• If You Are Having Trouble Logging In with Your Old Username and Password, Please use this Forgot Your Password link to get re-established.
  • Hey! Be sure to login or register!

Oops, darn it...

My airport neighbor and mentor Jim Webster (26K+ hr pilot) told me once while flying a Goose for Weber in Ketchikan, he flew around an island twice thinking he was making headway towards a village before he recognized the visibility problem. He died at Teshepuk Lake near Barrow in May 2020 while turning close to terrain allegedly in a flat light flight at night.

Even the best die young. Now how do we propose to teach the young to accept that challenge and avoid/overcome? Stay VFR is my recommendation.

Gary
 
If I select the chart view for Garmin Pilot I can zoom out and see the entire State of Alaska with no page borders. I can zoom in and scroll in any direction to whatever I’m looking for. With a simple tap of a finger I can switch that view to the familiar topo format and view areas or routes in that format. Can’t do that with paper. However you look it it we’re viewing information. The computer (gps, glass panel, iPhone) provides more of it in a more versatile package. If a guy can’t operate a device in a stressful situation he lacks training and/or familiarity with the device.

PS- I really like synthetic vision, too. My primary flight instrument view on my G3X is overlaid on synthetic vision. I rarely look at the moving map view. I usually keep the iPhone on the moving map screen and rarely use it, but it’s nice to glance at when vis is down, like when flying into the sun in smoke. In my steam gauge plane the iPad remains in moving map. I’ve never needed synthetic vision on that screen. My honest opinion of the utility of the information format between the two planes? Advantage G3X. No question about it.
 
Local ATP watched the Beaver at Lake Hood. Appeared to stall or loose lift, but then only the pilot knows for sure. Big load for the Katmai area. Nobody wins in a challenge like that.

Gary
 
BC12D-4-85 said:
Local ATP watched the Beaver at Lake Hood. Appeared to stall or loose lift, but then only the pilot knows for sure. Big load for the Katmai area. Nobody wins in a challenge like that.

Gary
Click to expand...
The winds were gusting out of the southeast all day the day of the accident. I took off on 25L at PANC several times during the day and was just getting beaten up. It was not fun flying.
 
Brian M said:
Any intel on the cub crashes? I spotted a bent plane on a strip I intended to land on yesterday, but couldn't land to verify nobody inside. Ended up calling the RCC to report it, figured nothing came of it since I didn't see anything in the paper. Still, can't help but be curious.
Click to expand...

ADN has an article. One by Tustumena lake with 2 on board, one by chakachamna with 1 on board. Nat guard picked up the peeps from both.
 
Odd place for that Beaver to end up. That route takes the planes over the E-W channel, not the slow taxi channel. Why didn't he keep nose to the wind for the normal route? Nobody who flies at Hood is unfamiliar with the SE winds. It doesn't make sense to me, but I guess accident videos rarely do. I'm happy the results weren't worse.
 
Last edited:
stewartb said:
Odd place for that Beaver to end up. That route takes the planes over the E-W channel, not the slow taxi channel. Why didn't he keep nose to the wind for the normal route? Nobody who flies at Hood is unfamiliar with the SE winds. It doesn't make sense to me, but I guess accident videos rarely do. I'm happy the results weren't worse.
Click to expand...

We waited all morning to launch the cubs but held off due to the SE winds running anywhere from 10 to 16 at about 190 which isn’t the worst but it occasionally would swing to 250 gusting into the 20s.

That swing in direction was the concern I had, as your quartering headwind can turn to a sudden gusting tailwind.

My 2 cents worth on the Beaver accident is that he was hit by a strong gust as he lifted off, which drifted him over the slow taxi canal. A stronger gust shifted to his tail while at slow speed and lost his lift.

In the video you see the tail drop. My thinking is that was when the gust hit him.
 
BC12D-4-85 said:
Not many options there once airborne. Lower the nose maybe, the rest is luck.

Gary
Click to expand...

Lower the nose for sure. I hate second guessing other pilots - I can't say that I would have done better in that situation - but it sure looked like the stall warning signs were there. Amazing there were no fatalities.
 
stewartb said:
Odd place for that Beaver to end up. That route takes the planes over the E-W channel, not the slow taxi channel. Why didn't he keep nose to the wind for the normal route? Nobody who flies at Hood is unfamiliar with the SE winds. It doesn't make sense to me, but I guess accident videos rarely do. I'm happy the results weren't worse.
Click to expand...

Don't know the site but the video appeared to show a low altitude downwind turn. While the experts know the dangers of downwind turns are mythical I have never accepted that. At low altitude the movement of the aircraft over the ground is a strong input to the pilot's senses whether he wants it to be or not.

Not much doubt the aircraft stalled while there was still altitude available for acceleration. I saw no attempt to lower the nose.
 
"At low altitude the movement of the aircraft over the ground is a strong input to the pilot's senses whether he wants it to be or not."

Agreed, but it can be dealt with, and is no reason to blame the wind.

I've gotten into a few internet squabbles about turning "downwind." Most recently on a crash in a large RC sailplane, that simply turned downwind too close to the ridge and then stalled. Several "experts" weighed in on the wind being the cause, I opined that it was loss of airspeed and being too close to the ridge. Kind of the same thing, but not really of course. I was also told to NEVER turn into the ridge when ridge soaring, "everybody knows that!" Again, I said into the ridge downwind turns are perfectly safe, with adequate room and a maintained airspeed. Then there was a pilot on the Av Web newsletter...., I'm amazed on how often this myth pops up to this day, and I can't help mouthing off about it! It gets perpetuated every time a crash like this Beaver one happens, the cause wasn't turning downwind, the cause was loss of airspeed with not enough room to drop the nose and gain some (though it looked like he could have, but having zero Beaver time I'll digress.) But I do have a lot of hang glider and UL time, very close to ridges while soaring (yeah I know, said it here before) but maybe that's why I get fired up when I hear the myth repeated once again. It's kind of like saying "the crash was caused by too much air in the fuel tanks."
 
For the unfamiliar, the standard route has planes fly over the E-W channel outbound, which is the stretch of water closest to the camera. Most pilots will clean the plane up while staying low and gathering speed down that channel and then climb once over Lake Spenard. Gusty southeast winds and the subsequent mechanical turbulence are common. Airspeed is life. Nothing about this video makes sense to guys that fly Lake Hood. I have no doubt a gust hit the plane. I have every doubt that a gust caused the accident. As an air taxi pilot friend told me yesterday, this hurts every operator at Hood, not just Regal.
 
Very sad. The plane launched out of the water like a scalded cat and rocketed up to altitude in record time... where it appears to have run out of energy.

Even in the wheel 206's I was beating it into our pilots (when room and terrain allow)- to stay low to the runway and let that airspeed build well above Vy before climbing out. Most flights are paid to go from point to point- the faster you travel across the ground, the better for the bottom line. Higher speed on climb cools the engines, gives you some room for gusts, and can get you there faster.

Stewart, I have the same questions... why would someone climb and turn so fast, (Chandelle?), instead of utilizing the waterway to the east to gain speed/altitude. These accidents tend to put fear into the traveling public, and business suffers.

Godspeed to everyone involved. Sad all around.
 
No expert in DHC-2's. Back in 1977 I flew one on wheel skis and then floats for a summer. Checkout involved lots of various stalls. I recall them being brisk, especially with flaps. Don't recall the rudder's effectiveness. It was rolloff and looking at the moose time until recovered with lots of weight and drag involved. I've heard the STOL kits and VG's can help.

Someone at the airport mentioned they can torque roll when slow. Big prop and engine. Don't know.

Gary
 
Last edited:
It was startling how nose high the Beaver was from the moment it appeared in view. What do you suppose the climb angle was?

Nose low if you want to go; nose high if you want to die.

Tragic, whatever the cause. IMO: exceeded aft cg limits or very bad piloting skills. No offense intended.
 
Classic case of a Cessna pilot flying a Beaver...... If you want to go UP with a Dehaviland wing: pump flaps down more, if you want to go DOWN pull nose up more. The airplane beged him to lower the nose....... He never did. Glad he didn't kill everyone. When the first wing buffet to stall all he had to do was drop the nose level and push both levers all the way forward and he had plenty of altitude to save that Beaver........ Horrible mistake imho.
Looks like a classic "low time in a Beaver" mistake from the movie. They are extremely luck it turned out as well as it did. Trying to blame this on the wind is BS excuse....... Look at water surface in the high speed channel? It wasn't
THAT windy.......jmo
E
 
Not recalling much about a Beaver stall (45 yrs ago) I looked up a couple threads from Canada>

http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopic.php?t=119645
http://www.avcanada.ca/forums2/viewtopic.php?t=121744

"In the controlled conditions of certification, the stalling of the DHC-2 was described as gentle. However, as is the case for many other aircraft, a stall in a steep turn under power triggers an Incipient spin with few or no signs of an impending stall, and the flight path changes from horizontal to vertical. In low-altitude flight, stalling followed by incipient spin, no matter how brief, prevents the pilot from regaining control of the aircraft before impact with the ground."

I guess the best aid is rigorous training with exposure to maneuvers when loaded, configured, and under power.

Gary
 
I was checked out in the Beaver by a very experienced deHavilland pilot. We did lots of stalls, plus executing quite steep turns. His mantra was: “Never try to turn a Beaver close to the ground without a good bit of flap deployed.” His point was a lot of pilots killed themselves in Beavers going into a pass and not configuring the plane prior to a turn. Takes some monkey motion to lower flaps: select flaps down, then start pumping.

I never thought the plane had any nasty stall characteristics. But, it’s folks like this guy who created the “need” for the Barron wing.

This guy never gave that plane a chance. It’s almost unbelievable nobody died.

MTV
 
https://ntrs.nasa.gov/api/citations/19740013521/downloads/19740013521.pdf

If interested in the Beaver's NACA 64A416-4416 airfoil have a read. Note the "brisk" loss of lift during the stall with various flap extensions vs retracted.

Edit: From the DHC-2's Op Manual p. 42:

"The stall is gentle at all normal conditions of load and flap and may be anticipated by a slight vibration, which increases as the flap is lowered. The aircraft will pitch if no yaw is present. If yaw is permitted, the aircraft has a tendency to roll. Prompt corrective action must be initiated to prevent a roll from developing."

Here's another report from a similar float accident - full power created yaw (P-factor?) and resulting roll into the yaw (torque roll or fuselage blanking part of the inboard wing's lift?) is the common factor with low airspeed wind over the rudder and wing controls :

"During the attempted overshoot, the rapid application of full power caused the aircraft to yaw to the left, and a left roll quickly developed. This movement, in combination with a high angle of attack and low airspeed, likely caused the aircraft to stall.

Gary
 
Last edited:
I was checked out in the Beaver by a very experienced deHavilland pilot. We did lots of stalls, plus executing quite steep turns. His mantra was: “Never try to turn a Beaver close to the ground without a good bit of flap deployed.” His point was a lot of pilots killed themselves in Beavers going into a pass and not configuring the plane prior to a turn. Takes some monkey motion to lower flaps: select flaps down, then start pumping.

I never thought the plane had any nasty stall characteristics. But, it’s folks like this guy who created the “need” for the Barron wing.

This guy never gave that plane a chance. It’s almost unbelievable nobody died.

MTV
 
S2D said:
Downwind turn to boot !!!!!
Click to expand...

If a young pilot, I wonder if his GPS had groundspeed prominently displayed?

Not much is said about ground obstructions, but this is a fine example that I believe had a big impact on the final results.

A heavy plane like a loaded Beaver does not accelerate quickly, it has about 15% less horsepower to weight ratio than a 2000 pound 150 cub. When taking off this beaver had a quartering headwind and turned to give himself a slight downwind...

While low and on the water the winds were obstructed by buildings at TS international and even more from hangars surrounding the lake. Those obstructions block the airflow low, but also push the airflow up- at some point in a climb there will be a windshear where the plane enters the higher velocity undisturbed air above the obstructions. If you are low and slow, facing downwind a all, that shear can be almighty scary; like climbing above the trees and finding a slight tailwind as you try to out climb the trees at the end.

Amongst the other things going on, it appears the climb stopped just above the buildings where that slight wind shear would be.

I don't get a good enough quality of video to see control surfaces, but the plane got slow, which is not a good look for a loaded beaver.

MTV: flap selector should be set to 'down' unless raising flaps, Correct? That is one of the teachings of all the old timers I flew with. But agree that pilots need to think ahead when flying these beasts. The good thing is that unless the windscreen is full of ground, it is close to flap speed, so as soon as you roll into a turn and give a touch of pressure your speed is low enough to start pumping flaps, but you better be pumping quick because that 110 MPH stall is coming.
 
I have taken off from Lake Hood in similar conditions with a similar load, though boxes of tools were substituted for some of the passengers. I am amazed in watching that video at how early he was off the water. The wind didn't look to be strong enough to be airborne that early, let alone as high up as he got. But without the actual numbers, just puzzling it out loud based on what little I know. What I see in that video doesn't make sense at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Alex Clark
I wonder what the deal is with this J-5 ?
Replies
1
Views
1K
Dough Head
Dough Head
rcsimpson
A real "Bush" plane?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Alex Clark
Alex Clark
G
Wonder if a Cub was the sling load?
Replies
11
Views
3K
mvivion
mvivion
FlipFlop
You'all be careful out there, ya hear?...
23 24 25
Replies
740
Views
252K
aktango58
aktango58
Ruidoso Ron
Lost a great friend yesterday.
Replies
13
Views
4K
Carbon Cub Chick
Carbon Cub Chick
Back
Top