Crash near Greenwood, Indiana 07/30/25

Flying Keys said:
Your first sentence is illogical. I explained to you why a continuous divergence over multiple datapoints is extremely unlikely. Put another way, to get the results we see over multiple points as a result of a divergence error (despite the self-monitoring and reporting) would take a set of coincidences the chances of which are astronomically small.

The satellite image is Google Earth, but since the path is geocoded, you can see it on any number of map overlays, all showing the same thing. Despite that, a choice to continue with skepticism not borne of evidence to the contrary is certainly a choice.
Click to expand...
It does look like there is some fairly constant error ( perhaps the 10 meter difference ) included in the data.
 
Warmi said:
It does look like there is some fairly constant error ( perhaps the 10 meter difference ) included in the data.
Click to expand...
10m is fairly typical. Note it’s not 100m increasing to 300+m, which it would have to be (in succession) to produce a geocoded result that by chance produced a relatively straight line diverging from the runway direction.

Also, if folks want more evidence of the accuracy, the last three hits are like an arrow pointing to the lateral location of the crash site, ending only 50m away (presumably due to loss of signal as it went below radio line of sight while spinning in). Only the last hit had a loss of accuracy (<30m) before it disappeared.

Looking at more ADS-B history in that area, most other aircraft manage to produce a straight line off the runway. Even her plane produced a straight track when it took off from OSH and again when it landed at HYF on the 27th. This is such a non-starter.
 
Albany Tom said:
I'd never heard of it before. From the specs, it's faster than the first production P-40's. Why so dangerous? I'd guess because it is neutral in roll and easy to spin, but that's mostly just guessing based on the looks and speed of the thing.
Click to expand...
Best glide speed/descent rate is similar to a safe full of bowling balls as I recall as well.
 
@wanttaja does the higher average time of lancair pilots indicate more time in that plane, or just more time?

My first DPE had a Lancair; doubtless he soloed before the wright brothers, but I wonder how much time he had to fly - vs examining and running an fbo and being a walking local legend of aviation.

I wonder if high time pilots who spend most of their flying hours elsewhere are really high time pilots with low time or low recency in the Lancair.

Devilishly hard to determine, I imagine.

There is nothing positive to say about another fatality. It’s all just sad.
 
Hengelo said:
@wanttaja does the higher average time of lancair pilots indicate more time in that plane, or just more time?

My first DPE had a Lancair; doubtless he soloed before the wright brothers, but I wonder how much time he had to fly - vs examining and running an fbo and being a walking local legend of aviation.

I wonder if high time pilots who spend most of their flying hours elsewhere are really high time pilots with low time or low recency in the Lancair.

Devilishly hard to determine, I imagine.

There is nothing positive to say about another fatality. It’s all just sad.
Click to expand...
To recap, the pilots of all homebuilts involved in accidents had a median total flight time of 1,000 hours, while those flying Lancair IVs had a median total time of 2500 hours.

In addition, the pilots involved in all homebuilt accents had a median of 60 hours time-in-type, vs. 109 for the Lancair IVs.

About 5.6% of homebuilt accidents occur on the first flight, vs. about 2% of Lancair IV accidents. However, the sample size rears its ugly head, here. That 5.6% of all homebuilts is 188 first-flight accidents out of 4,715 total accidents, while there's only one first-flight accident in my Lancair IV set.

(Note that the two percent of Lancair IV accident is the percentage of the number of accidents where time-in-type is provided by the NTSB report.)

Here's a clip from my summary spreadsheet, with the RV-8 for comparison.
1754269478454.png
Ron Wanttaja
 
Ron does the time in type decline for the year of the accident vs its lifetime average?
 
Hengelo said:
Ron does the time in type decline for the year of the accident vs its lifetime average?
Click to expand...
Not quite sure of what you're looking for, here, but the sample size is awful small for making any detailed conclusions. There are 76 Lancair IV accidents in my 1998-2023 database, but only about half of the NTSB reports include the full data of aircraft total time, pilot total time, and pilot time-in-type. A typical year sees 1-2 Lancair IV accidents; in fact, there are number of years that have no accidents at all.

Ron Wanttaja
 
Ran across a facebook thread with the following posts. FB discussion is usually hot garbage, but these two seemed relevant. Emphasis added to first post.

I was on downwind at an airport with the same CTAF and heard her call. She said she was going back and then just started saying “oh no, oh no, oh no”. It was sobering to hear the panic in her voice.
Click to expand...

I was the test pilot on a couple of 4P and have around 200 hours in them. You rotate at 90kts. It has a very low climb rate until you get around 130 kts and then she starts to climb better. There is no altitude at which you can return to the runway after an engine failure. To get enough altitude , you are too far from the runway. The plane is design for one thing, to go fast. At higher altitudes you can be seeing 290 kts. Approach speed is 110 kts minimum but is happiest at 120. I deep stalled every one I flew. You have to have the ball centered are she will snap into the stall.
Click to expand...
 
Just wondering about the relevance of average hours without the context of recent hours.
Appreciate it's a Sisyphean ask given the scarcity of data.
 
sourdough44 said:
The prelim is out. The data ‘seems’ to indicate the engine was producing normal power throughout the event.
Click to expand...


Can't say that yet. Engine performance came from the on-board Garmin avionics data, which did not record the end of the flight. The Garmin data stops 13 seconds before the ADS-B data. From the flight path graphic, the Garmin data does not appear to cover the loss of control event.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top