By: Propstrike - 25th July 2013 at 12:34
Can often be better witnesses as they do not come with preconcepted knowledge that can cloud what they are actually seeing
Two summers ago I watched the Skyraider ram the P51 out of the sky at DX, saw the debris falling, and followed the path of the aircraft until both reached the ground, but had you asked me 5 minutes later exactly what I had seen, I was not really sure, and in struggling to come up with an account, would have added details which would subsequently have been found to be wrong.
By: TonyT - 25th July 2013 at 00:18
One of the witnesses (albeit a 12yo kid) said the plane barrel rolled & one of the wings failed. Crash pic shows an aircraft seemingly missing the starboard wing
Can often be better witnesses as they do not come with preconcepted knowledge that can cloud what they are actually seeing
By: Propstrike - 24th July 2013 at 22:45
Seems to be the old killer, stall/spin, base to finals.
No loss of any airframe parts, or engine issues. Eye witness accounts are often wrong, in fact, they are nearly always wrong.
”A significant number of witnesses, some with piloting experience, observed the aircraft turn right base for runway 21L. They recalled that the aircraft appeared to be flying very slowly prior to an abrupt left turn away from the runway. Their accounts described a loss of control that was consistent with an aerodynamic stall followed by a significant wing drop. The aircraft was then observed to descend steeply toward the ground with a degree of spiral evident along the descent path before being lost to sight behind trees and buildings.”
http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2013/aair/ao-2013-051.aspx
By: Moggy C - 21st March 2013 at 08:15
“Some guy”?
OK let’s file that with all the other theories and await the results of the expert analysis.
Moggy
By: tangles - 21st March 2013 at 07:41
Spitfire
Some guy reported the engine was screaming and the prop wasn’t.This happened with the replica Mustang a while back killed him also.
By: Moggy C - 20th March 2013 at 14:57
Assuming that somewhat enigmatic posting is meant to suggest a drive belt failure as the cause of the accident
1) What is the source for this information?
2) How would the loss of a drive belt, and presumably of all engine power, result in a vertical descent as pictured, rather than a normal glide descent?
Moggy
By: tangles - 20th March 2013 at 10:01
Spit
Did a drive belt.
By: Dave Wilson - 19th March 2013 at 23:44
Very sad to hear about this. Condolencies to the pilot’s family and friends. Please let’s not speculate on what went wrong, that’s for the AAIB and also to show some respect for the pilots family.
By: Digger - 19th March 2013 at 06:15
Airshow Safety
The account that ‘aerobatics’ were involved leads one to have some sympathy with the UK LAA view that the type should not be approved for aeros here.
Sad news all the same.
Moggy
Admittedly I was in the car headed for the gate, but I didn’t see any Aero’s as such, just some fast passes and tightish turns. From what I could see, he was on a downwind leg with gear down when he dived in.
I am just hoping this does not spark another anti airshow debate, as in 50 years of attending airshows, this is the first fatatilty I’ve witnessed and only the second serious, the first being Neil Williams in a Stampe at Biggin Hill in the 60s……….Digger
By: ZRX61 - 19th March 2013 at 02:38
The ‘tail on’ shot shows the stbd wing, and if the spectator photo of the plane in a dive, gear down, is pre impact, then it does have the wings attached.
It shows about 3ft of the starboard wing & no impact marks on the tree just behind what’s left of the wing.
By: EGTC - 18th March 2013 at 22:27
Sad news. RIP.
By: Student Pilot - 18th March 2013 at 22:21
Moggy, the type is stressed the same as your RV, are RV’s OK’d for aeros in the UK? The aircraft would have not been doing “Aero’s” in the circuit area at Parafield. Newspaper “Aerobatics” can be anything from straight and level to 30 degree turns.
Nobody has said anything about medical problems may have contributed. Inattention or incapacity in slow flight from medical problems can have the same end result.
By: Moggy C - 18th March 2013 at 15:22
The account that ‘aerobatics’ were involved leads one to have some sympathy with the UK LAA view that the type should not be approved for aeros here.
Sad news all the same.
Moggy
By: JagRigger - 18th March 2013 at 11:13
One of the witnesses (albeit a 12yo kid) said the plane barrel rolled & one of the wings failed. Crash pic shows an aircraft seemingly missing the starboard wing 🙁
The ‘tail on’ shot shows the stbd wing, and if the spectator photo of the plane in a dive, gear down, is pre impact, then it does have the wings attached.
By: Propstrike - 18th March 2013 at 09:22
Might have been a tip that came off. If it lost an entire wing, I doubt it would look so complete. Also, wintesses mean well, but very often offer accounts which do not stand up to scrutiny or the known facts.
However, a life has been lost, and our conjecture is just so much hot air. If there are issues of airframe integrity, I imagine the authorities will be on to it.
By: ZRX61 - 18th March 2013 at 05:45
One of the witnesses (albeit a 12yo kid) said the plane barrel rolled & one of the wings failed. Crash pic shows an aircraft seemingly missing the starboard wing 🙁
By: taylorman - 17th March 2013 at 15:13
Very sad indeed, condolences to the family of the pilot
By: Newforest - 17th March 2013 at 12:56
More photos, very sad. 🙁
By: danjama - 17th March 2013 at 11:30
Condolences to the friends and family of the pilot. Found some photos of her flying here.
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=1284196
By: DazDaMan - 17th March 2013 at 10:35
Seen in better times:
🙁
Sign In
March 17, 2013 at 4:42 am