Why are all those people running across the runway??

[woodstock]

I preflighted and went back in for one last pit stop before heading up with my CFI. no sooner had I walked out of the building when someone from the other school next to us started running out the door and I heard someone else holler "accident!"

oh my God! there must have been over half a dozen of us running out to the runway. couldn't see a thing. no smoke, nothing. the guy next to me said he put it down while landing - at first we figured it was a tail dragger that did a ground loop.

as we got closer we heard the ones in front yell "he's ok! he's out!" and then I slowed down to a trot, uncertain whether to keep going or if yet another person was just going to add to the confusion. I started seeing a few people walking back, but there were yet more heading over. I stood there for a while, then headed to my plane to wait for my CFI to see what was going on. he wasn't there so I headed back towards the accident.

It was a Diamondstar, couldn't tell if it was a 2 seater or 4 seater. I think the tail number was 27X but I'm not sure.

anyway, apparently on landing somehow he veered into the trees. not sure yet if he was coming in, or had already touched down. it was the owner flying it, not a renter (it was a lease back to one of the schools there). I also heard today the guy was a student pilot. no idea at all if he was pre-PPL student or if this was something advanced. isn't that a lot of plane for a brand new student? I don't know...

the plane was a mess. at least one wheel had come off, the wing on the tree side was in sad shape, cowling pretty bad.

the emergency crews were out in droves. There must have been 3 fire trucks, a bunch of police cars, other personnel.

This was roughly 4 PM, and we were to fly to FRR, and had the plane until 6 PM. We decided to discuss the flight plan for FRR, which we did today. We sat around and talked and didn't leave til 630 and they were still out there. they did let the 3 planes circling, land, and a few others take off (who were not coming back).

this morning it was woefully sitting on a flatbed. I didn't have my camera on me. and the flight this morning was simply fabulous. perfectly blue skies, nice temps, a pretty flight over the Shenandoahs.

wouldn't want to be that guy.

 

[poadeleted3]

There was an accident at Perk Valley yesterday also. Somebody ran their Cessna off the end of the runway and flipped it upside down. All aboard escaped with bumps and bruises, so all is good there.

 

[woodstock]

There was an accident at Perk Valley yesterday also. Somebody ran their Cessna off the end of the runway and flipped it upside down. All aboard escaped with bumps and bruises, so all is good there.

how well reinforced is the roof of these planes? there doesn't seem to be much up there but gas tanks. you'd think it would crumple, no? and cause a fire?

glad they were ok.

 

[Brian Austin]

...It was a Diamondstar, couldn't tell if it was a 2 seater or 4 seater. I think the tail number was 27X but I'm not sure.

anyway, apparently on landing somehow he veered into the trees. not sure yet if he was coming in, or had already touched down. it was the owner flying it, not a renter (it was a lease back to one of the schools there). I also heard today the guy was a student pilot. no idea at all if he was pre-PPL student or if this was something advanced. isn't that a lot of plane for a brand new student? I don't know......

The DA20 (two seater) is a primary trainer.

IIRC, there are two versions of the DA40: one with a constant speed prop and one with a fixed pitch prop. The FP is marketed as a trainer and substitute for the C172.

There is no reason a pre-PPL student couldn't be flying any of them. Even a CS prop isn't that advanced for pre-PPL work. I know several pilots who bought 182's and trained in them for their PPL. It just adds some time and a little complexity to their training.

 

[Brian Austin]

how well reinforced is the roof of these planes? there doesn't seem to be much up there but gas tanks. you'd think it would crumple, no? and cause a fire?

glad they were ok.

It's more reinforced than a low wing. Think about the stress design necessary for the wing structure in a high wing.

If I was going to flip a plane, I think I'd prefer a high wing over a low wing.

 

[woodstock]

It's more reinforced than a low wing. Think about the stress design necessary for the wing structure in a high wing.

If I was going to flip a plane, I think I'd prefer a high wing over a low wing.

high wings rule!!

 

[woodstock]

its tail number is 127X. I think it is a 4 seater.

 

[Brian Austin]

its tail number is 127X. I think it is a 4 seater.

I didn't note it above. The DA40 is a four seater, not a two seater.

 

[fgcason]

how well reinforced is the roof of these planes? there doesn't seem to be much up there but gas tanks. you'd think it would crumple, no? and cause a fire?

In Cessna's that's where the main spar carrythrough is. It has to be farily tuff in that area to not drop the fuselage in flight and probably designed for a fair amount of impact protection. The hardware goes down the door frames somehow. From the looks of one plane I saw in a shop with corrosion from a water leak, it's apparently real spendy to replace the hardware that goes down to the floor. It wasn't a pretty sight either.

I've seen a couple wadded up planes with breached tanks that didn't involve fires. Need a spark and ignitable fuel/air mixture to get it going.

Much better to not crash.

 

[Ed Guthrie]

It's more reinforced than a low wing. Think about the stress design necessary for the wing structure in a high wing.

If I was going to flip a plane, I think I'd prefer a high wing over a low wing.

If I had to choose, I'd opt for a low wing Mooney. The Mooney's passenger compartment is surrounded by a tubular steel cage, whereas the Cessna's passenger compartment is surrounded by a beer can. A ribbed beer can, true, but a beer can still.

 

[pete177]

Was waitin fer someone to say it And BTW, high wings definately do not "rule" All they do is block your vision. Its just a cheaper way to build an airplane. Now, if they put that high wing behind the pilot out of the way, well, that'd be a different story.

If I had to choose, I'd opt for a low wing Mooney. The Mooney's passenger compartment is surrounded by a tubular steel cage, whereas the Cessna's passenger compartment is surrounded by a beer can. A ribbed beer can, true, but a beer can still.

 

[poadeleted3]

Was waitin fer someone to say it And BTW, high wings definately do not "rule" All they do is block your vision. Its just a cheaper way to build an airplane. Now, if they put that high wing behind the pilot out of the way, well, that'd be a different story.

I can see beautifully out of a high wing plane... long as I want to go sight seeing. They also provide wonderful shade.

 

[Brian Austin]

I can see beautifully out of a high wing plane... long as I want to go sight seeing. They also provide wonderful shade.

Given the choice between the two, I'll take the high wing and extra shade out here. Not to mention I can flip open the windows on most high wings.

I don't have any visibility issues with high wings, I guess. If I want to look left and can't see something, I just tilt the wing up a little.

 

[AdamZ]

John Lowrey: A noted aviation author and expert is of the belief that composite planes such as the Diamond may be safer in an accident b/c the composite material are thought to absorb the energy more than the metal.

 

[gismo]

In Cessna's that's where the main spar carrythrough is. It has to be farily tuff in that area to not drop the fuselage in flight and probably designed for a fair amount of impact protection. The hardware goes down the door frames somehow. From the looks of one plane I saw in a shop with corrosion from a water leak, it's apparently real spendy to replace the hardware that goes down to the floor. It wasn't a pretty sight either.

I've seen a couple wadded up planes with breached tanks that didn't involve fires. Need a spark and ignitable fuel/air mixture to get it going.

I could be wrong, but I don't think there's a wing spar carry through in a C172 or C182, at least not the kind of structure you find with a cantilevered wing. I also don't think there's any general advantage in a high wing or low wing when it comes to crashworthiness and/or surviving a flip. I suspect there's more difference between different airplanes of the same wing location than between high vs low on the whole.

Also FWIW it's my understanding that composites typically fail abruptly and catestrophically vs aluminum and steel which yields (bends permanently) before coming completely apart. That would indicate to me that metal would be preferred from a crashwortiness perspective since there would be little if any energy absorbed by a composite prior to it giving away completely. That said, I also expect that a composite design could be made as crashworthy as a metal one with the right effort.

Much better to not crash.

Amen.