N720RP 3 Fatalities in West Virginia

..does that return look really that bad? Enough to de-wing a plane? Wouldn't the bright red be worse than the yellow and green?

I mean, clearly it was. But I wouldn't think kissing the yellow part of a precip return would be enough to pull wings off an otherwise high performance and capable aircraft..

Not an engineer, but this, will never look strong enough to me.. thanks to @Racerx for the pic. The PA28s look even worse. This just doesn't pass the "looks about right" rule. Especially if you've seen other planes disassembled, Mooney, Beech, etc.
View attachment 109716


Compare that to the Aerostar's multiple beefy attach points, I snapped these photos while ogling at one while in annual. Water bottle for scale. Thanks Ted Smith!
View attachment 109717
Don't disagree re: Cherokee spars not passing the TLAR test. I'm not convinced though that any other plane would've done better. I've flown too close to a storm and taken an elevator ride in spite of being in vmc. Went to idle and was still climbing. Wasnt even a big storm like that, just a little isolated cell. With an altitude hold set I'd imagine Vne would happen fairly quick.

It's impossible to know the conditions where they were, but they were almost certainly in IMC. They could've just lost control due to SD, maybe gotten flipped over by turbulence, but I'm guessing they ended up in an unusual attitude, exceeded the red line, and then started shedding parts. Once that starts happening, it doesn't really matter if it's the wing spar or the ailerons or the stabilator.
 
A tale of three pictures:

4E126F5C-3EFD-42D3-900E-1496D94E1985.jpeg
A63E63C4-9643-42C7-835E-5114731FA1AD.jpeg
5916AA7F-30B6-44E4-AA55-AA50F569BD0E.jpeg

The black circle is the last known position of the aircraft. With the mosaic delay induced by scan volume and upload time, I’d venture the cell was closer to the position indicated in the third picture by the time the aircraft occupied the same space.
 
..does that return look really that bad? Enough to de-wing a plane? Wouldn't the bright red be worse than the yellow and green?

I mean, clearly it was. But I wouldn't think kissing the yellow part of a precip return would be enough to pull wings off an otherwise high performance and capable aircraft..

Not an engineer, but this, will never look strong enough to me.. thanks to @Racerx for the pic. The PA28s look even worse. This just doesn't pass the "looks about right" rule. Especially if you've seen other planes disassembled, Mooney, Beech, etc.
View attachment 109716


Compare that to the Aerostar's multiple beefy attach points, I snapped these photos while ogling at one while in annual. Water bottle for scale. Thanks Ted Smith!
View attachment 109717

While I'd not disagree @ all, the pilot's reaction to the updraft/downdraft/turb could have been a contributing factor to the wings coming off.

But yea, I want as strong as an attachment point as permissible in regard to the wings, not just 'good enough'.
 
It's impossible to know the conditions where they were, but they were almost certainly in IMC. They could've just lost control due to SD, maybe gotten flipped over by turbulence, but I'm guessing they ended up in an unusual attitude, exceeded the red line, and then started shedding parts. Once that starts happening, it doesn't really matter if it's the wing spar or the ailerons or the stabilator.
Salient point indeed.

A tale of three pictures
wow, thanks for putting that together.. certainly paint a more dire picture!

While I'd not disagree @ all, the pilot's reaction to the updraft/downdraft/turb could have been a contributing factor to the wings coming off.
Indeed, easy to overlook that I suppose

I don't mind IMC.. but the tall build ups scare the hell oughta me. Give those things a wide berth! Threading the needle really isn't worth it. Still, I want to be confident in my machine
 
Not an engineer, but this, will never look strong enough to me.. thanks to @Racerx for the pic. The PA28s look even worse. This just doesn't pass the "looks about right" rule. Especially if you've seen other planes disassembled, Mooney, Beech, etc.
View attachment 109716

Compare that to the Aerostar's multiple beefy attach points, I snapped these photos while ogling at one while in annual. Water bottle for scale. Thanks Ted Smith!
View attachment 109717

A Saratoga doesn't have a 6,000 lb gross weight or TIO-540s hanging on the wings, and it doesn't go 250 kts.
 
Sounds like this guy was VFR, which is fine, but that close to a t storm? No thanks. From the pics Flying Keys posted it looks like that gap was about 3 miles wide. Big nope for a t storm. Too close. Those gaps can close up. Even though there is no precipitation showing, gaps like that can still have all the associated shear and turbulence of a t storm. My rule for t-storms is 20 miles and I need to be in vmc to get around them so I can see them. Other wise I stay home or divert.
 
Sounds like this guy was VFR, which is fine, but that close to a t storm? No thanks. From the pics Flying Keys posted it looks like that gap was about 3 miles wide. Big nope for a t storm. Too close. Those gaps can close up. Even though there is no precipitation showing, gaps like that can still have all the associated shear and turbulence of a t storm. My rule for t-storms is 20 miles and I need to be in vmc to get around them so I can see them. Other wise I stay home or divert.

Definitely. And if you look at the mean storm vector - it was about 100°-110° true (almost parallel/along the frontal boundary as indicated by the precip echoes) and these were developed cells, so the upper cloud structures would have been spreading ahead of each cell cluster and merging with the next. The narrow gap may have been relatively precip-free, but definitely IFR at most altitudes, and as you said, rife with turbulence and shear.
 
Sounds like this guy was VFR, which is fine, but that close to a t storm? No thanks. From the pics Flying Keys posted it looks like that gap was about 3 miles wide. Big nope for a t storm. Too close. Those gaps can close up. Even though there is no precipitation showing, gaps like that can still have all the associated shear and turbulence of a t storm. My rule for t-storms is 20 miles and I need to be in vmc to get around them so I can see them. Other wise I stay home or divert.

I’m in the same boat as you when I fly pistons if I can’t divert around a line of storms in VMC then it’s time to land and wait it out or stay home.. it’s not worth the risk. I wonder if he was using ADS-B to shoot the gap which can be misleading because of the delay the radar picture shows… wouldn’t be the first time that’s caused false sense of hope that’s led to an in-flight break up unfortunately.
 
Could have been a passengers honest mistake.

View attachment 109758
You should be ashamed of yourself, people died, and you joke.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
LOL just kidding. In my line of work, you can only get through a day with a good dose of macabre humor. I just figured I'd write that, and beat to the punch, some uptight twit that I'm sure will come along soon and say something similar.
 
Stolen from a FB post...

- NTSB issues the preliminary report into the fatal inflight breakup involving a Piper PA-32-301 Saratoga, N720RP, that occurred on July 11, 2022, near Metz, West Virginia:

On August 11, 2022, about 1805 eastern daylight time, a Piper PA32, N720RP, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Metz, West Virginia. The private pilot and two passengers were fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 personal flight.

According to the pilot’s employer, the pilot and the passengers were congregants of the same church, and the flight was a planned day trip to conduct church business in Indiana. The accident occurred on the return flight. Preliminary Automatic Dependent Surveillance - Broadcast (ADS-B) data revealed that the airplane departed Deck Airport (9D4), Myerstown, Pennsylvania, about 0735 and landed at Daviess County Airport (DCY), Washington, Indiana. The airplane subsequently departed DCY at 1543.

The data showed the airplane in a cruise profile on an approximate 070° track about 9,500 ft mean sea level (msl). Weather radar imagery superimposed over the airplane’s flight track indicated that the airplane was flying approximately parallel to and south of a band of light/moderate to extreme precipitation that extended across Ohio, West Virginia, and Pennsylvania. Preliminary air traffic control communication information revealed that, at 1752:06, the pilot contacted the Cleveland Air Route Traffic Control Center controller and stated, “I’m looking at my NEXRAD here and I’m thinking about doing like 30 degrees left right now to get over the top side of this stuff, what does it look [like] at your end?” The controller replied, “I’m showing some slight gaps in that, but the whole line off your left-hand side is moderate to heavy with pockets of extreme. So, there may be some slight gaps. I’m just not real sure if they are in fact gaps from your point of view. But whatever you think looks good. Just let me know if you need anything.” The pilot replied, “I appreciate the help.”

At 1801:09, the pilot announced to the controller, “We’re going to deviate about 20 [degrees] left and see if we can [unintelligible] of this thing.” The controller responded, “Roger. I’m showing the more extreme heavy precipitation just off your left wing there and with the small gap at your 12 o’clock and 5 miles.” At 1801:31, the pilot replied, “Yep, that’s what we’re looking for.” There were no further communications from the airplane. At the time of the airplane’s final transmission, the ground track had changed to about 050°, and the airplane had entered an area of light precipitation. The airplane continued the same track about 9,500 ft msl, and over the next 6 miles, transitioned through light, moderate, heavy, and into an area of extreme precipitation. About 1803, the track data depicted a steep, descending, right turn that continued until data was lost.

The pilot held a private pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single-engine land. He did not possess an instrument rating. The pilot completed the requirements for operation under BasicMed on May 11, 2021. Examination of the pilot’s logbook revealed that the pilot began flying in 2005, and had accrued 387 total hours of flight experience, of which 232 hours were in the accident airplane make and model.

According to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records, the airplane was manufactured in 1980 and was powered by a Lycoming IO-540-K1G5 300-horsepower engine. According to the pilot’s employer, the airplane’s most recent annual inspection was completed August 10, 2022.

Local emergency services personnel located the airplane’s fuselage in hilly, wooded terrain about one hour after the accident. The fuselage came to rest inverted with the engine and propeller still attached. The fuselage was crushed uniformly on its right side along its entire length. The wings and the tail section, which included the horizontal stabilizer, elevator, vertical stabilizer, and rudder, were separated from the fuselage and located by emergency personnel and search and rescue volunteers over the following days.

The fuselage came to rest in the immediate vicinity of the final flight track data, and the wreckage was distributed generally south of the fuselage over about 0.8 miles. The left wing was about 100 yards to the west of the fuselage, and the right wing was about 400 yards southwest. Both wings were separated at their respective roots. The fracture surfaces displayed at each wing and their corresponding wing root at the fuselage were consistent with overstress fracture. Several pieces of aircraft sheet metal were found along the wreckage path, with pieces associated with the tail section the furthest away.

Flight control continuity was confirmed from the cockpit through several breaks and cuts consistent with recovery operations, to the flight control surfaces recovered in the debris field. An engine data monitor was removed from the instrument panel and retained for further examination.

The right side of the engine was impact damaged. The right rocker box covers (Nos. 1, 3, and 5) were molded around the rocker arms by impact, preventing movement. Once the valve covers were removed, the engine was rotated by hand at the propeller and compression was confirmed on all cylinders using the thumb method. The Nos. 1, 3, and 5 cylinders displayed cracks to the rocker box flange surface or the area between the valves within the cylinder head due to impact. The cooling fins were also damaged on these cylinders.

The right magneto was impact separated from the engine accessory case but produced spark at all leads when rotated using an electric drill. The left magneto, which was electronic, could not be tested for spark, but remained securely mounted to the accessory case.

All spark plugs were found installed to their respective cylinders. The plugs were removed and no damage was observed to any of the electrodes.

The vacuum pump remained attached to the accessory case. The pump was removed and disassembled; the rotor and vanes were intact, and the pump spun freely.

The propeller governor was attached to the engine securely and removed for examination. The screen was present and free and clear of any debris. The governor drive spun freely by hand and oil exited the unit during hand operation.

The oil filter was removed, cut open, and inspected. The filter element contained no debris and was unremarkable, the date written on the oil filter was 8/10/22.

The fuel servo was found secure to the engine with both the throttle and mixture cables attached. The servo was removed and disassembled. The inlet screen was free and clear of debris. Both diaphragms were unremarkable. The fuel manifold was securely attached to the top of the engine with no damage noted. The diaphragm was unremarkable. All 6 injector nozzles were removed and were unobstructed.
 
So sad. The advantage of adsb weather in a light single is that you can get an idea of when/where to turn around, and where to head to try to land. Not to fly THROUGH anything.

Yet I've been to safety seminars where one or more people in the audience talk about how it's fast enough that they can successfully fly through gaps. I guess I don't mind when they do that themselves, but p**** me off when they take passengers with them.
 
I used to be astounded by the extreme poor judgement exhibited by low time pilots that continued VFR into IMC, but that was long ago.

This guy was just another in a long line that thought his NEXRAD display provided accurate information about convective cells. He was discussing "gaps" with the controller, who had informed him there was "moderate to heavy with pockets of extreme" precip in the path he intended to take.

To the pilot, the weather was just blurred color images on a cockpit display that he could dance through. In reality, it was a boiling cauldron of forces that exceeded the energy contained in a good sized nuclear bomb.

He discovered that a bit too late.
 
22 hours a year avg, but comfortable enough to fly vfr around and through killer t storms. And some cfi thought it a good idea to sign him off in this plane...or maybe not.
 
Not knowing the pilot personally, I’m not capable of determining if this pilot simply had the inability to evaluate and respect the dangers involved or if he felt invincible. Or both. Regardless, the power of the storm met the weakness of the plane and its pilot. It’s unfortunate to see a pilot make such a decision as he stairs down what appears, by all indications, to be a deadly trap. Building experience with weather can be done in steps or stages, it doesn’t have to be all at once by blindly diving in.
 
Looking at the radar from the time of the accident, and the route being flown. I'm trying to understand why he felt the need to cross the line of storms. Its unclear to me that the weather would have been much better on the north side had he been able to cross, nor much closer than just staying on the south side of them. route.jpg
 
Jim K said:

"I've flown too close to a storm and taken an elevator ride in spite of being in vmc. Went to idle and was still climbing. Wasn't even a big storm like that, just a little isolated cell. With an altitude hold set I'd imagine Vne would happen fairly quick."


I flew many miles North of a collapsing monster thunder storm, in severe clear VFR conditions, but IFR flight plan. An updraft developed, and I reduced power to control my altitude, then trimmed nose down to top of the green arc, and idle power. I contacted my controller to advise that I could not prevent violating my clearance, and recited the above. His response was a block clearance into oxygen altitudes, and the observation that for every up draft, there was a downdraft, I might need all the altitude that I was getting "free".

Back to cruise power and speed, gained over 4,000 feet, but there was no downdraft. 20 or more miles further, we returned to our filed altitude, gradually. I suspect that my controller was a pilot.

As Jim K observed, there can be a lot of agitated air well clear of the visible thunder storm, and as both example shows, up and down can be strong.

Close enough to get in the space above or below any clouds associated with thunderstorms is beyond what we should expect to be safe.

I have flown through a lot of rain, but it was not the result of vertical buildup.
 
It didn’t even have to be the convection. Clouds alone could have done them in - he wasn’t instrument rated.
 
If it hasn’t been mentioned and reminded of in this thread yet, if autopilot equipped avoid ALT HOLD mode and if you must have the AP engaged only use PITCH mode when encountering significant turbulence.

Some of the worst turbulence I’ve encountered over the years in turbojet aircraft has been in either VMC or light IMC related to frontal boundaries. And I didn’t take stabs at cells that looked dangerous. It’s ironic that as an early IFR pilot, the one time I continued into a developing cell with unexpected moderate turbulence I was flying a PA32R. The astute controller offered me a vector out. Didn’t do that anymore.
 
I've flown in a hurricane, several gales in AK and FL.

Storm of the Century in early 90's.

Sparky mushroom clouds were avoided at all costs.

It astounds me that this pilot felt he was smarter than the storms or invincible.

My wife has to wake me up from a bad nightmare once in a while.
 
Another thing to mention, when trusting VIPs are along, safety margins can never be compromised. It’s one thing to flirt with disaster while solo, yes it can factor into decisions. Some will say one should always fly the same, for the most part true. That said I’ve seen people cut a few corners, I’d much rather they do that solo.


F00A0A62-C4DD-421B-8388-3B02AAB828FF.jpeg
 
This crash brought back memories of an almost identical event that occurred near College Station, TX in 2011. The pilot had the same ~400 hours, other people in the aircraft, long flight, forecast weather, NEXRAD in the cockpit, discussion with ATC, gaps, and aluminum raining from the sky. The only difference is that this pilot had an instrument rating, but that didn't matter because he also had the same faulty judgement that this accident pilot exhibited.

I know I'm preaching to the choir by posting the video, but it's a valuable lesson for those who may lack experience in these situations. The pilot is advised by ATC there is a line of strong thunderstorms in his path. The controller also notes that the aircraft's reduced groundspeed due to headwinds means that it's not possible to predict there will be a path through the frontal boundary.

The pilot replies "Yes sir, we're watching on the NEXRAD and we're just going to play it by ear." Anyone learning the ropes, so to speak, who may in the future be tempted to find a gap in a line of strong thunderstorms should reflect on this statement, picture themselves in that situation, and watch the video. You'll see that proceeding into the maw of the beast was as foolish as it sounds. Don't risk it.

This Air Safety Institute video recounts the events of the flight.

 
Last edited:
I can’t imagine the wing only being 400 yards away if the plane broke up at cruise altitude (9500ft)

This kinda reminds me of the guy who was doing something similar in Florida with a pc12, ended up giving the controls a stiff tug around 350 knots (vne on the pc12 is 236) and the wings pulled right off.
 
Sometimes accidents like these make me want to sell my Piper...

Looks like from the timed radar overlay, he hit a thunderstorm dead center. There are no planes certified for penetrating a thunderstorm, and few GA airplanes that can survive the stresses from a real thunderstorm. Take care of your Piper, don't. fly into TS, and you will be fine.
 
Heck, I've flown though tops of low 10k-ish building cumulus and felt the updraft, change in temp and turbulence. That was enough to convince me that if it looks bad, it is bad and either stay vmc or don't go in those conditions. I fly for fun. Building cumulus ain't fun unless there's a wide berth between them.

Sucker hole claims another one. RIP.
 
Back
Top