Having been in a situation where the plane just wouldn't climb anymore and being very close to treetops, all I can say is that if the plane is still flying and holding altitude, you are very hesitant to touch anything, flaps, prop, mixture etc. or make any type of turns. Its already hanging on the prop or the wings, stall horn blaring, and for fear of momentarily having it settle 20 feet down while you make a flap change or bank slightly, your instinct is its flying don't screw with anything until you have more room underneath the plane. Now if rising terrain is looming large maybe its time to experiment. But that is a split second decision just like a takeoff abort. My thought is he was doomed for bent metal the moment he left the ground. The good thing is he didn't stall it by jerking back or banking, which most likely would have resulted in a funeral. I say he made a series of very bad decisions followed by one good one (keep flying it don't stall it) that by luck kept the grimm reaper at bay. It didn't hurt that he was in a Stinson with a brick shithouse framework and that the slatted Stinson wings have great slow flight performance. I was lucky in that after a mile of treetop skimming I knew I had an open lake coming up, and once over the water I dared to retract the flaps from 20 to 10 and up she went. I also had floats on so I knew I could land on the lake if it still wouldn't climb once I retracted flaps. I swore I'll never put myself in that situation again. My lesson was much cheaper than this guys.

Maybe dumb question

But does the Stinson have flaps? I didn't see flaps deployed

Yes the Stinson has flaps, they probably add more drag than lift at that altitude.

flaps are visible at 6:58 out of the side window view - they look retracted to me

Talking about the mixture, I fly out of a 4500 airport. I seldom use a rich mixture unless I am off the ground and climbing hard. Usually only in the winter too. I adjust the mixture at run up to get the best RPM and then give it just a little more when I start my takeoff. Running too rich in the summer really makes your plane a slug, just like putting on the carb heat.

Like they say. An accident is usually a series of mistakes and not just one. Looks like there were several things that added up to the wreck. High DA, Weight, Fuel? Mixture? Who knows, but it is amazing to see the trees being shredded by that plane. Some had to be 6".

robw56 wrote:Yes the Stinson has flaps, they probably add more drag than lift at that altitude.

This is my uninformed question of the Stinson at 10 degrees of flaps. Why would they not work the same way as at lower altitudes for increasing lift, at least for liftoff or lowering stall speed in slow flight at high density altitudes? It would have been my unStinsoninformed choice.

I can't speak with absolute certainty about the use of flaps on a Stinson at high altitudes. However, I do know that in my C-170 POH above certain altitudes.... I think it is around 4000-5000 feet. It states the use of flaps for takeoff will increase the takeoff roll. I've also done testing from a 5000ft+ field elevation experimenting with different flap settings and concluded my plane climbs better with flaps retracted. Thats why I always milk them off as soon as I'm airborne.

Hey there, brother of robw56. My dad and I flew his 108-3 to Johnson Creek for the backcountry fly-in. We flew in the mornings and returned in the afternoon while on a 4 night stay. Even just the 2 of us in there we were always weary of density altitude. There is no way that you would catch me in any 4 seat plane with density altitude that high and in the back country. So glad these guys all made it. Just too bad they had to learn that way. And I agree that this video should be used in ground schools to teach student pilots the danger of density altitude. After having someone close to me die in a plane crash in February in Washington near Mt. Si in North Bend, this video made my stomach churn to see what it is like inside the plane in a crash.

Thank for the post,try to be extra
safe out there folks
Btw it's REAL hot here today.
Chuck

First time watching....gut wrenching to say the least. Those 4 folks are very lucky...VERY LUCKY. We should not arm chair QB this one. We make stupid mistakes....

About all I can say is wow!

AKT

This video is spreading quick, I just saw it on the ABC world news.

It's popped up on every forum, yahoo group or aviation list I am on!

As a note to self I did a calculation of how long a question mark turn back to the field would take. Using my rule of thumb formula, a two minute turn at 60 knots would require an 11 degree-ish bank angle and 90 seconds, the same amount of time it took from take-off to crash. Of course, you wouldn't know that with any confidence unless you practice it, which I intend to do.
Me thinks the mixture knob in a Stinson should not be in front of the pax's knee, not that he was using it, but for those that do.

I still can't get over the yahoos with cameras, the one guy filming his dazed impression--good Lord, that was as contrived as Avatar. I wonder if they were tweeting too while the pilot leaked blood, the social media craze is out of control!

I didn't read every post, so maybe I missed it, but knowing your V speeds is extremly important in instances such as this ...think about it, if your indicating slower than Vy, (as it appeared in the video, by the angle of attack in second video) the high angles of attack are simply Induced Drag. If memory serves, aren't V speeds published for max gross weight conditions? I do know from years of high DA Nevada flying, and now years of Idaho backcountry flying, that sometimes we inadvertantly raise that nose up a little to much just hoping she'll climb a little better, when actually it would climb better if allowed to accelerate some and reach that speed that results in best rate of climb. I'm in no way saying that is what happened here...but it may have been one of the links in the chain of events that resulted in what happened. I witnessed a Cessna 182 use 3/4 of the runway at Smiley Creek once simply because the pilot raised the nose wheel off the ground executing a picture perfect soft field take off, problem was, at that elevation, there wasn't enough HP to overcome the Induced Drag of the high angle of attack and the added drag of the grass strip. I talked to the pilot about it later and he said he contemplated pulling the throttle and letting it go off the end. Glad all are ok. These discussions are good reminders to all of us to stay sharp, and make good decisions. Joe

joecub wrote: If memory serves, aren't V speeds published for max gross weight conditions? I do know from years of high DA Nevada flying, and now years of Idaho backcountry flying, that sometimes we inadvertantly raise that nose up a little to much just hoping she'll climb a little better, when actually it would climb better if allowed to accelerate some and reach that speed that results in best rate of climb.

Excellent point.

All I can say is wow!

Another good rule of thumb from Sparky is the 70/50 rule (70% rotation speed by 50% of runway). As others mentioned, it looks like he got airborne in ground effect and settled back on to the runway once or twice way down the runway. I try to always have my abort point set in my mind, and if it is a new strip or I am concerned for whatever reason, I'll brief Dee on it as well (or whoever is with me). That way she is in the loop and is another set of eyes to keep my situational awareness up when things start happening fast.

I had the same thoughts: I don't think he dared to turn the plane. I think that the intercom audio would have been very interesting.

This will definitely be used for training by me and is a great reminder for all of us. Glad they all lived. Very, very lucky.

See... He shoulda done a hammerhead to turn around.

Gump

I will apologize first. I am about to be rude.
I had heard about this video... but just watched it today.
Fucking idiots. In the news, the one guy is saying the pilot should be credited with getting them down without killing them. I watched that takeoff very carefully. It was in the air for a long time before it came back down on the ground. Any fool who didn't shut it down at that point should never be allowed near the controls of a flying machine ever again. He then flys almost straight towards rising terrain and trees. After the inevitable crash... the survivors think they should all be on a TV show. They sit around staring into their gopros... instead of rounding up some first aid supplies and tending to the injured. Fucking idiots.
I just don't know what some guys are thinking when they take control of a flying machine on a hot day, at high altitude. Every frigging pilot out there knows the performance will suck. Darwin was cheated on this one.
Now... I am sorry. I will not say anymore.

joecub wrote:knowing your V speeds is extremly important in instances such as this ...

Extremely. It's interesting to note that Vx goes up with altitude, and Vy goes down with altitude. At the absolute ceiling of the plane, they are one and the same thing. Going slower than this speed at that point, and you will descend. Go faster, and you will also descend. This poor guy was very close to the point where Vx and Vy were one and the same thing. Here's why...
http://home.pcisys.net/~aghorash/Why_Vx_and_Vy_Change_With_Altitude.pdf
If your constraint is out-running the ground, the speed that matters is Vx, not Vy. Per the above, if you are close to your ceiling (and this guy was pretty close), there isn't much difference between the two. If one wants a max performance climb to avoid a ridge, one might find that Vy will climb up faster, albeit right through the side of the ridge. The difference between Vx and Vy can be fairly dramatic in a lightly loaded plane, and are much closer when heavily loaded.

I'm still not convinced pilotage post takeoff would have had a different outcome...just some pilotage pre-engine start.

flightlogic wrote:I will apologize first. I am about to be rude.
I had heard about this video... but just watched it today.
Fucking idiots. In the news, the one guy is saying the pilot should be credited with getting them down without killing them. I watched that takeoff very carefully. It was in the air for a long time before it came back down on the ground. Any fool who didn't shut it down at that point should never be allowed near the controls of a flying machine ever again. He then flys almost straight towards rising terrain and trees. After the inevitable crash... the survivors think they should all be on a TV show. They sit around staring into their gopros... instead of rounding up some first aid supplies and tending to the injured. Fucking idiots.
I just don't know what some guys are thinking when they take control of a flying machine on a hot day, at high altitude. Every frigging pilot out there knows the performance will suck. Darwin was cheated on this one.
Now... I am sorry. I will not say anymore.

At least they didn't put music on the video, AMIRITE?? *elbow*