PA32 down out of PDK

mikeinbama said:
My instructor drilled it into my head practically every lesson, stall the airplane to landing everytime whether it be runway, a field, water or tree tops. MCA everytime.
Click to expand...

MCA is not stall, it is just above stall.
 
gitmo234 said:
From what I've read/seen, the preferred method being to stall into the tops of the trees.
Click to expand...

As others mentioned, don't stall - do your best soft field landing to treetops and chances are you will walk away from the wreck.
 
Here's to hoping I dont need to try it for real.

Here's a screenshot of no real options but water or woods. This my strip, but not me flying or my airplane. This is the typical approach. Short of an incredibly strong tail wind, we always depart and land this direction. Due to obstacles and the pretty decent slope of the runway
 

Attachments

  • screenshot.png
    screenshot.png
    381.4 KB · Views: 102
gitmo234 said:
Here's to hoping I dont need to try it for real.

Here's a screenshot of no real options but water or woods. This my strip, but not me flying or my airplane. This is the typical approach. Short of an incredibly strong tail wind, we always depart and land this direction. Due to obstacles and the pretty decent slope of the runway
Click to expand...

That river would be a great spot for an emerg landing.
 
gitmo234 said:
Here's to hoping I dont need to try it for real.

Here's a screenshot of no real options but water or woods. This my strip, but not me flying or my airplane. This is the typical approach. Short of an incredibly strong tail wind, we always depart and land this direction. Due to obstacles and the pretty decent slope of the runway
Click to expand...

:confused: I see plenty of survivable options there. That field, the river, you even have friendly trees instead of conifers. There are way worse strips than that.
 
I would actually like to see an accident subforum. Good lessons to be learned and a great place to sticky the 100ll/contamination thread for more visibility
 
I found this video on live leak which was taken by a dash cam of a police cruiser. It appears that the pilot was attempting to line up with the road the cruiser was on. If he kept his course he may have had enough altitude and airspeed to clear the I-285 overpass and land straight ahead. It does not look like he stalled it. RIP :(

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8cd_1432366180&use_old_player=0
 
inactive15 said:
I found this video on live leak which was taken by a dash cam of a police cruiser. It appears that the pilot was attempting to line up with the road the cruiser was on. If he kept his course he may have had enough altitude and airspeed to clear the I-285 overpass and land straight ahead. It does not look like he stalled it. RIP :(

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=8cd_1432366180&use_old_player=0
Click to expand...

That is one up side to having cameras everywhere. It does help tell what happened sometimes. In this case I can't say how you can say he stalled it or not. The final leg of the flight, where if he was to have stalled, is not on that video.
 
Dav8or said:
That is one up side to having cameras everywhere. It does help tell what happened sometimes. In this case I can't say how you can say he stalled it or not. The final leg of the flight, where if he was to have stalled, is not on that video.
Click to expand...

If you look closely it "appears" as he made a controlled turn to the right moments before the crash.
 
Does anyone know what was waiting on the other side of the divider? I thought it was more highways. Not glad that he hit a divider but wouldn't want the fatality count to increase.
 
rbridges said:
Does anyone know what was waiting on the other side of the divider? I thought it was more highways. Not glad that he hit a divider but wouldn't want the fatality count to increase.
Click to expand...

The other side of the highway and then nothing useable for an emergency landing spot.

"The Perimeter" is right about where he hit, moving in a NE direction.
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    1 MB · Views: 66
I don't mean this disrespectfully in any way, but usually the ntsb reports will find a way to blame the pilot. I'm surprised they didn't mention either the pilots decision to takeoff even though he previously reported a slow climb or the fact that he took off over gross.
 
Saddest part about this is, if he realized it wasn't going to fly and committed to going down off airport sooner, there is a HUGE wide open construction site from where they tore down the GM plant that would have been just a 20 degree turn and closer to the airport than where he crashed.

I get it though, the fight to survive thinking you are going to be able to pull it out is strong. Tough decision when then engine is still running. They probably would have been better off it quit.
 
Last edited:
Dave Theisen said:
I get it though, the fight to survive thinking you are going to be able to pull it out is strong. Tough decision when then engine is still running. They probably would have been better off it quit.
Click to expand...

guaranteed. At least in the case of total engine failure the decision to "land now" would have been made for the pilot. Given this particular scenario (esp considering ATC recordings IIRC) the pilot was fighting hard to keep the plane in the air up until the final few seconds, with much less time to think about the reality of setting it down.
 
Last edited:
24 pounds over gross, while not good, isn't usually fatal. I think many of us were speculating that he might have been several hundred pounds over just after the accident. Such a sad accident.
 
eman1200 said:
I don't mean this disrespectfully in any way, but usually the ntsb reports will find a way to blame the pilot. I'm surprised they didn't mention either the pilots decision to takeoff even though he previously reported a slow climb or the fact that he took off over gross.
Click to expand...

I just now read the full NTSB report and like you say, no disrespect, but the pilot had discussion with both his CFI and the mechanic complaining about lackluster performance just days before the crash. Pardon my language but **** like that doesn't normally just fix itself. "The pilot told the instructor that he almost hit the trees near the end of the runway."

So with those issues happening he opted to load it to gross (technically a little over) on a hot day. Mechanical issues seem to be the underlying issue but this was not a case where no warnings were given. Hindsight is 20:20 and we can only learn from other's mistakes.
 
arkvet said:
I just now read the full NTSB report and like you say, no disrespect, but the pilot had discussion with both his CFI and the mechanic complaining about lackluster performance just days before the crash. Pardon my language but **** like that doesn't normally just fix itself. "The pilot told the instructor that he almost hit the trees near the end of the runway."

So with those issues happening he opted to load it to gross (technically a little over) on a hot day. Mechanical issues seem to be the underlying issue but this was not a case where no warnings were given. Hindsight is 20:20 and we can only learn from other's mistakes.
Click to expand...

yep, I agree, although my intention was more to point out that ntsb reports are usually so quick to point out pilot error but in this case they didn't but EASILY could have. that's all. they'd just to say 'over gross' if someone was 2.4 pounds over, 24 pounds, or 240 pounds.
 
24lbs over gross, you won't even feel it in a PA32. Sad case, seems like it could've been prevented.
 
NTSB: "Several days before the accident flight, the commercial pilot told his mechanic and flight instructor that the airplane had not been climbing well. The pilot had completed an engine run-up and subsequent test flight, and found no anomalies with the airplane."

Based on that statement it would appear the problem was intermittent and could not be duplicated on the ground. Given that the plane previously wasn't climbing well it would have been prudent to ground it until the problem was found and corrected. I'm not faulting anyone.
 
mtuomi said:
24lbs over gross, you won't even feel it in a PA32. Sad case, seems like it could've been prevented.
Click to expand...
If he had just refused the shorter runway, he might have been able to prevent it.

Classic case of the Swiss Cheese model.
 
mtuomi said:
24lbs over gross, you won't even feel it in a PA32. Sad case, seems like it could've been prevented.
Click to expand...
But you would feel it if the engine were not producing rated horsepower. Pilot reported he almost hit trees on an earlier flight due to low power. He then loads airplane over gross and attempts takeoff without first having a through engine check by a good mechanic! how could anything have gone wrong!?
 
FastEddieB said:
"The composition of debris and its origin could not be determined..."

Strikes me as odd...or lazy.
Click to expand...

The debris recovered from the fuel manifold was forwarded to the NTSB Materials Laboratory and examined using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy. The spectrum for the debris contained peaks that corresponded to signatures indicative that the material contained a carboxylic acid. A spectral library search was done on the debris spectrum. There were no strong matches found in the search; however, the debris spectrum had many similarities to several dicarboxylic acids, such as terephthalic acid and isophthalic acid. Carboxylic acids are pervasive in nature and are often found as precursors in polymer production, in adhesives and coatings, and are often naturally present in fuel as well as used as fuel additives (corrosion inhibitors and lubricity improving additives).
Click to expand...
 
Jimmy cooper said:
But you would feel it if the engine were not producing rated horsepower. Pilot reported he almost hit trees on an earlier flight due to low power. He then loads airplane over gross and attempts takeoff without first having a through engine check by a good mechanic! how could anything have gone wrong!?
Click to expand...
What constitutes a thorough engine check beyond a run up in this case?
 
24 pounds over gross?? That's not much more than a jacket and the stuff in your pockets.
 
MauleSkinner said:
What constitutes a thorough engine check beyond a run up in this case?
Click to expand...
One excellent check would have been to check all the fuel filters on the airplane. This is what almost killed me at teterboro on takeoff when it quit. This was due to a shoddy annual by a lousy mechanic who failed to check the final fuel filter on the mooney .( it was full of crap) Or the mags, plugs, on and on. Lots to check.
 
Kritchlow said:
24 pounds over gross?? That's not much more than a jacket and the stuff in your pockets.
Click to expand...
But as I mentioned before, gross is a lot if the engine is not producing enough power! In this case it proved deadly. Airplanes just don't tolerate carelessness well.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
But as I mentioned before, gross is a lot if the engine is not producing enough power! In this case it proved deadly. Airplanes just don't tolerate carelessness well.
Click to expand...
I truly doubt 24 pounds brought down the airplane.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
But as I mentioned before, gross is a lot if the engine is not producing enough power! In this case it proved deadly. Airplanes just don't tolerate carelessness well.
Click to expand...

I doubt if they had been 25 pounds lighter, this would have been prevented. How accurate was the NTSB at determining the actual takeoff weight. I'd guess they were at least +\- 25lbs.
 
Jimmy cooper said:
One excellent check would have been to check all the fuel filters on the airplane. This is what almost killed me at teterboro on takeoff when it quit. This was due to a shoddy annual by a lousy mechanic who failed to check the final fuel filter on the mooney .( it was full of crap) Or the mags, plugs, on and on. Lots to check.
Click to expand...

is there sight glass or you have to remove the filter?
 
Jimmy cooper said:
One excellent check would have been to check all the fuel filters on the airplane. This is what almost killed me at teterboro on takeoff when it quit. This was due to a shoddy annual by a lousy mechanic who failed to check the final fuel filter on the mooney .( it was full of crap) Or the mags, plugs, on and on. Lots to check.
Click to expand...
Ok...having read a little more, I see that he had a bad run up as well...the first thing I saw said his run up was good. Two times is the charm for me, mechanic's looking at the airplane.
 
I used to fly as part of a great club in FTW. Solid guys and great aircraft. One Sunday a couple of friends and I loaded up the 32-300 for a run to KGTU. We were at gross. She climbed out at 300' per minute. On the run back it was hotter. We got <200. Very disconcerting. I raised the issue at a the next meeting and the folks that flew her well under gross countered that there was no such issue. A few of us decided to test her out agian at gross on a warm day and fly by the book and test our numbers. Sure enough we got @250 fpm. Engine was past TBO but no metal in oil, good compressions, we checked the Tach etc. I kept raising the issue over the next few months and flew the other plane.. some of the guys wanted to do an interior, get paint etc. I kind of made a stink- i said " that xxxxxx interior is gonna look pretty awesome sitting in a pasture somewhere if we don't figure this out". I'd say the club was 50/50. I got on POA and asked you guys for advice. Two or three of you came back with "Cam". "It's the Cam" etc. She eventually went in for annual- guess what- Cam lobes were worn - I think two or three of them. We did a firewall forward. Oh yeah, also interior, some paint and some panel. When I read that NTSB report I drank a tall, neat, scotch....POA may have a lot of crazy banter and a somewhat aggressive troll club on occasion, but you guys may have saved someone's ass without knowing it, and I'm sure that happens somewhat often. The knowledge base here is truly invaluable..Many thanks.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top