Plane crash Gillespie Field, San Diego

jd21476

jd21476

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Jan 17, 2018
Messages
701
Location
San Diego, CA
Display Name
Display name:
jd21476
I just got a call saying a plane just crashed just short of Gillespie Field about 10 min ago. Anyone have any info?
 
Cbs8 just posted something a few mins ago.
 
Quite possibly this Lear 35. The article on CBS said reports came in at 7:15. FlightAware has this “landing” at 7:14. En route from SNA.
 

Attachments

  • E179891A-78B3-4B51-86F5-533294B187E5.png
    E179891A-78B3-4B51-86F5-533294B187E5.png
    1,015.9 KB · Views: 127
It was N880Z Lear35

Here is the audio with tower but I would advise with caution cause he hd the mic key’d when he crashed.

 
Yeah, it looks like he was maybe setup for the North-South runway when he cancelled IFR, maybe figured he would be landing straight in? Completely guessing...but from the track, it could be stall/spin as he was trying to turn to make 27R. From the start of his turn, that looks pretty tight/close to me for a plane that size.

Controller said left traffic to 27R, which I take as a VFR clearance, and pretty sure I heard him cancel his IFR.
 
Rgbeard said:
Mistook city streets for the runway?
Click to expand...
Looks more like a classic base to final stall, IMO. Same thing happened to a Lear at Teterboro about four years ago. Unfortunately, the Lear can be very unforgiving in this situation, so much so that the FAA came out with a circular about tight base turns in the Lear.
 
There is also some terrain that they could have run into.
 
NSFW Accident Site Footage:

The residents around the site are extremely lucky. The jet impacted at the street and left a sizable crater.
 
Albany Tom said:
Yeah, it looks like he was maybe setup for the North-South runway when he cancelled IFR, maybe figured he would be landing straight in? Completely guessing...but from the track, it could be stall/spin as he was trying to turn to make 27R. From the start of his turn, that looks pretty tight/close to me for a plane that size.

Controller said left traffic to 27R, which I take as a VFR clearance, and pretty sure I heard him cancel his IFR.
Click to expand...

Tight turn, probably dodging a cloud given our current weather and needed to stay tight. Plus the mountain just north of final for 27r about 2 miles out. No clue why he rejected 17 straight in. Maybe worried about braking action in the wet? Really sad. RIP.

Sent from my SM-G960U1 using Tapatalk
 
s35pilot said:
A Lear can’t land in 4500’?
Click to expand...

Probably can, but its tight. The Legacy Lears (20 and 30 series) are little hot rods. They are approach category D airplanes. They have very small wings, with small flaps and no slats, meaning they don't like to be slow. Low level, low speed maneuvering has bitten more than one, including the one mentioned before at Teterboro.
 
iamtheari said:
There is also some terrain that they could have run into.
Click to expand...

From the ADS-B tracks it appears the turn from downwind to base pointed it right at that hill which was at or slightly above the jet’s current altitude. If it had continued its present turn radius it would have overshot the final and could have hit the hill. It crashed before the hill. So, I’m guessing the turn was tightened at the last few moments and there was an accelerated stall.
 
TrueCourse said:
So, I’m guessing the turn was tightened at the last few moments and there was an accelerated stall.
Click to expand...

Most likely. We train about how bank angle affects stall speed during our PPL in small trainers. For example, in an airplane that stalls at 50 kts, in a 60 degree bank, at +2g, the stall speed increases 40% to about 70 kts. But use that same math in a plane that stalls at 130 kts, with a 140+kt approach speed, the stall speed now increases to over 180 kts. Not to mention the stall characteristics of an aircraft with the razor sharp wing of a Legacy Lear, by the time you realize you are in trouble, its too late.
 
Yet another crewed jet succumbing to a CFIT accident while trying to circle to land. Unacceptable.
 
TrueCourse said:
From the ADS-B tracks it appears the turn from downwind to base pointed it right at that hill which was at or slightly above the jet’s current altitude. If it had continued its present turn radius it would have overshot the final and could have hit the hill. It crashed before the hill. So, I’m guessing the turn was tightened at the last few moments and there was an accelerated stall.
Click to expand...


He got bit by rattlesnake.

38F2E589-7230-4354-AB53-88AC4456312D.jpeg
 
Why would he not stay IFR and request vectors for the 27 instrument approach?
 
A1Topgun said:
Why would he not stay IFR and request vectors for the 27 instrument approach?
Click to expand...
Well, technically there is no 27 approach. The localizer approach aligned with 27 is a circling approach (the final approach angle due to terrain to the east is nearly seven degrees).
 
Last edited:
Extended to the crash location.
7BFq2OU.png
 
A1Topgun said:
Why would he not stay IFR and request vectors for the 27 instrument approach?
Click to expand...
An extra 15 minutes of flying. I would like to think getting the instrument approach is what I would have done, but if you're tired and the boss man is going to yell about total time, I might have been tempted.
 
I recall hearing some many years ago that when a pilot says the "S" word it means he realized he screwed up while uttering the "F" word means something on the aircraft broke.
 
flyingron said:
Well, technically there is no 27 approach. The localizer approach aligned with 27 is a circling approach (the final approach angle due to terrain to the east is nearly seven degrees).
Click to expand...

Also, the LOC-D approach says circling runway 27R is not allowed at night. The GPS 17, which he was on before he canceled, also says circling to 27R is not allowed at night.
 
PPC1052 said:
Also, the LOC-D approach says circling runway 27R is not allowed at night. The GPS 17, which he was on before he canceled, also says circling to 27R is not allowed at night.
Click to expand...
Yep, if you look at the plane for the LOC-D you pretty much see why its a bad idea. Nasty terrain out there, but I'm not convinced that's what did these guys in. Looks like they were in a pretty steep descent before they got near the ground.
 
Looks like they were really booking it to be in the terminal area even for a jet. Looks to me like they were behind the airplane, couldn't get configured for 17 in time so chose the cancel IFR to make 27. Low, fast, increasing bank angle and headed right for a mountain.
 
Tantalum said:
note that Circling at night is not authorized for 27R...
Click to expand...

Does that have any teeth or more of a warning? I’ve done the GPS 17 circle to land left downwind 27 at night more than once. Or I guess I should say I know a guy who has.
 
s35pilot said:
Does that have any teeth or more of a warning? I’ve done the GPS 17 circle to land left downwind 27 at night more than once. Or I guess I should say I know a guy who has.
Click to expand...
It's a regulatory violation that can result in a certificate action, and of course, is significant evidence of your fault for tort liability.

However, I would note that the charts specifically prohibits circling to 27R. So, I think 27L is ok.
 
Last edited:
LesGawlik said:
An extra 15 minutes of flying. I would like to think getting the instrument approach is what I would have done, but if you're tired and the boss man is going to yell about total time, I might have been tempted.
Click to expand...
The owner of the plane is Med Jet LLC. I don't know what they do, but if it's air ambulance there is always the chance that a general sense of medical urgency made them want to save the 15 minutes.

TrueCourse said:
From the ADS-B tracks it appears the turn from downwind to base pointed it right at that hill which was at or slightly above the jet’s current altitude. If it had continued its present turn radius it would have overshot the final and could have hit the hill. It crashed before the hill. So, I’m guessing the turn was tightened at the last few moments and there was an accelerated stall.
Click to expand...
That's my impression. Turning to land on 27, they see the hill and panic. Who knows if they had any escape routes at that point. Maybe it was pull and hope not to stall, as opposed to guaranteed CFIT.

I don't know how far back this one will need to be rewound to find all the holes in the Swiss cheese, but I think the most causal and easiest for the rest of us to avoid was deciding to cancel IFR and fly a visual pattern in marginal visibility with terrain in the area. Set your personal minimums for when you will cancel IFR in the terminal environment and stick to them. (Easy example: If circling to land at night is prohibited, then don't cancel IFR when visibility is less than 5 miles.)

I didn't see these links in the thread yet:
Kathryn's Report: http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/12/learjet-35a-n880z-fatal-accident.html
ASN: https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20211227-0
 
Im based at Gillespie and that hill is not that big. You barely notice it when turning downwind to base or base to final.
 
iamtheari said:
That's my impression. Turning to land on 27, they see the hill and panic. Who knows if they had any escape routes at that point. Maybe it was pull and hope not to stall, as opposed to guaranteed CFIT.
Click to expand...

It's a Learjet at light weight. Pushing the throttles up and climbing back into the muck might have been a reasonable choice, but if you're fixated on landing, it might not occur to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top