Another stall spin crash (usa)

[Thruster88]

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/09/cessna-177rg-cardinal-rg-n2085q-fatal.html

 

50 comments and not one about the pilot's failure to maintain safe flying airspeed. Perhaps this is why it continues to happen. Pilot seem to lose sight of the fact that airspeed is controlled by the stick or yoke. Everybody focuses on the casual factors of density altitude and engine condition which was poor and would have been easily detected by a LAME. Why do pilots fail to maintain best climb speed? 

[turboplanner]

5 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2021/09/cessna-177rg-cardinal-rg-n2085q-fatal.html

 

50 comments and not one about the pilot's failure to maintain safe flying airspeed. Perhaps this is why it continues to happen. Pilot seem to lose sight of the fact that airspeed is controlled by the stick or yoke. Everybody focuses on the casual factors of density altitude and engine condition which was poor and would have been easily detected by a LAME. Why do pilots fail to maintain best climb speed? 

Poor training standards, and confusing advice.

[Flightrite]

Tragic & totally unnecessary:-( I often read the Kathryn's reports (whilst I re-fuel my FlightSim), makes for sobering reading at times:-(

Pilot/human error is always the cause nothing will stop that, there will be more guarantee it despite pilot experience!

[onetrack]

I cannot believe that so many comments on that crash, ignore the basic problem there. The bloke apparently did a lot of his own maintenance, and it certainly appears that he shouldn't have.

He got an oil sample report back that showed major problems with that engine - including the comment, "(there is) even enough chrome (in the oil sample) to show a ring problem.”

That engine was so sick, it would've struggled to get off the ground with no load and low fuel. Yet he was taking off in a 109°F (nearly 43°C) ambient temperature, with full fuel.

 

He was doing this with an engine that had broken compression rings on two cylinders, and valves that looked like they should've been scrapped 500 hrs ago.

The engine had a TT of 1216 hrs since a Lycoming rebuild, and it had No. 1 cylinder replaced just 75 hrs previous to the crash.

The maintenance was deficient, if one cylinder needed replacement 75 hrs ago, all 4 should have been checked more thoroughly, and perhaps a better understanding of the poor condition of the engine might have been arrived at.

 

While I agree with what Thruster is saying, as regards airspeed (and avoiding the dreaded turnback), the simple fact remains, the engine was so sick, it incapable of maintaining adequate airspeed, in either a climb or a turn.

I am amazed that pilots will spend so much time on flight planning and other factors, yet ignore the fact that the main item that enables them to keep airborne - the engine - is in a poor state to sustain the stages of their flight that demand full power.

[facthunter]

If you are familiar with your planes T/O performance  by a certain point on the runway you'd abort the take off If It hadn't accelerated adequately. I do this at any High D/A where the performance will be marginal in any case Step out the runway and decide a reject point... R'G Cessna's get more drag during the retract  cycle than if the gear is left down. Pulling the prop through would have shown that motor was in poor condition and it would have been breathing extensively. and probably 15% down on power.at least, A C/S prop will not show a rev decrease due to a poor engine as  a fixed pitch will.. Nev

[Flightrite]

Ive seen this sort of event personally & in recent times. Moderate DA & a poor performing engine. Luckily the occupants walked away from the crash less than a K from the end of the RWY. It happens and it remains a mystery as to why we do it?

[facthunter]

Maybe they think a Cessna is super docile.  The "normal' 172's are not  overpowered to say the least.  and will eventually bite if you push them.  Don't lose CONTROL of any plane if you can avoid it. . Nev

[derekliston]

Ignoring everything else, in that report this is reported as a Cessna 177RG Amateur built????

[jackc]

Engine did not make sufficient power, reject the takeoff……no wonder as it was a sick engine, a leakdown test not part of its previous maintenance?. Any troubled flights  previous?

[Thruster88]

11 hours ago, jackc said:

Engine did not make sufficient power, reject the takeoff……no wonder as it was a sick engine, a leakdown test not part of its previous maintenance?. Any troubled flights  previous?

The camshaft getting ground away by the pitted lifters would have been a gradual process over the previous 50-100 hours so the pilot may have been conditioned to the performance. Also the constant speed propeller masks power loss, the engine will still do 2700rpm on takeoff until it gets really sick.

 

The important thing to remember is that airspeed is controlled by the stick, not the camshaft or broken piston rings.  

[F10]

Seems strange the engine condition at 1200 odd hours. Broken rings, damaged valves, detonation, as a result of running it too lean will cause that. Pitting of the tappets probably from metal debris from earlier damage due detonation. EGT gauges are a good thing to have! I remember flying an aircraft with one, had a injected 200 Hp Continental, can’t recall the serial. EGT was super sensitive, a whisper of change on the mixture showed. 
I tell you now, laugh if you will, below 500ft AGL, I will not turn back, even in the Gazelle. If close to 500, 30 deg either side. You need to concentrate on landing, not load yourself up with trying a turn back. Nor get caught out turning downwind. 
When you are in danger and in our case, your pride and joy is heading for a damaging…without even realising it…you will instinctively ease back on that stick…Dan Gryder had a good suggestion, stick a 2mm wide strip of red pin striping on your ASI glass, at 5 Kts above your stall speed. It’s a strong visual cue/wake up call, when your getting slow, because your ASI needle goes behind it….somehow that shocks you a bit into reality.

Edited October 15, 2021 by F10

[APenNameAndThatA]

According to the comments, the pilot was very active in Angel Flight. 😮 

[facthunter]

You can pick a crook engine by the way it stops when  you shut down. A good free motor will bounce off compression if it's a flat four or six. THAT motor probably only had one good cylinder. IF the filter had been cut open as is advised all the metal bits would be obvious at each oil change. It's also likely the oil pump will be damaged as it's before the filter.  Follower and cam lobe pitting is from short engine runs and long periods of being idle. The location of the Lycoming camshaft at the top  of the case makes this more likely. The W-100 PLUS aviation oil was specially made for Lycoming camshafts. You need a POT off to have a look at the camshaft. You won't see all of it  but what's wrong with what you see will be all along it. Nev

Edited October 16, 2021 by facthunter

[Garfly]

This is a new analysis of an old Stall/spin accident (2013) by Scott Perdue.

 

 

[kgwilson]

Didn't see this thread originally & agree with the analysis & comments. My questions are "How can a Cessna 177RG be Amateur built" and why do they state that the "Aircraft Damage was substantial" when it was completely destroyed? Weird but then again this is the USA.

Edited April 22, 2022 by kgwilson

[Flightrite]

You can rebuild a plane from the ID plate up!👍

[onetrack]

Quote

My questions are "How can a Cessna 177RG be Amateur built" and why do they state that the "Aircraft Damage was substantial" when it was completely destroyed?

The way I read it, the "Amateur built" is a heading followed by a colon. If the aircraft was Amateur built, it would have "Yes" after the colon. It should have had "No" after "Amateur built", but it's obvious someone neglected to add the "No".

 

I'd guess, "Substantial" damage is Americans understated description, of we would describe as, "totally destroyed". Perhaps, to the Americans, "totally destroyed" is only used for a smoking crater with virtually no recognisable aircraft components.

[F10]

Yes, interesting case. The yaw and nose up pitch caused by power, in a power on stall, can get you into trouble. Taking the aerodynamic factors or mechanics of an autorotation, the start of the spin, I think what is important here, is there is a difference between the incipient recovery and a fully developed spin recovery. In the incipient phase, the stability or aerodynamic forces acting on the tail, are dominant and if you immediately centralise the controls, (stick neutral or slightly forward of neutral), power to idle, the aircraft will recover immediately. In a fully developed spin, moments of inertia in roll, pitch and yaw, have built up, the aircraft wants to keep doing what it’s doing, according to Newton first law. Most aircraft will be considered to be in a fully developed spin after 2-3 turns. So this is when you need to pull the stick back, to prevent rudder blanking and go check power off, then full opposite rudder, ease stick forward, to install wings. I think it is not vital to “stabilise the aircraft”, especially if you don’t have much altitude to work with. Rudder blanking not so critical in my view. Just start the recovery. Spin recovery can be confusing because for a short period of time, about 3/4 of a turn, the rate of into spin roll, increases. This is because the outer wing will un-stall  first, causing a short duration rapid increase in roll rate, before damping in roll suddenly stops it, as the aircraft recovers. At the end of the day, your aircraft flight manual instructions on spin recovery actions, should always be followed.

[Thruster88]

IMHO knowing how to recover from a spin is only useful for pilots who are going to intentionally spin their aircraft. No one accidentally enters a spin during cruise flight when there might be enough height for recovery. Stall spin accidents happen in agricultural ops, initial climb and circuit ops, following engine failure at low level and manoeuvring near rising terrain. In these cases there is nearly always insufficient altitude for a recovery even by the ace of the base, however not flying the aircraft at less than best climb, best glide speed always works. These two speeds are called best because they give the best performance in each case, no need to ever fly slower than 1.4 time stall speed.

Edited April 25, 2022 by Thruster88

[facthunter]

IF you carry a stall margin you are safe in most circumstances. Where you get gusts or windshear or icing you can lose the safety margin. The angle of attack is still the cause of a stall, (NOT pitch attitude) and the pilot controls that with the elevators.. In a turn with extra wing loading you have to calculate the NEW speeds that apply IF you don't have some form of AoA indication. It's easy to see that what is usually taught under the "STALLS" heading is grossly inadequate..  I've found that most pilots are decidedly scared of stalls and that may be helpful but having more knowledge would prevent the ever recurring accidents of this type. The two ways to increase airspeed are lower the nose and/or add POWER. Forward stick also unloads the wing by reducing the AoA.  Nev

[djpacro]

13 hours ago, F10 said:

.... your aircraft flight manual instructions on spin recovery actions, should always be followed.

Indeed. A flight manual will have the recovery procedure from a spin.

 

Even types not approved for intentional spins.

 

The certification test pilots define a spin as "a sustained autorotation at angles-of-attack above stall" per FAA AC 23-8C. That's all. 

 

Types not approved for intentional spinning are only tested "to assure that the airplane will not become uncontrollable within one turn (or three seconds, whichever takes longer) if a spin should be encountered inadvertently". No need to discuss whether it is an incipient spin or not. If it is autorotating then it is spinning so use the spin recovery method. Only done one turn - may be an incipient spin - doesn't matter, that's all that has been tested and the test pilot tells you in the flight manual how to recover.

Quote

there is a difference between the incipient recovery and a fully developed spin recovery.

The people who write the spin recovery method in the flight manual use the above definition of a spin, nowhere in AC 23-8A does it even mention an incipient spin. An incipient spin is a spin so use the spin recovery method in the flight manual.

 

Cessna's Spin Document notes:

Quote

The subject of airplane spinning is a complex one, which is often over-simplified during hangar-flying sessions. .... During this incipient phase, spin recoveries in those airplanes approved for intentional spins are usually rapid, and, in some airplanes, may occur merely by relaxing the pro-spin rudder and elevator deflections.
However, positive spin recovery control inputs should be used regardless of the phase of the spin during which recovery is initiated. Briefly, these control inputs should be 1) neutral ailerons and power off, 2) full rudder opposite to the direction of rotaiion, 3) just after the rudder reaches the stop, elevator briskly forward to break the stall, and 4) as rotation stops, neutralize the controls and recwer from the resulting dive.

Note the use of the word "may"!

Quote

there is a difference between the incipient recovery and a fully developed spin recovery.  In the incipient phase .. if you immediately centralise the controls, ....  Most aircraft will be considered to be in a fully developed spin after 2-3 turns.

So you recommend simply centralising the controls if in an incipient spin? Before 2-3 turns? AC 23-8A states "Most airplanes will not attain a fully developed spin in one turn." When I demonstrate an aggressive unintentional spin entry with power and aileron it will be fully developed well before 2-3 turns.

 

By all means, if in an aerobatic aircraft and unintentionally enter a spin while conducting aerobatics and take immediate action (so very early in the incipient spin phase), centralise the controls to prevent the spin from developing - it is appropriate then.

 

In other circumstances, this acccident is a good example of what goes wrong when transitioning from a stall recovery method to a different stall recovery method with a wing drop to a different recovery method from an incipient spin then to a different fully developed spin recovery method https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2014/aair/ao-2014-083/

Quote

So this is when you need to pull the stick back, to prevent rudder blanking and go check power off, then full opposite rudder, ease stick forward, to install wings.

Depends on the aircraft.

A type I flew recently stated that these 4 actions "must be carried out immediately and simultaneously. Power lever - idle. Ailerons neutral. Rudder - full deflection against direction of spin. Elevator - fully forward." That type is not approved for intentional spins so that is the required action when it is autorotating ... in the incipient spin phase. I wonder if the flight instructor in the fatal accident of that type knew of that when he was doing stall practice with a student as it is quite different from the method he was taught when he got his spin endorsement?

 

Edited April 25, 2022 by djpacro
minor typos

[F10]

11 hours ago, djpacro said:

 

 

Cessna's Spin Document notes:

Note the use of the word "may"!

So you recommend simply centralising the controls if in an incipient spin? Before 2-3 turns? AC 23-8A states "Most airplanes will not attain a fully developed spin in one turn." When I demonstrate an aggressive unintentional spin entry with power and aileron it will be fully developed well before 2-3 turns.

 

By all means, if in an aerobatic aircraft and unintentionally enter a spin while conducting aerobatics and take immediate action (so very early in the incipient spin phase), centralise the controls to prevent the spin from developing - it is appropriate then.

 

In my experience, during “g” or “accelerated” stalls, or autorotation induced with aileron lose or at the stall, the aircraft recovers very quickly with centralising controls. The real crucial factor is to unload or reduce AoA, that’s why ideally, get the stick forward of neutral. 2-3 turns of a spin will be considered fully developed when rates of roll, pitch, yaw are constant. In the incipient phase, roll, pitch, yaw are generally oscillatory, and the aircraft will also be transitioning from level flight, to a vertical spiral, around the spin axes. As I said, in the incipient phase, the moments of inertia in yaw, roll, pitch have not had time to build up. This is a generic consideration, some aircraft may well be fully into the spin earlier. But to me, there is a difference between the incipient and fully developed spin, and moments of inertia to me, will take more than 1 turn to fully develop. 
 

at the end of the day, consider an autorotation, occurring in a base leg turn. Without spin training, power to idle, then centralising controls, making sure you unload enough to un-stall the wings, crucial. Most aircraft should recover. In a fully developed spin, most aircraft should recover, with controls held neutral, otherwise to me, they should not have been certified. The reason that positive spin recovery actions are taken, is recovery will be faster. Snapping on full opposite rudder may not be required, and my slight problem with this is, you need to remember to centralise the rudder immediately on recovery, or yaw roll to the opposite direction could occur, and possibly cause an autorotation to occur in the opposite direction. Again, look at the flight manual.

 

11 hours ago, djpacro said:

 

Edited April 25, 2022 by F10

[F10]

Sorry, but struggle with this “quote” system!

[Mike Gearon]

5 hours ago, F10 said:

Sorry, but struggle with this “quote” system!

Edited April 25, 2022 by Mike Gearon

[kgwilson]

6 hours ago, F10 said:

Sorry, but struggle with this “quote” system!

Click quote & it appears in your post in its own box. Type your own comments under the box. Edit out parts of the quote by highlighting the text and pressing delete. Delete the entire quote by highlighting all the text & pressing delete, then right click & select back. The quote is gone. This works for a PC. Not sure about tablets & smaller.