Crash at south Lakeland x49.

I'd have to start going to church every day if that had been me.:eek:
 
flyingron said:
It would appear that this happened well down the field rather than at the threshold (displaced with buckets as the AF/D would have you believe). The diver appears to be traveling perpendicular to the runway so it is quite possible that the pilot figured the diver would have landed off the runway.
Click to expand...

Challenged said:
Animated timelapse of the event using the pictures: http://i.imgur.com/CQQPwRr.gif
Click to expand...

Looks like he was on the "go" part of "touch and go".
 
Captain said:
Meh. If I tell you my cars right front tire is flat we all know which tire that is.
Click to expand...

Just a side note..

Any vehicle repair manual I can remember reading refers to "driver's side" and "Passenger's side" not right/left.
 
flyingron said:
It would appear that this happened well down the field rather than at the threshold (displaced with buckets as the AF/D would have you believe). The diver appears to be traveling perpendicular to the runway so it is quite possible that the pilot figured the diver would have landed off the runway.
Click to expand...
No, it happened at, or short of the threshold. The photos of the incident show a road intersection, a small, box-like structure by the road, and house which are before or adjacent to the threshold.
141phyv.jpg
15dnfqb.jpg
 
Last edited:
dell30rb said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39pel1M593o

I realize these might be higher performance parachutes, but those things can drop altitude in a hurry, and scoot across in ground effect at 50 mph
Click to expand...

The parachute in this accident is big and slow, nothing like the little swoop rockets. Skydiver was in the Cessna pilots field of vision all the way down the Cessna pilots final approach.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Skydiver was in the Cessna pilots field of vision all the way down the Cessna pilots final approach.
Click to expand...
And just how in the hell do you know that?

Oh yeah...

You don't.

You're just being the typical you.
 
timwinters said:
And just how in the hell do you know that?
.
Click to expand...

Because I have thousands of parachute jumps, I know how fast and at what angle that parachute moves. Single category pilots should stick to talking about the single category they have flown. And look out the window all sorts of stuff out there to run into.
 
One of master Yoda's best lines

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk
 
Ooopsy doopsy. Unless it was recently reissued and not in the system yet Mr. Cessna pilot doesn't have a current medical.
 
I've seen several posts that say the parachute has the right of way. Where is this stated in the FAR's, I looked and can't find it.
 
Good sleuthing, the plot someone else posited where it was shown about 1/3 of the way down the field evidentally was in error.
 
Was the airplane landing or taking off? If it was landing I think the pilot saw the chute and tried to abort the landing. In the first picture of the sequence the plane appears to be climbing.

I can see how this could happen. Skydivers come down pretty fast under canopy and during takeoff or landing with no crossing runway most pilots are focusing down the runway and not likely paying much attention to something traveling across the runway and dropping in from above.
 
N2124v said:
I've seen several posts that say the parachute has the right of way. Where is this stated in the FAR's, I looked and can't find it.
Click to expand...

CFR part 105 covers parachuting. Skydivers are not ultralights or gliders. There was one case, formation flight for hire with pasengers, where they ruled skydivers are something between cargo and crew. You aren't supposed to parachute into airplanes but in the past the NTSB has blamed pilots for hitting skydivers. The rules don't reflect the capability hierarchy as the aircraft right of way rules try to.
 
§105.5 General.
No person may conduct a parachute operation, and no pilot in command of an aircraft may allow a parachute operation to be conducted from an aircraft, if that operation creates a hazard to air traffic or to persons or property on the surface.
Click to expand...
Parachuting onto the threshold of a runway would seem to create a hazard to air traffic.
 
If the jumper isn't swooping their decent rate isn't very high. maybe 10 to 12 feet a second, with a forward speed of around 15-20 mph not accounting for wind. The pilot of the plane should have seen him, not counting the fact that jumping is kinda publicized. Its our responsibility as pilots to know if theres a drop zone at an airport we fly in or out of. My canopy is 260 square feet, its bigger than most GA plane wings. So if you cant see a giant flying purple and green wing you need to find a hobby that involves yarn. I had that pounded into my head from my jump instructor, "right of way doesn't protect you". I never cross a runway under 750 feet, if I see a plane in my way I'll land off. I have a lot more options on landing areas than he does. I can land in farmer joes back yard, he cant. So both pilots should have done it differently, they are both very lucky. Technically the plane was in the wrong, he was powered and could have went around. But its easy to hear a plane under canopy, they really cant sneak up on you.
 
You have to remember he was doing touch and go's so was never over 800 ft and in short closed pattern. Diver jumped from 10000 ft. I'd say the diver had time to see a plane in the pattern on the way down. At the height they collided I'm sure they were both focusing on there point of landing. I watch for big birds around here as we have plenty and sometimes its still a where the heck did he come from. I'd say it was little of both's fault. What most people call a accident.
 
kkoran said:
Parachuting onto the threshold of a runway would seem to create a hazard to air traffic.
Click to expand...

It is the skydiving version of 91.13 everybody is always guilty and the pols can tell their constituents we have a rule making X illegal.
 
It appears the jumper missed the prop by a few inches. Wow. Both are lucky this did not happen higher up.
 
gismo said:
?..landing with no crossing runway most pilots are focusing down the runway and not likely paying much attention to something traveling across the runway and dropping in from above.
Click to expand...

From The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook:

"The pilot should direct central vision at a shallow downward angle of from 10° to 15° toward the runway as the roundout/flare is initiated. Maintaining the same viewing angle causes the point of visual interception with the runway to move progressively rearward toward the pilot as the airplane loses altitude. This is an important visual cue in assessing the rate of altitude loss. Conversely, forward movement of the visual interception point will indicate an increase in altitude, and would mean that the pitch angle was increased too rapidly, resulting in an over flare."

In my experience, once the roundout and flare has begun, pilots are no longer scanning all around them (head on a swivel), but quite focused almost straight ahead.

I know I am.
 
Last edited:
If the pilot had a medical maybe he could have seen the traffic.:lol:
FastEddieB said:
From The FAA Airplane Flying Handbook:

"The pilot should direct central vision at a shallow downward angle of from 10° to 15° toward the runway as the roundout/flare is initiated. Maintaining the same viewing angle causes the point of visual interception with the runway to move progressively rearward toward the pilot as the airplane loses altitude. This is an important visual cue in assessing the rate of altitude loss. Conversely, forward movement of the visual interception point will indicate an increase in altitude, and would mean that the pitch angle was increased too rapidly, resulting in an over flare."

In my experience, once the roundout and flare has begun, pilots are no longer scanning all around them (head on a swivel), but quite focused almost straight ahead.

I know I am.
Click to expand...
 
ClimbnSink said:
If the pilot had a medical maybe he could have seen the traffic.:lol:
Click to expand...

The key word is "maybe".

Of course, regardless of the height and angle of descent of the chute, and the phase of flight of the pilot, we know that you are 100% sure you would have seen the parachutist and been able to take immediate and correct avoidance actions.

Good for you. We need more "Super Pilots".

But always in the back of my mind is the admonition...

"Pride goeth before a fall".
 
Wow, amazing photo sequence. I don't even see any wingtips touch. It appears that the parachute and the nose absorb all of the airplane's energy.
 
FastEddieB said:
The key word is "maybe".

Of course, regardless of the height and angle of descent of the chute, and the phase of flight of the pilot, we know that you are 100% sure you would have seen the parachutist and been able to take immediate and correct avoidance actions.

Good for you. We need more "Super Pilots".

But always in the back of my mind is the admonition...

"Pride goeth before a fall".
Click to expand...
Or we can fly around like the Arabs trusting our fate to Allah. Funny that you guys are defending a 87 year old cowboy pilot.
 
ClimbnSink said:
Or we can fly around like the Arabs trusting our fate to Allah. Funny that you guys are defending a 87 year old cowboy pilot.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity, is there anyone that you won't insult? Are all parachutists beyond criticism?
 
Here's a unique(ish) thought.
The skydiver didn't see the plane....
The pilot didn't see the skydiver......
It was an accident.
They happen. Despite what the railroads say, every accident isn't preventable. If they were, we'd never have them. I doubt seriously if either guy is an idiot. Maybe, just maybe they both made a mistake at the same place on the same day.
Jeez.. you have crucified the old guy as having no medical, not looking for a freakin' parachute in the pattern (don't we all do that all the time? :confused:)
Some have said that the diver was crossing the field at a right angle. So what? I was based at KZPH (Zephyrhills) for two years and some skydivers landed in some pretty weird places at some pretty inconvenient times to say the least. I've landed at that field (X49) quite a few times and passed it on my way to work every day for 2 years. I never once saw a parachute land there. Ever.

Sit back, take a breath and ask how you'd want to be judged if it had been you.
 
My airport has a very active skydiving operation. They have a drop zone, they don't land on the runway or drop through the pattern. It's an airport, the runway is there specifically for airplanes to land on. You don't drive your car or minibike on it and it's not a landing area for parachutes.
 
Silvaire said:
My airport has a very active skydiving operation. They have a drop zone, they don't land on the runway or drop through the pattern. It's an airport, the runway is there specifically for airplanes to land on. You don't drive your car or minibike on it and it's not a landing area for parachutes.
Click to expand...

Correct! This type thing happens so quickly neither had time to react. The pilot was watching the runway as he should have been. He was over the runway which is where the parachutist did not belong. It was a high wing aircraft and he undoubtedly never saw the parachute. His attention was where it was supposed to be. I'll bet it never happens again at that airport and things will change. Some bicycle riders have the same poor judgement behavior. To trash the pilot without knowing the facts is immature.
 
I keep coming back to this thread and this accident, and it makes me think:

"I'd rather be lucky than good any day." ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top