Malibu down near Erie airport, Colorado

Clark1961 said:
nitpick - right traffic for 15 - all traffic stays west of airport to avoid housing on east side...and the Erie tower is east of the airport
Click to expand...


Well hell. I guess I haven't been up there in a long time. Ha. We used to watch students making laps on 15 from the picnic table at the FBO, but that was in 1991...

I just fly whatever the book and chart says. Good thing, huh? Being old and having memories of stuff before it changed is a *****. ;) ;). ;)

At least it explains why he ended up west of centerline.

Right pattern for 15 puts you over the dump with all the seagulls and is just begging for bird strikes.
 
denverpilot said:
Well hell. I guess I haven't been up there in a long time. Ha. We used to watch students making laps on 15 from the picnic table at the FBO, but that was in 1991...

I just fly whatever the book and chart says. Good thing, huh? Being old and having memories of stuff before it changed is a *****. ;) ;). ;)

At least it explains why he ended up west of centerline.

Right pattern for 15 puts you over the dump with all the seagulls and is just begging for bird strikes.
Click to expand...

Picnic table was still there a couple years ago if that helps.

Maybe it 'splains why west of centerline but too close in and precipitating the aircraft on unsuspecting dirt remains a mystery...
 
alfadog said:
Interesting. Here are the screencaps:



attachment.php
Click to expand...


Can anyone give me a better idea where the wreckage ended up on the map? I'm not familiar at all


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
SixPapaCharlie said:
If that is it, it doesn't appear anyone was going around.


Departing plane has local squawk. Inbound is 1200
both show > 200mph
Click to expand...

That right there makes me suspicious of webtrak. Landing or taking off, the meridian is not going over 200mph. Makes no sense.
 
Clark1961 said:
nitpick - right traffic for 15 - all traffic stays west of airport to avoid housing on east side...and the Erie tower is east of the airport
Click to expand...

Erie has a tower?
 
murphey said:
Erie has a tower?
Click to expand...

Erie tower is that tall, skinny thing that extends to about 985' AGL northeast of the field. There are a couple other tall towers northeast of there. Those three towers are the tall obstructions to be aware of when flying on the northwest side of Denver. Very important, don't fergit they are there...sorta like the big damn tower east of DEN. Don't bump into towers or support structures, very bad for little planes.
 
TriGear28 said:
Can anyone give me a better idea where the wreckage ended up on the map? I'm not familiar at all
Click to expand...

North of Baseline/Hwy 7, left of the runway. The runway is depicted there as the long diagonal line running northwest to southeast. What's not easy to see on that map is the terrain rises south of Runway 15 as you go toward Hwy 7, and also rises on the other side, about 300'. The airport sits downhill from the road, and then north of the airport is mostly flat.

murphey said:
That right there makes me suspicious of webtrak. Landing or taking off, the meridian is not going over 200mph. Makes no sense.
Click to expand...

The screenshot shows 125MPH for the departing aircraft before they passed. They passed almost down to E-470/Northwest Parkway, and definitely south of Hwy 7. The departing aircraft was accelerating, of course. I don't see anything abnormal in the Webtrack speeds.

What Clark and I are wondering is why the northbound/landing aircraft would still be doing 200 MPH there. But I'll admit, I don't know how quickly you can slow up a Malibu. Perhaps he was planning to enter the pattern, but he was way too low for that, which is the real data point that matters.

You'd think someone in the fly-in community would be an AvGeek and have a LiveATC node... all those houses have high-speed Internet... and tons of pilots... not one techno-nerd in there? :)

Wikipedia says stall speed is 58 knots/67 MPH. I'm guessing 200 MPH/173 knots is not normal speed for roughly a two-mile final... and I think that's where Clark's thinking is also.
 
This is a terrible loss of life. No matter the time of day, I always depart and land with all my lights on. It never hurts to make yourself as conspicuous as possible when close to the field; even more so a busy one. I'm not saying they didn't have theirs on, but I rarely see planes departing or arriving in the daylight with their lights on. If it makes it safer for a moving car, then more so for a plane.
 
WakeNCAgent said:
This is a terrible loss of life. No matter the time of day, I always depart and land with all my lights on. It never hurts to make yourself as conspicuous as possible when close to the field; even more so a busy one. I'm not saying they didn't have theirs on, but I rarely see planes departing or arriving in the daylight with their lights on. If it makes it safer for a moving car, then more so for a plane.
Click to expand...

Actually there were a number of studies after Canada mandated daytime running lights on vehicles sold there, that showed the accident rate didn't change at all.

Not saying it's not a good idea in airplanes, but the analogy is broken. There's no significant correlation between "safety" and lights on in automobiles.

There have been studies of motorcycle accidents, however, that show there is a small but measurable improvement in motorcycle accident rates.

The better analogy would be a comparison to motorcycles. :)
 
Clark1961 said:
Erie tower is that tall, skinny thing that extends to about 985' AGL northeast of the field. There are a couple other tall towers northeast of there. Those three towers are the tall obstructions to be aware of when flying on the northwest side of Denver. Very important, don't fergit they are there...sorta like the big damn tower east of DEN. Don't bump into towers or support structures, very bad for little planes.
Click to expand...
Oh THAT kind of tower....

Not only those towers but the traffic up there with student traffic from BJC, LMO, BDU and some APA makes it really busy at times. And all on different freqs.
 
There are so many scenarios I come up with in my head that could explain it at this point... But god rest their souls in the meantime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
murphey said:
Not only those towers but the traffic up there with student traffic from BJC, LMO, BDU and some APA makes it really busy at times. And all on different freqs.
Click to expand...

Nary a soul up there but me last time I went by - it was right after a thunderstorm had passed through so all the studs were hiding safe at home.

A couple mid-airs in the last five years or so traffic is certainly a problem.
 
denverpilot said:
North of Baseline/Hwy 7, left of the runway. The runway is depicted there as the long diagonal line running northwest to southeast. What's not easy to see on that map is the terrain rises south of Runway 15 as you go toward Hwy 7, and also rises on the other side, about 300'. The airport sits downhill from the road, and then north of the airport is mostly flat.



The screenshot shows 125MPH for the departing aircraft before they passed. They passed almost down to E-470/Northwest Parkway, and definitely south of Hwy 7. The departing aircraft was accelerating, of course. I don't see anything abnormal in the Webtrack speeds.

What Clark and I are wondering is why the northbound/landing aircraft would still be doing 200 MPH there. But I'll admit, I don't know how quickly you can slow up a Malibu. Perhaps he was planning to enter the pattern, but he was way too low for that, which is the real data point that matters.

You'd think someone in the fly-in community would be an AvGeek and have a LiveATC node... all those houses have high-speed Internet... and tons of pilots... not one techno-nerd in there? :)

Wikipedia says stall speed is 58 knots/67 MPH. I'm guessing 200 MPH/173 knots is not normal speed for roughly a two-mile final... and I think that's where Clark's thinking is also.
Click to expand...


Thanks for the perspective!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I fly out of EIK. This is very sad and hits close to home... Sorta numb with the details I've heard (most of which are not yet public). This is really sad.
 
V1-Vr-V2 said:
I fly out of EIK. This is very sad and hits close to home... Sorta numb with the details I've heard (most of which are not yet public). This is really sad.
Click to expand...

I've flown out of EIK (LSAs) and used Vector for maintenance...yup, very sad. Folks fly all sorts of patterns there so ya gotta be talking and looking all over. Most folks do it quite well and really cooperate.

Not interested in the gruesome details but if you have info on the flight please share.

Finally reviewed the webtraks info and it looks like the accident pilot may have descended after seeing the departing aircraft - I'm wondering if the shock of seeing someone coming at him lead to a medical problem which lead to the crash?
 
Very sad. :(

The witness said the engine sputtered then silence before the crash? Seems unlikely since the pilot lived there but could he have gone full rich before full throttle during the go around and killed the engine?

This article says some of the passengers extricated themselves.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/01/3-killed-2-injured-in-plane-crash-north-denver/

Condolences to friends and families. As a PA46 owner myself who also flies around a wife and three kids and a couple of dogs this hits home hard.
 
Clark1961 said:
The webtraks screen capture shows the "near-miss" about 3/4 mile south of the airport. The wreckage lies northwest of the airport....curious...

When I first saw the wreckage pictures with EIK's ramp in the background I thought it was a close in downwind but that doesn't make much sense in a PA-46.

If the webtraks stuff is accurate then what-in-the-heck was he doing 200 mph at 300' and 3/4 mile? "Watch this" for the girlfriend and kids?
Click to expand...

I doubt the accuracy of the plots and speed/altitude information. It's unrealistic to expect the track shown is within a couple of hundred feet of the actual aircraft position.

Same goes for FlightAware track and speed/altitude information. These services are representations of flight, they are not dead-on accurate.
 
3393RP said:
I doubt the accuracy of the plots and speed/altitude information. It's unrealistic to expect the track shown is within a couple of hundred feet of the actual aircraft position.

Same goes for FlightAware track and speed/altitude information. These services are representations of flight, they are not dead-on accurate.
Click to expand...

I had the same concerns so I still consider his 300' to be anomalous. Several possibilities for that, impossible to tell which including (considering his speed) he was seconds from impact when that snapshot hit.
 
Lord Muck said:
Very sad. :(

The witness said the engine sputtered then silence before the crash? Seems unlikely since the pilot lived there but could he have gone full rich before full throttle during the go around and killed the engine?
Click to expand...

Non-pilot witness accounts are notoriously inaccurate. When a 421C belonging to a family friend went down after takeoff, the information witnesses provided sounded like they were talking about five different scenarios. Engines running, not running, aircraft on fire or not on fire, banked left, upside down...you get the idea.

This brings back awful memories. Six people died in the 421 accident, all close friends.

My condolences to the friends and family of those lost.
 
Lord Muck said:
Very sad. :(



The witness said the engine sputtered then silence before the crash? Seems unlikely since the pilot lived there but could he have gone full rich before full throttle during the go around and killed the engine?



This article says some of the passengers extricated themselves.



http://www.foxnews.com/us/2014/09/01/3-killed-2-injured-in-plane-crash-north-denver/



Condolences to friends and families. As a PA46 owner myself who also flies around a wife and three kids and a couple of dogs this hits home hard.
Click to expand...


In a turbo, full rich would be the correct thing to do, no?
 
dans2992 said:
In a turbo, full rich would be the correct thing to do, no?
Click to expand...

most likely - I don't know the Malibu engine but it is reasonable to assume that the fuel controller senses manifold pressure and schedules fuel accordingly

now an unusual condition such as full rich at idle with high fuel pressure can kill an engine & turning a boost pump on at the wrong time can result in high fuel pressure at idle - it just depends on whether or not the boost pump has a stand-by function and I don't know the Malibu to say one way or the other
 
Clark1961 said:
most likely - I don't know the Malibu engine but it is reasonable to assume that the fuel controller senses manifold pressure and schedules fuel accordingly

now an unusual condition such as full rich at idle with high fuel pressure can kill an engine & turning a boost pump on at the wrong time can result in high fuel pressure at idle - it just depends on whether or not the boost pump has a stand-by function and I don't know the Malibu to say one way or the other
Click to expand...

Also depends whether you have a Lycoming (Bendix) FI or Continental, they are very different. The Lycoming is very difficult if not impossible to kill with the boost pump, Continental very easy if you turn it on high.
 
dans2992 said:
In a turbo, full rich would be the correct thing to do, no?
Click to expand...

Yes it is, along with full throttle. But if you slam in the mixture to full FIRST before pushing the throttle forward and if you do this with the engine barely above idle at a high altitude airport you could kill the engine. I haven't done this in a PA46 but have done it in another turboed plane by doing exactly that as an ignorant flatlander flying into a high altitude airport the first time.

It's a stretch. After saying it I don't think this is likely. At the speed he was going he was not at low power. Also he lived at this airport so would have been well acquainted with higher altitude field issues such as not going full rich at low power.
 
Henning said:
Also depends whether you have a Lycoming (Bendix) FI or Continental, they are very different. The Lycoming is very difficult if not impossible to kill with the boost pump, Continental very easy if you turn it on high.
Click to expand...

You can do it with the Lycoming too. Been there done that (unfortunately).
 
Clark1961 said:
most likely - I don't know the Malibu engine but it is reasonable to assume that the fuel controller senses manifold pressure and schedules fuel accordingly

now an unusual condition such as full rich at idle with high fuel pressure can kill an engine & turning a boost pump on at the wrong time can result in high fuel pressure at idle - it just depends on whether or not the boost pump has a stand-by function and I don't know the Malibu to say one way or the other
Click to expand...

The PA46 has boost pumps one for each tank that is always on (whichever tank is selected), and in addition the approach for landing checklist calls for the emergency fuel pump to be on too.
 
Lord Muck said:
The PA46 has boost pumps one for each tank that is always on (whichever tank is selected), and in addition the approach for landing checklist calls for the emergency fuel pump to be on too.
Click to expand...

I have a pa46- mine doesn't have boost pump for each tank and doesn't call for fuel pump to be on ever unless needed, actually on any checklist I have. Also if I make mixture too rich it will die on rollout.
 
Last edited:
Theboys said:
I have a pa46- mine doesn't have boost pump for each tank and doesn't call for fuel pump to be on ever unless needed, actually on any checklist I have. Also if I make mixture too rich it will die on rollout.
Click to expand...

Probably aught to get that looked at. Starter adapters for 550s are extremely expensive from what I've heard.
 
Theboys said:
I have a pa46- mine doesn't have boost pump for each tank and doesn't call for fuel pump to be on ever unless needed, actually on any checklist I have. Also if I make mixture too rich it will die on rollout.
Click to expand...

Well I have a PA-46 too and mine has a boost pump and the POH calls for it to be on during TO and landings...and while switching tanks...
 
Mine is a p310 and it only calls for low pressure on high temps or fuel flow fluctuations on takeoff. Says to have off for all approach and it's not a bad idea to have on low during fuel tank switch although mine doesn't mention it. It does say for go a rounds to go to full prop and mixture and power setting. However in reality mine has a 550. I also have a 550 in a Columbia and have found it also will die on rollout unless I do approach with pump on low. So would say it's not a bad idea.
 
The plane that went down was a 1994 Mirage N228LL so that would be the PA46-350.
 
Theboys said:
I have a pa46- mine doesn't have boost pump for each tank and doesn't call for fuel pump to be on ever unless needed, actually on any checklist I have. Also if I make mixture too rich it will die on rollout.
Click to expand...

Remember, there are two engine brands that go in a PA-46 and there are differences.
 
This one had a Lycoming TSIO-540-AE2A.
 
The image of the Malibu shows one blade of the prop. Note how it is not curled. The damage on the front looks like it impacted nose low then cartwheeled over? Doesn't look like the flaps are down either.

Really sad to the picture of the family that perished.
 
Interesting article in the [Boulder] Daily Camera today citing a pilot rated, eye-witness account of the plane lining up for 33 and nearly colliding with another PA46 departing runway 15 - which the winds were favoring at the time.

Daily Camera Article said:
"He wasn't smooth coming in," Ross said. "That's why I watched him." Ross said it looked like Frascona was executing an aborted landing maneuver. He said he saw the landing gear go back up and heard the power to the engine increase.

When the plane veered to the left and flew overhead, Ross said he could tell something was wrong.
Click to expand...
http://www.dailycamera.com/erie-news/ci_26455128/witness-plane-was-headed-wrong-way-before-erie

RIP
 
Thanks for the link. That is by far the most detailed account yet.
 
I've never flown a PA-46 but I wonder if they behave similar to the Acclaim in a go-around... if you simply mash the throttle full forward the nose will go straight up due to the significant aft trim required in the landing configuration. This is a recipe for a departure stall, especially with a fully loaded airplane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top