Light sports plane down near Batchelor NT.

[Jabiru7252]

https://au.news.yahoo.com/a/39478454/pilot-and-passenger-receive-minor-injuries-in-emergency-landing/

[NT5224]

Pilot and passenger's lucky escape after plane overturns during emergency landing[/url]

[Guest Guest]

Lucky! What engine would be in one of those things? I can't tell what it is

 

 

[Downunder]

Looks like yours NT5224.... spill the beans mate!

 

 

[NT5224]

This was me. It happened yesterday. I’ve often seen these type of reports and wondered what lay behind the hype and the sensation. I’ve tried to keep and open mind but now I I think I better understand the forces at play.

 

My incident was all over the media, especially here in The Territory. My wife and I were described as an ‘elderly couple’ who had astonishing luck to survive after undefined engine problems... Yep, we were called ‘survivors’ of a crash, with the image of our inverted plane all over the media.

 

I couldn’t really explain to my non-flying colleagues at work, but I want to run over what happened and how I feel about it here, in the hope that somebody will either learn from it or perhaps relate to how deflated I’m feeling. My wife is just plain cranky at being described as being aged ‘in her fifties’ by the media, a complete fallacy. .

 

Here’s what happened.

 

We were flying back from Crab Claw to Batchelor at about 2000 feet because we had just come out from under the 2500 ft step into G class airspace. That’s much lower than I would normally fly over bush but I had just given a 10 mile inbound and we could see home. The aircraft had been flying for over an hour and had already taken off twice that day. All indications were normal, and the motor was running fine but suddenly it seized. The prop jerked to a stop, and we were whistling through the air in silence, a fat barrel-shaped glider. Aviate, Navigate, Communicate, I trimmed for best glide. Had a glance around and then called ‘Pan’ on the Batchelor frequency, describing my engine failure and location. I tried to prime with the fuel pump and restart but something told me the engine was completely broke. Most concerning, we were over extensive woodlands and hilly terrain, no roads or anywhere to set down. But we always lookout for places to set down as we fly, and we had already discussed a couple of spots earlier during the flight.

 

Together my wife and I spotted a small clearing a couple miles away, to the north but it looked awfully far. I trimmed to stretch the glide as best I could, keeping an eye on the ASI knowing that 50-60 would give me my best chance. I gave a radio call of where we were heading. My wife’s instructor was somewhere around doing training and called back that the message had been relayed to Brisbane Central. We also heard a couple of other voices responding and relaying our message. Oddly enough that was really reassuring to know that our situation was known, not that it was much help for our immediate predicament. Dunno how long that glide lasted, in my perception it went on and on, reluctantly trading height for speed to stay away from stall. We just made it over the edge of the clearing and as I got over the last of the trees I put out extra flap and floated down to make probably my best landing that day, but into shoulder high spear grass. That grass slowed us down pretty quick, but as we decelerated on our landing roll our wheels started sinking into the bog. And we pitched forward, not at high speed, but enough to flip the aircraft onto its back.

 

The roll happened quite suddenly and was quite diseorientating, but my ‘elderly’ wife proved remarkably spritely and called “right, everybody out!” We scrambled out of the aircraft into the bog. We were shaken, but we were otherwise unhurt.

 

An R44 tourist flight was overhead in about ten minutes as we were trying to ascertain our damage and how we might get out of the swamp. The pilot landed and told us help was on the way and he would return after his tourists were unloaded. Top bloke! But within 30 minutes the CareFlight guys arrived from Darwin and extracted us, the pilot being very careful not to set down in the bog. They were fabulous, and really pragmatic about the incident. They ferried us back to Batchelor where they checked us out, I spoke with AMSA and gave a report to the Cops. We drove home that night still rather bemused by the whole experience. But our confusion was nothing to what we experienced this morning seeing our story all over the media this morning with it’s bizarre inaccuraries and sensationalism.

 

So tonight our beautiful aircraft lies inverted in a swamp and we’re waiting to hear from our insurers. Yes we are lucky, but we worked as a team and flew the plane to the ground a long distance without power. My wife who is undergoing flight training herself was calm and reassuring, and her amazing competence was infectious. She made me a better pilot. This sounds crazy, but I’m so glad she was with me through it. Shes gonna make an awesome aviator.

 

In 13 years flying, I’ve had an emergency landing before, but in the circuit, where it’s fairly clear what to do. This was different.

 

So why did the engine seize? Had I preflighted and pulled through the prop on the radial and managed the oil? Yes I had, but unfortunately on these radials it’s possible a bent rod could go undetected for weeks or months before it cuts loose. It’s really hard to tell without opening the engine and I had no reason to suspect that anything was amiss. The aircraft follows a regular maintenance schedule to GA standards. When we get the aircraft back it’ll be interesting to see what happened.

 

This can happen to anybody, quite unexpectedly. You never think it’s gonna happen to you. Walking away from this was testimony to some great instruction and sound advice I’ve received over the years. I hope I never have to apply that knowledge again.

 

 

 

 

[Guest Guest]

Excellent work there, stories to tell the grand kids seeing as you two are "elderly"

 

So what's the radial in yr plane?

 

 

[Downunder]

Thanks for writing that up. Sounds like you handled it well (wife too).

 

Too many times the outcome is less favourable. There seems to be a lot that stall it in the glide and pancake it in. I don't know why.

 

 

[NT5224]

Excellent work there, stories to tell the grand kids seeing as you two are "elderly"So what's the radial in yr plane?

It was a Rotec 2800 7 cylinder, but between the initial seizure and the roll damage who knows what it is now?

 

 

[Guest nicephotog]

All too familiar scenery for this armchair viewer of such equipment, but just like an aircraft 20 years old or more is becoming risky, Oddly! Australia does not have the geography allowing these types of aircraft and that is what happens to most of them the moment they require to land because of some problem.

 

The Germans during ww2 tried to fix that problem with a Storch, every military system that built or part built aircraft designs tried to survive or operate on those types of landing problem and the answer became STOL and an additive to it , it's landing gear, recently now called bush planes.

 

 

I suppose the best way of saying it, is that this will happen on too many at some time to allow the idea that the type of aircraft or undercarriage system be considered actually appropriate through such terrain. However, these experimental aircraft have not been abundant until around 2013.

 

 

[SDQDI]

Thanks for sharing that experience NT!

 

 

[turboplanner]

Thanks for the information NT; if only everyone would do that; regardless of the cause of the engine failure, a textbook set of actions we cal all learn from.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

All too familiar scenery for this armchair viewer of such equipment, but just like an aircraft 20 years old or more is becoming risky, Oddly! Australia does not have the geography allowing these types of aircraft and that is what happens to most of them the moment they require to land because of some problem.The Germans during ww2 tried to fix that problem with a Storch, every military system that built or part built aircraft designs tried to survive or operate on those types of landing problem and the answer became STOL and an additive to it , it's landing gear, recently now called bush planes.

 

I'm afraid you're amply demonstrating your 'armchair viewer' status.

The aircraft that NT5224 and his lovely young wife was flying, did have what you might describe as 'bush plane' landing gear, and the strength of it is well demonstrated by the fact that it's still attached and apparently undamaged following the mishap. In fact the strength of the whole structure is shown, in that the fuselage is fully intact, the wings are still where they should be, and the occupants relatively unhurt.

 

And - the article you linked to, for whatever reason, is a load of bunkum. I did read it all, though I wasn't inclined to after the first paragraph contained this piece of priceless wisdom -

 

"If you had an engine failure in a 4 seat ordinary light aircraft, there effectively is nowhere to land unless there is a deliberate runway, AND it would tend to plummet not glide ! "

 

.................

 

1@NT5224[/uSER] - it looks like you and your good lady did an excellent job under the circumstances, and hopefully there will be little or no damage to the plane and you'll be back in the air soon. If you can manually flip it back upright and get it lifted out by helicopter it can be landed back on its wheels without damage at the destination.

 

Previous similar recoveries have shown that if you can arrange a three-point lifting attachment to each of the forward wingspar-to-cabin attach points and the third to the rudder post, with lengths organised so that the plane hangs about 5° nose low then it should behave quite reasonably on the hook. In any event avoid it hanging nose high or it will want to fly and become uncontrollable.

 

In case you have any doubts about your handling of the matter, thinking that you could somehow have prevented the overturn, I'd suggest not to beat yourself up over it. I had an almost identical occurrence 32yrs ago. I was on approach to land at the Surfers Paradise Raceway (gone now, it's a housing development called Emerald Lakes), and had special permission to operate from there as long as there were never any 'problems'. On long final I had a section of the cabin roof come loose and it started flapping uncontrollably which gave some disturbing effects on control due the the varying airflow over the tail.

 

In retrospect I should have just landed but being mindful of my obligation I decided to power on and go elsewhere. It quickly became clear that the increased airflow from the prop-wash was making the condition much worse so I cut the engine and chose what looked like a large grassy area a mile or so to the west. As it turned out it was an area of swampy tall (2m+) grass in the grounds of the Gold Coast German Club - but you couldn't tell that from the air. I set up for a very slow landing which all went fine and was touching down when I had a very peculiar sensation just as you described. It seemed like the smoothest landing ever but then, as the plane descended into the grass everything turned green and then a very disorientated feeling - in my case I didn't realise I had inverted. It was the softest landing, completely cushioned by the grass with absolutely no damage to the airframe.

 

In seconds I was out and wondering how to get the plane moved out of there and in minutes a friend had flown over and landed nearby and was helping me work it out. A few minutes after that the news and police helicopters were there, and that's when the only damage was done, as the police clumped around in their boots on the underside of my wings 'searching for casualties' - it was a single-seat plane but that was too much for the local constabulary to process, it seemed.

 

Being close to a road we were able to detach the wings and carry it out with the help of a few friends, and I was flying again a few days later.

 

 

[facthunter]

You did good NT. Nev

 

 

[Guest nicephotog]

-> Head in the clouds I understand what you are saying but the aircraft only has larger than normal landing wheel diameter (and probably wider), Howver it is some of the problem that what they landed on does exist all over Australia apart rough ground and the "learned modern STOL engineering requirement" shows as in the video of the "bushplanes" what it actually requires of wheel size and tyre size to land successfully on such a rationally possible chance of terrain during a failure !

 

About glide, "modern (2010 - 2013) developed experimental license and kit build STOL solutions" are generally 10 Knots slower in glide in a four seat compared to an older lighter two seat light aircraft such as the one in the article here that crashed!

 

 

[SDQDI]

While I love my STOL planes I have to agree with HITC in regards to the four seaters plummeting comment. While a stol plane may glide slower their glide ratios are generally much worse than the sleeker designs so technically, while I dislike the phrase plummet, the stol is actually closer to plummeting than a sleeker design aircraft.

 

As for forced landings I would take a STOL plane over a sleek any day but when choosing a plane there is a lot more to consider than its forced landing characteristics. I LOVE big tyres but for long cross country trips they aren't as practical.

 

 

[Guest nicephotog]

While I love my STOL planes I have to agree with HITC in regards to the four seaters plummeting comment. While a stol plane may glide slower their glide ratios are generally much worse than the sleeker designs so technically, while I dislike the phrase plummet, the stol is actually closer to plummeting than a sleeker design aircraft.As for forced landings I would take a STOL plane over a sleek any day but when choosing a plane there is a lot more to consider than its forced landing characteristics. I LOVE big tyres but for long cross country trips they aren't as practical.

...And the last statement (sentence you wrote) "IS the big head scratch in it all" (speed vs practicality) , but the inference in it all is the problem of the Australian environment and ANY final touchdown whether *government generated response or an engine failure, *there is nowhere to land unless you have PPL and VH registration (never mind RPL stepping stone) , airfields are scanty (so too the aviation industry at the light aircraft level) of any type , a good example of what occurs in this countries thinking is Adaminaby NSW airfield in the Snowy Mountains, it simply a stretch of grass for light aircraft to land but it is its ethos that counts, Money! Money from tourist industry to a AKA "location" , that sort of thing , a quaint little village where people go for holidays and eat the Salmon mouse and meet ..."a Mr. Reeper or something"...

It all collectively sums up says standard ordinary light aircraft in Australia are not supported.

 

Although.. I don't quite know what to make of this ones specs on staying up or a landing from engine failure.

 

This quite good stuff and may be able to be better fitted for larger anti-bogging / ant-rock-thump - anti-rabbit-hole wheels.(It's almost a STOL)

 

Murphy Moose | Murphy Aircraft Mfg Ltd.

 

I would think insurance companies may find these types of aircraft much more amenable to insure at lower cost

 

For people to use light aircraft, they need somewhere to take-off and somewhere to land ! That is simply not practical for them to bother in Australia unless they have PPL and VH.

 

Or use uncontrolled airspace after RPL training (if they want to safely) , but will need the undercarriage to do it and the roll distance assured !

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Nicephotog:

 

Even after re-reading your posts I'm having some difficulty understanding what you are trying to say.

 

Perhaps you are not aware of the many excellent aircraft that are well-adapted to Australian conditions. They do not require PPL or prepared runways.

 

At least two of the contributors to this thread have built and fly such aeroplanes.

 

 

[Guest nicephotog]

Head in the clouds wrote this ! ...The aircraft that NT5224 and his lovely young wife

 

 

was flying, did have what you might describe as 'bush plane' landing gear,...

 

Now refer back to the picture of that up-ended upside down aircraft , that is EVERYTHING those AKA ..."big wheels (on bush STOL)"... SDQDI spoke of, are the purpose of (to prevent sinking in and prevent nose plant) , AND it did not suffice an unprepared runway ! period. AND in one of worst of circumstance.

 

Thee is no doubt the aircraft has bigger wheels than normal but finally it does not cohere to true "unknown terrain surface safety" as a good bet the vehicle will land undamaged by either severe jarring or jamming into things such as a rabbit hole or soft earth !

 

To understand it

 

I dispute (if you will) that Australia's isolated environment and hence distances as standard required to traverse and in fact any point of its environment you wish to choose,has any rational safety in an "light aircraft" outside of use of a STOL

 

Too again, it is agreed that STOL hits the ground less hard in aerodynamic terms of delivery of it's dispersed kinetic energy on "landing impact" and worth every point in it preventing major injury or death by that very point.

 

The appearance of the aircraft in this thread shows it was in actuality an immensely dangerous life threatening result.

 

In some terms ANYHOW "STOL" method and specification along with "bush plane" classification (as shown in the video) can be described in its entirety as a complete packaged SAFETY SYSTEM !

 

So if those aircraft do not conform to that, then they are not bush aircraft, they are simply an ordinary light aircraft that does better than most would at the actions of a "bush plane" classification !

 

...So if that happens on a plane in that situation as has in this thread then it is NOT a bush plane (whether STOL roll-climb included or not) !

 

 

[jetjr]

Lots of insurers wont insure if you indicate not using designated ALA

 

Yeah I'm lost too

 

You expecting an airfield every 10nm?

 

A key component of RAA aircraft is slow stall speed, relates to less energy and supposed "safer" accidents

 

 

[Yenn]

NT5224 Well done. The best thing in an emergency is a cool head and both of you had that. I think the media were implying that you can safely live to become "aged" at least that is my interpretation.

 

 

[nomadpete]

NT,

 

Thank you for sharing your story frankly and factually. You both handled the situation so very well. You are uninjured and your aircraft looks to have suffered minimal damage. That is a great outcome in a difficult situation. If you find yourself replaying the event in your mind, all I can say is don't rehash it. You did a great job. Your training came to the fore when needed. I feel for you and your partner, as media hysterics are, at the very least annoying. At worst they can be damaging.

 

 

[BirdDog]

Wow man! Congrats to you. You did a great job.

 

 

[rep003]

Much respect NT . it is one thing to learn it and quite another to Apply it when it really counts!

 

Awesome outcome.

 

 

[NT5224]

Hi everybody.

 

Thanks so much for the comments of support and encouragement. That's what you get sharing your story with other aviators rather than non-flyers.

 

What frustrated me yesterday was the local media reporting of our spectacular 'crash'. A local radio channel apparently reported that we had miraculously survived (and I didn't hear this myself) when the aircraft had fallen from the sky or flown into the ground inverted, as shown in the picture! Of course the flip had only occurred at low speed when the wheels stuck in mud at the end of the landing roll. Understandably, we had relatives seriously worried for our lives... Also we were reported to have 'injuries' or 'minor' injuries. We were both unharmed by the incident and I just drove us home after the misadventure. Its unfair how our sport is tarnished by this sensationalism.

 

Anyway gripe over.

 

On the issue of STOL raised by nicephotog, I'd consider my own Murphy Rebel a serious STOL bush aircraft, designed and built for the Canadian outback. Funnily enough, I currently have on order some 29 inch Alaskan bush tyres to be fitted to it. If they had arrived and been fitted before Sunday they almost certainly would have prevented my rollover on landing. However, they weigh 15kg each and if they had been fitted its likely the weight and drag would have compromised that lengthy glide to the clearing we pulled off. We might have dropped into the bush. I'd rather take the roll-over than fly my wife into trees.

 

Have been in touch with the insurers and plans are afoot for the recovery. Its going to be a bit of an adventure getting to the landing site at this time of year and getting the aircraft out.

 

Cheers

 

Alan

 

 

[turboplanner]

Hi everybody.Thanks so much for the comments of support and encouragement. That's what you get sharing your story with other aviators rather than non-flyers.

What frustrated me yesterday was the local media reporting of our spectacular 'crash'. A local radio channel apparently reported that we had miraculously survived (and I didn't hear this myself) when the aircraft had fallen from the sky or flown into the ground inverted, as shown in the picture! Of course the flip had only occurred at low speed when the wheels stuck in mud at the end of the landing roll. Understandably, we had relatives seriously worried for our lives... Also we were reported to have 'injuries' or 'minor' injuries. We were both unharmed by the incident and I just drove us home after the misadventure. Its unfair how our sport is tarnished by this sensationalism.

 

Anyway gripe over.

 

On the issue of STOL raised by nicephotog, I'd consider my own Murphy Rebel a serious STOL bush aircraft, designed and built for the Canadian outback. Funnily enough, I currently have on order some 29 inch Alaskan bush tyres to be fitted to it. If they had arrived and been fitted before Sunday they almost certainly would have prevented my rollover on landing. However, they weigh 15kg each and if they had been fitted its likely the weight and drag would have compromised that lengthy glide to the clearing we pulled off. We might have dropped into the bush. I'd rather take the roll-over than fly my wife into trees.

 

Have been in touch with the insurers and plans are afoot for the recovery. Its going to be a bit of an adventure getting to the landing site at this time of year and getting the aircraft out.

 

Cheers

 

Alan

Were you happy with the NT News story NT. I thought it was pretty close to what you told us, but I can get a message through there.