C421 crash Long Island
Thread Starter
C421 crash Long Island
Any thoughts on this video: https://nypost.com/2021/01/11/video-...njured-pilot/?
Pilot severely injured but alive. Engine problems reported but to me it looks as if forward speed was very low at impact.
Pilot severely injured but alive. Engine problems reported but to me it looks as if forward speed was very low at impact.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,597
Received 275 Likes
on
153 Posts
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/246603
Forward airspeed looked almost negligible - port wing may have absorbed much of the impact? Very lucky, hope he is making a good recovery.
Forward airspeed looked almost negligible - port wing may have absorbed much of the impact? Very lucky, hope he is making a good recovery.
Thread Starter
The airframe came down on what appeared to be a clump of bushes and/or small trees, I guess that absorbed some of the energy along with the wing and underfloor structure (probably not much of that on this type).
Moderator
The airplane was obviously fully stalled, so it was a failure of the pilot to maintain flying speed. Of course, engine power really helps a pilot to maintain flying speed, but it's still possible, and rarely necessary, to maintain flying speed without any engine power, even in a twin. So it should be practiced. A pilot must do whatever is necessary to assure that sufficient flying speed is maintained to (a) maintain controlled flight, and (b) reserve enough speed to flare, and arrest a descent just prior to contacting the surface. If, in the last 100 feet before contacting the surface, the plane is stalled, arrival will be painful. And, when you're stalled, you have very little control as to where you actually go, so controlling to your selected contact point is very difficult. I don't know the phase of flight from which this crash occurred, though I'm thinking that because the gear was up, it wasn't a final approach, but it is a reminder, particularly for single pilots, to maintain at least Vy, and Vy and Vmca for twin pilots.
A 421 is a rather high wingloading plane, so though it will glide okay, the pilot has to maintain flying speed, it has little tolerance for getting slow. I believe, that like the 310/340 I used to fly, in the 421, the pilot more or less sits on the main wing spar. With the gear up, there is little to absorb a belly landing, so make it gentle. In other types (C 210, for example), there is some pretty well empty fuselage under the seats, so there will be a little absorption of a belly landing, but not if you're sitting on the spar, and the spar is the first thing to hit the ground. Yes, hitting one wing down absorbed a little energy, but not enough.
I find that the more advanced the plane, and more self assured the pilot, the less pilots practice on type with the most basic power off flying skills. In each of my two planes, I'll practice a power off landing from downwind at least once a month or so. I get that it would seem very odd to practice a power off landing in a 421, but had the pilot maintained that skill, this outcome would have been better. Yes, the pilot survived, but a hit that hard will have him/her recovering for a long time....
A 421 is a rather high wingloading plane, so though it will glide okay, the pilot has to maintain flying speed, it has little tolerance for getting slow. I believe, that like the 310/340 I used to fly, in the 421, the pilot more or less sits on the main wing spar. With the gear up, there is little to absorb a belly landing, so make it gentle. In other types (C 210, for example), there is some pretty well empty fuselage under the seats, so there will be a little absorption of a belly landing, but not if you're sitting on the spar, and the spar is the first thing to hit the ground. Yes, hitting one wing down absorbed a little energy, but not enough.
I find that the more advanced the plane, and more self assured the pilot, the less pilots practice on type with the most basic power off flying skills. In each of my two planes, I'll practice a power off landing from downwind at least once a month or so. I get that it would seem very odd to practice a power off landing in a 421, but had the pilot maintained that skill, this outcome would have been better. Yes, the pilot survived, but a hit that hard will have him/her recovering for a long time....
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,597
Received 275 Likes
on
153 Posts
Apparently climbing out of Farmingdale, lost one and was trying to return when the other failed..
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The airplane was obviously fully stalled, so it was a failure of the pilot to maintain flying speed. Of course, engine power really helps a pilot to maintain flying speed, but it's still possible, and rarely necessary, to maintain flying speed without any engine power, even in a twin. So it should be practiced. A pilot must do whatever is necessary to assure that sufficient flying speed is maintained to (a) maintain controlled flight, and (b) reserve enough speed to flare, and arrest a descent just prior to contacting the surface. If, in the last 100 feet before contacting the surface, the plane is stalled, arrival will be painful. And, when you're stalled, you have very little control as to where you actually go, so controlling to your selected contact point is very difficult. I don't know the phase of flight from which this crash occurred, though I'm thinking that because the gear was up, it wasn't a final approach, but it is a reminder, particularly for single pilots, to maintain at least Vy, and Vy and Vmca for twin pilots.
A 421 is a rather high wingloading plane, so though it will glide okay, the pilot has to maintain flying speed, it has little tolerance for getting slow. I believe, that like the 310/340 I used to fly, in the 421, the pilot more or less sits on the main wing spar. With the gear up, there is little to absorb a belly landing, so make it gentle. In other types (C 210, for example), there is some pretty well empty fuselage under the seats, so there will be a little absorption of a belly landing, but not if you're sitting on the spar, and the spar is the first thing to hit the ground. Yes, hitting one wing down absorbed a little energy, but not enough.
I find that the more advanced the plane, and more self assured the pilot, the less pilots practice on type with the most basic power off flying skills. In each of my two planes, I'll practice a power off landing from downwind at least once a month or so. I get that it would seem very odd to practice a power off landing in a 421, but had the pilot maintained that skill, this outcome would have been better. Yes, the pilot survived, but a hit that hard will have him/her recovering for a long time....
A 421 is a rather high wingloading plane, so though it will glide okay, the pilot has to maintain flying speed, it has little tolerance for getting slow. I believe, that like the 310/340 I used to fly, in the 421, the pilot more or less sits on the main wing spar. With the gear up, there is little to absorb a belly landing, so make it gentle. In other types (C 210, for example), there is some pretty well empty fuselage under the seats, so there will be a little absorption of a belly landing, but not if you're sitting on the spar, and the spar is the first thing to hit the ground. Yes, hitting one wing down absorbed a little energy, but not enough.
I find that the more advanced the plane, and more self assured the pilot, the less pilots practice on type with the most basic power off flying skills. In each of my two planes, I'll practice a power off landing from downwind at least once a month or so. I get that it would seem very odd to practice a power off landing in a 421, but had the pilot maintained that skill, this outcome would have been better. Yes, the pilot survived, but a hit that hard will have him/her recovering for a long time....
Moderator
Lot of Monday Morning Quarter-backing going on here. . . . if only they had your skills. . . .
When I had the great pleasure of a day's visit with former contributor here, John Farley, he told me many inspiring stories about flight testing Hawker Harriers. One of them was his intended power off landing in a Harrier on the dry lake bed at Edwards Air Force Base (effectively unlimited length runway). Though I have never flown anything like a Harrier, I believe that if it can be successfully landed power off, any GA plane can. It may be messy, for lack of a decent plot of open land, but it should be under some control. I was inspired by John to maintain these basic skills, and to pass on their importance.
This video shows exactly what I warn pilots I train to not do - get slow power off, and loose control.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Paisley, Florida USA
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regards,
Grog
From that video it didn't look like there was anywhere suitable to land. Hitting things at minimum speed matters. He may have done the best possible for forward and vertical speed combined. I assume the landfill is behind the building. Were there vehicles/people on the landfill, seen only when very low?
From that video it didn't look like there was anywhere suitable to land. Hitting things at minimum speed matters. He may have done the best possible for forward and vertical speed combined. I assume the landfill is behind the building. Were there vehicles/people on the landfill, seen only when very low?
Moderator
A wise person once told me: "Chances of survival are inversely proportional to angle of arrival". If you're flying, you know that you have to contact the surface at some point. The more parallel you are, the better the outcome. Airplanes are designed to protect the occupants through a much greater forward crash load than a vertical impact load. For obvious reasons, helicopter occupant design standards are different, more protecting for vertical arrival to the surface. Losing control of the plane just before contact with the ground should never be a crash survival tactic, unless you're sacrificing yourself to save someone else on the surface.
Thread Starter
The exception to that rule was the 'stall the aircraft into the treetops' option that was sometimes exercised when faced with an unplanned glider over an extensive forest. In this particular case, the aircraft, or the occupant I should say, may have benefited from encountering some bushes or small trees, but the manner in which it arrived suggests that any control over the path was lost at an earlier stage. Fostex's point has also been stated as 'fly the aircraft as far into the crash as possible' although I cannot remember who was the source for that nugget of wisdom.
What made this video stand out for me is that we rarely see the last part of the arrival in such detail. Fortunately the occupant is still alive to tell the tale. The point about the spar being below the seats is an interesting one. I am aware of the fact that light aeroplanes, including twins, rarely have much of a crumple zone below the seats or floor. Take a C150 for example where the distance between your own back end and the bottom of the fuselage is only a couple of inches. It makes the fact that the pilot survived this accident all the more rare.
What made this video stand out for me is that we rarely see the last part of the arrival in such detail. Fortunately the occupant is still alive to tell the tale. The point about the spar being below the seats is an interesting one. I am aware of the fact that light aeroplanes, including twins, rarely have much of a crumple zone below the seats or floor. Take a C150 for example where the distance between your own back end and the bottom of the fuselage is only a couple of inches. It makes the fact that the pilot survived this accident all the more rare.
Moderator
The exception to that rule was the 'stall the aircraft into the treetops'
Take a C150 for example where the distance between your own back end and the bottom of the fuselage is only a couple of inches.
Note in my photo, the wrinkle in the aft fuselage, and flattened bottoms of the tip tank, along with absence of any slide marks whatever, to show how hard it hit vertically.
https://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/39240
Alleged communication from the event.
Moderator
Well, I know that the controller was doing his best, and trying to help, but in a highly stressful time for the pilot, he saturated the pilot with helpful information, but it was still saturation. When the controller said you're 4 miles out, at 1100 feet, there was the big clue to everyone that the plane was not going to make it back to the airport power off. I'm guessing that a 421 descends at more than 1100 FPM power off. If it was being flown at even 120 knots (which I bet gets you much more than 1100 FPM), it'll only make it half way back. 'Sounds like it crashed just less than half way back. When you're committed to a forced landing, you may as well be realistic about where you can get to, and make a better job inside the comfortable glide range, rather than a stalled crash at the edge of the glide range. Knowing your comfortable glide range is important, even in a twin.
Gnome de PPRuNe
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Too close to Croydon for comfort
Age: 60
Posts: 12,597
Received 275 Likes
on
153 Posts