Pitts 12 down in Lake Weir, Florida, 2 fatalities

[Capngrog]

A Pitts 12, based out of Leeward Air Ranch, Ocala Florida, went down in Lake Weir yesterday with the loss of two lives. There were reportedly several witnesses to the crash. They were doing some aerobatics over the lake about a half mile south of the north shore of the lake and apparently got into some sort of trouble at the top of a loop. One person was seen to bail out of the airplane while it was upside down (inverted spin?), but apparently was too low for his chute to open. One report indicated that the airplane ran out of airspeed at the top of the loop. The wreckage was recovered from Lake Weir yesterday. Apparently, video, although tough to watch, will eventually surface.

 

[Capngrog]

Here's a link to a video of the crash:

The video was aired yesterday evening by Orlando's (Florida) FOX 35 News.

If you look closely, you can see a smaller "splash" just to the right of the splash made by the airplane as it went in. I guess reports of one guy leaving the airplane before impact were correct.

I don't know much about aerobatics, but from what I've read and heard, it is dangerous to run out of airspeed at the top of a loop, because that can result in an inverted spin. Is that correct?

 

[Stewartb]

I’m no aerobatics guy but I recall Pitts stall recovery requires closing the throttle, not adding power. Counter intuitive.

 

[FastEddieB]

I don't know much about aerobatics, but from what I've read and heard, it is dangerous to run out of airspeed at the top of a loop, because that can result in an inverted spin. Is that correct?

My only experience is with Citabrias, but run out of speed at the top of a loop and the nose will just fall and recovery is routine. High performance aerobatic planes may differ, but for a flat spin you have to feed in a lot of forward stick and possibly a lot of rudder as well, neither of which is instinctive.

 

[RoscoeT]

I don't know much about aerobatics, but from what I've read and heard, it is dangerous to run out of airspeed at the top of a loop, because that can result in an inverted spin. Is that correct?

No it's not dangerous if you're flying aerobatics at legal and safe altitudes. And no this won't result in an inverted spin. A loop is a positive G maneuver. If you're really clumsy and mishandle the controls while stalling on top of a loop, it might be possible to spin, but it'll develop into an upright spin, not an inverted spin because it was initiated by pulling the stick back under positive G. An inverted spin is initiated by holding the stick forward. Either way no big deal. Nobody should be doing acro who's uncomfortable recovering all types of spins.

I’m no aerobatics guy but I recall Pitts stall recovery requires closing the throttle, not adding power. Counter intuitive.

In the aerobatic world it's more about spin recovery than stall recovery but a Pitts will recover a stall or spin just fine with or without power, but standard emergency spin recovery technique should always include pulling power off first since power can aggravate things if other controls aren't positioned properly. If you make perfect control inputs, using power will recover a spin quicker, but this situation is at odds with the nature of emergency spin recovery where the spin is accidental rather than intentional. The Pitts in this video spun in. Aerobatic pilots typically only bail if there's a mechanical issue, but we may never know what actually happened here.

 

[MooneyDriver78]

I thought Pitts and other aerobatic airplanes were designed (oversized rudder) to be able to get out of any spin, inverted or not?

 

[RoscoeT]

I thought Pitts and other aerobatic airplanes were designed (oversized rudder) to be able to get out of any spin, inverted or not?

They can, easily and quickly. There are four main reasons aerobatic pilots fail to recover spins before hitting the ground. By far the #1 reason is loss of control during a maneuver and failure to recover due to insufficient altitude, training, situational awareness, or any combination of the above. Distant remaining reasons are mechanical control failure, pilot medical/incapacitation, and passenger interference on the controls.

 

[danhagan]

If you've never done spins, you should with an instructor. I got to do a flight review in a Pitts several years ago. Instructor allowed me to "fix" the first spin ... correction happened SO FAST that I converted a left turn spin to the right ... Pitts are very nimble and all four "PARE" items are almost simultaneous and without a lot of stick jockeying ... did other maneuvers as well, and was glad I got to see that area of flying ...

 

[Dana]

It can also be easy to confuse an inverted spin for an upright one in the opposite direction, and the control movements for recovery are opposite.

I've seen no mention of the pilot's experience level, but a Model 12 is hardly an entry level aerobatic machine.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Anyone have an N number? Would be interesting to check flightaware and see what altitude they were flying at. Normally when practicing acro you want to be over a linear terrain feature like a straight road to maintain alignment. The fact that they were over water suggests to me that they were deliberately flying low.

Altitude is life when flying acro. Altitude gives you time to recover, time to troubleshoot, and time to bail. I lost 2 good friends to low altitude acro. That's why IAC gradually moves the floor down as you progress thru levels.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Aircraft was N112JH. Flight was maneuvering between 3K and 5K altitude, and spun in from 4700 AGL, which should have been plenty of time to recover.

The pilot just registered his aircraft this spring, so probably was new to the type.

Sounds like the classic Pitts spin accident, with pilot over-controlling and transitioning from upright to inverted in opposite direction.

Is Beggs-Mueller not a thing anymore?

 

[RoscoeT]

There is some reporting that the front seat CFI passenger a was going to "show him (the pilot) a maneuver". I can't verify that, but Beggs-Mueller is alive and well in the acro world among those who are vigilant with emergency spin recovery awareness and training. Though there is another technique that's arguably better than Beggs-Mueller which involves pulling power and neutralizing ALL controls. There's nothing you can do in a Pitts or most purpose-built aerobatic planes which this technique won't recover. The advantage over Beggs is that it completely removes all situational awareness requirements on which direction you're spinning and whether you're inverted or upright. You just have to admit you're out of control.

 

[Ed Haywood]

The latter is how I was taught. Power off and center stick and rudder. I thought BM was power off and let go of everything (eg feet flat on the floor) but I remembered wrong.

I don't recall seeing any model 12's when I was knocking around IAC events. Got the impression it was more of a "hot rod" than a competition aircraft.

The factory (Jim Kimball) is in the same town, so he certainly had access to competent transition training.

 

[RoscoeT]

I thought BM was power off and let go of everything (eg feet flat on the floor) but I remembered wrong.

No, Beggs-Mueller involves pulling power off, applying full opposite rudder, and letting go of the stick. Not all airplanes respond to B-M for all spin modes. In his book, Gene Beggs mentions the T-34 and SNJ/T-6 do not recover using this technique, and that the 152 Aerobat and Decathlon have specific spin modes that won't recover using B-M. In the Decathlon it's inverted left rudder, which requires actively pulling the stick back to neutral after applying opposite rudder. The neutral technique works in a Decathlon for all spin modes.

 

[Capngrog]

The factory (Jim Kimball) is in the same town, so he certainly had access to competent transition training.

I may be guilty of nit-picking here, but Jim Kimball's place is actually in Tangerine, Fl, about 3-1/2 miles S.E. of downtown Mt. Dora, Florida, approximately 35 miles S.E. of Leeward Air Ranch. As you say, that's not far, and there are other champion caliber aerobatic pilots closer to Leeward Air Ranch; for example, at Love's Landing. As you pointed out, the area does not lack pilots with aerobatic expertise.

 

[Doc Holliday]

I don't believe Mr. Kimball offers transition training.

He may have previous clients who can offer it. Again, just owning one doesn't make someone a competent provider of instruction.

YMMV

 

[RoscoeT]

Kimball sold the Model 12 rights a few years ago anyway. He was strictly in the fabrication/design business.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I may be guilty of nit-picking here, but Jim Kimball's place is actually in Tangerine, Fl, about 3-1/2 miles S.E. of downtown Mt. Dora, Florida, approximately 35 miles S.E. of Leeward Air Ranch. As you say, that's not far, and there are other champion caliber aerobatic pilots closer to Leeward Air Ranch; for example, at Love's Landing. As you pointed out, the area does not lack pilots with aerobatic expertise.

LOL, I figured when I wrote it that someone would nit-pick me on it. I suppose "right down the road" would have been more accurate.

I once almost landed at Kimball's place by accident. I had just started flying again after a 5 year break, and took a rental C182 from Plant City in search of a grass strip to violate my rental terms. Intended to land at Bob White (X61), but I was flying off a paper sectional with no GPS, and I overshot by a few miles. Kimball's airfield has the same runway orientation, but is a bit shorter at 2600'. My short field technique was extremely rusty and I had about 3 hours total time in a 182, so after 3 low passes I gave up and flew home. I noticed a crowd at the lone hangar watching me. On the way back I saw Bob White airfield and realized my mistake. For some reason I had Kimball's email, so I pinged him and apologized. He said it happens all the time. This was probably 10 years ago.

Back to the accident: here is a Pirep by Budd Davisson 20 years ago. http://www.airbum.com/pireps/PirepPittsModel12.html

From the pics, it appears the same aircraft was the one that crashed: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/08/pitts-model-12-n112jh-fatal-accident.html

 

[Ed Haywood]

Another flight review. Looks like the same aircraft. That must have been the factory demo bird. https://www.kitplanes.com/flight-review-pitts-model-12/

Of note:

"Phillips reports that if you are doing a hammerhead to the left and wait too long before pulling the power back (seconds, that is, not fractions of seconds), the enormous torque and gyroscopics of the propeller can pull you into an inverted spin, and it’s hard to recognize because the airplane is oscillating in pitch."​

 

[RoscoeT]

"Phillips reports that if you are doing a hammerhead to the left and wait too long before pulling the power back (seconds, that is, not fractions of seconds), the enormous torque and gyroscopics of the propeller can pull you into an inverted spin, and it’s hard to recognize because the airplane is oscillating in pitch."

I can see that as possible, but only if you don't control the gyroscopic pitch forward by applying aft stick during the pivot, similar to how you control the aft gyroscopic pitch of any normal direction hammerhead with forward stick during the pivot. Russian radial, you'd hammer to the right anyway.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I can see that as possible, but only if you don't control the gyroscopic pitch forward by applying aft stick during the pivot, similar to how you control the aft gyroscopic pitch of any normal direction hammerhead with forward stick during the pivot. Russian radial, you'd hammer to the right anyway.

The altitude and airspeed profile on flightaware are consistent with a hammer.

 

[RoscoeT]

If that's the case, lots of pilots have accidentally spun out of hammers in all Pitts models, mostly by kicking early with a little excess airspeed and overdoing the forward elevator input which basically produces a low speed negative vertical snap which positions all three controls perfectly for a transition to an inverted flat spin....which is really no problem with a little altitude and proper training.

In the crash video, the steep pitch attitude appears to be that of a power off spin, but it's not clear enough to see if it's upright or inverted. In any Pitts, it's also not hard to accidentally crossover from an upright spin to an inverted spin and vice versa if you hamfist the the initial spin recovery attempt. It crosses over and continues to spin while the pilot fails to recognize what happened, thinking they are holding anti-spin inputs, though the plane keeps spinning. Lots of pilots have spun into the ground like this. Good advanced aerobatic spin training prevents this.

I hate to speculate, but allowing pilot passengers to fly maneuvers in an unfamiliar type reeks of control interference. If the front seat pax/pilot locked on the controls after accidentally spinning out of a maneuver, it could explain why the rear seat pilot/owner bailed while the front seater stayed in. Or they both could have gotten in over their head and confused on how to recover. Control failure is possible, but it's extremely uncommon in these airplanes. Unfortunately we may never know what happened.

 

[djpacro]

The neutral technique works in a Decathlon for all spin modes.

I hadn't heard of that before so a surprise, can you expand on that please? I'm aware of Bill Finagin and his use of that in a Pitts.

Incidentally, not all with a Pitts in the name recover using BM - my friend's Wolf Pitts Pro for one.

 

[RoscoeT]

I hadn't heard of that before so a surprise, can you expand on that please? I'm aware of Bill Finagin and his use of that in a Pitts.

I don't have direct experience with this technique in the Decathlon, just Decathlon pilot friends who've tried it with various spin modes and reported it works.

 

[Ed Haywood]

Here is a specific discussion of a fatal Decathlon crash due to an inverted spin:

https://acro.aerobaticsweb.org/threads/970163/msg000003.html

They started from 7K, so they had plenty of time to try various techniques. The student bailed out and survived.

 

[Capngrog]

I'm no aerobatic pilot and have not actively flown in years, but as I recall, part of inverted spin recovery (never did one - only upright spins) is full aft stick/up elevator ... also, rudder inputs are reversed when inverted ... left rudder to go right etc. Is that correct? If so, the cfi in the above example must have thought he was in an upright spin. I did a few upright spins in basic flight training (I think it was required back then), but none since. I have enough trouble visualizing the proper control inputs for inverted spin recovery while sitting here at my desk. I can appreciate how an inverted spin would be extremely disorienting to someone unaccustomed to them. It would be quite difficult to exit the back seat of a Decathlon while it was in an inverted spin. R.I.P. the cfi in the above example.

 

[Ed Haywood]

I'm no aerobatic pilot and have not actively flown in years, but as I recall, part of inverted spin recovery (never did one - only upright spins) is full aft stick/up elevator ... also, rudder inputs are reversed when inverted ... left rudder to go right etc. Is that correct? If so, the cfi in the above example must have thought he was in an upright spin. I did a few upright spins in basic flight training (I think it was required back then), but none since. I have enough trouble visualizing the proper control inputs for inverted spin recovery while sitting here at my desk. I can appreciate how an inverted spin would be extremely disorienting to someone unaccustomed to them. It would be quite difficult to exit the back seat of a Decathlon while it was in an inverted spin. R.I.P. the cfi in the above example.

He had deliberately entered an inverted spin for the purpose of demonstrating it, so I strongly doubt he mistook upright for inverted.

Pro-spin and anti-spin inputs are not complicated, especially in a Decathlon, which is in most instances a very benign aircraft to spin. Roll inverted, push stick forward to stall, rudder in the direction you want to rotate. Recovery is rudder opposite rotation and neutral stick. Just like upright. It takes a lot of stick travel to stall or spin inverted; I have to grab the frame and do a crunch to get it far enough forward.

Disorientation is a huge problem in an aircraft like a Pitts, which rotates at 720 degrees per second. In a Decathlon, I never found it challenging. In an deliberate spin, you know what direction you made it rotate, so go the opposite direction to recover. The Decathlon is not like a Pitts, where you can accidentally transition to opposite rotation and orientation without knowing it.

I got my inverted spin training from Adam Cope, one of the most experienced Decathlon instructors in the country. He emphasized that 99% of the time, simply relaxing the pro-spin inputs causes instant recovery from an inverted spin. Since it is so awkward to get the stick far enough forward to stall, it is harder to hold an inverted spin than to break it.

There are some instances of an inverted spin where airflow over the rudder can be blanked by the wings, reducing control authority and ability to break the rotation. I don't know the nuances well, but power, ailerons, and CG can contribute to this condition. The response is to confirm power is fully off and stick is centered. Centered rudder should work, but rudder opposite direction of rotation works faster, or so I have been taught. If there is the possibility of confusion about direction of rotation, neutral rudder would be more reliable.

Back to the OT: the Pitts and its derivatives are far more challenging aircraft in the spin regime. They are also far more likely to accidentally spin than a Decathlon, which you would really have to work at. Several reputable instructors offer 5 or 10 hour advanced spin courses dedicated just to exploring the various modes of spinning a Pitts, such as flat spins, accelerated, and the effects of power on/off, aileron, etc.

 

[Capngrog]

Thanks Ed, I appreciate the information.

 

[RoscoeT]

I'm no aerobatic pilot and have not actively flown in years, but as I recall, part of inverted spin recovery (never did one - only upright spins) is full aft stick/up elevator ... also, rudder inputs are reversed when inverted ... left rudder to go right etc. Is that correct?

Definitely not. Applying full aft stick to recover an inverted spin will only accelerate the spin and in some airplanes will sufficiently blank the rudder such that the spin will continue even with opposite rudder applied. In other airplanes if you pull the stick full aft and apply opposite rudder, the airplane will just transition from an inverted spin to an upright spin. Spin recovery technique is fundamentally no different whether you're upright or inverted. You only need to move the elevator to a sufficiently centralized position to break the stall. You don't fully deflect the elevator to recover.

Disorientation is a huge problem in an aircraft like a Pitts, which rotates at 720 degrees per second.

Nah, you can't even get near 720 deg/sec doing a snap roll in a Pitts. I've only ever produced around 420 deg/sec. snapping a Pitts. Spin rate is much slower, more like 200 deg/ sec. for a power off spin, and a little less for a powered flat spin. You might get around 360 deg/sec. doing an accelerated power on spin.

Back to the OT: the Pitts and its derivatives are far more challenging aircraft in the spin regime. They are also far more likely to accidentally spin than a Decathlon, which you would really have to work at.

They are more responsive, but not necessarily far more likely to accidentally spin. You really have to severely mishandle the controls with full deflections to produce an accidental spin in a Pitts. And they recover any type of spin as easily as anything. They are just totally honest airplanes with no characteristics or quirks. They just do what you ask and nothing more. Standard PARE spin recovery, or pulling power and just neutralizing all controls quickly recovers any possible spin mode in a Pitts. Those who've spun in from altitude succumbed to lack of training, panic, and brain death. A little basic training does wonders. Glad you got some.

 

[Capngrog]

Definitely not. Applying full aft stick to recover an inverted spin will only accelerate the spin and in some airplanes will sufficiently blank the rudder such that the spin will continue even with opposite rudder applied. In other airplanes if you pull the stick all the way back and apply opposite rudder, the airplane will just transition from an inverted spin to an upright spin. Spin recovery technique is fundamentally no different whether you're upright or inverted. You only need to move the elevator to a sufficiently centralized position to break the stall. You don't fully deflect the elevator to recover.

Now I'm totally confused! I don't remember the acronym "PARE", but I do recall that was the technique I was taught.

Please bear with me in my confusion. If I'm flying along inverted and want to change my direction of flight to the left, I'd feed in left aileron and right rudder - correct? If I manage to return to stable inverted flight and want to descend, I'd pull back on the stick - right? Now, having recovered from these two dare devil maneuvers, I decide, for some reason, to perform an inverted spin to the left. By "left", I mean altering the aircraft's heading to the left. Maybe my frame-of-reference here is inconsistent with accepted aerobatic terminology, because I mean by "left", altering the aircraft's nose left of the current direction of flight. My only experience with inverted flight is with RC aircraft, and that frame-of-reference is totally external and not from a pilot's frame-of-reference inside the cockpit of the aircraft. Therein could lie the source of my confusion about inverted spins. Anyway, part of the PARE procedure to break an aircraft's spin is to lower the nose ... right? To lower the nose when inverted, you ease back on the stick ... correct? Ehhhh, maybe not ... I dunno.

My experience is from so long ago, I'm having difficulty putting the remains of my brane into the cockpit of an inverted aircraft. I think I understand an upright spin fairly well, but an inverted spin? Not so much.

I can certainly understand why there may have been confusion/disorientation in the cockpits of the Pitts 12 that is the subject of this thread. Especially if an upright spin could transition to an inverted spin in the blink of an eye.

 

[RoscoeT]

Don't overthink it. A left rudder spin recovers with right rudder whether it's inverted or upright. Either way you do NOT move the elevator full aft to recover an inverted spin, or push it full forward to recover an upright spin. The real difference between inverted and upright spins is that from the pilot's perspective, during an inverted spin, the airplane yaws in the direction you're holding rudder, but it rolls in the opposite direction. An upright spin yaws and rolls in the direction of the rudder, from the pilot's perspective. This can cause confusion for pilots who are inexperienced with inverted spins, since the roll component can dominate their vision. From the ground, a left rudder inverted spin appears to both roll AND yaw to the right though.

 

[djpacro]

They are more responsive, but not necessarily far more likely to accidentally spin. You really have to severely mishandle the controls with full deflections to produce an accidental spin in a Pitts.

Easy enough for an inexperienced Pitts pilot doing a hammerhead as they tend to give it a lot of aileron and forward stick at the same time as they hit the rudder - if too early on the rudder it will quickly enter an inverted spin going flat. (I have quite a bit of time instructing in Pitts and Decathlon.)

My only experience with inverted flight is with RC aircraft, and that frame-of-reference is totally external and not from a pilot's frame-of-reference inside the cockpit of the aircraft. Therein could lie the source of my confusion about inverted spins. Anyway, part of the PARE procedure to break an aircraft's spin is to lower the nose ... right? To lower the nose when inverted, you ease back on the stick ... correct?

We're always going to be talking direction from the pilot's point of view and therefore it is important to differentiate between the direction of roll and yaw. The PA in PARE is there to remove the forces tending to make it spin flat so will revert to the steep spin mode. (Note that the Pitts S-2A placard and AFM require inspin aileron to recover from a flat spin - certification testing found a spin mode which was unrecoverable otherwise.)