Plane Crash Barossa Valley 26/6

[Guest ozzie]

Wow after reading these three pages of posts i had to check that i hadn't somehow ended up on the pprune forum

 

Well dicussed troops!

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Is the RAA going to ground the tecnams till they have ruled out the airframe? seems prudent

 

 

[alf jessup]

Is the RAA going to ground the tecnams till they have ruled out the airframe? seems prudent

FT

 

Might pay first to find out if the wing fell off on its own accord or was taken off with the help of the pilot involved in this tragic event

 

Alf

 

 

[fly_tornado]

Grounding for a few weeks whilst the airframes are inspected is a small inconvenience compared to this.

 

 

[alf jessup]

Grounding for a few weeks whilst the airframes are inspected is a small inconvenience compared to this.

I am happy enough to ground my plane if the need is there but I am sure it won't take all that long to figure out if it fell off or was taken off with some help

 

At this stage I cannot see that happening as another brand has a lot of stoppages and they haven't grounded them

 

Alf

 

 

[acro]

If you aproach this logicaly you will realise that a plane will not fly for a kilometer without a wing.I heard from a local aviator there that the wing seperated along a rivet line. There are only one conclusion i can make as a result of these two peices of information What you beleive at this time is up to you.

with half a wing (or 2/3 in this case) it will fly for 1km with a lot of rudder input

 

 

 

in fact several usaaf and raaf pilots rammed japs in P-40's off horn island and returned with half a wing, 200 miles out

 

 

[nickduncs84]

Just as a matter of interest guys, where do you normally obtain your weather reports before flying?

NAIPS via ozrunways. The new wx planner is great if you haven't seen it yet. I flew nearby the day of this accident and there was no way I was leaving the circuit. We have had the same sort of conditions in SA for a couple of weeks now. Low level cloud combined with large areas of surface fog in the mornings. Combined with the high winds, things were swirling around quite a bit. Certainly not a day for cross country flight, and I believe the area where the plane went down was even worse conditions and more challenging terrain.

 

 

[aj_richo]

Here is a better shot of the wing with the tail out of the way, doesn't look like it was carved off by a wire strike

 

but I have no accident investigative skills..

 

 

 

[Teckair]

Here is a better shot of the wing with the tail out of the way, doesn't look like it was carved off by a wire strikebut I have no accident investigative skills..[ATTACH=full]31010[/ATTACH]

You can't tell from these photos.

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

with half a wing (or 2/3 in this case) it will fly for 1km with a lot of rudder input...in fact several usaaf and raaf pilots rammed japs in P-40's off horn island and returned with half a wing, 200 miles out

Amazing! The aircraft in the first pic is benefitting from a bit of extra leading edge... Maybe that confirms the old saying that the back of the wing is only streamlining for the spar...

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

I don't want to hijack this thread with irrelevant information but there's something interesting that some folks may not have seen before, so I've created a new thread with a link below.

 

This was prompted by Deborah's comment above and MotzartMerv mentioned it earlier - that an F15 was flown having lost one wing.

 

Not only was it flown but the Israeli Airforce pilot Zivi Nedivi had a midair collision during a dogfight, started spinning but recovered using afterburner and then flew the aircraft back to base. Although the handling was marginal for control he landed and didn't realise he only had one wing until he opened the canopy. This took place nearly 30yrs ago. Sounds like BS? Here's the link to the other thread where the History Channel video is posted.

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Hi deborah. Can we all just keep speculations to a minimum please. An eye witness report doesn't mean jack in the real world of investigation. Anyone with any experience with these matters will tell you 5 people witnessing the same event will have 5 different stories to tell.

 

Lets wait and see what is uncovered by the people on the scene.

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

We need to be careful drawing any conclusions at all based on "what me mate told me" and assumptions based on what we reckon is or isnt possible.An f15 eagle made a successful landing with an entire wing missing once.

There are several factors being raised as contenders and as is usually the case its never just one that causes the accident.. We need to let the facts come out.

I saw that clip too. Well executed model plane and real Eagle.

 

Phil

 

 

[motzartmerv]

Wasnt a clip Phil. Its a documented fact.:) No youtube back in the days this happened.

 

 

[Jabiru Phil]

Wasnt a clip Phil. Its a documented fact.:) No youtube back in the days this happened.

Sorry, wrong incident. Should have read further on.

 

Phil.

 

 

[acro]

Good to see such a strong response for NAIPS, and I agree it's not always user friendlyIf the NAIPS report was for moderate to severe turbulence then the question might be whether it was referenced, because the outcome of that report would pretty much produce the result.

AJ it does look like a structural break rather than a wire strike I agree. Wings can develop a wave action under severe two way stress and can even break into several pieces.

 

In turbulence it may have been possible to get some control over the aircraft for a short time before the inevitable final loss of control occurred.

 

The other concerning factor with this flight is that it has been suggested it was commercial.

naips always says mod/severe turb under 5000ft i didnt think it changed

are you saying flutter was the cause? i believe if it was flutter the wing would be snapped at the root and bent backwards

 

 

[acro]

I don't want to hijack this thread with irrelevant information but there's something interesting that some folks may not have seen before, so I've created a new thread with a link below.This was prompted by Deborah's comment above and MotzartMerv mentioned it earlier - that an F15 was flown having lost one wing.

 

Not only was it flown but the Israeli Airforce pilot Zivi Nedivi had a midair collision during a dogfight, started spinning but recovered using afterburner and then flew the aircraft back to base. Although the handling was marginal for control he landed and didn't realise he only had one wing until he opened the canopy. This took place nearly 30yrs ago. Sounds like BS? Here's the link to the other thread where the History Channel video is posted.

F15 wings are only for bombs

 

 

[Guest Andys@coffs]

F15 wings are only for bombs

indeed, pretty sure if you strap those afterburner equipped monster fuel pumps to a concrete brick it could be made to fly!

 

 

[turboplanner]

naips always says mod/severe turb under 5000ft i didnt think it changed are you saying flutter was the cause? i believe if it was flutter the wing would be snapped at the root and bent backwards

I don't think the velocity would be enough in level flight.

 

 

[acro]

I don't think the velocity would be enough in level flight.

i have never seen flutter take a partial wing, it normally takes a whole wing or both or the tail. also the missing flaps are odd, if he has exceeded VFE you would think both wings would completely fail.

 

 

[acro]

"Wing structure features a single spar torque box connected to fuselage via three pin attachments to each half wing" i guess it could quite possibly shear the outer wing then...hmm

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

 

what is that hanging off the vertical stab?

 

 

[acro]

what is that hanging off the vertical stab?

headset? saw that in other pics, not nice

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

ok look closer and i can make out the jack plugs. thought it may have been a guy wire or similar

 

 

[pylon500]

Many interesting (and odd?) comments here...

 

I think we should all agree that part of the LEFT (PORT) wing is missing.

 

The flaps appear to be missing.

 

People are talking about 'struts'?

 

The reports are calling the aircraft a Technam P-96, the rego on the RAAs site calls it a P-96...

 

A Technam P-96 is a non strutted, LOW wing aircraft;

 

 

Without knowing the distance the tip was found from the main wreckage, it is only speculation that there was a wirestrike.

 

The weather reports tend to aim the cause more in the, loss of control / overspeed / flutter direction, as does the clean break of the outer panel.

 

A sad and concerning thought.

 

Those operating P-96's (and other Technams) might just have a closer look at aileron hinges, mass balance attachments, flap hinges, flap 'up' stops and general control system tightness at their next Daily Inspection, as I'm sure they do....