Light aircraft in water off Curl Curl

[kaz3g]

Well if that is what the article said it is clearly BS. Try landing a C182 with fixed UC in water versus say a retractable C182 ... the latter would be my choice any day if I didn't want a face full of water on touch down. Don't you just love the term 'statistically'.David

Hey David.

 

Perhaps pilots in both samples stuffed up to the same extent?

 

Like you, I would much prefer to ditch a retract (with prop stopped and preferably horizontal) than a fixed gear.... one would think a high wing virtually becomes a planing hull in that situation! Of the latter, a TW should be marginally better than a nosewheel in my view.

 

kaz

 

 

[Spin]

Watched ACA last night, I'd say old mate had used up a fair portion of his luck in surviving that! The underwater footage once again illustrated just how badly the aircraft was damaged, certainly backs up the story of it diving and crashing into the water, rather than a controlled ditching.

 

Much as some people might say threads like this are ghoulish - the discussion prompted me to do a whole lot more reading (and thinking) about what I would do in a similar situation and although i probably haven't changed my basic approach (something like Jeff Gordon outlined above), I would certainly be better prepared now.

 

Fly the plane until the last piece stops moving........

 

 

[Guest SAJabiruflyer]

Trying to work out if the Video Footage was real and from this crash or just something ACA got from file footage. Regardless, it was an interesting interview, very fortunate man to survive. Good to see there was no light-aircraft-bashing in the story.

 

 

[Jeff Gordon]

I'm impressed with Channel 9. A well put together story and quite caring of the survivor. I think the footage underwater is of the lightwing, but the footage going into the water is possibly done with a R.C. or from archives...but is very realistic.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

I agree with Jeff. The footage in the water was from the news footage on the actual day.

 

Still does not explain the accident though. I hope the survivor was questioned by accident investigators, as he may with the right questions be able to provide details that shed light on the cause. In the interview he seemed to have a clear memory of the detail of the accident.

 

Aircraft don't just fall out of the sky because the engine stops! There's more to it. Perhaps the glide to the beach was not achievable and the pilot stalled the aircraft trying to extend the glide. In the early tv footage it depicted the aircraft's track as if it would have had to fly over or around the headland to land on the beach. (This may just have been editorial assumption) If that was the case, there is also the chance of mechanical turbulence and / or rotor from the headland. Does anyone know what the local weather conditions were at the time?

 

 

[FlyingVizsla]

ATSB is assisting RAAus - see report.

 

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2011/aair/ae-2011-111.aspx

 

Sue

 

 

[Jeff Gordon]

Thanks for the information Sue re this and the Accident North of Melbourne. I have Bookmarked the link to the ATSB website.

 

In answer to your post David. the eyewitness report said:

 

"He got to probably mid Curl Curl beach losing altitude and decided, I'm not too sure why, to do a 180-degree turn."Probably thought he couldn't land on Curl Curl Beach, running out of room and didn't make it. Went straight into the water at North Curl Curl.

 

"He was heading into the wind. That would have been his best bet to get elevation. I'm not quite sure why he didn't try and land at South Curl Curl beach, possibly thought he was going to run out of beach and maybe end up in houses, so he turned.

 

"But it was probably a fatal error because once he turned and went with the wind he lost altitude and hit the water."

So I think the plane may have been too low to complete the turn and stalled in the turn and consequently ditched. Only time will tell.

 

 

[Guest davidh10]

Thanks Jeff... The thread is so long now, and having been split as well, that I had forgotten the 180 degree turn to downwind.

 

The ATSB link is really new. I subscribe, but didn't check it Friday. Unfortunately their final report will most probably be along the lines of we were / weren't successful at obtaining information from the flight recording instruments and have returned any results to RAA. RAA will then be bound not to release, as it is a Police investigation....

 

*Edit. It actually came out at least a week ago, but was not in my subscription feed. My hypothesis is that as they released a large number of reports over a couple of days, and the RSS feed only publishes the latest 10 news items, the large number of reports published in a short period pushed it off the list before it noticed as available, or perhaps even before the RSS file was updated.

 

 

[Litespeed]

I have just watched the ACA interview.

 

Whilst it did a fair job and was not used to attack light aircraft, truth obviously is a victim.

 

They continually talk of a broken back- wrong he had a cracked vertebra. A huge difference, a broken back means he would have died in the plane, not had a chance to get out and would not be able to swim at all.

 

Even the rescue doctor which came to visit(obviously for Tv purposes) even said a broken back. SHAME SHAME SHAME.

 

I work with the disabled and they would fume at such a claim.

 

Pity truth always falls victim to a good story.

 

As a side note the channel nine site has some calling him a HERO- no blame to him, but Hero he is not. Nothing heroic about trying to save your own skin.

 

Just my 2 cents.

 

Phil

 

Sick and tired of bull in media

 

 

[sfGnome]

Much as some people might say threads like this are ghoulish - the discussion prompted me to do a whole lot more reading (and thinking) about what I would do in a similar situation and although i probably haven't changed my basic approach (something like Jeff Gordon outlined above), I would certainly be better prepared now.

Same here. I flew down the coast from the Seacliff Bridge to Wollongong this week, and I did a hell of a lot more preparation because of this discussion, so thanks to all of you. One conundrum though. Do I give my beloved a full ditching rundown as we approach the water and have her never go near an aircraft again, or do I go softly softly and have her less prepared than possible? I'm a wimp, so I went the softly softly approach...

 

 

[Guest Jake.f]

Just watched that ACA report...

 

The media make me absolutely sick sometimes. Seriously.

 

For starters there was the constant playing of the Mayday call, and they even touched it up nicely so that the transmission it was transmitted over is barely audible, and they also mixed and matched the 2 calls. They even made the effort to crash a remote control aircraft into a lake and film it for that real 'dramatic' touch.

 

Until this point I wasn't aware that there was a 'news' chopper in the air broadcasting the rescue attempts live. I'm absolutely speechless at this. The air ambulance is there to save lives, and instead they come across as being a part of this sick dramatic show. All the while the chopper sits there beaming these images around the place, while the pilot's body is still in the aircraft.

 

It is sickening really, and totally unnecessary. What does broadcasting this sort of thing achieve? The possibility that the family of one of the passengers is watching is real, and then they have the trauma of not knowing if their loved on is on the stretcher or still in the plane. I can also guess that the families of anyone flying a small aircraft in the Sydney area would not have been sick with worry seeing that.

 

 

[Spin]

sfGnome said; "One conundrum though. Do I give my beloved a full ditching rundown as we approach the water and have her never go near an aircraft again, or do I go softly softly"

 

Old actor once said to me, "you gotta know your audience". I'm with you on the softly, softly approach, fact is there is only so much a pax is going to take in and keeping their confidence up is important too.

 

 

[rick-p]

I just flew victor 1 yesterday, over curl curl as well but not to gawk at the sight but I usually take a friend on that flight purely because it's spectacular. I always make sure we have vests on since that's the last thing I want to be thinking about at the time.As for people saying they wouldn't do victor 1 because of the risk, I disagree. Flying is a risk and getting your head into gear being ready is a part of the training. I want to be ready in the mind but I don't want to fly thinking I'm going to die every time I go up, I want to enjoy my flying and being prepared for an emergency is a part of that, knowing when not to fly but the sound of this thread makes it sound like doing that sort of flying is looking for trouble. Don't know how to put it into words but flying ahead of the plane and enjoying the flight is much better than thinking that every flight you are going to die.

 

I hope I conveyed what I was thinking.

Bloody good point mate, I really think that at times the forums seem to get a little left of centre and thereafter become morbid erasing the real joy of flying.

 

Lets learn something from these incidents but not treat them as a soap box of doom and gloom if you fly.

 

We drive cars everyday and we don't labour on all the accidents and deaths on the roads.

 

It's a fact of life that if you get out of bed in the morning there is a chance that you may have an accident by the end of the day.

 

Do what we do as safe as possible but enjoy it at the same time as life is too short too spend it worrying about if and when we are going to come unstuck.

 

Rick-p