Bonanza crash caught on video

It was Caltrans, the *******s. THey issue the airport permit, you know.

Jim

--
"If you think you can, or think you can't, you're right."
--Henry Ford



"Robert M. Gary" wrote in message Yea, those things
always give me the chills. I can't believe that the
FAA (or more likely CalTrans) required your airport to *install*
airplane obsitcles.

-Robert

Dudley Henriques wrote:

I agree with you that waiting on the facts is a prudent move with these
things.

Wait for the facts? Wow...what a novel idea! :-) Just think what that
would do to the noise level on threads like this...

I think it's too dramatically different from everyday experience, so the
people watching the gory pictures tend not to identify with them, so they
really don't have much effect.

I was shown those horrible videos (made by the Ohio Highway Patrol,
BTW) in driver's ed, and they had a profound influence on me. I
remember kids fainting and puking in class.

In fact, they had such a restrictive impact on my (normal-for-age-16)
crazy driving that I actually bought the DVD (which is available on-
line) of those films and made my son watch it. It's WAY too
politically incorrect for our cradle-to-grave sappy society nowadays,
and it's still awful to watch.

Dunno if it had the same impact on him, but I figured it was worth the
chance. Male teenage drivers are like hand grenades with the pin
pulled -- you *know* they're going to blow up, it's just a matter of
when and where.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

I've never flown a Bo so I don't know what is flaps characteristics are,
but if the flaps mainly add drag and don't lower the stall speed
appreciable, then using them for takeoff would make little sense. The
Arrow performed only marginally better when using flaps for takeoff.
The Skylane was a whole different airplane with flaps 20 on takeoff.
The deck angle was amazing and the climb speed substantially reduced.

Yep, horsepower makes all the difference. In our 150 hp Piper
Warrior, adding flaps for takeoff was something we did cuz we were
told to do so -- but they didn't really make much difference. That
plane just daintily floated off the ground (and back ON the ground,
when landing) no matter what the flap setting.

Our 235 hp Piper Pathfinder is WAY different. With 2 notches of
flaps, on a cool day, you can just hang on the prop and see nothing
but sky. It'll leap off the ground much faster with than without
flaps.

Which is why I'm surprised to hear of a high-horsepower plane like the
Bonanza that DOESN'T use flaps for takeoff. When I saw the video, I
thought for sure that was the reason for the crash.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

karl gruber wrote:
Yes, flaps need power and the 150 just doesn't have it. The 172 is a
little better, but the 182 really begins to show what flaps combined with
power can do for takeoff.

Matt

Vx is without flaps in a 182.

Karl



OK, you've posted this same thing twice ... and I never said that Vx was
with flaps extended. So, what is your point?

Matt

I was at a poker run a week ago in my A36 with 5 people we took off at BNG
(banning) we were behind a Cherokee 140. We watched the 140 almost crash. I
got on the radio and asked if he was in trouble he replied back yes. I told
him keep the nose down 3 or 4 times as i was watching him. He made it thank
god.

A bunch of us witnessed the same thing happen at OSH, when a Beech
Skipper departed Rwy 27 and disappeared behind the mall across Hwy 41
from the airport. One of our group immediately called the tower on
his hand-held, and informed them that a plane may have crashed.

Just then the radio crackled to life, with the voice of a guy who was
clearly under stress, saying "That's us! We think we're running on 3
cylinders, but we're gonna try to make it to Marshfield!"

I watched the papers and NTSB reports after that, and never saw any
accident report, so he apparently made it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Matt Whiting wrote:
Robert M. Gary wrote:
On Aug 31, 7:40 pm, Mike Granby wrote:
Another witness mentioned an engine sputter
Whatever the cause of a crash, there's always someone who hears the
engine splutter...

All aircraft engines sputter, that's just the nature of how they work.
They don't sound like BMV engines.


Bull. I can easily tell a well-running aircraft engine from one that
isn't running well.

I think he might have meant that a direct
drive unmuffled flat-four sounds rough
at idle compared to most cars. And I'd
agree.

I think he might have meant that a direct
drive unmuffled flat-four sounds rough
at idle compared to most cars. And I'd
agree.

It's that "unmuffled" (or partially muffled, at best) part that gives
it that characteristic quality.

Our friend has an airplane powered by an unmuffled Chevy V-8, and it
sounds just as sputtery at idle...
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

In article ,
"karl gruber" wrote:


Yes, flaps need power and the 150 just doesn't have it. The 172 is a
little better, but the 182 really begins to show what flaps combined with
power can do for takeoff.

Matt

Vx is without flaps in a 182.

Karl

On my '57 model 182 there are two Vx speeds...one for flaps 20 and one
for flaps up.

In article ,
Dudley Henriques wrote:



I Agree. This one just might turn out to be an engine issue suffered
right at or after rotation. No telling without the analysis that will
follow the crash, but it very well might not have been a density
altitude problem or an over gross problem at all.
I agree with you that waiting on the facts is a prudent move with these
things.
Dudley Henriques

I'm wondering if perhaps this guy did an intersection takeoff.