quote:

Originally posted by trapper189:

I hope it wasn’t your friend.

No sir, this was a different Bonanza. I did not know that until the N-number was mentioned here.

Bonanza is a good bird, we built a lot of them here. Can't say the same for the pilots or the mechanics.

The approach to the ground in both the video and the one still showing impact is way too steep to be a good controlled approach. However, the article mentions clipping a power line. It is always better to touch down under control with as little impact as possible, but it is hard to know whether the pilot had lost control of the airplane earlier, or was on track to make the best of a poor situation when he hit wires and everything went pear shaped.
In any case, a horrible mess.

quote:

It is always better to touch down under control with as little impact as possible

I remember my first flight instructor telling me, years ago (summer of 1964), "If you have to make a forced landing off airport, aim for the biggest, softest, cheapest thing that you can find."

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:

Barring a heavy cargo load aft, which is always a possibility, it is not possible for weight and balance to be out of limits with two people in front.

That's not the point.

Weight and balance is about more than just balance. It's also about weight. Weight equates to performance. One can be well within the envelope, yet face performance issues under full power: density altitude is one such factor that plays against weight.

With an engine out, weight also impacts stall speed, and glide, which becomes THE critical factor in attempting a return to land, or seeking a place to land, including the speed of approach, and the required distance to put the airplane down.

Most pilots do not practice engine-out approaches to land, especially off field, and expect their approach path and approach to land to be what they see in the traffic pattern. It is not. Most instructors do NOT teach off field landings. They address it verbally, but have never made one themselves, nor have they ever had a student do it. Most pilots, private, commercial, ATP, have never made an off airport landing. The first time they are exposed to it is an emergency, which is the absolute worst time to be learning something for the first time.

When pilots do practice engine-out work, they seldom do it at gross weight.

Experiencing an engine-out situation, especially in a single engine airplane, whether a complete power loss of partial power loss, is NOT the same as retarding power in the traffic pattern, with or without an instructor on board, and saying "can you make the numbers?" Not remotely so.

One may very well be within the weight and balance envelope, but still be critical due to weight. We do not know what was carried in addition to two people. We do not know the fuel load. We do not know the balance. Facts are not in evidence, yet speculation is rife. Guesswork.

Ironically, aviation is all about NOT guessing. We don't guess at fuel requirements, airspeeds, weight, balance, weather, clearances, etc. In fact, legally, if we don't know, we're required to find out, and we're responsible for every facet and every detail. We're responsible to know, not to guess. Good airmanship, then, is to not speculate, and to not guess, but to examine the facts alone, and refrain from guesswork until facts are in evidence. Even if one has a popular youtube channel.

According to the generally reliable AvWeb, the pilot attempted a 180* turn to land on Rwy 28L immediately after taking off from Rwy 10L


"Local reports are saying that the aircraft took off from North Perry Airport in Hollywood, Florida, on Runway 10 Left. It appears the Bonanza had engine trouble and the pilot attempted a 180-degree turn to land on Runway 28 Left, which displaced is less than 1500 feet south of the departure runway. Images from the Ring camera show the Bonanza, with the gear still up, in a steepening right bank toward the runway, just miss the roof of a house and then make hard contact with the SUV, which was driving north on SW 72nd Avenue. The airplane’s right wing appears to have been breached and a plume of fuel spray can be seen on the video. Before sliding to the airport perimeter fence, the airplane catches fire. In other images from the scene, the engine can be seen torn off the firewall."

Link: https://www.avweb.com/aviation...ught-on-ring-camera/

When I was learning to fly, my instructor would reach over and just yank the mixture to kill the engine. I knew he had picked the field we were going to set down in and I had better been looking for it the whole time. He was a commander in the navy training pilots on twin engines with Cessna O-2 Skymasters.

It was always some crop duster strip out in Plains, GA. Plenty of them, I just had to pick the one we had either passed or over in some obscure corner.

If the foggles went on, I had an engine fire and had to simulate putting it out before he would remove them.

I think I spent more time with the engine off than I did actually flying with him. He said no student would ever be killed for a recoverable forced landing as he had several unplanned landings under his belt, one which balled up a Viking in the trees when the boost pump failed on a tank swap. They walked away just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:

When I was learning to fly, my instructor would reach over and just yank the mixture to kill the engine. I knew he had picked the field we were going to set down in and I had better been looking for it the whole time.

Before I decided to focus on Bonanza / Baron instruction, I did a fair amount of primary instruction at Our Little Airport.

I always thought that the worst time for an engine failure in the light single engine airplanes that were used for primary instruction, was immediately after takeoff. An engine failure at that point would mean that the trainee was no longer flying a powered airplane, s/he would be flying a glider, with little to no energy reserve in terms of altitude and airspeed. This was a situation that I discussed, and then practiced, with my students.

I would tell them that with an engine failure when taking off to the south, an immediate right turn would have them looking at a crop duster's strip.

"What about an engine failure when taking off to the north?" they would ask.

I would reply, "Repeat after me: 'Yitgadal v'yitkadash sh'mei raba'".

For you non-Jews, those are the beginning words of the Kaddish, a prayer that is said when mourning a death.

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
He said no student would ever be killed for a recoverable forced landing as he had several unplanned landings under his belt, one which balled up a Viking in the trees when the boost pump failed on a tank swap. They walked away just fine.

Typical military aviator arrogance, there.

He got lucky. Very lucky.

Any guesses who is the wannabe military pilot who couldn’t make it with the big chip on their shoulder? First guess is free.

A better aviator, one who exercised better airmanship, wouldn't have made a tank swap in a single engine airplane, unless over a location where a forced landing could be made. That's the point. In case you missed it.

Whomever said, "I'd rather be lucky than good," was a fucking idiot.

Your words: Instructors don’t actually train for engine failures effectively, they talk about them. Military instructors actually surprise students constantly with simulated engine losses. Cue the military vs civilian jerk, “well that’s just military arrogance”. Uh, ok.

I’ve flown with guys like you. Your chip on your shoulder always has to try to make your experience and training seem better than the military pipeline. It’s the total little man syndrome. And it’s boring, get over it. Everybody brings something to the table. Leave it at that.

By the way , you would have never made it in the military. I’ve heard the saying I’d rather be lucky than good a million times. It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means.

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
This was a situation that I discussed, and then practiced, with my students.

Last spring, my CFI wasn't as gracious as you are, V-Tail. She didn't discuss - she just pulled the power at 1,000 AGL on departure.

I learned a LOT that day.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:

quote:

Originally posted by Mars_Attacks:
He said no student would ever be killed for a recoverable forced landing as he had several unplanned landings under his belt, one which balled up a Viking in the trees when the boost pump failed on a tank swap. They walked away just fine.

Typical military aviator arrogance, there.

He got lucky. Very lucky.

YOU don't know him. NOTHING about him. He is the LEAST arrogant man I know.


Speaking of arrogance, hi pot, meet kettle.

quote:

Originally posted by VictimNoMore:

quote:

Originally posted by V-Tail:
This was a situation that I discussed, and then practiced, with my students.

Last spring, my CFI wasn't as gracious as you are, V-Tail. She didn't discuss - she just pulled the power at 1,000 AGL on departure.

I learned a LOT that day.

Hmmm . . .

I did say "discussed, and then practiced. Primary students are, by definition, beginners. I have no expectation that they would be prepared to handle an emergency situation that is given as a pop-up with no preparation. The instructor should prepare the student by explaining what will happen, and then demonstrating. Pulling power, out of the blue as it were, with no teaching prior to the act, is not productive.

Once the student has been introduced to this situation and has shown that s/he can handle it, I inform the student that "You know that you can deal with this, so I want you to understand that it can, and probably will, happen when you least expect it."

Thinking back, way back, when I took my first checkride in 1964, the examiner did pull power on takeoff. It was no big deal because my instructor had taught this properly and we had practiced until it was almost routine and no longer an adrenaline-producing event.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
I’ve heard the saying I’d rather be lucky than good a million times. It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means.

Someone had a great quote about luck. I’m sure I’ll totally mangle it, but went something like, “It’s all about luck, and I find the harder I work the better my luck is.”

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Your words: Instructors don’t actually train for engine failures effectively, they talk about them. Military instructors actually surprise students constantly with simulated engine losses. Cue the military vs civilian jerk, “well that’s just military arrogance”. Uh, ok.

Military IP's pull the power and get their students landing on farm roads, abandoned runways, desert surfaces, fields, and other viable forced landing locations? Bullshit. Fucking lies and bullshit. You know that. Don't talk such stupidity.

Military aviators experience the power pulled to flight idle. Whatcha gonna do? That's it. Just like most civilian flying schools.

There's a big difference, and you KNOW it. Don't be a fucking dumbass.

Most military aircraft are not capable of being landed off field; tactical equipment has egress capability. Large transports do not (with the exception of bombers, which do not have a high success rate of egress). The idea of the large aircaft is to get them to a landing site, and single engine and high speed tactical aircraft, to get out when options are exhausted. The military does NOT teach forced landings in their aircraft, helicopters excluded.

You know this.

Light aircraft and general aviation aircraft are another matter entirely, and any instructor who doesn't teach his students to properly handle a forced landing has failed his student. Any instructor that lets a student's first forced landing be in an actual emergency has completely failed the student.

Pulling the power to idle and asking what the student will do, or retarding it to idle in the pattern, abeam the numbers or high key or where ever you chose to do it is NOT the same. Not remotely fucking the same. Apparently you do not know that.

As for the military instructor identified previously, the "captain" giving 0-2 instruction, who taught civilians, bragging about balling up a Bellanca Viking and walking away is NOT skill. Attempting to insinuate otherwise is sheer ignorance. Unwarranted fucking arrogance, too.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
I’ve flown with guys like you.

No. You have not.

You're a fucking southwest pilot with what, a military background? No, you haven't flown with "guys like me." You never will.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
Your chip on your shoulder always has to try to make your experience and training seem better than the military pipeline.

I said nothing of the kind. Those are YOUR words. You eat them. You own them. Speak for yourself. Do not attempt to insert your mealy mouthed bullshit into my comments.

I said nothing about my training, nor have you an inkling, as I haven't discussed it. Again you lie, as you often do.

quote:

Originally posted by pedropcola:
By the way , you would have never made it in the military. I’ve heard the saying I’d rather be lucky than good a million times. It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means.

I know exactly what it meeans, and it's fucking bullshit. That you don't know this speaks volumes.

quote:

Originally posted by slosig:

Someone had a great quote about luck. I’m sure I’ll totally mangle it, but went something like, “It’s all about luck, and I find the harder I work the better my luck is.”

Exactly.

quote:

Originally posted by sns3guppy:


As for the military instructor identified previously, the "captain" giving 0-2 instruction, who taught civilians, bragging about balling up a Bellanca Viking and walking away is NOT skill. Attempting to insinuate otherwise is sheer ignorance. Unwarranted fucking arrogance, too.

Where did I say he BRAGGED about it. He was my vice-principal at the school where I taught. It was common knowledge the plane had a problem and was forced down. He only mentioned it once as a warning of it could happen to me when out solo.



You take the cake with arrogance and rude baseless bullshit.

Wow, I logged on to the Sig Forum to brighten my day and apparently I logged onto Airline Pilot Central Forum instead and landed right in the middle of a civilian vs military shit fest.
This is almost as good as the stuff in the hanger forum of FlightInfo.com.

quote:

civilian vs military shit fest

Yeah, the forecast is for increasing belligerence. Totally unnecessary but aviation topics seem to incite this behavior.

Then there are are silent guys. The gentlemen who strap into USN or USMC airplanes and get shot off the pointy end of a ship, and return for a recovery in shitty weather. These guys are heroes and rarely, if ever, participate in these shit flinging episodes.