Accident: Jacobs Well - blue Foxbat

[Teckair]

as they say...any landing u can walk away from....is a good one!....perfect example...the a/c and its equipment protected the occupants in a unexpected situation...and they live to fly another day....!

I don't agree with that I reckon any landing where you don't break something is a good one, there are plenty of terrible landings that people walk away from.

 

 

[Teckair]

where's the nose gear gone?

Probably ripped off by some grass.

 

 

[alf jessup]

Silverwing...I am sure I saw a white Foxbat at Shute harbor on day fitted with a Jab engine. As a level 2 I take an interest in these things, however I could have been mistaken, or it could well have been just a real bad dream !!.....................Cheers Maj...

Wash your mouth out Maj,

 

It must of been a bad dream, a wet dream or a nightmare for you to say that.

 

Alf

 

 

[alf jessup]

one thing that can happen in the foxbat...not that i am implying anything here .....is that u can get in a situation where u attempt to fly with no tank selected...they have a poor fuel selection setup...a tap on the left and right....if they had a çentral'selection it would improve things....also...little wheels dont like rough paddocks...

cficare,

 

I actually think the fuel selection location isn't all that bad as long as you actually select atleast one tank, fairly simple system I thought looking at my mates one.

 

Just my opinion.

 

Alf

 

 

[facthunter]

It was probably a fire problem.The fire in the engine went out. I have witnessed an engine failure on take off which would have to be a fuel selector error. These planes will come down like a parachute if you just pull the stick right back. I wouldn't do it in any other aircraft but it works with these. The worse thing it will do is widen the wheel tracking measurement a bit. Nev

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

....These planes will come down like a parachute if you just pull the stick right back. I wouldn't do it in any other aircraft but it works with these. The worse thing it will do is widen the wheel tracking measurement a bit. Nev

Um, I've got a bit a time in that actual aircraft, one of the things I do with all new types as soon as I'm at height is I investigate the stall characteristics across the whole power envelope. I didn't find that one any different from the other Foxbats I've flown, it has had the typical 'bat bump at the stall and all that. Power off it stalled very gently as you suggest but hold it there and unless you keep it level with rudder it dropped a wing like most other planes. Hold the wings level with busy feet and it might be feasible to mush it down but I wouldn't be suggesting that as a better option than establishing glide and landing ahead because the descent rate would build up pretty quickly and a compressed spine will kill you quite effectively even if the plane might only need a couple of new gear legs...

 

 

[Ballpoint 246niner]

Instructor Culture?

Was there an instructor in either of these aircraft Turbo?. My understanding was that the Tecnam at Boonah had a private certificated pilot and his grand daughter in it , and this one? Names not released yet.

 

I would strongly defend the general instructor base in this country, believing, and knowing many have grown up with the ultralight movement and, even the GA industry in Oz and they are stringently tested and reviewed by robust processes in RA. Whether all pilots choose to adhere to the practices taught to them is another matter all together.

 

 

[Teckair]

FH said These planes will come down like a parachute if you just pull the stick right back. I wouldn't do it in any other aircraft but it works with these.

 

I have a real issue trying to believe that and would never do it and suggest that no one else try it either. That does not work with the very lightest wing loading ultralights once the wing is stalled the aircraft becomes a homesick manhole cover.

 

 

[Ballpoint 246niner]

I must say I am personally horrified by some of the comments from this thread and will respectfully withdraw further comment for fear of saying something I may regret. I fear for some of the assumptions and misinformation being tabled with regard to aircraft spec, instructor standards, and general guessing. This fails to enhance any learning and would be better served in a British tabloid.

 

No further comment.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Was there an instructor in either of these aircraft Turbo?. My understanding was that the Tecnam at Boonah had a private certificated pilot and his grand daughter in it , and this one? Names not released yet.I would strongly defend the general instructor base in this country, believing, and knowing many have grown up with the ultralight movement and, even the GA industry in Oz and they are stringently tested and reviewed by robust processes in RA. Whether all pilots choose to adhere to the practices taught to them is another matter all together.

See post#14

 

Pilot error is significantly a product of training and supervision - ongoing training and supervision.

 

 

[facthunter]

OK Teckair. I said I wouldn't do it either but I have seen it done and the plane did just that. I also have a friend who got within an inch of buying one for the express reason that it was one way of landing in hospitable terrain and was something his non flying wife would be able to do if he was incapacitated.. It is no different in principle to putting a DH 82 into a spin if over bad terrain and the engine failed. The thought music was that the plane had little forward speed and a survivable sink rate. Nev

 

 

[Sapphire]

Someone described to me a short field landing technique where you decent the a\c at stall angle with sufficient power to keep it there. With all that drag you would be using a fair bit of power and generating a flow of air over the wing at that stall angle. At correct height you gun full power to arrest your rate of decent and land heavily, but not enough to collapse the u/c. Good for getting into places only a helecopter can go. Havn't tried it, but probably will one day-practice the decend bit high up and see if you can always keep the wing level. I think once a wing drops near the ground the game is up.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

The only thing I've come across that will drop in near vertical with some degree of safety, is the Slepcev Storch. And it's got to have close to twice the wing and flap area that a Foxbat would have. It also has a landing gear specifically designed to handle it, with miles of travel and big fat spongy tires!.............................................................Maj...

 

 

[facthunter]

Speculate how you like. I have seen it done I would estimate the sink rate at about 500 fpm. At most 700 fpm. the undercarriage was possibly bent but not obvious to me without measuring it. You can do the same with a thruster but the sink rate is too high to do it without damage. Of course if the wing drops and you start to spin you are in trouble . I NEVER suggested this is for everybody. Either the importer or the manufacturer must have said this is a technique that works with the Foxbat. I know it does because I've seen it. (I'm not in the habit of making things up incidently). The engine fail was at about 300 feet and I was within 200 metres of the touchdown point. I didn't say it was vertical Maj, but it just "mushed " down with about a 5 degree nose up attitude to the ground. the descent angle was (estimate ) 45 degrees. Nev

 

 

[David Isaac]

You can do something similar with the AAK Hornet too Maj. I know what Nev is talking about.

 

 

[Guest Maj Millard]

I don't have trouble believing it is possible at all Nev, as there are several aircraft that can get into a stable stalled 'mush', and be held there quite safely. My mind goes back to the days of the Kasperwing which demonstrated the descent just about everytime it landed.

 

The 500-700 fpm descent rate sounds a little riskay however.....................................................Maj...

 

 

[facthunter]

I dunno Maj the gazelle power off approach was always around 600fpm+. It's only these pesky jabiru's that float forever, unless you get the speed right back. Nev

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Is there any "factual' information about this prang? All ive read so far is speculation ( pretty sh!t speculation) and insults.

 

CFI, do you get bored after a few months of not insulting people and stirring the pot? What, GA aeroplanes dont crash? GA cfi's are incapable of sh!t training and supervision?? Flying into storm clouds to prove a point would be considered a "poor standard" of training in ANY circles. Did you forget you clicked on the Rec flying forum and not the wrinkly fruit forum?

 

Do you have more info about this prang that we are not privy to? Was it indeed an engine failure? If so how what were the training "failures' that have been identified? Or was that just pure and utter rubbish speculation from someone that should know better (presumedly)

 

 

[fly_tornado]

just another slow day down in tassie?

 

 

[Phil Perry]

one thing that can happen in the foxbat...not that i am implying anything here .....is that u can get in a situation where u attempt to fly with no tank selected...they have a poor fuel selection setup...a tap on the left and right....if they had a çentral'selection it would improve things....also...little wheels dont like rough paddocks...

Hi Cfi. . . . that paddock grass looks a bit "Thick"and claggy, not many "Average" wheels are going to cope with that, even at extremely low contact speed ? I know that Foxbats can, with full flap deployed, land at quite a nice sedate pace, but when the nosewheel buries itself in soft / rough grass like that depicted,, . . . . it doesn't take much for the remaining inertia to forward flip, however gracefully. . . .

 

When I did my check flight in the first one built in the UK years ago. . ., the importer / Instructor ( Who was based at our airfield - Otherton ) told me to be really gentle with that nosewheel, and not to use the brakes at all unless it was really unavoidable, as the nosegear assembly was ( then ) a bit "Fragile" for grass strips due to the manner of attachment of the noseleg. We have experienced several noseleg failures at our site, though not for over a year, these all failed whilst the aircraft were taxying on our pretty good smooth, level, well kept grass, indicating possible progressive failure in the system of attachment to the airframe. ( Poor general maintenance or even pre-flight inspection perhaps. . . ? ) Three of the aircraft concerned were operated by four person syndicates, so that the possibility might exist of the odd "Firm" landing. . . going unreported in the group hangar log. . . Later kit issues could well have been "beefed up" a bit since then. Foxbats do have a very good safety record here though, the only other problem one of our members had with his Foxbat Sport was the detachment of the rudder control mechanism at the tail end,. which resulted in a lot of flutter, but no serious loss off control, this has been modified via LAA directive.

 

I guess the watchword is, stay out of rough grass until a set of Dazza38 tractor wheels are fittted !

 

I agree entirely re the fuel selection though, I don't know of a reported fuel management issue, but the potential certainly exists when the fuel selector(s) are behind the pilot.

 

The ONLY design feature I really don't like with all the "single centre stick" models here is the positioning of the throttle lever on the door sills, ( ripped me shorts sliding out twice ! ! ! )

 

Insufficient info regarding history of the particular flight to permit much further speculation as to the cause, until the PIC reports what happened. . . . Do these surviveable "fender benders" require any sort of official investigation in Australia, or is that only in the event of serious injury / fatality I wonder ? In the UK, ALL accidents have to be reported if an aircraft suffers any structural damage / deformation, whether there were any injuries or not. Although they tend to allocate a lower priority to minor("ISH") "benders" especially if similar ones have happened before, or when the cause is blindingly obvious.

 

Be interested to know. . . .

 

Phil

 

******EDITED TO ADD********

 

Reading Merv's post just now, I have to state that with a total of 93 hours on foxbats, I am not even approaching the point where I would advise a pilot to use ANY other form of approach method outside of that published in the POH, and demonstrated by an instructor qualified on type. Surely anything else should reasonably fit into the "Unauthorsied Test Pilot" ( Darwin Award Attempt ) category ?

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Hi Phil, yes thats true but I dont think anyone was trying to suggest that.

 

Cheers

 

ps, is that a stagarwing in your profile pic?

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Hi Phil, yes thats true but I dont think anyone was trying to suggest that.Cheers

ps, is that a stagarwing in your profile pic?

Hi Merv,

 

Actually, I was referring to some of the other postings on the thread regarding freestyle landings which worried me a little. . .

 

The avatar pic. . .

 

Is an Antonov AN2, and the tiny thing next to it is a Tiger Cub - biggest and (possibly) smallest single engined biplanes ? ( no doubt someone will post a pic of an even smaller one now. . .! )

 

 

[Teckair]

For anybody who thinks the stick back parachute decent theory might work on various aircraft, if you value your health and your aircraft don't try it. From 20 feet damaged aircraft, from 60 feet severe aircraft damage and spinal injuries, from 120 feet written off aircraft and probable death. It does not work with light wing loading planes like Drifters, Thrusters and Chinooks and it will be even less likely with heaver wing loadings. Some students I have taught thought a Drifter would 'float' down and land if they just held the stick back at 10 feet I would explain no you can not do that, but they don't actually believe me. After they have got their certificate and out of training some have tried it with damaged undercarriage the result.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

..... I would estimate the sink rate at about 500 fpm. At most 700 fpm. the undercarriage was possibly bent but not obvious to me without measuring it. You can do the same with a thruster but the sink rate is too high to do it without damage......

Unashamedly off topic funny story about Thruster sink rate etc...

 

Way back when... before Bill Dinsmore (AUF Ops Manager/Training officer) personally travelled around and trained and approved some of us as CFIs we only had approved ultralight instructors and they were mostly one man, one aircraft affairs. When someone wanted to be allowed to do flight training he/she had to be trained by an instructor and then assessed and approved by another instructor, this was about 1985/6.

 

I'll use false names for the rest of our cast... So Bob was a relatively new flyer who got his training from Brian up in the tropical north and then went straight on with instructor training and bought a brand new Thruster Gemini complete with trailer from the Sydney factory. He drove all the way down there and collected the plane but didn't have a chance to fly it due to the weather.

 

He'd had a chat with the AUF about setting up his school and been given a list of instructors along his way, who could check him out and provide the approval he needed to get started. He put in a big day's drive heading north again and then decided to pause for a day or two and do his check flights with a friendly instructor called Ben who also had a Gemini, so Bob reckoned he'd know what he was doing while flying his prized new plane.

 

They went out to a mate's airfield, a bit of a tricky place actually, being right behind a large mountain and the field was surrounded by tall trees, but it was a large paddock so quite manageable, and good practice for 'over obstacles' on departure and approach. They assembled the shiny new plane and Ben took it for a few laps solo to be sure all was well. Then he got out, had a chat about the plane's handling and invited Bob to go flying with him. Bob jumped in and had his straps tight in a flash, he was keen for his first experience of his lovely craft. Ben took a look and asked Bob why he was in the left seat, if he was getting approved as an instructor he needed to be in the right seat. Bob said he'd never flown from the right side before, that didn't surprise Ben much, he'd heard a bit about Brian before... he must remember to mention that to Bill!

 

I expect most folk know that the Gemini has a central stick and a throttle at each side, so if you fly from the left seat your control stick is in the right hand and throttle in the left hand. From the right seat the control stick is in the left hand etc, and many folk get a bit stressed about the idea of flying with the 'wrong' hand when transitioning from left to right seat to start instructing. However, usually the transition is a complete non-event and people convert very easily, often without even thinking about it.

 

Anyway Bob was very stressed about changing seats so Ben suggested they go for a fly with Bob in the left seat which he was used to while he got familiar with the new plane, and they'd change seats later. They did a dozen or so circuits and then stopped for a chat. Ben reckoned Bob flew OK except for the last part of the final approach, they'd get to about 10ft/3m and then Bob would hesitate at about the time he should be starting to round out and then sometimes he'd end up too low and risk bouncing and other times he'd flare suddenly but too high and Ben would have to apply lots of power and heaps of back-stick to cushion the arrival or they'd have just stalled at 6ft and ended up in a big heap.

 

Off they went and practiced, and practiced, and practiced, the roundouts were still a lot shaky but at least Bob had now got the idea about how to save the day, firewall the throttle and hold the stick back and wait... not a bad landing even if a little abrupt.

 

The day was wearing on and Bob wanted to get this over with and be off the next morning heading north again so they swapped seats and Bob mentally practiced flying with his left hand. All was set and off they went. The take-off was fine and also the circuit but at 3m there was a hell of a dither and Ben powered on and round they went. This happened twice more with Ben having to save the day each time. The next time, during the circuit Bob decided he wasn't having any more of being 'saved', he'd get it right for sure. Down final approach they came and at 3m they started to roundout, they still had a bit of power on, it all looked good, they rounded out a touch too much but it was still good, the bit of power on was doing its magic... Bob started to worry they might be a bit slow but he wasn't going to be saved again, so he acted, and acted quickly, decisively and suddenly, he pulled the power off and firewalled the stick!

 

Poor Ben did his best but it was too late, the Gemini smashed into the ground and bounced 2m back into the air with virtually no airspeed, Ben got full power on as they descended for another almighty thump into the turf and then they were flying again. One wheel and gear leg was careering across the paddock and the other wheel was sticking out almost horizontal.

 

I watched as they completed another couple of circuits and had the usual mad ideas of driving the trailer down the strip for them to land on but Ben had it sorted, he used the crosswind to make a very creditable one bent-wheel, flat tyre landing and did a couple of really cool ground-loops just to end the day with a flourish.

 

 

[XP503]

Geez what a rockshow