Light plane crash south west of Sydney 24 Jan 2024.

[RFguy]

I see Roundsounds posted the same thing. there you go QED.

[KRviator]

14 minutes ago, Roundsounds said:

You do realise the ADSB returns are based on pressure height? The QNH at 3pm was 1007, therefore you need to take approx 180’ off the ADSB pressure height return to get an altitude.

I did, and I'd forgotten! Appreciate the correction. 

I simply compared it to the two earlier laps from a few hours previously, I didn't think to get the QNH's and cross-check the baro-corrected altitudes.

Edited January 28 by KRviator

[kgwilson]

So he was a couple of hundred feet too high. What has that got to do with anything except accuracy. A stall turn is virtually ruled out due to air & ground speed. I'm still thinking mechanical or airframe issue. Whether it was signed out recently or not doesn't matter. No Lame is perfect and things can go undetected for years even with all the right maintenance. These may be very rare but can and do happen.

[facthunter]

Do you know what a "stall turn" IS. It's not a stall while turning. It's a manoeuvre you can be taught . Signed off in my logbook.  Nev

[RFguy]

anything like a turn in a lazy 8, or a energy exchange mustering manourver ?

[facthunter]

IT's a course reversal with or without power to use the least energy, in the simplest of terms.  .   If you want to go further discuss it with your instructor..  Nev

[old man emu]

Anyone know which organisation operated the aircraft?

[nathanc]

Altocap

 

[Thruster88]

Preliminary report from Australian Transport Safety Bureau. No fault found with the aircraft. The position of the elevator trim tab was not mentioned. 

 

 https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2024/report/ao-2024-002

 

 

[BrendAn]

could it possibly be a medical issue.  just seems very strange.

i know everyone thinks it only happens to old people but not always.   

 

Edited March 14 by BrendAn

[onetrack]

Would suicide be a possibility? Seems strange that witnesses stated they saw the aircraft going nose-down at high power, and the investigators have determined it hit the ground at an angle of 60°.

Nothing stacks up - "no evidence of an in-flight break-up or other pre-impact airframe or control defects", and the engine was deemed to be producing power at impact.

State of mind of the pilot must be part of this investigation. All the other information points to adequate pilot skills - "The instructor reported that, during these flights, the student pilot demonstrated exceptional aircraft handling proficiency, and the instructor assessed them as competent and ready for their first solo".

Not just "adequate" aircraft handling proficiency - but "exceptional" proficiency. How many can claim to be classed at "exceptional" skill levels, with low hours?

[pmccarthy]

47 hours dual and only 4 solo seems a bit strange if I am reading it correctly.

[danny_galaga]

1 minute ago, pmccarthy said:

47 hours dual and only 4 solo seems a bit strange if I am reading it correctly.

I thought wed established he was converting from RPL or something. Maybe the 4 hours is PPL?

[danny_galaga]

Sorry pmccarthy, right you are. 

 

Onetrack, I think we can't know enough about the pilot to talk about suicide. That just comes off as ghoulish I think.

[turboplanner]

This is the prelim. report so they will now be doing the detailed work item by item.

1400' downwind?

steady descent 130 kts?

 

[Roundsounds]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

This is the prelim. report so they will now be doing the detailed work item by item.

1400' downwind?

steady descent 130 kts?

 

The 1400’ is an ADSB return and is based on 1013Hpa, corrected for QNH comes in at around 1300’ AMSL. 

The descent speed of 130KTS is a ground speed, given it was descending at a rather steep angle the IAS would have been significantly higher. 

Edited March 14 by Roundsounds

[turboplanner]

42 minutes ago, Roundsounds said:

The 1400’ is an ADSB return and is based on 1013Hpa, corrected for QNH comes in at around 1300’ AMSL. 

The descent speed of 130KTS is a ground speed, given it was descending at a rather steep angle the IAS would have been significantly higher. 

in a 1000' circuit?

[BrendAn]

42 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

in a 1000' circuit?

whats wrong with that,  1300 amsl is probably 1000ft agl

[turboplanner]

18 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

whats wrong with that,  1300 amsl is probably 1000ft agl

From the report: "Recorded altitude has been converted to height above the elevation at the point of ground impact. This was about 10 ft below the airport elevation."

AGL is also mentioned on the graph.

 

Circuit height is 1000' AGL

That's where he was supposed to be on downwind, and at somewhere like Camden, spot on it.

 

This was driven home to me one day when I was flying along at the minimum 500' agl and after a while realised I could see the bark peeling off dead sticks on the ground which was rising.

 

[skippydiesel]

38 minutes ago, turboplanner said:

From the report: "Recorded altitude has been converted to height above the elevation at the point of ground impact. This was about 10 ft below the airport elevation."

AGL is also mentioned on the graph.

 

Circuit height is 1000' AGL

That's where he was supposed to be on downwind, and at somewhere like Camden, spot on it.

 

This was driven home to me one day when I was flying along at the minimum 500' agl and after a while realised I could see the bark peeling off dead sticks on the ground which was rising.

 

You are correct Turbs - Camden circuit height is 1300 ft (1000 AGL).

 

Having flown there quite a few times. I draw your attention (once more) to how wide the aircraft has flown - well beyond any of my poor attempts at a professionally executed pattern. The pilot is so wide, it suggests to me that he must have had an issue, possibly as early as up or cross wind. having pointed this out I dont think it leads to any particular conclusion, other than the pilots possible loss of situational awareness. 

[Roundsounds]

1 hour ago, turboplanner said:

in a 1000' circuit?

[facthunter]

All in All the circuit seems to have been flown pretty accurately till turning base.  Nev

[Roundsounds]

9 minutes ago, skippydiesel said:

You are correct Turbs - Camden circuit height is 1300 ft (1000 AGL).

 

Having flown there quite a few times. I draw your attention (once more) to how wide the aircraft has flown - well beyond any of my poor attempts at a professionally executed pattern. The pilot is so wide, it suggests to me that he must have had an issue, possibly as early as up or cross wind. having pointed this out I dont think it leads to any particular conclusion, other than the pilots possible loss of situational awareness. 

The ATSB report shows about a 1NM downwind spacing, doesn’t seem “so wide”. Having flown there a few times myself, I’d say the spacing was pretty normal for Camden operators. 

[turboplanner]

10 minutes ago, Roundsounds said:

Have a look at the VFG regarding circuit height and the ATSB report.

[BrendAn]

3 hours ago, turboplanner said:

From the report: "Recorded altitude has been converted to height above the elevation at the point of ground impact. This was about 10 ft below the airport elevation."

AGL is also mentioned on the graph.

 

Circuit height is 1000' AGL

That's where he was supposed to be on downwind, and at somewhere like Camden, spot on it.

 

This was driven home to me one day when I was flying along at the minimum 500' agl and after a while realised I could see the bark peeling off dead sticks on the ground which was rising.

 

But wasn't he at 1000 ft