C172 crash at Coney Island

Four people with full fuel? Aft CG in a slow turn with a maybe wind-shear?
Or a seagull prop strike? If he was at the height of the parachute jump,
that's only 250'!!!




"Gary Drescher" wrote in message
...
Four people died aboard a 172 that crashed at Coney Island today
(http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/22/ny...2crash.html?hp).

According to witness descriptions, the plane approached the shore at low
altitude, turned sharply, and then plummeted vertically. The witnesses had
the usual confusion about "stalling" and interpreted the crash as a loss
of
power, but it sounds like it may have been a classic stall resulting from
inadequate airspeed during a steep turn. Coney Island is close to a
section
of airspace where the Class B has a floor just above 500', so it may be
that
the plane hadn't climbed much above that altitude, and tried to turn
abruptly away from the shore in order to avoid overflying a built-up area
too low.

--Gary

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.

G Faris

"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?

Thanks,
Gary

"Gary Drescher" wrote in message ...
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?

Usually not more than once per pilot...

Matt Whiting wrote:

Montblack wrote:

("Matt Whiting" wrote)

Are you sure the engine quit?

Yes. CBS Evening news (Saturday evening) said the engine stalled.

Ha, ha, ha. Yep, I'd sure take a CBS News report to the bank ... NOT.

It will be interesting to see what the real investigation turns up.

The sarcasm in his post seemed pretty obvious to me.

--
Peter

















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Yeah, but both Newsweek *and* Dan Rather's C-BS news are saying it. Gotta be
true, doesn't it?




"Peter R." wrote in message
...
Matt Whiting wrote:

Montblack wrote:

("Matt Whiting" wrote)

Are you sure the engine quit?

Yes. CBS Evening news (Saturday evening) said the engine stalled.

Ha, ha, ha. Yep, I'd sure take a CBS News report to the bank ... NOT.

It will be interesting to see what the real investigation turns up.

The sarcasm in his post seemed pretty obvious to me.

--
Peter

















----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

R.L. wrote:
Sure they can. But then if the engine quits, you're at the limits of w&b
(four occupants, nearly full fuel, and who knows how many fat guys are on
board)), 500' AGL/MSL, in a slow turn AND THEN YOU FLY BY THE BOOK AND TRY
TO PULL BACK AND GET TO MAX GLIDE SPEED @ 69K WHEN BEACH WINDS ARE
SLOPPY-VARIABLE -- that's a killer recipe.

Well, if that's what you would do and if that's a killer recipe for you, then
you should definitely not fly there.

George Patterson
"Naked" means you ain't got no clothes on; "nekkid" means you ain't got
no clothes on - and are up to somethin'.

nrp wrote:
I get suspicious about these - a low time pilot, no experience or
instruction with aft CG, maybe a little show-off to the many friends on
board.

None of this is true, so you can quit being suspicious.

George Patterson
"Naked" means you ain't got no clothes on; "nekkid" means you ain't got
no clothes on - and are up to somethin'.

"Ben Hallert" wrote in message
oups.com...
I suspect that the plane stalled (aerodynamically), a witness reported
it as such to the media, and the media rep, upon hearing the word
'stalled' assumed that they must be talking about the engine. One guy
reports that the engine stalled, then all the other reporters
immediately chime in with the same stuff because person A spoke with
such authority.

One witness did say that the engine sputtered two or three times, before
going silent. I think that would be a definite stall.
--
Jim in NC

"nrp" wrote in message
ups.com...
That (CFI etc w paying pax) puts a completely different light on this
one. We'll have to wait for the report. THX for the clarifications

A report I read said the engine sputtered a couple times, then the plane
turned sharply, as to go out to sea. Was the pilot trying to ditch, and not
kill people on the beach, and it instead spun in? All speculation, of
course.
--
Jim in NC