Lest you think you can beat density altitude

[eaglepilot]

So that we can all learn-

From another site:

"The video seems to document an accident in ID in June (NTSB report here; news account here). The aircraft in that accident was a Stinson 108-3.

According to those reports, the departure airport was Bruce Meadows Airport (U63), Stanley, Idaho, elevation 6370. Google Earth view here.

The investigation has only begun, but the video appears to show one hazard associated with operations at high density altitudes, viz., that you may be able to take off, but you may not be able to outclimb terrain and obstructions."

The video is chilling in how benign it seems until there is a problem.....


http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=835_1344412426

[Iflylower]

Ouch. That hurt to watch.

[OLDCROWE]

As a recent member of the hat club whom had a close encounter with a tree or two. I can truly say that was nauseating to watch and listen to, but all should do so and if you don't have shoulder harness get them today because **** happens every day, even at the end of a simple cross-country in flat land America and they will help to keep your face out of the panel most times.

[aktango58]

I disagree that it was benign...

Just my observations that I would council a student if I was watching this:

First the load was four adults, all average or larger... you have close to 700 lbs inside.

How much fuel????

On takeoff, it was obvious that there was a minimum of lift. At some point you need to recognize that flying is not a good idea, the plane does not want to lift. If it is a slug in ground effect, you are asking for trouble.

The plane went from light color ground with little vegetation, and crossed over a darker color, tall trees. The trees shade the ground and absorb heat, so will not give thermals upward... when you have updraft in the non-tree area, the down thermals will be guess where????

The pilot did not use all of his options... why not put down some flaps for lift? one notch of flaps, (Stinson is a two notch bird right?), and use the extra camber for lift.

Once the pilot realized that lift was not going to be much, I think he should have turned around and gotten back and lightened the load.

Yes, I am after the fact armchair quarterbacking, but think about the 'gotta get there' that was happening to continue. We, all of us, need to fight the 'need' to go and ask less from ourselves and our birds. It is cheaper.

I feel bad for all the folks, but man it was obvious that the plane was out of it's useful element long before liftoff.

[RaisedByWolves]

i was flying one of our flight schools 172's with no shoulder belt. i felt naked. At least the stock cessna one will help some what..

Tom

[Darrel Starr]

I had to force myself to watch it -- painful! At least we knew at the outset that everyone survived.

[Jeffrey Flinn]

aktango58 is right......painfull to watch........many others in same scenario not around anymore.

[eaglepilot]

I disagree that it was benign...


...I feel bad for all the folks, but man it was obvious that the plane was out of it's useful element long before liftoff.

I used the word benign because it seemed so familiar, some guys out for a dinner flight in their buddy's airplane. Something I have done myself...but not with the same results.

I wonder how many of us would have aborted the takeoff/flight given that nothing dramatic was happening, just lack of performance on the way to the crash site. Was there a clear point in that flight that said 100% that they were not going to make it? Had the pilot flown the plane close to the limits before and gotten away with it?

Remember too that they had flown in earlier in the day (as per the description), so the pilot probably felt like the plane was capable.

I had the same sense of a flight being benign before the problem, in the video of the two unfortunates that did not survive a rising terrian/density altitude accident in 1984 in Colorado. They were just flying around, looking at the scenery and commenting, then suddenly they were in trouble.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=316_1249535759

Sometimes the things that bite you in the a** don't appear sinister, just benign

[C-90 Cub]

I agree. He flew a long time and just kept heading for the trees knowing that the airplane was really struggling. Beyond the trees were mountains. Never added any flaps either. Not condemning..........and it's easy to sit here and watch and say I would have done this or that, but sure seemed like he had plenty of flat ground to do a shallow 180, fly a low pattern, and get back on the runway. Then try it again the next morning. Maybe he was a flat lander and that was his first encounter with high density altutude. Tough lesson.

Steve

Steve

[WWhunter]

This incident and accompanying video was just on the CBS morning show. Glad they are all walking and talking today.

[mvivion]

Consider the survival aspects, let alone the obvious performance or lack therof.....

Portable GPS on the yoke, portable GPS in pilot's side of windshield....No shoulder harnesses. I know of at least one accident where a portable GPS in one of those positions was the proximate cause of death WITH shoulder harnesses.

Passengers properly dressed for a "wilderness" flight? Shorts and T-Shirt wouldn't provide much protection if they'd got a little further prior to crash and had to spend the night. Night-time at that elevation can easily lead to hypothermia, even in summer.

They were all VERY lucky.

There but for the grace of God go I.....

MTV

[SchulerJL]

This brings up a question: I have an inertia reel shoulder harness - Fixed has to be better, but how hard is it to grab the flap handle? Anybody have a fixed shoulder harness?

[Henny]

This brings up a question: I have an inertia reel shoulder harness - Fixed has to be better, but how hard is it to grab the flap handle? Anybody have a fixed shoulder harness?

I've got a fixed harness and never had an issue with reaching the flap handle. It's more of a small shift to the left than a lean forward to grab the handle when the flaps are up. 2:45 of the video below shows going from first to second notch of flaps and then putting them up when coming off the step:

[SchulerJL]

Thanks Henny - like your videos by the way - I have been thinking of changing. I don't trust that Inertia thing.

[PatínLoco]

Yeah, hard to watch, but grateful that all are OK. I just don't understand how this pilot continued his attempt to take off after such a long take off run, AND after the airplane lifted off and then settled back down. That plane wasn't going to fly!!! High DA, probably over gross, small engine ... all spells one thing, it's not the time to fly!! Maybe later, maybe in the morning.<br /><br />I lived 20 in Florida, and then moved to Colorado. What a wake up call this density altitude. From not having to worry about it, or even thinking about it, to (after Wx) the most important issue to consider before every flight. I'm glad I had the experience, and a very experienced mountain flyer who spent several hours in my cockpit showing me the intricacies of mountain/ high DA flying. One day he took me to High County Airport in Leadville, CO, the highest airport in the US at an altitude of 9,927 feet. I found out that there is a flight school up there, but it only operates from 6am to 9am. Later than that, the DA is much too high for their 172s even though the strip is 6,400' long. They told me that in the summer, the DA is higher than the ceiling for most small GA aircraft. Now that's an eye opener.<br /><br />Now, going back to the video. I'm glad I watched it. I am sure that most of us would have set that plane down after such a long attempt at take off, and specially after lifting a few feet off the ground and had the aircraft settle back down. For some reason, I seem to need these reminders once in a while, that if I'm not careful, it could happen to me.

Eduardo

[mvivion]

This brings up a question: I have an inertia reel shoulder harness - Fixed has to be better, but how hard is it to grab the flap handle? Anybody have a fixed shoulder harness?

I experienced a catastrophic engine failure in the mountains, and the airplane cartwheeled on landing. I had BAS harnesses in a Cessna 185 and didn't even get strap rash, though the "arrival"was anything but smooth. See
http://www.basinc-aeromod.com/ and look at the pictures and read the testimonials. Mines in there.

Inertial reels are designed to lock up with sudden motion.

In the accident I noted re the portable gps, the pilot had fixed harnesses, which he'd obviously loosened at some point, probably for comfort. The beauty of inertial reels is they move around with your body's movements until you move quickly.

Fixed are better than none, but GOOD inertial reel systems are orders of magnitude better overall.

If they arent snug, they can't save your life and snug fixed harnesses get uncomfortable after a while.

MTV

[OVEREASYGUY]

My take on this:
If once this guy left the ground he leveled off and got up to 80 mph - then climbed out once he got to the last tree line - he would have been fine!
Once he knew he was going into the trees, if he had pulled on one notch of flaps, lowered the nose and skimmed the tree tops, perhaps even began a slow 180 degree turn so he could fly back over the runway - he might have made it?
with a full load, maintaining the angle of attach he did just didn't allow him to gain enough speed - my guess is he never got above 60 mph and with that load - that was just not enough.
That's what I like about super cubs - they are just about impossible to overload.
Truly an amazing piece of video. I try hard to always run my camera on take off and landings - just in case!
it's sad when accidents happen which could have so easily been avoided!
Fully loaded, hot day, what in hell was this pilot thinking? It seams so obvious to me - take off, once airborne (20 feet off the ground) level off, gain loads of speed, then climb out as the tree line approaches. That was one long ass stretch before they hit solid tree cover! Why no flaps? What's up with that?
I doubt he thought to flip the master switch off just before going down! That would have reduced the odds of fire radically! Perhaps on such a take off flipping the master off to begin with might be a good idea? Heavy load, hot weather, nasty trees to land in if things don't work? What's the master switch on going to do for him? Only thing I can think of is a quick yell for help might have gotten out on the radio?
Well that's sure a video which will be watched a million times over!
Fly safe and fly safer when you have friends with you!
Cliff in Maine

[eagledriver]

Glad they are okay. The interesting thing I caught in the slow motion part of the video was that he did not give up flying the airplane. His hands are on the yoke at impact and appeared to continue to try to be steady. That may have played into their ability to walk away from the accident.

[aktango58]

Cliff,

Respectfully, your post belays a lack of understanding and experience with hight density altitude. The guy did try to gain airspeed, and did keep it low... watch as he turns slightly to go between the trees early on.

Once above the trees, he could have pointed the nose down and gained speed, but once he got to tree top level, (which was not far below), he would need to level off and would lose speed while trying to maintain altitude.

Crashing in a turn is not a good idea.

The plane needed to be turned around over the flat ground, or takeoff aborted really, and done so very carefully. Once over the trees, it was going to crash.

You think a cub can not be overloaded and crashed in density altitude????

Warning, weight can bring a cub down in ways you would not even consider. Thinking otherwise is dangerous.

[Anne]

Maybe he didn't want to make a turn back because he thought he might stall-spin? In any case, it's sad, and something we're all learning from (or being reminded of). Thanks for the discussion, from a flatlander at 840' MSL.

Anne.

[ndill]

Just goes to show that we as both humans and pilots can talk ourselves into anything.

[sjohnson]

I've flown into Bruce Meadows at least a dozen times (like many locals) and, other than its elevation, consider it one of the more benign airstrips in the Idaho backcountry. The runway is 5000' long, gravelly but relatively smooth and unobstructed. It gets wet on the west end every spring, but looked mostly dried out in the video (there's water in the ditches to either side). The interesting thing to me is what factors might have led the pilot into doing the takeoff. The owner is located in Boise, so for this purpose, assume he's familiar with the area.

I assume the temperatures were about 75* F at around 2 pm that day, but could easily have been higher, giving a density altitude in the 9000' range (field elevation is 6370). It appeared that he had 3 large adult men in the plane, we don't know his fuel load, but I assume he was pretty close to gross at around 2400 lbs.

I used a Archer manual (I know, but I don't have a Stinson manual), which is for a fixed pitch, 180 HP airplane with flaps. The takeoff performance is literally off the charts, as in poor. Extrapolating, he would need 3400' - 4000' of ground roll, depending on flaps, for dry pavement. It appears from the video that that's about what he used. After takeoff, he could expect 300 fpm climb performance. We don't know which engine or prop was actually on the Stinson, but 180 hp with a cruise prop seems common. It is doubtful his performance was much better than this.

The terrain immediately around the strip is relatively open, and looks flat in the valleys leading to the west and southwest. It actually rises a bit, but climbing 500' or so should clear the trees and get you to lower terrain. I suspect this is why he went ahead and made the takeoff.

For me, personally, I wouldn't takeoff with these numbers, especially given the swirly conditions in mid afternoon. But how often do we actually check? He'd probably been there before, it didn't feel that hot (especially relative to Boise, which was in the nineties by that time), the terrain is not challenging, winds were generally light, and the Stinson has good slow airspeed performance. It's a good reminder, for me, that its not just about getting the plane off the runway. Adequate control and cllimbout performance is required, too.

Setting a ground roll limit helps. The long ground roll in the video had me groaning. Setting a limit at 2500', given the long runway, would have prevented this, even without checking the numbers.

[eaglepilot]

A Poster in another forum has a 108-1 manual and he notes: Assuming 6300 foot pressure elevation and just 70 degrees, my 108-1 manual (15 less hp but calculated at a gross weight 170 pounds less than the 108-3 in question) shows a takeoff distance off the chart (greater than 5,500 feet).

Further info shows: The FAA lists that N-number having a 165 Frank. It certainly sounded like a Franklin in the video as well.

Also noted-It appears like the mixture is full rich at the start of the takeoff roll.

My points-so many factors that went into the final result. I remember from my training days being taught that if density altitude is even a question, after referring to the POH and satisfying yourself that flight is possible, mark off 50% of the runway available (visually, mentally, or on foot), and if you are not at 75% of takeoff speed at that point, abort, turn around, shut down and recalculate. I would like to hear from others if there are any other rules of thumb they might use.

[eaglepilot]

From the comment stream on the video-

"Many posts have stated that they were overweight, but that is probably not true. The Stinson 108-3 typically has a useful load of 1000# and when full fuel A(50 Gal) is subtracted, you still have 700# of payload. As Bruce Meadows has no fuel on the field,it is very unlikely that they had full tanks. Looking at a pic of those on board, it appears that only the pilot would weigh around 200#, so the aircraft was below, although near gross weight.

Field elevation is 6370 feet

According to National Weather Service historical data weather at time of takeoff was:
82 degrees F.
Dewpoint 29 degrees F
Altimeter 29.92

With this information, I calculated a density altitude of 9307 ft.

As an owner and pilot of Stinsons for many years, I would never have attempted a takeoff under those conditions. In that situation, the aircraft will not climb out of ground effect until it reaches at least 100 mph, indicated airspeed. The ONLY way he could have successfully taken off would be to perform a normal takeoff, level off in ground effect (within 1 wingspan of the ground) and accelerate until he had enough airspeed to climb. From the video, you can easily see he rotated and maintained substantial pitch up attitude from rotation to hitting the trees. You can also see there was no loss of altitude, no "air pocket". He just mushed the thing into the trees.

Posted by: StinsonMike "

[eaglepilot]

Here's more info



From the poster of the picture-

"This image illustrates the problem the pilot had flying in high density altitude conditions. It appears that the pitch attitude is about 17 degrees, while the aircraft is not gaining altitude. Even if the measurement here is off by a degree or two, it's obvious that the aircraft was flying just short of stall.

Note to self: if ever in a situation like this, land on the remaining runway; or land in the field before the trees; and try to crash as well as these guys did."


My point-I note in video from Camera 2 (min 7:00), that the underside of the wing is vibrating, perhaps due to disturbed air from the wing flying close to stall (or is that normal?)

[N85DZ]

From AvWeb "Gropp had been involved in another accident in 2010, also while flying a passenger. In that incident, Gropp found himself low on fuel and elected to land the Cessna 150D he was flying at an alternate airport short of his planned destination. The aircraft reportedly attempted a landing at Smiley Creek airstrip, where the runway was covered in snow and flipped over almost immediately. Neither Gropp or his passenger were seriously injured."

[mvivion]

An important point: Just because the weight and balance report for your aircraft provides 1000 pounds of useful load, that fact has NOTHING to do with whether the airplane can actually fly at that weight (GW) in any given set of circumstances. That's what those performance tables are for. Unfortunately, many older a/c and most modified aircraft (think engine change, wing extensions, etc) provide little if any performance data.

Thats when we all need to do some of that "pilot stuff".

MTV

[barbwire]

My first plane was a 108-3 with the 165 Franklin. I am sure many of you have flown them or learned in one. Very solid plane and fun to fly but very underpowered.
My strip is at 1300 ft elevation And only 600 ft. Long. On a hot summer day by myself I would have trouble getting out. Never with full fuel.
Density alt. on a hot day could exceed 3500 ft and mine required leaning to achieve max rpm's

Useful load on mine was less than 500 lbs. with full fuel!! It was metal so some of the fabric are a little lighter and would have a little more useful load.
Io
To bad it was a beautiful plane ------Just glad everyone was ok.

[Toothcarpenter]

Wait! Hot day. 4 people, Some fuel, high altitude, What's missing here? Does this guy have a turbine on his Stinson? I cannot think of any decent words with which to describe my disgust with this pilot. Guys like this smear all of us with their do do. Whats missing here, is common sense and respect for the lives of others. This guy has wanton disregard for the lives of his son, and friends. Man, none of us needs friends like that. We need friends we can trust with our welfare. Bruce Meadows, is so big, that since he decided to give it a try, he had all kinds of room to figure out that it wasn't going to work, and stop it before leaving mother earth. The media, keeps quoting the admiring statements of the son and passengers. I can't find much to admire about someone who is just about to kill me? Someone in this thread, said something about turning around. I would like to know how you turn around in an aircraft that won't fly out of ground effect. With a density altitude like it was that day, all the pilots I know, would have been strongly urging the so called pilot, to not go, and any potential passenger, to not get in. If this guy is so driven to fly somewhere, or alternately to get recognized in the Darwin's Awards, then he should fly by himself to McCall, or Cascade, and send a competent pilot, with 300 horsepower, and a turbo, to go get his son and friends, one or two, or three at a time, in a manner and time, judged to be safe by a competent pilot. Sending someone to pick them up, would have been a lot less expensive than a broken airplane, and jaw. I hope this guy, rushes directly from the hospital to the nearest outlet for lottery tickets. I have seen situations where the pilot went up by himself, first to get a sense of the performance at the time, and then hauled his passengers out one at a time. Now, a choice like that, would be admirable. I'd like to know if he even thought about the effects of density altitude that day. Good grief Charlie Brown. Time for this dude to turn in his ticket, and take up something he is competent at, and unlikely to hurt any of the rest of us. Un Freekin Believable. Let him fly the plane by the front door of the super market. That's it!! I guess I'm harsh. Man, dying is harsh. Killing your son is harsh. Killing your friends is harsh!!

[aktango58]

Tooth,

It is possible that the guy just landed with that load, and did not realize the change in DA over a half hour there... Yes it is a mistake, but all pilots make them.

As far as turning around in ground effect, come on up and I will show you. There was plenty of time and area to make a turn, just not a steep one.

[12 Geezer]

Yeah, maybe enough room to turn - maybe. But WHY? There was certainly PLENTY of room to set back down straight ahead, even on the rougher ground after the strip was used up - - - I don't agree with turning in this situation, which was already critical. Just one monday-morning-quarterbacking opinion - - -

[FdxLou]

"Stuck on stupid."

Lou

[ndill]

Wait! Hot day. 4 people, Some fuel, high altitude, What's missing here? Does this guy have a turbine on his Stinson? I cannot think of any decent words with which to describe my disgust with this pilot. Guys like this smear all of us with their do do. Whats missing here, is common sense and respect for the lives of others. This guy has wanton disregard for the lives of his son, and friends. Man, none of us needs friends like that. We need friends we can trust with our welfare. Bruce Meadows, is so big, that since he decided to give it a try, he had all kinds of room to figure out that it wasn't going to work, and stop it before leaving mother earth. The media, keeps quoting the admiring statements of the son and passengers. I can't find much to admire about someone who is just about to kill me? Someone in this thread, said something about turning around. I would like to know how you turn around in an aircraft that won't fly out of ground effect. With a density altitude like it was that day, all the pilots I know, would have been strongly urging the so called pilot, to not go, and any potential passenger, to not get in. If this guy is so driven to fly somewhere, or alternately to get recognized in the Darwin's Awards, then he should fly by himself to McCall, or Cascade, and send a competent pilot, with 300 horsepower, and a turbo, to go get his son and friends, one or two, or three at a time, in a manner and time, judged to be safe by a competent pilot. Sending someone to pick them up, would have been a lot less expensive than a broken airplane, and jaw. I hope this guy, rushes directly from the hospital to the nearest outlet for lottery tickets. I have seen situations where the pilot went up by himself, first to get a sense of the performance at the time, and then hauled his passengers out one at a time. Now, a choice like that, would be admirable. I'd like to know if he even thought about the effects of density altitude that day. Good grief Charlie Brown. Time for this dude to turn in his ticket, and take up something he is competent at, and unlikely to hurt any of the rest of us. Un Freekin Believable. Let him fly the plane by the front door of the super market. That's it!! I guess I'm harsh. Man, dying is harsh. Killing your son is harsh. Killing your friends is harsh!!

I don't think your being harsh at all. Why anyone in their right mind would depart an airport at that altitude, with that load, in that aircraft without having a
hard look at the performance tables is indefensable. And he had a commercial ticket to boot.

[Toothcarpenter]

I have spent some time, years ago, flying a PA18, 150 horse, with Sorenson belly tank and spray booms, real close to the ground under power lines and over fences. Loaded, on a warm day, that thing was a pig. I am not particularly afraid of maneuvering close to the ground, but I sure don't want to do it at density altitude above 10,000 feet, in a Stinson, and with my son and two friends along for the ride. Lets assume the pilot did come in and land a half hour before he decided to depart. Wouldn't a landing like that, impress most of us, to take some caution in departing? The temperatures don't go from 60 to 100, in a half hour. Unless that Stinson was repowered, an early morning departure at low temperatures, with that kind of load at 6500 feet, would, I think, concern most of us. I have personally flown my Comanche, and C182 out that strip with four people on board. One mildly warm day, with the C182, flying rafters, out of Bruce Meadows, into Indian Creek, it was a real dog, and taking more than one person at a time with their gear did not leave a lot of margin. I have ridden with some of those guys who live in those canyons, day in and day out. They are better than I am, and their margins are closer. I was quite happy to be sitting in the right seat. I keep wondering if we will lose our back country privileges, because too many accidents are happening, and some time some advanced thinking person, or persons, along with their ambulance chasing lawyers, will start suing the state, for providing us all with these attractive nuisance, back country airstrips. The logic will be; Don't you think the state could spend our tax dollars, on something safer, which benefits a larger segment of the tax paying population of the State of Idaho??. I don't know.....Just thinking. We cannot personally curb the foolishness of other people, but we can as a community be so safety conscious, and talk it up so much to our flying acquaintances, that the numbers of avoidable accidents are significantly reduced. My thoughts......I am personally impacted every time someone augers in, and ......I am done mouthing off about this.

[Grant]

My thoughts......I am personally impacted every time someone augers in

Agreed....

[ndill]

Agreed....

+1 while I can forgive someone for a small miscalculation. I just can't excuse gross incompetence.

[spinner2]

I appreciate the passenger being willing to post the video so that we all could learn from it. With all of the negative comments this has received I wonder if he would do so again?

Personally I think the DA issue should be something the CFI's stress during a BFR, especially with pilots that they know fly underpowered 4 seat airplanes.

It reminds me of a flight I took as a passenger in a Cherokee Six quite a few years ago. We were in Colorado Springs during the summer. We left around mid-day and through a miscommunication with the line crew, took on more fuel than the pilot had intended. It was hot, probably in the 90's, and our climb performance with five people on board was very poor. The pilot kept the nose low even when the terrain was rising and we gained enough airspeed to get a positive rate of climb. It was an eye opener for me as a young student pilot at the time. I hope I don't ever forget it.

I wish the video poster had included more information about the post-crash rescue. Did the ELT go off, did someone else see the crash and help?

[fabricfan]

I am not a fan of government getting involved with everything, but this pilot could have easily been charged with something criminal if he were operating a boat or vehicle while negligently putting people in danger. He definitely violated many rules and ethics. Shameful.

[eaglepilot]

I wish the video poster had included more information about the post-crash rescue. Did the ELT go off, did someone else see the crash and help?

Here's a followup interview with the pilot's son, one of the passengers. Gives a lot of post crash info.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/2012/0...-disaster.html

A small point, the son says that his Dad turned the aircraft at the last second so that the pilot would take the brunt of the impact, yet the video shows the airplane went into the trees right wing low indicating a right turn. My guess is: at that point there was a loss of control, and the pilot had no ability to influence which side of the aircraft went into the trees first.

[eaglepilot]

Okay, so here's a question....if the airport is at a density altitude of 9,500, does the thin air affect the pilot's judgement, before flight?

We know that we don't fly over 10,000 ft (in Canada) for extended periods due to hypoxia concerns, could someone be affected at 9,500, perhaps if they have respiratory issues? My gut says yes, but I'd like to hear from others.