C172 crash at Coney Island

In article ,
says...


"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

It's perplexing that an 1800-hour CFI would have a stall/spin crash on a
sightseeing flight, with or without an engine failure.

Perplexing - maybe. Disturbing - certainly. Rare - NOT.

It's not rare for an 1800-hour CFI to have a stall/spin crash in good VFR
weather? How often does that occur, according to your data?


Not my data - that's the job of the NTSB.
Check out these two, which I just pulled out or recent memory, off the top
of my head. High time, high-class pilots. Thousands of hours. ATPs. Lives
lost after stalling by exceeding allowable angle of attack in low-altitude
manoeuvers. Admittedly, there is a medical "factor" in one of these tragic
accidents, which by some accounts may have been more important than the
simple "factor" status allowed by the NTSB, but even if you strike this one
out, it's only one of dozens you'll find in the NTSB database.

http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/brief.asp?e...15X00505&key=1
http://www.ntsb.gov/NTSB/GenPDF.asp?...03FA173&rpt=fi

It is disturbing that seemingly no amount of time or experience will put us
completely out of danger from this type of misjudgement. The two cited here
are complex aircraft, with crew coordination considerations, however you'll
find dozens of "stall turning final" kinds of accident reports by ATP's in
Cessna singles.

G Faris

"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

"Greg Farris" wrote in message
...
In article ,
says...

It's perplexing that an 1800-hour CFI would have a stall/spin crash on a
sightseeing flight, with or without an engine failure.

Perplexing - maybe. Disturbing - certainly. Rare - NOT.

It's not rare for an 1800-hour CFI to have a stall/spin crash in good VFR
weather? How often does that occur, according to your data?

Not my data - that's the job of the NTSB.
Check out these two, which I just pulled out or recent memory, off the top
of my head. High time, high-class pilots. Thousands of hours. ATPs. Lives
lost after stalling by exceeding allowable angle of attack in low-altitude
manoeuvers. Admittedly, there is a medical "factor" in one of these tragic
accidents, which by some accounts may have been more important than the
simple "factor" status allowed by the NTSB, but even if you strike this
one
out, it's only one of dozens you'll find in the NTSB database.

Both of these accidents occurred in poor visibility (1100', 3sm in the case
with the medical factor; in the other, a witness described the plane
"reappearing" from clouds at 200' on a *visual* base leg). Thus, neither is
an example of the sort I was asking about.

--Gary