerved to the left on touchdown, it effectively guaranteed a collision.

Click to expand...
You’re right. I got it backwards, but not the exit. Pilots tend to land left of centerline. Fixing it.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
To be fair... The Grummans have castering nosewheels, and thus need to have some level of braking effectiveness to steer enough that it'd be perceptible to those outside the aircraft. At the speed it happened I'm not sure he was really there yet.

That said, I've been wondering why, knowing he was close behind another aircraft, he decided to go toward the side of the runway with all of the exits, since that's where the plane in front of him would be going. Stay on the other side and go in the grass if you have to.
Click to expand...
I was mostly just doing a bit of gentle teasing about trying to use the yoke like a car's steering wheel, which indicates to me a full helmet fire sufficient to cause him to fall back to really fundamental habits. It's a bad day when you forget that ground steering in an airplane is done with the feet!

I don't want to pile on the guy too much. Clearly he made some bad decisions that he probably wouldn't have made on a better day and in a better headspace. It's pretty obvious to all of us that he could have kept flying the aircraft without any difficulty, made an ill-advised approach right behind another aircraft, and chose to land in about the worst possible spot. I'd love to buy the guy a beverage and hear his experience of it, especially why he locked in so hard on an unnecessary expedited landing.
 
eman1200 said:
well obviously if he had no electrical he wouldn't be able to taxi so he was just trying to have enough momentum to get off the runway. sheesh guys...........
Click to expand...
Yeah, getting a jump start on the runway is dangerous. Some idjut might run into you. :rolleyes:
 
AvNavCom said:
It's a bad day when you forget that ground steering in an airplane is done with the feet!
Click to expand...
It's actually a really good reason why everyone should start out flying lessons in an aircraft with a nice little wheel about 161 inches behind thier butt. Learn to taxi an actual airplane, coordinate controls on the ground, be aware of thier surroundings and the wind strength and position.

How to read a paper map. Or just how to navigate . . ..

Aircraft systems. How they work, what constitutes an emergency, how to deal with the unexpected, and how to remain calm while making the best possible decisions quickly, even with limited data.

It seems that this guy "learned" to fly the same way that people "learn" to skydive by being strapped to someone else. His body was there . . .. Given his state of competence and reasoning he is fortunate to just be getting "piled on". He's dern lucky he didn't kill somebody.
 
asicer said:
1/4-1/2mi is a bit close, isn't it? I was taught to continue on the downwind until traffic to follow is abeam on final, which would be 0.75-1.0mi.
Click to expand...
Especially close when the 182 is making a normal stabilized approach and the Grumman is approaching flaps up.
 
asicer said:
GLS-LVJ looks to be about 15 minutes so the pilot should have had a good 10 minutes to calm down and formulate a plan.
Click to expand...
Does anyone know his intended destination? He, or at least the same plane, was apparently in and out of KLVJ within a couple weeks before the mishap flight. If his intended destination was KLVJ, it boggles the mind how he would need a magenta line to find it when he was already 1/3 of the way there. The total distance is 25 nm (barely half of what it would take to count toward a rating or certificate) so he was probably within 20 miles and pointed straight toward the place. Even the worst compass I've ever used in a plane would be sufficient to complete that flight without a GPS. Even without a compass, it shouldn't have been hard to simply fly in a generally forwards direction for 10 minutes.

The mishap-causing mistake here was following the 182 too closely. It's basic airmanship. Almost every plane is measurably faster than some other plane. I come over the fence at about 45 knots in the J-3. If this pilot had working flaps, a working radio, and no helmet fire, would he have been able to land behind a Cub without ruining someone's day?

The other ADM points that I hope the rest of us would have gotten better include:

1. If you don't know how to safely fly the plane without electric power (example: knowing the approach speed and sight picture for a no-flaps landing), don't take off immediately after a jump start. At least watch the electrical system on the ground to be sure it's charging the battery.

2. If you have an emergency 5 minutes after departure, consider turning 180 degrees either direction, especially if you need a magenta line to find any other airport. The conversation about having a hard time seeing the light gun signals is much less awkward than the one about running out of fuel trying to find an airport, chopping up someone's empennage, or even merely violating the Houston Class B airspace.

3. If you are NORDO, overfly the field at 1,500 AGL so you can observe the windsock, other traffic in the pattern, etc., and then make a normal pattern entry. Following the first plane you see on final (which it seems he did) at a distance too close for Airventure (where they have ATC and three runways to divide traffic among) is usually a bad idea for many reasons.
 
iamtheari said:
...or even merely violating the Houston Class B airspace.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, he was inside the 30nm veil without ModeC/ADSB wasn't he? I wonder if that will be a part of a conversation with FSDO.
 
asicer said:
Oh yeah, he was inside the 30nm veil without ModeC/ADSB wasn't he? I wonder if that will be a part of a conversation with FSDO.
Click to expand...
That would depend on where he lost his electrical system. The mode C veil extends almost to KGLS, so depending on which direction he took off, he may have entered the 30nm area while ModeC was still operating.
 
Even if I was on fire (which is one of the few times I'd hasten to get on the ground), I'd not fly into another plane doing it.
 
flyingron said:
Even if I was on fire (which is one of the few times I'd hasten to get on the ground), I'd not fly into another plane doing it.
Click to expand...
OK, hands up everybody who believes they would.

Nauga,
who can hit what he doesn't see
 
flyingron said:
Even if I was on fire (which is one of the few times I'd hasten to get on the ground), I'd not fly into another plane doing it.
Click to expand...
I think me too. I’ve had a few situations in and out of aviation which indicate to me that I would not panic. But I’m also aware that one never knows until confronted.
 
midlifeflyer said:
I think me too. I’ve had a few situations in and out of aviation which indicate to me that I would not panic. But I’m also aware that one never knows until confronted.
Click to expand...
I've had two engine failures, countless electrical failures, countless mag/initial failures, etc... over the years. The last failure where the engine hand grenaded over a largely wooded area, my approach to the one open pasture, I'm just thinking "I hope this doesn't hurt."
 
flyingron said:
I've had two engine failures, countless electrical failures, countless mag/initial failures, etc... over the years. The last failure where the engine hand grenaded over a largely wooded area, my approach to the one open pasture, I'm just thinking "I hope this doesn't hurt."
Click to expand...
Yeah, I've had my share including losing power in the clouds over the Rockies. Right about here.

1736439305534.png
I didn't even think about whether it would hurt. Too caught up in doing my job to fly the airplane and hope the moving map on my GPSMap396 would help me not hit something on the way down and be able to see and make our landing site when we broke out. A passing pilot I spoke with after told me I sounded cool, calm, and collected over the radio. I've heard the tapes and was surprised.

Nevertheless I'm not quite presumptuous enough to be certain that the next time I won't need to at least change my underwear.
 
Let me make sure I have this straight.

1. Jump starts plane.
2. Departs with known electrical issue (refer to #1).
3. Loses electrical power ~5 minutes after departure.
4. Proceeds to continue flight to original intended destination 10 minutes away rather than returning to point of departure 5 minutes away.
5. Possibly busts Mode C veil of KHOU (depending on the FAA's interpretation of an aircraft "without an engine-driven electrical system" as it applies to an aircraft with an electrical failure).
6. Enters KLVJ pattern how?
7. Proceeds down final for KLVJ despite being too close to the 182T and unstable in his own approach.

I hate the conclusion this draws me to. We could be looking at a pilot who deliberately created an unsafe situation because he thought he could pull it off, and is now hiding behind an electrical failure as an after-the-fact excuse. Here is my rationale.

By themselves, #1 and #2 could be reasonable choices in day VFR conditions. #3 is a predictable outcome of #1 and #2, and therefore should not alarm the pilot. #4 would imply that, indeed, the pilot was not alarmed or in a state of panic from his electrical failure. #4 also indicates that he had full understanding that his engine was in no danger of stopping. #5 could be a forgivable oversight by itself, but might also demonstrate reckless disregard for busy airspace.

Here is where things really get interesting. #6 is unclear, but the pilot acknowledges having ADS-B in through his Sentry. He therefore should have seen the target for the 182T (and any other broadcasting traffic) and been able to plan a safe pattern entry well in advance, even if he hadn't been able to establish early visual contact with the 182T. Then we have #7. Maybe he goofed up his slick pattern entry because he failed to account for his faster no-flaps landing speed.

Where does all of this leave us? His pattern of decisions demonstrates a strongly mission-oriented mindset. He may have developed tunnel vision about landing the plane on the first attempt. Regardless of his statement to the NTSB, his actions and video evidence show no sign that he ever actually considered a go-around. To the contrary, the video evidence shows a pilot taking extraordinary measures trying to force a first-attempt landing. Consider this in context with #1-5, and we have a troubling pattern of calculated decisions.
 
Last edited:
traumamed said:
. . . . (W)e have a troubling pattern of calculated decisions.
Click to expand...
:yes:
traumamed said:
. . . . (D)epending on the FAA's interpretation of an aircraft "without an engine-driven electrical system" as it applies to an aircraft with an electrical failure . . .
Click to expand...
So, if I remove my right seat cushion, or buckle a milk crate there, I don't need an ELT? :happydance:
 
traumamed said:
5. Possibly busts Mode C veil of KHOU (depending on the FAA's interpretation of an aircraft "without an engine-driven electrical system" as it applies to an aircraft with an electrical failure).
Click to expand...
The reg doesn't say "without an engine-driven electrical system." It says, "not originally certificated with an engine-driven electrical system." The exception to the mode C veil does not apply to Tigers. If the electrical system crumps, it violates 91.215 if it strays into the listed airspace that requires transponders.
 
traumamed said:
#6 is unclear, but the pilot acknowledges having ADS-B in through his Sentry. He therefore should have seen the target for the 182T (and any other broadcasting traffic) and been able to plan a safe pattern entry well in advance, even if he hadn't been able to establish early visual contact with the 182T.
Click to expand...
Too much "tree" detail. The "forest" was CAVU. "He therefore should have seen the" 182 by looking out the window. Oh that's right. He did see the 182 out the window.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top