Bellanca crash, crosswind got him, 3 people uninjured, plane was definitely injured.

dtuuri said:
I can't tell much from that wx rpt. It was 29 miles away. Which do you believe, the wind 29 miles away or your lyin' eyes?
Click to expand...
My Lyon’ eyes pretty much agree with what’s 29 miles away, so... ;)
 
MauleSkinner said:
My Lyon’ eyes pretty much agree with what’s 29 miles away, so... ;)
Click to expand...
Well, I never said it was a "direct" tailwind. If it were a direct crosswind you should be able to see in the mouth of the sock from that angle. All I can see is the side. I can't figure how to grab a screen shot from full screen. Maybe somebody with better computer skills...

Notice how the door opens like it gets caught by the wind? A tailwind, that is. :)
 
Not sure about cross wind, tail wind etc, but it looked to me he was running out of runway due to whatever reason and tried to forced it onto the runway. Easy to lose control when the wing is still trying to fly and you’re trying to steer.
 
Only the pilot knows for sure what he did on the approach and landing, thats not going to buff out for sure. Glad everyone is OK.
 
MauleSkinner said:
It’s a lot easier to jump to stupid pilot trick when the pilot says he was doing stupid things, like adjusting indicated airspeed due to high DA.
Click to expand...


It may seem like something every pilot should just know, but not all do.

As a springboard for discussion, maybe on a Flight Review, I’d ask something like, “Let’s say you normally approach at 70 kts. If approaching Denver on a hot day, what adjustment, if any, would you have to apply to your normal 70 kt IAS?”

You’d be surprised how many pilots get that wrong.
 
bradg33 said:
The BSV can be a little touchy on the ground, since it's got solid connections from the pedals to the nosegear.
Click to expand...
Piper Cherokee also has direct connection to nosegear. Its pilots learn quickly to straighten it momentarily as nose comes down and then immediately dial that rudder back, to avoid an uncomfortable side jolt as the moment of contact. But that's all there is to it. I don't have any time in Bellanca but if what you say holds for it, then there must be more to its design than just a rigid connection of pedals to nosegear.
 
I have zero Bellanca time. To me, the approach looked fast, as others have noted, but also appeared flat. That could have caused an unfamiliar sight picture, which resulted in an inadequate flare and the Navy style landing.
 
Flare? Nyet! Approach iz fine!

This is the first flight of Yak-152 with the chief test pilot of OKB Yakovlev, Vasily Sevastyanov at the controls.

 
Last edited:
Someone on the Viking Pilots group pointed out that it doesn’t look as if the flaps were down. I always land with at least half flaps and usually with full. There are only three settings on the Viking: up, 23°, and 45°. Typical landing is at full flaps, although I usually use half flaps when shooting an IFR approach. Landing with no flaps wih low time in type isn’t a great practice.
 
Last edited:
zaitcev said:
Piper Cherokee also has direct connection to nosegear. Its pilots learn quickly to straighten it momentarily as nose comes down and then immediately dial that rudder back, to avoid an uncomfortable side jolt as the moment of contact. But that's all there is to it. I don't have any time in Bellanca but if what you say holds for it, then there must be more to its design than just a rigid connection of pedals to nosegear.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don’t think the Viking is challenging on the ground due to this. Just something to be aware of when transitioning from a Cessna with spring or bungee connections to the nose gear. It’s really an honest, straightforward plane to fly. Like most planes, not a good idea to land with a side load on the gear.
 
zaitcev said:
Flare? Nyet! Approach iz fine!

This is the first flight of Yak-152 with the chief test pilot of OKB Yakovlev, Vasily Sevastyanov at the controls.

Click to expand...

upload_2020-8-7_22-49-38.png
'Heck, now that's a ground crew that's doing it right. That's what I call a blue ribbon post-flight. I might bring this up with my expediter next week. I mean, I'm lucky if I get the chocks thrown at my aircraft's general direction after I come back from my Skygod duties. I don't get no respect I tell ya. :D
 
I had my BSV since 2016. I loved everything about it except the elevator...
While the ailerons are light and powerful the elevator is heavy and, when landing needs to be trimmed nose up (a lot) or force required to rotate the nose up is really high! Also, you must carry power (POH says 15") and 90 mph until the wheels are on the ground...and they're not kidding! I always used 90mph, 15"/fine pitch and half flaps and trimmed almost full nose up...then the landing were grease jobs .
It's not dangerous but it doesn't land like a Lance or a Bo. Pull the power out on final to "glide" to the touchdown and the BSV will fall out of your hands @ 90 mph.
Budd Davidson at www.airbum.com did a writeup on the Viking and gives a fair description of the airplanes personality quirks.
I love the Viking and miss mine. I'll also say that IMPO if this guy hadn't been in a Viking he and his passengers might have been killed or badly hurt; the BSV is built out of 4130 steel tubing and is hell for stout. Any other plane would have folded up around the occupants when he hit that berm.

Chris
 
I think he just wanted to get to the parking area in more direct fashion
 
I usually speed up a bit with bad crosswinds, and usually use a bit less flaps too, if the field is big enough to take it. Yes, the airplane "feels" better, more air over the control surfaces. That said, the trick is the line the airplane up with the runway in a forward slip, then land on one wheel. The pilot in the video didn't appear to do that. Probably not the first to loose it in a crosswind and won't be the last. With luck the next guy won't have some bozo with a camera filming his moment of shame.

Did a few crosswind landings a couple weeks ago. They sucked pretty hard too, glad no one was filming.
 
steingar said:
I usually speed up a bit with bad crosswinds...Probably not the first to loose it in a crosswind and won't be the last.
Click to expand...

If and when you do "loose" it in a crosswind, extra speed will not be your friend. Speed up for gusts, not for steady crosswinds.
 
steingar said:
...
Did a few crosswind landings a couple weeks ago. They sucked pretty hard too, glad no one was filming.
Click to expand...
We had a particularly nasty gusty crosswind day a couple days ago. I went up. Wish I hadn't. Similarly glad no one was filming. My landings probably made yours look perfect.
 
FastEddieB said:
If and when you do "loose" it in a crosswind, extra speed will not be your friend. Speed up for gusts, not for steady crosswinds.
Click to expand...
Yep. The best reason I ever heard for adding speed due to crosswind was to prevent flap strikes on the ground in a B-727. In that case, you used less flap, hence a higher speed.
 
This is where I jump in again and extol the benefits of a taildragger endorsement. Very useful for drilling runway alignment into your head. Wheel landings in a taildragger are a great way to get comfortable with touching one wheel first. Plus you learn what the footrests are for.
 
FastEddieB said:
If and when you do "loose" it in a crosswind, extra speed will not be your friend. Speed up for gusts, not for steady crosswinds.
Click to expand...
In my whole flying career I've yet to see steady winds of any kind. If you've got a crosswind you can bet it'll be gusty. A little extra speed will make things a bit better so long as the field is sufficiently long so not to worry about an overrun.
 
steingar said:
In my whole flying career I've yet to see steady winds of any kind. If you've got a crosswind you can bet it'll be gusty. A little extra speed will make things a bit better so long as the field is sufficiently long so not to worry about an overrun.
Click to expand...
My recommendation to you would be to become proficient in one configuration and speed and use it every time.

Not an instructor, or expert of any kind, just a guy that had read a lot of your posts, and flies the same plane.
 
Salty said:
My recommendation to you would be to become proficient in one configuration and speed and use it every time.

Not an instructor, or expert of any kind, just a guy that had read a lot of your posts, and flies the same plane.
Click to expand...
Balderdash. Every situation requires its own solution. I do think it healthy to keep in mind that one solution is to simply go elsewhere.
 
Ed Haywood said:
This is where I jump in again and extol the benefits of a taildragger endorsement. Very useful for drilling runway alignment into your head. Wheel landings in a taildragger are a great way to get comfortable with touching one wheel first. Plus you learn what the footrests are for.
Click to expand...

yes! Now when I fly the 172 even in Wind idda not flown in before becoming a TW guy and completly comfortable doing so.

I’m kind of surprised how when I fly with friends I notice how not perfectly aligned we always are at touch down..
 
steingar said:
Balderdash. Every situation requires its own solution. I do think it healthy to keep in mind that one solution is to simply go elsewhere.
Click to expand...

I agree. The “always the same” well that works if you just rent on nice days n go around town, but if you’re going to travel in your plane and face different circumstances you best be ready for that age old lesson “fly the plane”

I notice this w gold that do a mechanical pattern entry always. XXXX rpm at this point and this point, etc. I’m a flat lander n fly out west once a year. Do that mechanical pattern with high DA and you’ll be on the ground on base leg!
 
FastEddieB said:
Please explain.
Click to expand...

To fly a certain indicates airspeed it simply requires different throttle... my ol Cessna 140 flies about 100mph at 2400rm around 2-3k MSL where I typically fly. At a higher altitude (or DA) that same throttle setting will show an 85mph cruise.

so often I found at higher altitudes I required more power than I normally would to maintain a given airspeed and proper rate of decent...

So if one has to set to 1800 rpm late in downwind, they may find they need more than 1800 to have the plane fly the same way it does at lower altitudes. So that rule to set for 1800 is to rigid for all scenarios...
 
Huckster79 said:
I agree. The “always the same” well that works if you just rent on nice days n go around town, but if you’re going to travel in your plane and face different circumstances you best be ready for that age old lesson “fly the plane”

I notice this w gold that do a mechanical pattern entry always. XXXX rpm at this point and this point, etc. I’m a flat lander n fly out west once a year. Do that mechanical pattern with high DA and you’ll be on the ground on base leg!
Click to expand...
For anyone else, I’d agree.
 
Huckster79 said:
To fly a certain indicates airspeed it simply requires different throttle...So that rule to set for 1800 is to rigid for all scenarios...
Click to expand...

Got it. I was thinking more in terms of airspeed, not power setting.

I asked only because I’ve not noticed any need to significantly change power settings with altitude. But I can see how at higher density altitudes in a lower-powered plane it could make more of a difference.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
You guys are wasting your time. @steingar already knows he is right and will not listen to you.
Click to expand...
He who is Steingar has been around long enough to know that coastal Florida, Central Michigan, and the high desert of Arizona are different places with very different challenges. No one approach fits everything you’re going to land in, so you need a big bag of tricks. Unless of course you only fly within 50 miles of your home base on sunny days. Those of us who use the airplane to travel know that different conditions often require different approaches.
 
steingar said:
He who is Steingar has been around long enough to know that coastal Florida, Central Michigan, and the high desert of Arizona are different places with very different challenges. No one approach fits everything you’re going to land in, so you need a big bag of tricks. Unless of course you only fly within 50 miles of your home base on sunny days. Those of us who use the airplane to travel know that different conditions often require different approaches.
Click to expand...
That has nothing to do with what I posted.
 
steingar said:
Balderdash. Every situation requires its own solution. I do think it healthy to keep in mind that one solution is to simply go elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Every situation requires it’s own solution, but situations (and solutions) don’t change as much as a lot of pilots seem to think.
 
MauleSkinner said:
Every situation requires it’s own solution, but situations (and solutions) don’t change as much as a lot of pilots seem to think.
Click to expand...

A cold winter crosswind approach to an unoccluded lengthy asphalt strip is a very different beast to a midsummer approach to an occluded turf strip. You do very different things with the aircraft. A good pilot has a big bag full of tricks. A crap pilot like me at least knows the bag exists. An accident waiting to happen is someone who thinks every approach is the same.
 
steingar said:
A cold winter crosswind approach to an unoccluded lengthy asphalt strip is a very different beast to a midsummer approach to an occluded turf strip. You do very different things with the aircraft. A good pilot has a big bag full of tricks. A crap pilot like me at least knows the bag exists. An accident waiting to happen is someone who thinks every approach is the same.
Click to expand...
So...you’ve got your “normal” landing and your “short field” landing. Pretty small bag so far. ;)
 
Did anyone else notice he’s landing downwind? Look at the flag pole. Too fast and wrong direction. Wow did he hit he ground hard on touchdown.

5918F304-F9C9-4E52-86BE-60F5AC284736.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Just wanted to drop by and say
The BSV is not difficult to fly, or land.
If a yoke-klutz like me can do it, anyone can.

20 yrs 1800+ hr Viking time
 
I average about one forced go around per year at most. The last one was in a Tiger. Lined up on final. Seemed fine. Then some wind kicked in quite close to the ground. Didn’t feel good about it and went full throttle and let the plane weather vane into the wind. Ended up just above the weeds like 20* off the runway. It all worked out and I landed the next time around. You can always go around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top