Plane down off of Cape May, NJ

I grew up in Cape May and spent a lot of my childhood on the beach there. People flying low over the water (50'-100') was not uncommon when I was a kid. But within a wingspan of the water was unusual. Doing it in any plane is risky. Doing it in something as slick as a Mooney is even more so.
 
RIP. Hopefully him flying that low over the water was because he was having some sort of mechanical problem, and not because he was just flying in a risky manner. Maybe he was trying to ditch when he hit that swell.
 
Very sad. I’m a Cape May Beach Patrol alum and know that area like the back of my hand. There’s a large expanse of fairly unpopulated beach there (especially pre-season mid-week) and it looks like the tide was out. Would seem a very attractive option for a forced landing.
 
A second video has been posted that shows the plane, but not the crash. Very low over the water and at the end looks like it may hit it, but you can see the plane climbing at the end of the clip. Sounds like the engine was making power, and appears had enough to climb.

https://www.instagram.com/p/ByDn-YhFbf5/?igshid=4veg25rrk07


Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
That second video looks like it was recorded in Wildwood Crest, which is a good 6-7 miles away from where the plane went down.
 
If and it’s always a big if the reports of the pilot flying very low are true it probably makes the accident investigation easy. There are a few truths in aviation. One of them is that the record for low flying will never be broken only tied!
 
buzzard86 said:
That second video looks like it was recorded in Wildwood Crest, which is a good 6-7 miles away from where the plane went down.
Click to expand...
Yeah, just noticed that on second look. I am trying not to jump to conclusions, but if that video is indeed several miles from the site, then, yeah.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
drotto said:
Yeah, just noticed that on second look. I am trying not to jump to conclusions, but if that video is indeed several miles from the site, then, yeah.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Same here, just trying to understand what could have happened. From the central Crest area, Google maps measures about 7.4 miles along the coast to the crash site. The distance from the Crest to KWWD is just 4.9 miles. If he were having engine trouble at the location at which the second video was recorded, would seem to make sense to have turned directly to the airport. Mostly just tidal marsh between the Crest and the airport.
 
buzzard86 said:
Same here, just trying to understand what could have happened. From the central Crest area, Google maps measures about 7.4 miles along the coast to the crash site. The distance from the Crest to KWWD is just 4.9 miles. If he were having engine trouble at the location at which the second video was recorded, would seem to make sense to have turned directly to the airport. Mostly just tidal marsh between the Crest and the airport.
Click to expand...
And KWWD is a very easy airport to see, and has two wide and fairly long runways. Plus, it is mainly marsh land through there, and a wide nearly empty beach, so plenty of relatively good picks for a forced landing. It is making me think negative thoughts, again trying not to rush to judgement.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
buzzard86 said:
Same here, just trying to understand what could have happened. From the central Crest area, Google maps measures about 7.4 miles along the coast to the crash site. The distance from the Crest to KWWD is just 4.9 miles. If he were having engine trouble at the location at which the second video was recorded, would seem to make sense to have turned directly to the airport. Mostly just tidal marsh between the Crest and the airport.
Click to expand...
I know we all hate speculation and armchair quarterbacking in these situations but from what I saw on the videos posted, engine issues would not be my first suspicion. Probably not my second or third suspicion either.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I know we all hate speculation and armchair quarterbacking in these situations but from what I saw on the videos posted, engine issues would not be my first suspicion. Probably not my second or third suspicion either.
Click to expand...
I know the plane's owner's, and will get more info at some point. It just is not appropriate at this time.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
Sound like they've found the wreckage but did not find the pilot.
 
There’s a webcam pointed directly at the crash area. Wonder if there’s recorded footage.
 
I have a friend (no, really :) ) who used to like flying down on the water until a pelican flew up in front of him and scared the crap out of him. He don’t do that no more. :)
 
Juliet Hotel said:
I know we all hate speculation and armchair quarterbacking in these situations but from what I saw on the videos posted, engine issues would not be my first suspicion. Probably not my second or third suspicion either.
Click to expand...
I had those same thoughts when I saw the video taken before an infamous accident in Florida:
 
Sad to see. Will be very upsetting if indeed that vid was a few miles a away and this was just hotdogging. Seems like in that Instagram vid he was hauling a$$.
 
Pilot was identified. His FB page is full of pics of the plane.
 
Apparently the remains and plane have now been recovered. I will be interested in seeing what caused this.
 
Juliet Hotel said:
Pilot was identified. His FB page is full of pics of the plane.
Click to expand...

Actually, his background photo is a picture of my friends plane. It is not the plane he crashed. Why would a person put a random picture of someone's plane as their background, when they could have easily taken a photo of the rental they are flying. People are just bizarre.

Then again, why would you buzz along the water ? :dunno:
 
GMascelli said:
why would you buzz along the water
Click to expand...

Low level flying whether over water or land can be a lot of fun and it really highlights the speed at which you are flying but it requires precision flying, adherence to personal minimums and over open water like that off the southern tip of NJ, additional planning for swells.
 
^^^Yep that.^^^

Slow planes feel like they're really fast when take them right down on the deck. Fast planes feel like you're breaking the speed of sound when you do it. Lots of Mooney drivers love their Mooneys because of the speed. His FB page sure does make it seem like he was in love with Mooneys. I'll be watching for the final report on this one.
 
Preliminary report is out. The FAA has not assigned a cause yet, but the report reads as if the pilot was hot dogging it, got too low and the bottom got wet. He then pulled up realizing this and managed to stall the plane. Again, I hope this is not me jumping too conclusions, but it really looks like that is the situation.

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2019/05/mooney-m20j201-n201dg-fatal-accident.html?m=1

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk
 
apr911 said:
Low level flying whether over water or land can be a lot of fun and it really highlights the speed at which you are flying but it requires precision flying, adherence to personal minimums and over open water like that off the southern tip of NJ, additional planning for swells.
Click to expand...

Planning for swells means you’re far below any prudent personal minima. Low altitude training over water is prohibited in Marine Corps training rules specifically because of the hazards associated with lack of peripheral cues that makes speed/altitude distinction difficult.
Suggestion if you want to build a visual reference for speed go VFR on top where if you tap a cloud you’re not likely to destroy anything but some puffies.
 
John Bussard said:
Planning for swells means you’re far below any prudent personal minima. Low altitude training over water is prohibited in Marine Corps training rules specifically because of the hazards associated with lack of peripheral cues that makes speed/altitude distinction difficult.
Suggestion if you want to build a visual reference for speed go VFR on top where if you tap a cloud you’re not likely to destroy anything but some puffies.
Click to expand...

By all accounts I've seen thus far, this Mooney bounced off the water after striking water with the fuselage, in which case I would agree that he was far below prudent altitudes but bersonal minima are exactly that, personal. What's low over the water to you is likely not low to a seaplane pilot for example. With a low-wing 17.5ft (35 total) wingspan like a Mooney, it wouldn't take much of a turn and a swell to bury a wing tip and cartwheel the plane and you are absolutely correct about the hazards associated with the lack of peripheral cues and is more or less what I was getting at with my comment about "planning for swells."

Flying over open water is quite a bit different from flying over a protected harbor, lake or river because of the lack of visual cues (including boats) by which to gauge your altitude. You also have the additional challenge of dealing with swells of unknown height that you are likely unable to see or gauge from the air. While swells are typically fairly uniform, it is also not all that uncommon to have individual waves that are quite a bit larger than the one's preceding or following it.

For VFR pilots, VFR on Top is not an option.

To be clear, I'm not endorsing this type of flight but neither am I condemning it. I'm not here to judge others for their flying; if flying low over the water or scud running under the clouds floats your boat and tickles your fancy, have at it but do be aware of the risks and the "other considerations" you should give to such activity before doing so.
 
John Bussard said:
Suggestion if you want to build a visual reference for speed go VFR on top where if you tap a cloud you’re not likely to destroy anything but some puffies.
Click to expand...

I recently experienced this for the first time in the right seat on a pipeline sortie and it was amazing. We were IFR and didn't do it intentionally but it was mesmerising.
 
apr911 said:
By all accounts I've seen thus far, this Mooney bounced off the water after striking water with the fuselage, in which case I would agree that he was far below prudent altitudes but bersonal minima are exactly that, personal. What's low over the water to you is likely not low to a seaplane pilot for example. With a low-wing 17.5ft (35 total) wingspan like a Mooney, it wouldn't take much of a turn and a swell to bury a wing tip and cartwheel the plane and you are absolutely correct about the hazards associated with the lack of peripheral cues and is more or less what I was getting at with my comment about "planning for swells."

Flying over open water is quite a bit different from flying over a protected harbor, lake or river because of the lack of visual cues (including boats) by which to gauge your altitude. You also have the additional challenge of dealing with swells of unknown height that you are likely unable to see or gauge from the air. While swells are typically fairly uniform, it is also not all that uncommon to have individual waves that are quite a bit larger than the one's preceding or following it.

For VFR pilots, VFR on Top is not an option.

To be clear, I'm not endorsing this type of flight but neither am I condemning it. I'm not here to judge others for their flying; if flying low over the water or scud running under the clouds floats your boat and tickles your fancy, have at it but do be aware of the risks and the "other considerations" you should give to such activity before doing so.
Click to expand...

The reason I’m so firmly against flat-hatting is because I generally don’t believe the folks doing so HAVE balanced the risks and other considerations. Hence I shoulda put quotes around “personal,” as they’re not well informed enough to develop minima for atypical envelopes like this...

I’m eagerly NOT advocating because this mentality is destructive and at its worst takes innocent lives along with it on the joyride. Yes we can say it’s their individual decision but especially now it’s virtually impossible to not affect someone else when it goes sideways.
 
GMascelli said:
Actually, his background photo is a picture of my friends plane. It is not the plane he crashed. Why would a person put a random picture of someone's plane as their background, when they could have easily taken a photo of the rental they are flying. People are just bizarre.

Then again, why would you buzz along the water ? :dunno:
Click to expand...

Possibly the same as a moron at my work who took a picture in front of his neighbor’s Stearman when he doesn’t even fly. He then got to bask in the attention of folks asking “is that your airplane?” While saying “no, but it’s remarkably easy to fly” like he’s some accomplished pilot...like I said, he’s a moron.
 
John Bussard said:
The reason I’m so firmly against flat-hatting is because I generally don’t believe the folks doing so HAVE balanced the risks and other considerations. Hence I shoulda put quotes around “personal,” as they’re not well informed enough to develop minima for atypical envelopes like this...

I’m eagerly NOT advocating because this mentality is destructive and at its worst takes innocent lives along with it on the joyride. Yes we can say it’s their individual decision but especially now it’s virtually impossible to not affect someone else when it goes sideways.
Click to expand...
If you splat, it sure does affect a lot of folks, but so do many of our decisions; it's the price of living and be interconnected, I think. Risk and reward are very personal - what's outrageous to one may be exhilirating to another, and worth the possibility of consequences. I've flown low over open water. I liked it.

I'd hate to see us in the business of forcing our risk formulas on everyone else - we are too eager to make rules for "the other guys" who aren't as "informed" as us.

No one gets out alive - leave some room for other options on the way. . .
 
overdrive148 said:
We were IFR and didn't do it intentionally but it was mesmerising.
Click to expand...
That's my favorite kind of flying, when you're assigned an altitude that is right on top and you skim along. Cool stuff!

Also, regarding this accident, if he actually was joyflighting skimming the water surface then that is just flat out stupid. And these are the kinds of stats that make it seem like single engine GA flying is less safe than driving, on par with motorcycles or worse

<shakes head>
 
Sundancer said:
If you splat, it sure does affect a lot of folks, but so do many of our decisions; it's the price of living and be interconnected, I think. Risk and reward are very personal - what's outrageous to one may be exhilirating to another, and worth the possibility of consequences. I've flown low over open water. I liked it.

I'd hate to see us in the business of forcing our risk formulas on everyone else - we are too eager to make rules for "the other guys" who aren't as "informed" as us.

No one gets out alive - leave some room for other options on the way. . .
Click to expand...

I understand that completely. But the interconnected piece is what rubs me the wrong way the most. Yes going way out over open water minimizes some risk to others, but minimizing it to a level that makes it other than selfish is next to impossible.

We can get super relativistic on this but the bottom line is- If the PIC truly knew/processed the risk would he have done it? I submit most of these types of mishaps surprise someone and they could’ve known better.
 
So when he kissed the water the first time airframe wise what happens? Bend the prop pretty hard? Maybe why when he pulled up he didn’t have any thrust to match it. Or just an AoA stall?

I know a lot of ppl hate reading about accidents, but spending time reading and watching those videos on yT are helpful for PIC to think about their own decision making. There has to be someone who read about this accident that does this kind of crap and say “oh ****, I was doing that” and maybe just maybe they stop doing it.
 
Tantalum said:
That's my favorite kind of flying, when you're assigned an altitude that is right on top and you skim along. Cool stuff!
Click to expand...

I had never been in the front seat when punching through clouds before. We had some nearly vertical clouds in front of us - My brain was yelling at me saying that it was a solid object we had to avoid. I had to focus on relaxing for the first two or three towering cumulus we punched through. The clouds kept rising up under us but ATC kept giving us higher altitude so we stayed skimming the tops for some time. That was the best part of the flight. The worst was scooting around at 1000agl in the middle of the summer in west Texas with turbulence and winds and heat. I had to break out the dramamine to survive that one.
 
overdrive148 said:
I had to break out the dramamine to survive that one.
Click to expand...
I bet! I did a little flying with my nephew a few weeks ago down in Florida, it was hot, humid, and I was wondering how all the students there survive their steep turns, etc., without getting sick!
 
Gad, bleech . . .picture yourself in the back of a C-130, 300' AGL for hours, 100+ degrees; like being in a dumpster, towed by a pickup, as fast as it can go, over scattered railroad ties; wearing helmet, harness (or chute), with the smell of hot hydraulic fluid, like sickly-sweet yeast. And the effing extraction chute doesn't come out of the bomb rack, or the load jams. No wonder the get young guys do that stuff. . .
 
John Bussard said:
I understand that completely. But the interconnected piece is what rubs me the wrong way the most. Yes going way out over open water minimizes some risk to others, but minimizing it to a level that makes it other than selfish is next to impossible.

We can get super relativistic on this but the bottom line is- If the PIC truly knew/processed the risk would he have done it? I submit most of these types of mishaps surprise someone and they could’ve known better.
Click to expand...
I'm good with not personally approving of it - not so good with imposing my will on someone else, and vice versa. Selfish is a value judgment, I think; like eating fried food or sky diving - someone close to you is likely to share the consequences. Not sure where the line is between the impact to others and living your best life. . .
 
Sundancer said:
If you splat, it sure does affect a lot of folks, but so do many of our decisions; it's the price of living and be interconnected, I think. Risk and reward are very personal - what's outrageous to one may be exhilirating to another, and worth the possibility of consequences. I've flown low over open water. I liked it.
Click to expand...
You might be fine with accepting the risk of going out over water and going splat. But if you go splat, someone is going to have go look for you. And if they find you, or think they've found you, they're going to have to suit up and dive to try to get your carcass back. In that situation, your choices end up putting others at risk.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top