Twin Cessna Crash in AR

ARFlyer

En-Route
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Messages
3,182
Location
Central AR
Display Name

Display name:
ARFlyer
A Cessna 310 crashed today in North Little Rock after unknown conditions. It had just departed the field and was on a return when it stuck the ground and caught fire. They narrowly missed a warehouse and a fuel farm for the local water company. 2 people on-board, one killed another only suffered minor burns. Of course there is information floating, regarding the flight, about the community but I won't post about speculation on what was seen.

I knew the pilot killed as he was the one who did my multi ride. Learned a lot during that ride. Very knowledgeable pilot.

Graphic Warning:

Here's the video of the crash if any care to see http://www.thv11.com/news/local/video-plane-crashes-at-ark-airport/174564429.
 
Last edited:
Sad to hear. Sorry for your loss. RIP
 
Sorry to hear. RIP.
 
Oh boy. That was a fireball, surprised the other guy made it out. These are the incidents we need to take long hard looks at and learn from if mistakes were made. Or it could just have been bad luck. If I end up dying in a fireball and there was something to learn from the incident I hope it gets picked apart ad nauseum so others don't make the same mistakes. RIP to the pilot.
 
Oh boy. That was a fireball, surprised the other guy made it out. These are the incidents we need to take long hard looks at and learn from if mistakes were made. Or it could just have been bad luck. If I end up dying in a fireball and there was something to learn from the incident I hope it gets picked apart ad nauseum so others don't make the same mistakes. RIP to the pilot.

Yeah, I quite amazed he made it out mostly unscathed. Only thing I can think of is he was thrown free from the cabin on impact. That impact was very extreme.

Thanks everyone for the thoughts. Most everyone I know is in shock that it happened to him and his family.
 
So sorry for the loss of your friend.
 
Sad to hear stuff like this...
 
:-( RIP and condolences. Be interesting to hear from the survivor what happened.
 
OH man.... I was up doing a flight review in Conway then. Didn't hear anything on the radio but They just changed CTAF at NLr airport.

We're there any witnesses that actually saw what happend?
 
Sorry to hear about this.
The survivor (also a pilot?) should hopefully be able to shed some light on the event.

This sucks.
 
OH man.... I was up doing a flight review in Conway then. Didn't hear anything on the radio but They just changed CTAF at NLr airport.

We're there any witnesses that actually saw what happend?

Yep, also sent a PM.

I was wondering why I couldn't hear the CTAF on the LiveATC replay. I heard LIT DEP talking to pilots about it but that's it. LIT Dep wasn't very skillful on their replies about the crash. They told one pilot that " a crash just happened at NLR and it hit the fuel farm. You can still go there but i bet you can't get fuel." This was before they found out that it was a fuel tank from a nearby company. Not the airport fuel farm.

Sorry to hear about this.
The survivor (also a pilot?) should hopefully be able to shed some light on the event.

This sucks.

Yep, he was a pilot.
 
Ugh. All over the TV. Not much left of that 310.
 
Oh boy. That was a fireball, surprised the other guy made it out. These are the incidents we need to take long hard looks at and learn from if mistakes were made. Or it could just have been bad luck. If I end up dying in a fireball and there was something to learn from the incident I hope it gets picked apart ad nauseum so others don't make the same mistakes. RIP to the pilot.

I feel the same way. While it sometimes seems morbid and disrespectful to "pick it apart" I feel it's appropriate in a pilots forum. I have learned a lot of valuable stuff from "speculations" that turned out to be not the cause
 
Luvflyin exactly. I have learned a ton from "speculation". The more I read of possible scenarios that went wrong the more it sticks in my head and hopefully if I end up in that spot I can either avoid the situations discussed or make the right decision during crunch time if a mistake or bad luck happens. A lot of healthy discussion goes on during these accident threads. Some crusty characters here are so uptight it is hard to discuss anything. Reading the "Let's wait 2 years for the NTSB report before speculating" really gets old.
 
I feel the same way. While it sometimes seems morbid and disrespectful to "pick it apart" I feel it's appropriate in a pilots forum. I have learned a lot of valuable stuff from "speculations" that turned out to be not the cause

The issue is more along the lines of no one really knows what happened besides the surviving pilot. Plus the locals know that the local news doesn't have the full picture. So I'm not going to help complete that picture. As it often leads down a dark hole, if your wrong.

The main theory among the public data is that they lost an engine on takeoff and tried to do an air return back to the another offset runway. The reason for the power loss, is of course, still unknown at this time.
 
It was a pretty somber mood at the airport yesterday. Had to be in Little Rock for a photo shoot. Saw the wreckage. Pretty odd spot IMO. The location makes it look more like an attempted return than a LOC. And if you are media - don't use my pictures without permission. They are copyrighted.

13173562_10209581883330131_9214167158599007269_o.jpg


13119810_10209581882130101_8906483934790341277_o.jpg
 
The issue is more along the lines of no one really knows what happened besides the surviving pilot. Plus the locals know that the local news doesn't have the full picture. So I'm not going to help complete that picture. As it often leads down a dark hole, if your wrong.

The main theory among the public data is that they lost an engine on takeoff and tried to do an air return back to the another offset runway. The reason for the power loss, is of course, still unknown at this time.

What you just said is true for any accident. So we should wait years until the final NTSB report before discussing it? Sorry, I disagree. The "speculation" threads are more educational than damn near any other threads on here. Anyone with half a brain should understand a lot of it is indeed speculation and take everything with a grain of salt.

Even if some of the theories are not entirely accurate, they are often discussed with A LOT of helpful advice on what not to do and scenarios to avoid. As long as it is done respectfully there shouldn't be a problem. If I ever end up in smoking hole in the ground I hope people speculate and discuss every single detail. My hope is people will learn something from it and maybe it will prevent an accident in the future. The truth will eventually come out. But in the mean time, let it serve as an educational platform.
 
The issue is more along the lines of no one really knows what happened besides the surviving pilot. Plus the locals know that the local news doesn't have the full picture. So I'm not going to help complete that picture. As it often leads down a dark hole, if your wrong.

The main theory among the public data is that they lost an engine on takeoff and tried to do an air return back to the another offset runway. The reason for the power loss, is of course, still unknown at this time.

This particular accident so far doesn't really have much to discuss or speculate on. All that's known is pretty much they landed short. Other accidents that have at least some history of the flight are the ones that lend themselves to "Monday morning quarterbacking" are the ones where a lot can be learned from "second guessing." It's not about who can figure out what actually happened and "beat the NTSB." There is one now about the partial panel midair breakup over Long Island where all kinds of guesses, what ifs, maybes, possiblys, and probablys bring out a lot of very valuable information that one of us may not have thought of before and could be the difference someday
 
More information was released Saturday.

The flight was a checkride for an ATP. Witness said that the plane seemed to have a lack of power and that the gear wasn't down.
 
Been listening and watching Facebook discussions on this accident. Typical useless conversation at the moment due to minimal facts. I'll wait for the NTSB report.

Regardless of what if found, training and certification of pilots is needed but serious business. To those CFIs and DPEs that frequent theses forums: thank you.
 
It's not about who can figure out what actually happened and "beat the NTSB."

Actually, yes...yes it is. It's exactly that 99.99% of the time. People wanting to play super sleuth. It apparently makes them feel important in some way.
 
R.I.P., deceased pilot. And speedy recovery to the other pilot.
Eagerly awaiting the NTSB preliminary report, hopefully it will have some good information from the surviving pilot. A twin down is always a peculiar thing.
 
Actually, yes...yes it is. It's exactly that 99.99% of the time. People wanting to play super sleuth. It apparently makes them feel important in some way.
Kinda like this self-important post containing nothing but your opinion? :)

Discussion of accidents prior to some pretty piece of paper with a government logo on it, has some purpose, but it's not always about figuring out what actually happened. It's about thinking of ways it could have happened and internalizing the possible solutions that can be applied to your own flying.

I've talked to two pilots on the phone in the last three years who discussed their own accidents. When they speculated the causes, were they "attempting to beat the NTSB"? ROFLMAO. No.

Both were CFIs and both were simply discussing it. Since they were sitting in the planes when the problems occurred, I'm going to bet they had about the best available knowledge of what just about killed them, without sending stuff to a lab for analysis. They also had incorporated new techniques into their training procedures to try to help mitigate what occurred.

The NTSB reports on both aren't out yet. But their students now gain the benefit of those new procedures brought about by thoughtful introspection and discussion with others. One is a chief pilot for a school, so I suspect his new procedures are required of all of his CFIs.

It's ludicrous to state that everyone that talks about an accident or its possible causes is doing it to beat the investigators to their conclusions.

Super-sleuths indeed. What a load of crap, Tim. I'd say confidently that the reasons folks discuss accidents and accident chains is rarely motivated by that. You have an oddly twisted view of your fellow aviators.

By the way, the reason they discussed their experiences over the phone and not online, was directly confirmed by me to be because of liability -- any possible simple mistake in wording opens them up to life-destroying lawyers who make money by mincing words.

Their experiences and instruction on how to avoid their scenarios would be quite beneficial to the pilot community at large, but the risk of sharing and getting a sentence wrong can destroy their life, so the information they could share that might save someone else's life, won't be published anywhere. The pretty accident report with the nice official NTSB logo will have a "cause", but won't have their mitigation techniques mentioned in it.

One may do a safety seminar on it. That'll get his information to about 50 people. The other probably won't have time.

I'm sure they'd get a good laugh out of your opinion of them discussing their accidents with people though. I did. 99.999%. LOL. Sure.
 
Actually, yes...yes it is. It's exactly that 99.99% of the time. People wanting to play super sleuth. It apparently makes them feel important in some way.

Not even close. Projecting much? Most of the time it is people genuinely curious as to what happened. People speculate on all kinds of things, aviation accidents are just one topic. As pilots it is normal to discuss accidents and yes even *gasp* speculate. From that speculation has come many good and educational discussions.
 
Ok, no I don't no what happened. I did look up some weather earlier on this, seemed to be a gusty wind from 320 or so at 19 kts about the time. I thought they had 5/23(17/35 too?) for runway options?

Over the years what 'red flags' do we have with 'ATP/ME' check rides? A good portion of the flight involves SE ops and 'engine failures' at various times. Yes, the timing of the failures and how it's done is often given a fair amount of thought.

There was that recent crash of a multi in FL while doing training of some sort. Then you add in the potential 'student' actions, wrong rudder, no rudder, to slow, whatever. The instructor/evaluator needs to have a window to take over before things go to far.

Just some random thoughts.
 
Actually, yes...yes it is. It's exactly that 99.99% of the time. People wanting to play super sleuth. It apparently makes them feel important in some way.
Just no, and I personally am aware of 2 specific accidents that are factually incorrect on the NTSB site - that isn't so much the NTSB's fault, but they rely too heavily on some FAA people and sometimes that can become political. I'd rather know what people who are actually familiar with the accident think happened.
 
More information was released Saturday.

The flight was a checkride for an ATP. Witness said that the plane seemed to have a lack of power and that the gear wasn't down.
We were at the airport on Friday. Word was that the surviving airman was a C-130 pilot - so it's not like he wouldn't have multi-time or an idea of what to in emergencies. One would hope that this would mean an accurate NTSB report, but that does NOT guarantee it.
 
Just no, and I personally am aware of 2 specific accidents that are factually incorrect on the NTSB site - that isn't so much the NTSB's fault, but they rely too heavily on some FAA people and sometimes that can become political. I'd rather know what people who are actually familiar with the accident think happened.

Oh, I agree with that. That's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about all the wild speculation within a day, two days, a week, that goes on here when we know absolutely nothing about the facts of the accident.
 
We were at the airport on Friday. Word was that the surviving airman was a C-130 pilot - so it's not like he wouldn't have multi-time or an idea of what to in emergencies. One would hope that this would mean an accurate NTSB report, but that does NOT guarantee it.

One of Barrett's CFIs is a Herc driver.... Wasn't him was it?
 
One of Barrett's CFIs is a Herc driver.... Wasn't him was it?
I have no idea. The FBO guy said that there were a bunch of C-130 guys stationed nearby who had taken the ATP written before the deadline change trying to get their ATP certs finished up and that it was apparently one of those checkrides when it happened.
 
One of Barrett's CFIs is a Herc driver.... Wasn't him was it?

According the the news the guy was a out of state Herc pilot doing his ATP ride. The DPE was a local CFI/Corp pilot that most of us knew really well. As stated in my OP he was the DPE on my multi ride.
 
Ok, no I don't no what happened. I did look up some weather earlier on this, seemed to be a gusty wind from 320 or so at 19 kts about the time. I thought they had 5/23(17/35 too?) for runway options?

Over the years what 'red flags' do we have with 'ATP/ME' check rides? A good portion of the flight involves SE ops and 'engine failures' at various times. Yes, the timing of the failures and how it's done is often given a fair amount of thought.

There was that recent crash of a multi in FL while doing training of some sort. Then you add in the potential 'student' actions, wrong rudder, no rudder, to slow, whatever. The instructor/evaluator needs to have a window to take over before things go to far.

Just some random thoughts.

Yeah. Twin engine training does have some "history". I don't recall the numbers but many years ago the accident rate was pretty disproportionate. You mentioned 'ATP/ME' check rides. Is that worse than the general twin traing rate?
 
We were at the airport on Friday. Word was that the surviving airman was a C-130 pilot - so it's not like he wouldn't have multi-time or an idea of what to in emergencies. One would hope that this would mean an accurate NTSB report, but that does NOT guarantee it.

Quite often the survivor of an event such as this will have no memory of what happened. Considering the distance between the initial hit and the resting place of the debris it's incredible the guy lived. It looks like the aircraft traveled about 200' after the first point of impact.

Your photo is really sobering.
 
NTSB just released the preliminary report on the accident: http://ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/GeneratePDF.aspx?id=CEN16FA172&rpt=p

The report states that the ATP applicant reported a loss of the left engine on climb out from runway 5. The applicant said that the DPE took over the controls and tried to return the plane to runway 17. NTSB stated that the radar data indicates that the aircraft was close to Vmc, within 9 knots, during the left turn back towards the airport. The aircraft impacted the ground in a left bank while trying to return to runway 17.
 
NTSB just released the preliminary report on the accident: http://ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/GeneratePDF.aspx?id=CEN16FA172&rpt=p

The report states that the ATP applicant reported a loss of the left engine on climb out from runway 5. The applicant said that the DPE took over the controls and tried to return the plane to runway 17. NTSB stated that the radar data indicates that the aircraft was close to Vmc, within 9 knots, during the left turn back towards the airport. The aircraft impacted the ground in a left bank while trying to return to runway 17.

I'm not really qualified to comment so I'll just ask a dumb question. Why bank into a dead engine? Seems like the wrong thing to do.
 
It looks to my untrained eye like a fateful combination of engine out, insufficient altitude and airspeed to recover. I'm too green to guess whether the wind was helping, hurting, or irrelevant. Was this "the impossible turn?" My heartfelt respects to the deceased, God rest his soul, and speedy recovery to the injured.
 
Back
Top