Aircraft down at Lakeland Linder

Ed Haywood

Ed Haywood

En-Route
Joined
Jul 12, 2020
Messages
2,966
Location
Tampa FL
Display Name
Display name:
Big Ed
Forced landing in industrial area east of airport, 2 on board, both airlifted for medical treatment. Very little info in news reports. Nothing on type aircraft, other than single engine. Appears from news photos that there was no fire, which is positive. Anyone have more?
 
Ed Haywood said:
Approach or departure?
Click to expand...

RyanB said:
FlightAware track looks to indicate it was on approach.
Click to expand...

Right, and I should have been clearer in my response. The aircraft appears to have departed Sebring to the southwest before heading north toward Bartow, where it looks to have performed a touch-and-go before heading toward Lakeland.

There isn't any apparent sign of trouble on LiveATC until LAL Tower warns the pilot of an altitude restriction for an RC event, and the pilot responds "we've got an engine failure, we've got to land." Tower clears him to land on 5 and then 27, but the pilot responds they won't make it.
 
flightwriter said:
Right, and I should have been clearer in my response. The aircraft appears to have departed Sebring to the southwest before heading north toward Bartow, where it looks to have performed a touch-and-go before heading toward Lakeland.

There isn't any apparent sign of trouble on LiveATC until LAL Tower warns the pilot of an altitude restriction for an RC event, and the pilot responds "we've got an engine failure, we've got to land." Tower clears him to land on 5 and then 27, but the pilot responds they won't make it.
Click to expand...

They also did a T&G at Arcadia. Aircraft is based in Lakeland and flew to SEF that morning, presumably for a hundred dollar hamburger. Would really suck if it was fuel exhaustion. Hopefully they recover from their injuries.
 
A local from another board says that the CFI was providing advanced (maybe Commercial) instruction to the owner, that the plane had been around there for awhile, and that the CFI is a nice gentleman in his 70s, who currently has 2nd and 3rd degree burns over 80% of his body.
 
FlightofTwo said:
A local from another board says that the CFI was providing advanced (maybe Commercial) instruction to the owner, that the plane had been around there for awhile, and that the CFI is a nice gentleman in his 70s, who currently has 2nd and 3rd degree burns over 80% of his body.
Click to expand...
That's terrible. I wish him luck, he's going to need it. Doesn't sound like fuel starvation.
 
We need more planes with a BRS. It's sad that we have the technology to save so many pilots, but do not use it.
 
Not fuel exhaustion but could still be fuel starvation. Googling "bonanza fuel selector" brings up several similar accidents.
 
Ed Haywood said:
Not fuel exhaustion but could still be fuel starvation. Googling "bonanza fuel selector" brings up several similar accidents.
Click to expand...
From my data: Fuel Exhaustion/Starvation Rates

upload_2021-5-24_7-44-17.png

"Sample Size" is the number of accidents, varying from ten to fifteen years.

The "PA-28-140-181" column includes PA-28-140, -161, -180, and -181 models.

Ron Wanttaja
 

Attachments

  • upload_2021-5-24_7-40-21.png
    upload_2021-5-24_7-40-21.png
    3.4 KB · Views: 7
MountainDude said:
We need more planes with a BRS. It's sad that we have the technology to save so many pilots, but do not use it.
Click to expand...
Yes!! Thanks for posting this.

steingar said:
Some Bos have a really tricky fuel system
Click to expand...
Yeah, I flew in a friend's very old Beech and the fuel system really had me scratching my head. Located in such a way that you can't reach it while you're flying, and the valve switches are not obvious, I think off is pointing forward? And the handle design makes it hard to tell by feel since the handle sticks out in both directions.. you can easily accidentally turn the fuel off. I found myself having to slide my seat back, turning the thing, and looking down to visually verify it wasn't off
 
MountainDude said:
They are not. I am just saying we have the tech, but I am sure the certification costs would be huge.
Click to expand...
That and the demand [sadly] might not be there. There are BRS available out there but many people accept the risk tradeoff for the weight/cost savings and the perception of apparent skill.

I'm with you though..
 
MountainDude said:
We need more planes with a BRS. It's sad that we have the technology to save so many pilots, but do not use it.
Click to expand...
If they were already on approach talking to tower, were they even high enough for the chute to help if they theoretically had one?
 
Todd82 said:
If they were already on approach talking to tower, were they even high enough for the chute to help if they theoretically had one?
Click to expand...
Most will work 300-500 agl. Some have been pulled very low
 
We have the ability to put them on all aircraft, as demonstrated by the Apollo missions in the 60’s/70’s.

Where do we draw the line?? Single pistons, multi turbines, jet airliners..??
 
Todd82 said:
If they were already on approach talking to tower, were they even high enough for the chute to help if they theoretically had one?
Click to expand...

The faster you’re going the quicker the chute will deploy. He was busting 180 knots, I bet that chute came out in a hurry.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top