Developing story, 12/13/18: 1 dead at KVPZ crash

Status
Not open for further replies.
VPZ hits home for me as a Valpo U alum so I was following this one a little closer than most.

From the PA28 Facebook group so take with somewhat of a grain of salt, however they had screenshots of the prior incident report...
Plane was a Comanche. Privately owned, and had bent metal in it before, while with a CFI doing insurance dual time, in a landing incident. CFI, at the time, had no Comanche time but was giving the dual to make the insurance man happy.
 
Yikes. God bless. Will be interesting to hear a lot of the info surrounding this.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Pure BS. There is no need or requirement to wait until the FAA arrives to remove the body. In fact, most FAA inspectors prefer that it is gone when they arrive.
Click to expand...

I was not, and am usually not command. I can only say that the guidance we have, and what happened on this scene, is that if there is someone to save, do whatever you have to do. But if there is no savable life and extrication is required, don't touch until the FAA arrives and gives the go ahead to start cutting. We had a crash a while back where we did get the two occupants out and they were ok. We sure didn't waste any time there. Because I am not command, I cannot tell you if those instructions come from the airport director or the FAA.
 
Rushie said:
Thank you for the detailed description of the victim. We normally only get "multiple blunt force injuries" and I've been curious exactly what that means. I guess from a physical standpoint, it's plain it was instantaneous and he didn't suffer. Also I think it's good for people to know exactly what you have to deal with, with the job of extracting the remains. I appreciate those of you that have that unpleasant task.
Click to expand...

He surely didn’t suffer, it was hard and fast. Our hangar security camera caught footage, it’s not even two seconds.

It’s an honor to serve, but it for sure takes the ability to handle bad days, and the need for strong coping mechanisms and methods is real. Always a horrible day when you can’t help.
 
I feel for all first responders who deal with this...never is it easy...
 
Damn!

Wonder what the cause was

Also doubt prior damage history had anything to do with anything.
 
SkyDog58 said:
Pure BS. There is no need or requirement to wait until the FAA arrives to remove the body. In fact, most FAA inspectors prefer that it is gone when they arrive.
Click to expand...

Correct EMS and FD own it, once they make sure there is no one left to help and no hazard to others, than the FAA can play.
 
James331 said:
Damn!

Wonder what the cause was

Also doubt prior damage history had anything to do with anything.
Click to expand...

Is it not considerable that if the engine was worked on, that could have had something possibly to do with it? I’m not speculating, I would just think it would be possible.
 
That’s one reason why I could never be a first responder...brutal dealing with stuff like that.
 
TheTraveler said:
Is it not considerable that if the engine was worked on, that could have had something possibly to do with it? I’m not speculating, I would just think it would be possible.
Click to expand...

If it was old damage, no
 
The portion about the engine stopped with no residual fuel on the ground is distressing. It doesn't jive with other reports of the aircraft having been fueled recently. Certainly that impact would've ruptured the bladders. The one in FL recently went in like that as well. Nasty business.
 
Chip Sylverne said:
The portion about the engine stopped with no residual fuel on the ground is distressing. It doesn't jive with other reports of the aircraft having been fueled recently. Certainly that impact would've ruptured the bladders. The one in FL recently went in like that as well. Nasty business.
Click to expand...

Just to clarify: there was fuel, and the smell was strong, but we had no puddles. The aircraft was in the swail, and it's pretty deep and wide. With a larger fuel spill I'd expect a puddle or pool, but there wasn't any. It is certainly possible with the unusually warm temps that it could have been sucked up and absorbed into the ground, but it's hard to say where that expectation or estimation is with the size of the area, the incline, the soft ground, and the tall grass.
 
TheTraveler said:
Just to clarify: there was fuel, and the smell was strong, but we had no puddles. The aircraft was in the swail, and it's pretty deep and wide. With a larger fuel spill I'd expect a puddle or pool, but there wasn't any. It is certainly possible with the unusually warm temps that it could have been sucked up and absorbed into the ground, but it's hard to say where that expectation or estimation is with the size of the area, the incline, the soft ground, and the tall grass.
Click to expand...

It’s not like it was hundreds of gallons of fuel. Just using a fuel level of 20 gallons per side, with an impact as severe and steep as this one the tanks very likely ruptured and spilled most if it onto bare ground. Also, it was not done gently. It was scattered violently. It would not take long to soak into the ground and run down the hill a little bit, thereby increasing the surface area into which the spilled fuel soaked. No puddling needed.
 
Lachlan said:
It’s not like it was hundreds of gallons of fuel. Just using a fuel level of 20 gallons per side, with an impact as severe and steep as this one the tanks very likely ruptured and spilled most if it onto bare ground. Also, it was not done gently. It was scattered violently. It would not take long to soak into the ground and run down the hill a little bit, thereby increasing the surface area into which the spilled fuel soaked. No puddling needed.
Click to expand...

that's why the NTSB reports often mention areas of dead grass / underbrush (or the absence thereof) in the vicinity of the impact or airframe. So we should find out pretty soon.
 
The "professional umbrage crowd"...

I'm gonna use that one.
 
NTSB invites the FAA? Or, if the FAA clearly isn't a possible contributer to the accident cause, they invite themselves? Curious who makes the call - I know there are times when the FAA isn't allowed to participate in the investigation, other than to answer questions/provide data, since they may have culpability.
 
Sundancer said:
NTSB invites the FAA? Or, if the FAA clearly isn't a possible contributer to the accident cause, they invite themselves? Curious who makes the call - I know there are times when the FAA isn't allowed to participate in the investigation, other than to answer questions/provide data, since they may have culpability.
Click to expand...


FAA is like Jehovah witnesses or inlaws, they kinda just invite themselves.
 
A retired friend, from the NTSB, said there were occasions the FAA had to be told to butt out, until it was (or wasn't established) if FAA was contributory. Just anecdotal, didn't sound lie a routine thing.
 
Funny...all my posts were magically deleted. I guess I still have them in my email for when I get the subpoena...
 
James331 said:
Well that got neutered
Click to expand...

I think you win the prize for best word choice...

I wonder who decided which posts were deleted and which were worthy enough to stay. Seems a little one sided now.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top