Columbia crash...opinions

"xyzzy" wrote in message
ups.com...

Kobra wrote:
Check this clip out. What does everyone think happened here?

http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZWC2XJYgcJU

....

What kind of player does this video use? It doesn't play in my IE and
there is no link on the page to download the player.


You probably have your security set too high, and disallow the necessary
Control.

("BTIZ" wrote)
Look again, front seat passenger (adult), back seat passenger (adult male)
and I'm guessing that a litter with a medical patient behind the pilot,
look at the oxygen support and other medical supplies.


http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZWC2XJYgcJU

Is that the same (crash) plane or a second plane?

When I saw the post-crash fire and smoke, and the people on the ground being
treated, I figured the crash plane was toast.


Montblack

Looks to me like the flap setting may be "a little" more than usually used for
this type of takeoff, but not enough to be causal or contributing.

Hard to say much about speed from this type of video, but he looks slow.

Could be a problem with the C/S prop. The 182, with the prop at fine pitch
usually has abundant excess horsepower on takeoff. If he set the prop wrong, or
if it malfunctioned it could look like this.

Otherwise, as others have stated here, you'd have to know something about the
density altitude at the time, and the loading of the aircraft, as well as
whether the engine itself failed to develmop power.

GF

On 2006-03-30, Mike Granby wrote:
Someone elsewhere suggested that the gust lock might have been in
place, as you don't see the ailerons moving.

Unlikely. The standard Cessna gust lock locks the elevators in an almost
full nose-down position - it's improbable he'd have been able to raise
the nose at all. It just looks like a classic insufficient
airspeed/mush/stall accident.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

In rec.aviation.owning Greg Farris wrote:
: Looks to me like the flap setting may be "a little" more than usually used for
: this type of takeoff, but not enough to be causal or contributing.

: Hard to say much about speed from this type of video, but he looks slow.

: Could be a problem with the C/S prop. The 182, with the prop at fine pitch
: usually has abundant excess horsepower on takeoff. If he set the prop wrong, or
: if it malfunctioned it could look like this.

: Otherwise, as others have stated here, you'd have to know something about the
: density altitude at the time, and the loading of the aircraft, as well as
: whether the engine itself failed to develmop power.

True. It sure looks like a classic mush/stall though. He got airborne
too early, but with plenty of potential ground-effect acceleration space/time.
Between the partial stall with resulting wing drop, and perhaps seeing the people
ducking for cover, he tried to suck it up and over. Without ground effect to
accelerate, he got irrecoverably behind the power curve.

-Cory

--

************************************************** ***********************
* Cory Papenfuss *
* Electrical Engineering candidate Ph.D. graduate student *
* Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University *
************************************************** ***********************

CG problem..probably aft...which would
make rudder potentially worthless.

Why? An aft CG will reduce the rudder's arm and increase the p-factor,
but it won't render it useless.

Greg Farris wrote:
Could be a problem with the C/S prop. The 182, with the prop at fine pitch
usually has abundant excess horsepower on takeoff. If he set the prop wrong,
or if it malfunctioned it could look like this.


Don't see how he could have done that. Have you *ever* tried to take off with
the throttle(s) / prop(s) / mixture(s) not pushed full forward? Particularly on
a maximum effort takeoff? (Maybe holding back a little bit on a turbocharged
engine with the throttle as redline dictates).





--
Mortimer Schnerd, RN

VE

In article ,
says...

He got airborne too early, but with plenty of potential ground-effect
acceleration space/time. Between the partial stall with resulting wing drop,
and perhaps seeing the people ducking for cover, he tried to suck it up and
over. Without ground effect to accelerate, he got irrecoverably behind the
power curve.

-Cory

Maybe - but I generally consider that there's not *that* much ground effect
to worry about in these high-wing Cessnas. He got pretty high for that.

Sure doesn't look like fun.



In article ,
VE says...

Don't see how he could have done that. Have you *ever* tried to take off with
the throttle(s) / prop(s) / mixture(s) not pushed full forward? Particularly
on a maximum effort takeoff? (Maybe holding back a little bit on a
turbocharged engine with the throttle as redline dictates).


I agree - it sure seems intuitive to push everything to the firewall in such
a case - but then it seems intuitive as well to remove gust locks, yet some
pilots manage . . .

GF

Yep, "Behind the power curve".

Al


"Dylan Smith" wrote in message
...
On 2006-03-30, Mike Granby wrote:
Someone elsewhere suggested that the gust lock might have been in
place, as you don't see the ailerons moving.

Unlikely. The standard Cessna gust lock locks the elevators in an almost
full nose-down position - it's improbable he'd have been able to raise
the nose at all. It just looks like a classic insufficient
airspeed/mush/stall accident.

--
Dylan Smith, Port St Mary, Isle of Man
Flying: http://www.dylansmith.net
Oolite-Linux: an Elite tribute: http://oolite-linux.berlios.de
Frontier Elite Universe: http://www.alioth.net

I"m not sure if I think this is really a weight issue. Yes, he may have
been over weight, but a C-182 (with a strong engine) will physically
take off and fly well over gross. Maybe he had too little runway and
tried to pull it into the air too soon? Again, the prop seemed to be
turning slow in the video, but I'm not a video expert and not familiar
with all the effects of the sample rate of the camera.

-Robert, CFI