Accident report on the midair at Tenino

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 07:58:32 -0700, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

The raw radar returns (tapes) had them both at approx. 3500 msl.
As I recall, the weather was fairly decent that day (I was up/
flying in the general vicinity that day).

Bela P. Havasreti

"Karl Treier" wrote in message
.. .
OK on that heading shouldn't you be at Even + 500' for VFR? Amazing that
the CG was not shifted aft so far as to make it impossible to pitch down.

It appears that both planes were below 3000' AGL. Although Tenino is at
about 300' the surrounding terrain pokes up over 1000.' It is a favorite
area for instructors to demonstrate to students how rising terrain can meet
lowering clouds, since such conditions can be found there very frequently.
In fact, that is where my instructor taught me about CFIT when I was a
student. Reading the accident report it appears that both planes may have
had their altitude restricted by low clouds, which is pretty much a normal
state of affairs around here. The report notes that neither pilot was using
flight following. It does not say that flight following might well have not
been available in that area and that altitude. Radio reception out there is
spotty at best. I almost always lose both radio and radar contact somewhere
in the area south of SCOOT, even though I am flying a published IFR approach
and on an IFR flight plan.

The other thing is that from that area north there is a lot of flight
training going on, with airplanes constantly maneuvering, climbing,
descending, and practicing IFR maneuvers with one pilot under the hood. It
is just inside the 15 DME arc for the VOR/DME approach into Olympia and near
the final approach course and not all that far from the published holding
pattern for the missed approaches into Olympia. There are likely to be two
or three planes flying these approaches at any one time. Consequently there
are so many airplanes flying at odd altitudes and odd directions that for
all practical purposes the VFR altitude rules might as well not exist. For
that matter, these have to be the most widely ignored regulations in the
country, especially in the West.

You have to keep a sharp eye out. Sometimes even that is not enough.

I have always been told that it is impossible to pitch down if your engine
comes off. You will pitch up, stall, and die. That is what I have always
been told. I guess in a 170, at least, that is not true. I would guess that
the engine weighs about 270 lbs. with accessories and sits about 20 inches
forward of the datum. He also lost the prop and part of the cowl. The 170 is
a tailwheel airplane, so landing gear would be unaffected. (Now there is an
interesting argument in favor of tailwheel airplanes -- if your engine falls
off, you don't lose your nose gear!) At the same time, losing all that
weight might improve your glide significantly.

He probably would not even have nosed over if he hadn't hit the trees and
power line.