Baron down at Lagrange Ga, 3 killed

Last edited:
Witnesses said the aircraft was doing a practice maneuver called "shoot instrument approach"...
Click to expand...

Really some quality reporting there.

The witnesses said the plane was trying to avoid a glider when it stalled and the plane nosedived.
Click to expand...

Sharp turn into a stall I guess? That really sucks, there's been too many of these lately.
 
So easy to sneak up on people when they are busy watching TV.
 
ClimbnSink said:
So easy to sneak up on people when they are busy watching TV.
Click to expand...

I wonder that if a glider was involved, did it have a radio, and if so, were they all using it? Someone shooting practice instrument approaches (heads down and/or on the goggles), surprised at the last second by a comm-out glider landing?
 
Banjo33 said:
I wonder that if a glider was involved, did it have a radio, and if so, were they all using it? Someone shooting practice instrument approaches (heads down and/or on the goggles), surprised at the last second by a comm-out glider landing?
Click to expand...

Comm out glider operations are legal. And reality. You have to look out the window unless it is IMC. Or you will eventually die. TV fans are going to be asking for ADS-B out on tall mountains soon.:rolleyes: if only the terrain had a radio...
 
Not a big fan myself of shooting practice (or currency) approaches at non-towered airports. RIP.
 
alfadog said:
Not a big fan myself of shooting practice (or currency) approaches at non-towered airports. RIP.
Click to expand...

For some reason, I had never considered the danger of doing that at a field shared with gliders. They could possibly be NORDO (no ability to alert you of their presence) AND without the ability to go around (I presume) if it appears you may not see them. Seems so obvious to me now. :dunno:
 
Banjo33 said:
I wonder that if a glider was involved, did it have a radio, and if so, were they all using it? Someone shooting practice instrument approaches (heads down and/or on the goggles), surprised at the last second by a comm-out glider landing?
Click to expand...

Yesterday was CAVU, so it was a practice approach, complete with safety pilot. Which brings us to the role of the safety pilot and how s/he allowed the situation to deteriorate.
 
From rec.soaring(yeah soaring pilots still use a newsgroup.)
OK guys. I guess it's time to post some of what we really know. I'm the president of Southern eagles Soaring Club at LaGrange. We were not operating Saturday and I was not at the field. The Civil Air Patrol had been operating their L23 towed by their 172, for several hours from runway 3.

The Baron had been doing ILS low approaches to runway 31. They landed and refueled. There were various reports of what the Baron was doing before it crashed, including a missed approach from a practice ILS, a take off, and a go around. With all these reports, you can judge for your self the accuracy. Everyone agreed that they did not hear any radio calls from the Baron.

The 172 and L23 were stopped on runway 3, south of runway 31. They never crossed the runway. The crews were very experienced, with 2 CFIG's in the L23 and a retired Air Force pilot and now Delta Captain flying the 172. One of the CFIGs is also a club member.

The crews saw the Baron at low altitude along runway 31. It pulled up very nose high, rolled to the left from 100-200 feet, and crashed in an approximate 60 degree nose down attitude. The front seat pilots were killed on impact. The passenger in the back later died at the hospital.

We do not now, nor will we ever know what made the PIC take the action that he did. They could have been flying simulated instruments, practicing single engine, had an engine failure, or any of a number of things.

Since the names have been release, we do know that the two co-owners were in the aircraft along with another pilot. Records show one of the co-owners was multi-engine rated. No records on the other co-owner. The third person did hold an ATP and instructors rating. We do not know the seating arrangement or who was at the controls.

All the noise about a glider being involved was from one person that was interviewed by two TV stations. He said the Baron was trying to avoid a glider. It unclear as to his actually seeing the crash. The only glider operating that day was sitting on runway 3 behind the tow plane.

Also to show the accuracy of the reporting, one of the stations reported the Baron had flown from Panama City, FL to LaGrange that morning. They used a screen shot from flightAware.com to confirm it. When we checked flightaware, it did indeed show a flight from Panama City as being the last flight they had recorded. Of course, That flight took place in October, 2013!

If any FACTS become available, I'll let you know. However, conjecture will not accomplish anything and could hurt our sport.
 
Anybody holding their breath waiting for a retraction/apology to the soaring community from the TV station?
 
Not IR'd yet, so don't know much of anything about missed approaches. Outside of a catastrophic mechanical/airframe failure of some kind, is there anything involved in a missed approach procedure that could cause that kind of sudden nose up roll? Or like the glider post suggested, will we never know? Very sad stuff. :(
 
Thanks Greg. I read your response on RAS too.

Final NTSB report will be an interesting read. May not even mention the glider activity as they were not involved. But you'll never see that in the news.
 
Last edited:
Irish_Armada said:
Not IR'd yet, so don't know much of anything about missed approaches. Outside of a catastrophic mechanical/airframe failure of some kind, is there anything involved in a missed approach procedure that could cause that kind of sudden nose up roll? Or like the glider post suggested, will we never know? Very sad stuff. :(
Click to expand...

It will be interesting to see what the investigation reveals about the pitch trim setting.
 
BillTIZ said:
It will be interesting to see what the investigation reveals about the pitch trim setting.
Click to expand...

That occurred to me as well. I don't have any Baron time, but even the 182 requires a fair bit of nose up trim for landing, go arounds need nose down trim.
 
BillTIZ said:
Thanks Greg. I read your response on RAS too.

Final NTSB report will be an interesting read. May not even mention the glider activity as they were not involved. But you'll never see that in the news.
Click to expand...

That wasn't me I copied that, thought it was clear. Apologies for any confusion.
 
Lance F said:
Anybody holding their breath waiting for a retraction/apology to the soaring community from the TV station?
Click to expand...

Has there been some additional evidence to refute the original claim that a glider was involved?
 
BillTIZ said:
It will be interesting to see what the investigation reveals about the pitch trim setting.
Click to expand...

I own the exact same model Baron as the accident airplane. While I probably use slightly more nose up trim on final than on takeoff, it really isn't that much.
 
In my -10 with two up front, IF I trim all of the pressure off, it is a handful during a go-around. I don't usually fly without the kids filling the rear seats, otherwise I have to remind myself to leave a little "pull" for the final approach. Sorry for the loss.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Has there been some additional evidence to refute the original claim that a glider was involved?
Click to expand...

A bunch of sailplane pilots have tried setting the record straight without luck. Apparently the story has been picked up widely as filler carrying the bogus info. Bit tinfoily but isn't there some news magnate that is anti-glider? rumor has it he almost hit one in his jet.
 
Lance F said:
Anybody holding their breath waiting for a retraction/apology to the soaring community from the TV station?
Click to expand...
We all know there's no point. Flying little airplanes with only two engines is dangerous, just look at the crash picture. Flying something with NO engine is pure lunacy, right Lance?:D
 
ClimbnSink said:
A bunch of sailplane pilots have tried setting the record straight without luck. Apparently the story has been picked up widely as filler carrying the bogus info. Bit tinfoily but isn't there some news magnate that is anti-glider? rumor has it he almost hit one in his jet.
Click to expand...

Gordon did set a record, broke his old record from two years ago by about 40 miles.

Two place glider from Minden NV to Casper WY. Enough for a record, but his goal was Rapid City, SD. Got high as FL280 during the flight.
 
Last edited:
Irish_Armada said:
Not IR'd yet, so don't know much of anything about missed approaches. Outside of a catastrophic mechanical/airframe failure of some kind, is there anything involved in a missed approach procedure that could cause that kind of sudden nose up roll?
Click to expand...

A missed approach is just a go-around during an instrument approach (followed, by default, by navigating to a designated missed-approach hold).

Or like the glider post suggested, will we never know? Very sad stuff.
Click to expand...

It's possible that the investigation will turn up clarifying physical evidence or reliable witness testimony. Too bad though that airports don't routinely record video of their runways. Even small airports could afford a webcam or two that might provide helpful clues in the event of an on-field crash.
 
Irish_Armada said:
Not IR'd yet, so don't know much of anything about missed approaches. Outside of a catastrophic mechanical/airframe failure of some kind, is there anything involved in a missed approach procedure that could cause that kind of sudden nose up roll? Or like the glider post suggested, will we never know? Very sad stuff. :(
Click to expand...

This is pure speculation.
May well have been a situation where one engine produced power during the missed/go-around while the other one did not. This need not have been a catastrophic failure. It may have just been a "hiccup" for some reason and when the engine is bench tested it will fire right up.
I had something similar occur years ago teaching in a light twin. During a power off stall recovery one engine spooled up, the other did not... below Vmc. It was interesting.
Granted, the Baron should have been above red line, but if it was a low energy go around when this occurred energy (airspeed), might bleed off very quickly. At that altitude even the best instructor would be challenged to recover in time. Heck, the picture looks like they may have been in the process of a recovery but just ran out of altitude.
Again, this is speculation and I don't think it is a slam on any of the pilots. As I wrote if this happened the engine may well start right up and the NTSB investigators will scratch their heads and say "Control lost for some unknown reason."
 
Such a shame,may they rest in peace. Prayers go out tithe familes.
 
I really doubt it was an engine out based on the picture. Looks like it stalled straight ahead, unlike what you would see in a VMC situation.
 
Dave Theisen said:
I really doubt it was an engine out based on the picture. Looks like it stalled straight ahead, unlike what you would see in a VMC situation.
Click to expand...

Unless they started the recovery procedure correctly. If they did the airplane would look very much like the picture. Power to idle, level the wings, lower the nose to get above red line, see the ground rushing up and pull.
 
Blackhawk said:
Unless they started the recovery procedure correctly. If they did the airplane would look very much like the picture. Power to idle, level the wings, lower the nose to get above red line, see the ground rushing up and pull.
Click to expand...

Seriously? :eek: Power to idle in a stall? Why?
 
Geico266 said:
Seriously? :eek: Power to idle in a stall? Why?
Click to expand...

Power to idle in a Vmc roll. Look at my post and what he was responding to. My thought was the possibility of an engine not coming on line during the go around. Airspeed quickly bleeding off, beginnings of a Vmc roll, proper recovery procedure but running out of altitude.

Another possibility with the stall scenario, not sure if this was a single yoke Baron. That would make things dicey for an instructor trying to recover at that altitude.

Who knows. Something did get away from the instructor but I'm not blaming him at this point as not enough information. I've always said that teaching MEL is the most hazardous instruction I do.
 
I don't fly twins but I assume it's the best way to counter a Vmc roll. Beat me...
 
alfadog said:
Not a big fan myself of shooting practice (or currency) approaches at non-towered airports. RIP.
Click to expand...

Why? I do most of mine at non-towered airports, just not at the non-towered airport where I am based [because we don't have any approaches due to trees at both ends of our 3001' of asphalt].

Practice approaches require a safety pilot, whose job is to look out the windows for traffic, terrain and other obstacles.

I've shared fields with skydivers, who make one announcement before dropping several meat missiles, but never with gliders. There are, however, several aircraft at my home base without electrical systems, and they do not all carry handheld radios, those that do sometimes have battery issues, and radios are not required [as I often remind myself flying past a nearby field where few people seem to use the radios installed in their airplanes].

I feel bad for the families of the three in Lagrange. For the sake of those three, I only hope it was quick. Based on the apparent lack of a significant crater, the Baron wasn't moving very fast, but was certainly fast enough.

Fly safe!
 
Hank S said:
Why? I do most of mine at non-towered airports, just not at the non-towered airport where I am based [because we don't have any approaches due to trees at both ends of our 3001' of asphalt.
Click to expand...

So you are trusting your safety pilot - who may not be very familiar with your aircraft, who may delay in responding, who may be more interested in what you are doing that what is outside - to save your butt if a NORDO (or glider) cuts in front of you at 400 feet. Especially in a twin. Too much going on at many non-towered airports and lots of towered alternatives for me. YMMV.
 
alfadog said:
So you are trusting your safety pilot - who may not be very familiar with your aircraft, who may delay in responding, who may be more interested in what you are doing that what is outside - to save your butt if a NORDO (or glider) cuts in front of you at 400 feet. Especially in a twin. Too much going on at many non-towered airports and lots of towered alternatives for me. YMMV.
Click to expand...

Anyone under the hood must trust the safety pilot, even when flying practice approaches into towered fields. ATC's job is separation of IFR traffic, anything they do for participating VFR traffic is advisory in nature. NORDO aircraft fly higher than 400 agl and often have no transponder, either, so how will ATC vector you away from them? That's why you have a safety pilot, preferably not just a "warm body" you picked up at the FBO that day to make yourself legal.

In this particular case, the glider appears to have been on the ground on a crossing runway, hooking up to the tow plane. Both appear to have been well clear of the runway the Baron was using.
 
Hank S said:
Anyone under the hood must trust the safety pilot, even when flying practice approaches into towered fields. ATC's job is separation of IFR traffic, anything they do for participating VFR traffic is advisory in nature. NORDO aircraft fly higher than 400 agl and often have no transponder, either, so how will ATC vector you away from them?
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing TRACON and Center with the tower. I hardly think tower's instructions are "advisory in nature".
 
Lance F said:
Anybody holding their breath waiting for a retraction/apology to the soaring community from the TV station?
Click to expand...

Saw a note from what I would consider a reliable source that the tow plane and glider had started takeoff roll on Rwy 3, tow pilot saw the Baron and called abort, glider pilot popped the release both the tow plane and glider executed an aborted takeoff and exited the runway.

Not sure if that constitutes 'involved' or not for the glider.

It will be interesting to see what the investigation says about the flight controls of the Baron.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top