EFATO

[Guest ozzie]

[fly_tornado]

he had some serious turning going on to get into that paddock

 

 

[facthunter]

I thought he was slipping trying to lose height. Unlucky with the type of surface he ended up on. Can't see anything wrong with the flying except the plane might have been a piece of junk. Nev

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

recent rain and cessna fuel caps

 

 

[Teckair]

I thought that pilot did well to pull that off, stall warning on for the turn I reckon he would have had that plane well balanced.

 

 

[facthunter]

You can still fly with the stall warning going on a Cessna It's got about 5 knots margin. Nev

 

 

[Robbo]

I screwed up and put a big fat bloke in the back seat of a Cessna once and I flew a circuit with the stall warning going off the whole time.

 

 

[facthunter]

Nuisance isn't it. I'm not recommending it by the way, but you can get really critical in some places and it works well in ground effect.. If you have to jump a fence get a few extra knots up first. Cessna's will get you out of places others won't and the flaps work. Nev

 

 

[poteroo]

C205 was the original try at a C206 - but had a 260HP Continental IO-470 engine. It had poor elevator command - and needed power to hold the nose up on landing, especially with the CoG forward and full flap (40o) selected. It seemed to me that after a successful steep turning, plus slipping descent, his load changed from good for takeoff to too far forward, and he ran out of elevator command in the flare. (stall warning ceased for some time prior to and after touchdown). Also, as there were no RHS double doors on the 205, the RHS door should have been unlocked/opened by the jumper who was close to it. (pilot would have been too busy to touch his side).

 

He did well to keep the aircraft flying. Once the turn was initiated - the nose has to necessarily be pushed down, and then some. Well flown I thought.

 

I flew 100 hrs or so carrying freight in one of these things and it was no rocket ship! You needed the weight well distributed by compartment limits for it to be able to hold off for long during the flare. As we know, parachutists are very mobile self loading freight, and probably were all well forward for take-off, (as usually directed), hence the flip over was unavoidable once the nosewheel touched and weight began to transfer onto it.

 

Of interest, I also flew a very early U206, (N5034U) in Arizona and Mexico during 1992. It was #34 of the U206's to come off the production line and it had all the pitch/elevator difficulties of the C205. The big improvement was 285HP plus the big doors. A few of these early 206s' came to grief on steep strips in various 3rd world countries as they proved difficult to roundout from a full flap approach. I seem to remember there was some directive to limit flap to 20 on steep strips for those models.?

 

happy days,

 

 

[winsor68]

I thought he was incredibly lucky...and nothing else. Remember...nose down...30degrees of heading only.

 

Here we are just a few days after another extremely experienced pilot and friend is lying in a mortuary after trying what the above pilot was lucky to pull off...and we have experienced people claiming the above was somehow an example of good piloting and he was "unlucky" the field was a little rough!!!???

 

WHAT THE FXXK GUYS!!!! WAKE UP!!!

 

 

[Guest ozzie]

Just watched this another half dozen times and it wasn't a full EFATO. It was still running and popping away right thru the turn. Still had TO flap by the looks of it when laying on its back.He had to keep the turn going lots of brush and a drainage ditch that he just cleared. Not much back stick on the flare. you can see the elevators through the rear window.He used the height he had to his advantage. I think he knew where he was going and how to get there. If the ground was firm he would have gotten away with it.

 

 

[farri]

I thought he was incredibly lucky...and nothing else. Remember...nose down...30degrees of heading only.Here we are just a few days after another extremely experienced pilot and friend is lying in a mortuary after trying what the above pilot was lucky to pull off...and we have experienced people claiming the above was somehow an example of good piloting and he was "unlucky" the field was a little rough!!!??? WHAT THE FXXK GUYS!!!! WAKE UP!!!

Don, At this stage, is there any evidence or proof that Ross, went in, because he was attempting to turn back?

 

Frank.

 

 

[winsor68]

Don, At this stage, is there any evidence or proof that Ross, went in, because he was attempting to turn back?Frank.

None in my opinion. It appears to me that Ross was going for the cross strip. Manoeuvring in a way that we are taught to avoid in training...in exactly the same way the pilot in the above video does.

 

 

[farri]

None in my opinion. It appears to me that Ross was going for the cross strip. Manoeuvring in a way that we are taught to avoid in training...in exactly the same way the pilot in the above video does.

I rest my case....Cheers.

 

Frank.

 

 

[docjell]

I'm missing something here Frank . Is not the observation by several ground observers ( including pilots) that Ross attempted a turn back good enough? The passage of time or waiting for a coroners inquest isn't going to change facts. The only persons really qualified to comment were there as it happened.

 

Windsor 68's "it appears to me he was going for the cross strip"is fascinating

 

 

[Phil Perry]

I screwed up and put a big fat bloke in the back seat of a Cessna once and I flew a circuit with the stall warning going off the whole time.

Nonsense. . . . . .I never flew in the back with you Robbsy ? ? ? ?

 

 

[Robbo]

Nonsense. . . . . .I never flew in the back with you Robbsy ? ? ? ?

You got a twin?

 

 

[Phil Perry]

You got a twin?

They chucked me out of the RFDS when we had the old DeHavilland Drover triple mate,. . . .they said to me,. . ."listen Phil,. . . . we're thinking of retrofitting these buggers with another engine,. . .until then, since we can only carry very lightweight casualties because of fat pilots, and even fatter doctors.. . . . we'll have to let you go mate,. . .have you ever thought of driving JCBs, or Jumbo jets. . .. . .where your weight would be an advantage / irrelevant . . .? ? ? "

 

 

[Phil Perry]

Rob. . . . I regrettably hung up my twin entitlement ten years ago. . . .could't really justify financing the horrendous cost of the revals.

 

Dumped the I/R as well,. . . .but fortunately, have not forgotten all that I learned. HOWEVER. . . I'd be stupid if I tried an ILS approach at an Intl' airport without serious retraining after so long,. . .procedures change with rapid fluidity. . .but the experience is useful if I am ever presented ( as a right seat passenger, or whatever ) with a poor vis situation, as I posess sufficient knowledge to be of some assistance to the captain in his hour of need,. . . ie, get the 'eff outa there. I doubt, even at this length of absense from regular IFR flying that what I know would not be of use. ( Bin there done that on a couple of occasions. . . it's amazing how many PPLs think they can handle IMC without a proper rating. . . .but that's where we get the "controlled flight into terrain" statistics mate )

 

I am lucky in that I have a young ( 31 ) millionaire friend who flies trikes, AND owns a share in a sexy 6 seat aircraft too,. . .He gets me to fly with him on some weekdays and I was amazed to learn that when he took his instrument training, no one ever mentioned to him that it would be a good idea to try to keep a mental picture in his head of where he actually was around an instrument let down,. . .spatial awareness etc. . . this isn't really taught here the way I was . . .If you are just looking at a pictorial display on the panel,. . this will well work, and it obviously does, but I like to keep track of where I am on that approach plate all of the time, by cross referencing the old style panel instruments and trying to hold a mental "Picture" of where my aeroplane is in space. . . . .

 

Too many ipad screenflyers nowadays in my own view,. . . maybe that's where it's all going and I feel sure that it is. . .as technology advances and becomes more and more reliable. and semi - to fully automatic . . . I just think that something will be lost,. . . .perhaps I'm just a bloody technoluddite. . .I dunno. . . .

 

 

[Robbo]

I was meaning do you have a twin brother, if you weren't that fat guy in the backseat must be your twin

 

 

[Phil Perry]

I was meaning do you have a twin brother, if you weren't that fat guy in the backseat must be your twin

HO HO HO MEEEEEERY Christmas. . . .

 

No Rob,. . . I have two Brothers,. . .much younger than I. . . the youngest one is a pilot ( Trikes ) and the next eldest isn't. . .dyed in the wool biker . . .can't understand what we see in flight. . . .( dopey Barstard. . .) but it takes all kinds. . .) he's a brilliant Automotive electroncis Whizz. . . .works for himself and is always in great demand.. . . . he lives 700 metres away from me and I have not seen the bloke for seven months. ( Probably avoiding me ) the younger one is a bloody hermit. . .rareely see him unless he fancies a pint at the local real ale shop. . .then we meet. Another Biker,. . .and he has not flown the trike for a year,. . .very busy with work I guess.

 

No. sorry mate,. . .they broke the mould after me. . . . .

 

( Probably good for the planet )

 

 

[farri]

I'm missing something here Frank . Is not the observation by several ground observers ( including pilots) that Ross attempted a turn back good enough? The passage of time or waiting for a coroners inquest isn't going to change facts. The only persons really qualified to comment were there as it happened.Windsor 68's "it appears to me he was going for the cross strip"is fascinating

I don`t know if you are missing something or not but to me, Windsor 68`s " It appears to me that Ross was going for the cross strip", is exactly that! What it appears!

 

Post #10...WHAT THE FXXK GUYS!!!! WAKE UP!!!.....To what?.... To what appears to be the cause?....Regardless of who saw what, they can`t be sure, of exactly what caused Ross, to end up where he did.

 

 

 

There have been many accidents in the time I`ve been flying and yes! due to lack of any official report, on a lot of them, I`ve formed my own opinion on some of them, but that is all it is! my own opinion, based on what I know.

 

 

 

I have no problem with discussing an accident before a report is issued, because in most cases, there never is an official report, but it should be kept to the known facts, if there are any and it should be discussed in a respectful manner.

 

 

 

Frank,

 

Ps, And now, I`m going flying!

 

 

[Phil Perry]

I was meaning do you have a twin brother, if you weren't that fat guy in the backseat must be your twin

Didn't you see that photo of me taken by David ( DGL FOX ) when he trespassed on our airfield last summer ? ? ? ? ?

 

FCS would God be NICE if he'd made TWO poor barstards that looked like that ? ? ? ? Now come on. . .don't take the wee wee lad. . .I liked you up until now. . . .

 

 

[winsor68]

My "WAKE UP GUYS" was in response to forumites heaping praise upon the video pilot for his actions in response to his partial engine failure...which to my mind is exactly the actions that kills experienced aviators. You can bet your bottom dollar that a pilot with 50 hours in their log book would have crash landed straight ahead with wings level... perhaps with a different outcome...but with practically zero chance of a stall and folding the aircraft into a soccer ball shape.

 

The reason I am off the opinion that Ross' accident was not a typical turn back was the photo showing the projected flight path off the aircraft posted on another thread. He had less airstrip behind than he did in front

 

 

[Teckair]

My "WAKE UP GUYS" was in response to forumites heaping praise upon the video pilot for his actions in response to his partial engine failure...which to my mind is exactly the actions that kills experienced aviators. You can bet your bottom dollar that a pilot with 50 hours in their log book would have crash landed straight ahead with wings level... perhaps with a different outcome...but with practically zero chance of a stall and folding the aircraft into a soccer ball shape.The reason I am off the opinion that Ross' accident was not a typical turn back was the photo showing the projected flight path off the aircraft posted on another thread. He had less airstrip behind than he did in front

I take your point about the video pilot. Apparently there were reliable witnesses and a video at the Ross accident who say it was a turn back.