Single experimental crash lands on a flat roof

My first reaction was, "I guess you CAN'T make an emergency landing on a factory roof" (haven't we all wondered?) but at a closer look it appears he hit pretty hard without doing much to the roof.
 
My first reaction was, "I guess you CAN'T make an emergency landing on a factory roof" (haven't we all wondered?) but at a closer look it appears he hit pretty hard without doing much to the roof.

Well, I guess it CAN be done, but it's a bit hard on the airplane and its occupants.

Here's one from almost 10 years ago:

https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/144766
 
I’ve worked on a bunch of factory rooves (is that a word?). AC units are a problem, them holding you up, not a problem...
 
"rooves" if you're being a stickler, but I suppose here in the midwest it would be pronounced as "rufs"
Either way, hopeful for a full recovery.
 
At least that plane can land fairly slowly, although from the wing resting places it stopped rather suddenly.
 
The over all appearance of the debris suggests a Stall and Fall from a moderate altitude.

Most factory roofs are rated for fairly high loading, and should support most piston singles, as long as the initial impact is low. This is particularly true of the very large modern factories and warehouses.

That plane would have been fine if he had slipped it to a low and slow enough position to make a normal landing. Stopping before the edge would have been the big challenge.

Edited to add: The steep angle of impact and damage to the nose end of the plane, and relatively none to the tail indicates that controlled flight was not occurring, and since it seems to have just taken off from the nearby airport, a departure stall is likely. I wonder if fear of crashing on the roof caused him to try to stretch his glide beyond that roof?
 
Last edited:
Looks like it was most likely on departure based on one picture that showed the roof with the runway in the background.
 
Is that sand scattered all around the aircraft parts?
 
Is that sand scattered all around the aircraft parts?

Probably sand or some other absorbent material to soak up spilled fuel. The Seawind that crashed through the roof of the Publix Supermarket in DeLand, Florida 10 years ago penetrated the roof and caught on fire (see link in my above post), so the risk of fire as the result of an aircraft crash is almost always high.
 
From Grammarist

Roofs is the plural of roof in all varieties of English. Rooves is an old secondary form, and it still appears occasionally by analogy with other irregular plurals such as hooves, but it is not common enough to be considered standard.
 
Probably sand or some other absorbent material to soak up spilled fuel. The Seawind that crashed through the roof of the Publix Supermarket in DeLand, Florida 10 years ago penetrated the roof and caught on fire (see link in my above post), so the risk of fire as the result of an aircraft crash is almost always high.
I was wondering if that was why it was there, but it sure seems like better choices for absorbent material could be found.
 
Clay is common, like cat litter. It's absorbent, cheap, generally non-reactive, and doesn't add to the fire load. Not many things better, although I supposed companies making competing proprietary products would argue otherwise.
 
Clay is common, like cat litter. It's absorbent, cheap, generally non-reactive, and doesn't add to the fire load. Not many things better, although I supposed companies making competing proprietary products would argue otherwise.
I bet "Pig" Incorporated would debate you! They seem to have cornered the industrial absorbents market.
 
My first reaction was, "I guess you CAN'T make an emergency landing on a factory roof" (haven't we all wondered?) but at a closer look it appears he hit pretty hard without doing much to the roof.

Nice thing is, there is some give in a roof. Much more than hitting dirt.
 
Back
Top