Crash in Bolingbrook

flyingcheesehead

flyingcheesehead

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
24,256
Location
UQACY, WI
Display Name
Display name:
iMooniac
Just watching the news here in Milwaukee, they showed a crash in Bolingbrook, IL. It was in the parking lot of a Chase bank, lots of foam and several burned cars. Looked like some kind of single, couldn't tell what though.

Grant, you know anything about this?
 
Terrible, prayers for the victims and families.
 
flyingcheesehead said:
Just watching the news here in Milwaukee, they showed a crash in Bolingbrook, IL. It was in the parking lot of a Chase bank, lots of foam and several burned cars. Looked like some kind of single, couldn't tell what though.

Grant, you know anything about this?
Click to expand...

Wingtips a look like a Cirrus...
 
Can't be good ,prayers go out to the victims and family's involved.
 
I hate these stories... prayers for all involved.

-Rich
 
Last edited:
Few high quality pictures I was able to find


BVC2WDJCAAAyaSZ.jpg:large


1280


1280


1280


1280
 
Tragic no matter if an RV a Cirrus or a whatever.
Just E of the SE corner of the runway, and the winds were from the south today.

High alpha, and slow in a Cirrus. Not a good place to be.
And no tanks you very much.
 
"As soon as it crashed, it was just a pile of flames," Jamison said"

I'll be interested in what it is. Whatever it is, I don't want one.

Looks more like a go-around gone bad from the description.

RIP
 
Looks like one died, and one injured now. Sad very sad.
 
I'm afraid this might be another one of those typical SR22 crashes. In the go around, low speed and high AoA, push all levers forward, lots of torque and small rudder, equals what you see in the pictures above.
 
I don't have much to add here, except that it wasn't us. Praying for the pilot and his family.
 
My parents live 15 mins away. Flew into this airport earlier this year. I did a go around after coming into the short runway way too fast as I was to nervous flying over homes and businesses on short final. There are tons of home just south of the runway. The chase bank is right about on crosswind to downwind turn. I venture to guess he was taking off 18 and tried to turn crosswind too early at too high AoA to avoid the houses, may have had the flaps still down and stalled it out on the go around like said above.

Either way the pilot is a hero, avoiding taking it through a house. If it is a cirrus we should learn more from the black box. No word of any chute pull?
 
No chute pull. Wife died. SR20 confirmed. Pilot was on fire as he exited the plane, and asked bystanders to try to get his wife out. A non-pilot but aviation friendly friend of mine was just interviewed as a witness on WBBM.
 
Pilot Nick said:
My parents live 15 mins away. Flew into this airport earlier this year. I did a go around after coming into the short runway way too fast as I was to nervous flying over homes and businesses on short final. ?
Click to expand...
Here we go again. 3300 is plenty and that's in my twin....many times. Grant knows I've been in there. Homes and shopping center but the ends are not obstructed.....not even the Target at the north end.

Time will tell but it just this sort of "oh this is short" thinking that kills pilots. Once you have briefed, fly the speed, you have a spare 1500 feet and you need to be able to fly to PTS standards.....!

Tragic.
No tanks you very much.
 
Last edited:
nddons said:
Is a 60 kt stall speed just too hot for many pilots?
Click to expand...

Thing is, and you read it here all the time, people are doing 10-20kts over 1.3 Vso on final because they are afraid of the bottom of the envelope. How many Cirrus drivers fly final at 72? And in a lightly loaded plane, that's going to be 5kts fast. Mooney's got their bad reputation for eating props the same way. People just don't practice bottom of the envelope flying enough to get comfortable with it.
 
This is sad, and tough to see at one of my home airports.

It was a surgeon from Kentucky and his wife. May she rest in peace, and he have a successful recovery.

Winds in the area were out of the E/NE all day. From what I've read, it sounds like he landed on 18 and tried to abort the landing. If there was a tailwind component, that could've compounded things.

Clow isn't a tricky airport. Yeah, there are houses to the south but they don't obstruct the approach. Nothing really to the north except some power lines and a further distant shopping center.
 
It's a losing battle for CFI's. They're going to fly a whatever speeds they like "because it feels better" and whatever happens happens. I carry a POH for both the A-36 and T-210 that are highlighted with the approach, landing, balked landing, stall, landing distance and associated conditions. The reason they are highlighted is that pilots would otherwise never find them during the normal time allotted for the oral portion of the FR.

One of my favorite scenarios is to tell the pilot that the brakes have failed and that the runway is closed for construction past midfield (it's 7,000' long) then ask his intentions. During the oral we will have done the calculations that show total landing distance at max gross weight to be ~1,500' and these toads will be sweating bullets trying to decide if they can get whoaed in more than twice that distance. Go figure.


Henning said:
Thing is, and you read it here all the time, people are doing 10-20kts over 1.3 Vso on final because they are afraid of the bottom of the envelope. How many Cirrus drivers fly final at 72? And in a lightly loaded plane, that's going to be 5kts fast. Mooney's got their bad reputation for eating props the same way. People just don't practice bottom of the envelope flying enough to get comfortable with it.
Click to expand...
 
Sad news for the family and the community. I hope he pulls through.

For stories like these, it reminds me to remain proficient. I have a flight with my family this weekend, and that is why I am flying solo tonight.
 
Will you practice last-minute go-arounds?

masloki said:
Sad news for the family and the community. I hope he pulls through.

For stories like these, it reminds me to remain proficient. I have a flight with my family this weekend, and that is why I am flying solo tonight.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
It's a losing battle for CFI's. They're going to fly a whatever speeds they like "because it feels better" and whatever happens happens. I carry a POH for both the A-36 and T-210 that are highlighted with the approach, landing, balked landing, stall, landing distance and associated conditions. The reason they are highlighted is that pilots would otherwise never find them during the normal time allotted for the oral portion of the FR.

One of my favorite scenarios is to tell the pilot that the brakes have failed and that the runway is closed for construction past midfield (it's 7,000' long) then ask his intentions. During the oral we will have done the calculations that show total landing distance at max gross weight to be ~1,500' and these toads will be sweating bullets trying to decide if they can get whoaed in more than twice that distance. Go figure.
Click to expand...
Is it? My CFI who does pretty good with a lot of things does not do real well with the whole concept of speed over the fence. Do not ask me why, I have asked her and have complained a number of times to her about it, but she gets real ansy with "slow speed over the fence." When training in a 172 she had me at 70kts over the fence, and in my 182 in was 80 kts. Those 10 kts makes a huge difference. I know they are way too fast, and just compensate on my landings realizing I am going to land long. The hard part was realizing this during training, and I did not fully grasp the concept until I did a precheckride ride and really expeienced the difference. I like to doe maneuvers for practice once a month and sometime more often and usually vary what I do. Last weekend it was short field landings(which I had not done in my plane in probably about a year), and played with speeds on a 3600X50 runway. My "goal" was to be able to slow to a stop before the 1st taxiway(about 1700 ft) with minimal braking. It was runway 23 with winds at 160 at about 10 kts at my home field about 30 miles away. Windsock at the landing field showed similar. Doing my regular landing 70 kts with 2 notches flaps and I rolled right past the intersection. At 60 knots with full flaps, I had more than enough runway to spare to turn off at 1700 feet.
 
More terrible news - the pilot passed away this morning at Loyola. RIP

:(
 
wabower said:
Will you practice last-minute go-arounds?
Click to expand...

Well, my home airport has a 2800x38' runway with a displaced threshold on one end so go-arounds were emphasized in my training. I am junior enough that I won't call it "practice" when I make the call to go-around. I call it ADM.
 
I am proud to say that my last go-around was at Oshkosh in the middle of the Show and I remembered how to do it right. Damn that was a fun flight.
 
Sad, you shouldn't be able to survive the impact and die in the fire.
 
Has your CFI ever seen the performance section of your POH? That's where I would start the discussion, followed by the realization that "over the fence" speeds aren't part of any manual (that I've ever seen, anyway) but instead the published speed in landing distance charts is 50' above the surface. The 50' is standard obstacle clearance altitude, so the charts are based on required loss of altitude rather than "dragging it in" over a wheatfield.

I'd also review the change in stall speed (and therefore approach speed) based on mid-weight vs. max weight that I'm guessing to be ~5 knots for your 182.

For my T-210 at 3,800# max landing weight the 50' speed was 74 KIAS, with ~1,500' total distance (no wind) but with max braking. With 10 knots wind the distance decreased ~10%, or braking could be reduced and while maintaining the original distance.


douglas393 said:
Is it? My CFI who does pretty good with a lot of things does not do real well with the whole concept of speed over the fence. Do not ask me why, I have asked her and have complained a number of times to her about it, but she gets real ansy with "slow speed over the fence." When training in a 172 she had me at 70kts over the fence, and in my 182 in was 80 kts. Those 10 kts makes a huge difference. I know they are way too fast, and just compensate on my landings realizing I am going to land long. The hard part was realizing this during training, and I did not fully grasp the concept until I did a precheckride ride and really expeienced the difference. I like to doe maneuvers for practice once a month and sometime more often and usually vary what I do. Last weekend it was short field landings(which I had not done in my plane in probably about a year), and played with speeds on a 3600X50 runway. My "goal" was to be able to slow to a stop before the 1st taxiway(about 1700 ft) with minimal braking. It was runway 23 with winds at 160 at about 10 kts at my home field about 30 miles away. Windsock at the landing field showed similar. Doing my regular landing 70 kts with 2 notches flaps and I rolled right past the intersection. At 60 knots with full flaps, I had more than enough runway to spare to turn off at 1700 feet.
Click to expand...
 
wabower said:
Has your CFI ever seen the performance section of your POH? That's where I would start the discussion, followed by the realization that "over the fence" speeds aren't part of any manual (that I've ever seen, anyway) but instead the published speed in landing distance charts is 50' above the surface. The 50' is standard obstacle clearance altitude, so the charts are based on required loss of altitude rather than "dragging it in" over a wheatfield.

I'd also review the change in stall speed (and therefore approach speed) based on mid-weight vs. max weight that I'm guessing to be ~5 knots for your 182.

For my T-210 at 3,800# max landing weight the 50' speed was 74 KIAS, with ~1,500' total distance (no wind) but with max braking. With 10 knots wind the distance decreased ~10%, or braking could be reduced and while maintaining the original distance.
Click to expand...
I got my PPL a few years ago and my IFR about a year later, so I only use her for recurrent training. She knows the POH, and never really gave me an answer about her habit of coming in fast. I have spoken to some of the other CFI's that work with her, and that I have worked with and they sort of just shrug their shoulders. She truly does know her stuff, and is a fairly good teacher, though she is more of a seat and pants type of pilot, then a book smart pilot. I do not have my POH on hand but I am thinking your numbers are pretty close. If I remember correctly a change of 10 kts (with no flaps as well) increases the landing distance on the order of 40%.
 
It sounds like you already know the numbers as well as the performance that results. Your situation is a classic example standardization deficiencies within GA. CFI's don't know or care, so students don't learn what they need to know to avoid the traps.

douglas393 said:
I got my PPL a few years ago and my IFR about a year later, so I only use her for recurrent training. She knows the POH, and never really gave me an answer about her habit of coming in fast. I have spoken to some of the other CFI's that work with her, and that I have worked with and they sort of just shrug their shoulders. She truly does know her stuff, and is a fairly good teacher, though she is more of a seat and pants type of pilot, then a book smart pilot. I do not have my POH on hand but I am thinking your numbers are pretty close. If I remember correctly a change of 10 kts (with no flaps as well) increases the landing distance on the order of 40%.
Click to expand...
 
Why are Cirrus so flammable again? I suppose the fuel cavities (can't really call those things 'tanks'...) were designed by a guy who thought he got a job at a cluster bomb unit plant, but is there something specifically flammable about the chemistry of disintegrating glass and epoxy that triggers that instant inferno? I thought fiber-reinforced composites were fire-resistant...
 
hindsight2020 said:
Why are Cirrus so flammable again? I suppose the fuel cavities (can't really call those things 'tanks'...) were designed by a guy who thought he got a job at a cluster bomb unit plant, but is there something specifically flammable about the chemistry of disintegrating glass and epoxy that triggers that instant inferno? I thought fiber-reinforced composites were fire-resistant...
Click to expand...

The wings shatter, rupturing the entire "tank" to whatever heat source is there to ignite the thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top