Intimidating view for a departure

holly carp!!

Gonna have to watch that agian with sound but to just keep flying at the mountain for so long......
 
NTSB Identification: DEN84FA308. The docket is stored on NTSB microfiche number 25894.

Accident occurred Friday, August 10, 1984 in TABERNASH, CO Probable Cause Approval Date: 12/14/1992 Aircraft: CESSNA L-19E, registration: N4584A Injuries: 2 Fatal.

THE AIRPLANE DEPARTED GRANDBY 8/10/84 AND FAILED TO ARRIVE AT ITS DESTINATION. ON 8/23/87, IT WAS FOUND ON THE SLOPE OF A HIGH TREE-COVERED RIDGE. VIDEO TAPE RECOVERED FROM THE WRECKAGE PROVIDED A VISUAL AND AUDIO RECORD OF THE FLIGHT FROM TAKEOFF TO IMPACT. COMPARING THE RECORDING TO A TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP, THE FLIGHT WAS SLOWLY CLIMBING BUT ITS ALTITUDE ABOVE THE GROUND WAS DECREASING WHEN IT CRASHED AT THE 10,200-FT LEVEL. DURING THE LAST FEW SECONDS OF THE TAPE, THE TERRAIN DOMINATED THE VIEW THROUGH THE COCKPIT WINDOW. THE PILOT MADE AN APPROXIMATELY 45 to 55-DEG ANGLE BANK TO THE RIGHT, AND THE STALL WARNING HORN COULD BE HEARD 3 TIMES DURING THE APRX. 180 DEG OF TURN. THE AIRPLANE SUBSEQUENTLY STALLED 3 TIMES, SPUN, FLIPPED OVER, AND ENTERED THE TREES. THE DENSITY ALTITUDE WAS JUST ABOVE 13,000 FT.**

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: IN-FLIGHT PLANNING/DECISION, IMPROPER...PILOT IN COMMAND AIRSPEED...NOT MAINTAINED...PILOT IN COMMAND…DENSITY ALTITUDE NOT TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION WHILE ATTEMPTING 180-DEGREE RIGHT TURN AT APPROX. 45 to 55 DEGREES OF BANK ANGLE...PILOT IN COMMAND INSUFFICIENT LIFT AVAILABLE TO COMPLETE THIS MANEUVER SAFELY.

Contributing Factors: WEATHER CONDITION...SUNNY AND HOT…HIGH DENSITY ALTITUDE CONDITIONS… TERRAIN CONDITION...MOUNTAINOUS/HILLY…FLIGHT INTO CONTINOUSLY ASCENDING TERRAIN…HIGH DEGREE OF BANK ANGLE RESULTING IN LOSS OF POSITIVE AERODYNAMIC LIFT…AIRCRAFT UNABLE TO MAINTAIN LEVEL FLIGHT…

NOTE: The Cessna manual for the L-19E lists the service ceiling for this make/model as 20,300 feet. Under “optimum” conditions (less density altitude), and/or with a much gentler bank angle, the pilot should’ve been able to safely complete this turn. By banking at 45 to 55-degrees under existing temperature conditions at the time of the crash, he effectively put the performance ceiling for completing this maneuver well below that altitude.
 
Going only by the description of "near Tabernash, CO", yes. Pretty close.
 
I suspect "henning" flew out of there on 3 cylinders with 7k density altitude while 500# over gross and cleared it straight out without a problem at least 3 times. :rolleyes:
 
20,000 feet? Was not aware that a normally aspirated airplane would have such a high service ceiling. Guess it just has a good power to weight ratio and a high lift wing??
 
dell30rb said:
20,000 feet? Was not aware that a normally aspirated airplane would have such a high service ceiling. Guess it just has a good power to weight ratio and a high lift wing??
Click to expand...

The L-19 was certified back in the day...

My 1940 Chief published service ceiling is 15,000

Sure, if you launched off a cliff at 15,500 it might stay level for a few seconds.

:rolleyes:
 
I've had my 182 at a DA of 20K and was still able to climb sufficently to not call it my service ceiling, it can be done
 
dell30rb said:
20,000 feet? Was not aware that a normally aspirated airplane would have such a high service ceiling. Guess it just has a good power to weight ratio and a high lift wing??
Click to expand...

Keep in mind that the L-19 is more or less a militarized Cessna 170B. Same wing, same tail....but with a 0-470 instead of the 145 hp O-300 that was in the 170s. Factor that with the two seats vs 4 and I would say that the L-19 has a much better power to weight ratio than the 170. The 170 published ceiling is 15,500 so I can see an de-militarized L-19 getting up to 20k.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Keep in mind that the L-19 is more or less a militarized Cessna 170B. Same wing, same tail....but with a 0-470 instead of the 145 hp O-300 that was in the 170s. Factor that with the two seats vs 4 and I would say that the L-19 has a much better power to weight ratio than the 170. The 170 published ceiling is 15,500 so I can see an de-militarized L-19 getting up to 20k.
Click to expand...

Like noted above I did it with the same engine and more weight, I have no doubt that an L-19 could do it.
 
Took off out of ASE in the sim today... reminded me of this thread. Felt like the little engine that could on takeoff, "I think I can, I think I can."

attachment.php


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • crj_ase_rwy33.jpg
    crj_ase_rwy33.jpg
    31.6 KB · Views: 55
  • crj_ase_cockpit.jpg
    crj_ase_cockpit.jpg
    39.4 KB · Views: 56
Could have tried Runway 15 instead of 33 in the jet for an even more serious butt-pucker. :rofl: ;) ;) ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top