Jump to content

3 more gone too soon. Near Maffra 16/11/24

BirdDog

By BirdDog
in Aircraft Incidents and Accidents

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

skippydiesel
skippydiesel

I may have this very wrong - Once airborne, unless subject to turbulence/wind shear/ gust, the aircraft does not "know" or care from which direction the wind is coming from. The aircraft will perform

facthunter
facthunter

"Pilot Error" is an expression that has NOT been used by  investigators for quite a while. It actually gets you nowhere. There's ALWAYs some reason, why? Investigation is justified as being a way of i

Thruster88
Thruster88

The published stall speeds are very unrealistic for an aircraft with 800kg MTOW and only 110 sq feet of wing. Could it lead pilots to fly at unsafe airspeed during manoeuvring? 

Posted Images

kgwilson Well-known member

kgwilson

Posted
Posted

No a terrible tragedy, not an accident. There is always a cause and it rarely comes to something accidental.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, kgwilson said:

No a terrible tragedy, not an accident. There is always a cause and it rarely comes to something accidental.

on flight radar there was a 4 seat morgan cougar circling at 400 ft @60 knts. disappeared after circling twice.

spacesailor Well-known member

spacesailor

Posted
Posted

Is the " minimum stall speed "  set too low , so pilots think they  can  

Still manoeuvre,  while flying too slow .

60 kn in a straight line will be so near the minimum,  they could stall when turning .

spacesailor

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted (edited)

SPECIFICATIONS:

  • Wingspan: 7.92 m (26 ft)
  • Length: 6.70 m (22 ft)
  • Height (tricycle undercarriage): 2 m (6 ft 6 in)
  • Wing area: 10.26 m² (110.5 sq ft)
  • Cruising speed at sea level: 241 km/h (150 mph)
  • Manoeuvring speed: 167 km/h (106 mph)
  • Stalling speed, clean: 56 km/h (35 mph)
  • Stalling speed, with flaps: 50 km/h (31 mph)
  • Service ceiling: 3,048 m (10,000 ft)
  • Rate of climb at sea level: 366 m/min (1,200 ft/min)
  • Empty weight: 353 kg (778 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 800 kg (1,764 lb.

it has quite a low stall speed and 50knt approach. 

Edited by BrendAn
Flightrite Well-known member

Flightrite

Posted
Posted

Doesn’t look good🙁 Hope we an all learn something from this tragedy🙁

Rotax powered machine, many will be watching closely considering the extensive SB recently by BRP-Rotax.

  • Like 1
  • red750 changed the title to 3 more gone too soon. Near Maffra 16/11/24
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted
6 hours ago, Flightrite said:

Doesn’t look good🙁 Hope we an all learn something from this tragedy🙁

Rotax powered machine, many will be watching closely considering the extensive SB recently by BRP-Rotax.

It's all flat paddocks and lots of roads around here. I would have thought  they would just pick a clear paddock or road to set it down . Engine trouble should not be catastrophic. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
turboplanner Well-known member

turboplanner

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, BrendAn said:

SPECIFICATIONS:

  • Wingspan: 7.92 m (26 ft)
  • Length: 6.70 m (22 ft)
  • Height (tricycle undercarriage): 2 m (6 ft 6 in)
  • Wing area: 10.26 m² (110.5 sq ft)
  • Cruising speed at sea level: 241 km/h (150 mph)
  • Manoeuvring speed: 167 km/h (106 mph)
  • Stalling speed, clean: 56 km/h (35 mph)
  • Stalling speed, with flaps: 50 km/h (31 mph)
  • Service ceiling: 3,048 m (10,000 ft)
  • Rate of climb at sea level: 366 m/min (1,200 ft/min)
  • Empty weight: 353 kg (778 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 800 kg (1,764 lb.

it has quite a low stall speed and 50knt approach. 

167 km/hr = 90 kts

56 km/hr = 30 kts

50 km/hr =27 kts

  • Like 1
SGM Well-known member

SGM

Posted
Posted (edited)


Hard to believe that an 800kg aircraft of this size could stall at 27kts... looks like this was questioned 14 years ago too...

 image.thumb.png.ad3a761d07bb823de35b15f650c67be9.png

Edited by SGM
  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2
Thruster88 Well-known member

Thruster88

Posted
Posted
8 hours ago, BrendAn said:

SPECIFICATIONS:

  • Wingspan: 7.92 m (26 ft)
  • Length: 6.70 m (22 ft)
  • Height (tricycle undercarriage): 2 m (6 ft 6 in)
  • Wing area: 10.26 m² (110.5 sq ft)
  • Cruising speed at sea level: 241 km/h (150 mph)
  • Manoeuvring speed: 167 km/h (106 mph)
  • Stalling speed, clean: 56 km/h (35 mph)
  • Stalling speed, with flaps: 50 km/h (31 mph)
  • Service ceiling: 3,048 m (10,000 ft)
  • Rate of climb at sea level: 366 m/min (1,200 ft/min)
  • Empty weight: 353 kg (778 lb)
  • Loaded weight: 800 kg (1,764 lb.

it has quite a low stall speed and 50knt approach. 

The published stall speeds are very unrealistic for an aircraft with 800kg MTOW and only 110 sq feet of wing. Could it lead pilots to fly at unsafe airspeed during manoeuvring? 

  • Like 3
  • Agree 2
  • Informative 1
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted
Just now, BrendAn said:

I left that out because I did not want to put the reg number out there but I guess it doesn't make any difference.

Screenshot_2024-11-17-08-12-00-87_8a6ce7ef6b1c5341b022b20d7fbb4b6e.jpg

It did a lot of tight circles around. Maffra before heading over to upper Maffra . Might have been looking or knew people at the vintage truck show which was on at the Maffra oval.

  • Informative 2
skippydiesel Well-known member

skippydiesel

Posted
Posted

The published (above) stall/cruise, air speeds are not impossible but are highly unlikly, especially for a 800 kg TO weight. I only know of two aircraft , both with 600 kg TO, composite airframes & fowler flaps, that would equal (slightly exceed) the claimed flight envelope.

  • Like 1
  • Informative 1
SGM Well-known member

SGM

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, onetrack said:

The aircraft appears to have been VH-registered, as the ATSB has initiated an investigation.

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/media/2024/tinamba-west-aircraft-accident

Is it an official position that ATSB doesn't examine accidents of RAAus aircraft? Does anyone have that in writing?

With many factory-built aircraft now RAAus registered and many flight schools in RAAus, there seems to be as much to learn going forward from any RAAus aircraft accidents, as there would be from accidents on (rare) experimental class VH-registered aircraft.

  • Like 1
clouddancer Member

clouddancer

Posted
Posted

It is a funding and resourcing issue. The ATSB don’t have the funds to investigate any accidents involving sport aviation aircraft. Unless a minister gets involved and demands they investigate.

The solution is to lobby for the ATSB to be better funded and resourced.
As pilots are generally Australian taxpayers, regardless of the aircraft registration, fatal and serious accidents should be investigated.

it is not an official policy or written document AFAIK, but a budgetary decision.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 2
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Thruster88 said:

The published stall speeds are very unrealistic for an aircraft with 800kg MTOW and only 110 sq feet of wing. Could it lead pilots to fly at unsafe airspeed during manoeuvring? 

do you think this might turn out be another stall spin on final turn.

  • Like 1
skippydiesel Well-known member

skippydiesel

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

do you think this might turn out be another stall spin on final turn.

Not commenting on this incident, of which I know nothing, other than whats on this page - IF (?) they were doing low pass/orbiting an event/something on the ground, it's very easy for the pilot to allow air speed to drop below stall / in turn. IF (?) this happened close to ground, recovery would have been unlikly.

  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Thruster88 Well-known member

Thruster88

Posted
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, BrendAn said:

do you think this might turn out be another stall spin on final turn.

Seems likely given the flight track and the flat nature of the terrain. Can't see a strip there so maybe a moose turn stall spin.

 

We learn the aircraft had changed hands only very recently. Wind out of the north at 20 knots may have been producing some turbulence. Sad situation. 

Edited by Thruster88
  • Like 1
  • Informative 2
BrendAn Well-known member

BrendAn

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

Seems likely given the flight track and the flat nature of the terrain. Can't see a strip there so maybe a moose turn stall spin.

 

We learn the aircraft had changed hands only very recently. Wind out of the north at 20 knots may have been producing some turbulence. Sad situation. 

it can get pretty bumpy close to the hills there and a northerly would make it rougher. temp was about 28 to 30 .

onetrack Well-known member

onetrack

Posted
Posted (edited)

200L of fuel capacity, if near full, and 3 POB, could make for a low speed manoeuvring trap for a new owner. How many times have we seen pilots stall and crash when looking for something on the ground, and they overlooked adequate airspeed for too long? 20KTS of wind is a high wind component, compared to the published stall speed.

 

Edited by onetrack
  • Informative 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...