First crash of 2010 Airventure
Mon Aug 02, 2010 10:35 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
tricycles are for little girls
Tue Aug 03, 2010 5:34 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I guess that makes since.
Tue Aug 03, 2010 7:53 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I am kinda puzzled by this. If the video was not shot, commissioned or owned by Jack Roush how can he, his organization, attorneys or any other faction of his group dictate to Youtube to pull it off their site ??????
Last edited by Stol on Tue Aug 03, 2010 3:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ben Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
www.haaspowerair.com
Tue Aug 03, 2010 9:05 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Stol wrote:ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I am kinda puzzled buy this. If the video was not shot, commissioned or owned by Jack Roush how can he, his organization, attorneys or any other faction of his group dictate to Youtube to pulling it off their site ??????
MONEY?
- Glidergeek offline
- Posts: 1937
- Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 8:02 pm
- Location: Hesperia
- Aircraft: 1968 P206C
DG 400
Tue Aug 03, 2010 2:57 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
George,
Listen to the tower audio again. The one asking if "you going to be alright with this" is clearly the OSH tower controller, who was calling Roush "6Sierra" at this point, then started calling him "Premiere". There's no doubt that the controller was questioning the spacing.
MTV
Listen to the tower audio again. The one asking if "you going to be alright with this" is clearly the OSH tower controller, who was calling Roush "6Sierra" at this point, then started calling him "Premiere". There's no doubt that the controller was questioning the spacing.
MTV
Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:46 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
The good news is that Biffle won the race on Sunday so all is well in Roush-Fenway land.
gb
gb
Tue Aug 03, 2010 6:55 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Glidergeek wrote:Stol wrote:ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I am kinda puzzled buy this. If the video was not shot, commissioned or owned by Jack Roush how can he, his organization, attorneys or any other faction of his group dictate to Youtube to pulling it off their site ??????
MONEY?
I would think that the people that own the video's can still post else where as long as it's legal to do so. Unless whoever owned the video's already got compensated from the Roush people. I don't know......
Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:14 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Mike, we listened to it multiple times, because a number of things seemed odd. These guys also agree with what we heard:
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviati ... /msg45654/
http://www.liveatc.net/forums/atcaviati ... /msg45654/
Tue Aug 03, 2010 8:23 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Stol wrote:ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I am kinda puzzled by this. If the video was not shot, commissioned or owned by Jack Roush how can he, his organization, attorneys or any other faction of his group dictate to Youtube to pull it off their site ??????
More likely the EAA owns the video. Probably says that on the back of your ticket.
- Bonanza Man offline
- Posts: 909
- Joined: Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:42 pm
- Location: Seeley Lake
Thu Aug 05, 2010 4:57 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
George,
Listen to the VOICES. The VOICE which is giving instructions to aircraft (not just 6JR/Premiere) is the same one that said "I don't think so". You're only listening to a very seriously edited tape, not the whole deal.
In any case, it makes no difference. If I recall correctly, your version is even worse than mine, from the perspective of Mr. Roush. If he really didn't think so, why didn't he initiate a go around? He was dog slow turning from base to final, and frankly, I suspect it was pretty much all over at that point. So, what's your point?
It was a classic swept wing jet stall event. They were lucky they weren't a bit higher.
MTV
Listen to the VOICES. The VOICE which is giving instructions to aircraft (not just 6JR/Premiere) is the same one that said "I don't think so". You're only listening to a very seriously edited tape, not the whole deal.
In any case, it makes no difference. If I recall correctly, your version is even worse than mine, from the perspective of Mr. Roush. If he really didn't think so, why didn't he initiate a go around? He was dog slow turning from base to final, and frankly, I suspect it was pretty much all over at that point. So, what's your point?
It was a classic swept wing jet stall event. They were lucky they weren't a bit higher.
MTV
Thu Aug 05, 2010 5:06 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Bonanza Man wrote:Stol wrote:ccurrie wrote:there was videos on youtube but they got pulled, roush's people must have got a hold of them
I am kinda puzzled by this. If the video was not shot, commissioned or owned by Jack Roush how can he, his organization, attorneys or any other faction of his group dictate to Youtube to pull it off their site ??????
More likely the EAA owns the video. Probably says that on the back of your ticket.
What ticket............................
I payes my money and got a wristband... I am looking it it now and don't see any fine print on it..
Ben Haas
www.haaspowerair.com
www.haaspowerair.com
Thu Aug 05, 2010 9:31 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Mike, I am not trying to defend Roush, just make sense of this ridiculous crash. You got an old guy, single pilot in a jet, headed to Oshkosh in day, VFR conditions to sign autographs and give a speech, presumably about what a stick he is, with a gal, not his wife, but with an "attractive empennage," get into a position with an unstabilized approach, make a late decision to execute a balked landing, and despite being in an aircraft with a high power to weight ratio, mismanage the AOA control and depart controlled flight, narrowly miss aircraft and people on the ground, break the fuselage, and then exit the aircraft with the engine power levers at a high power setting leaving emergency personnel to shut down the engines. The ATC sequence is puzzling at best on the tapes I have listened to, but since misery loves company, I would bet this controller won't be back at Oshkosh next year if Roush has his way.
As you and I have discussed previously in a long ago thread on that Internet babe, without a medical, taxiing her iced up CJ across the grass in Maine and then killing herself and her son, I believe that turbojets need not just two engines, but two competent pilots to achieve their safety potential. While I have thousands of hours of single pilot turbine time, we have a policy of not carrying passengers single pilot in a jet. I also believe single pilots in a turbojet have a greater responsibility to choose the conditions they fly in, to receive more recurrent training, and generally act more cautiously in exchange for exercising single pilot privileges in a turbojet.
As you and I have discussed previously in a long ago thread on that Internet babe, without a medical, taxiing her iced up CJ across the grass in Maine and then killing herself and her son, I believe that turbojets need not just two engines, but two competent pilots to achieve their safety potential. While I have thousands of hours of single pilot turbine time, we have a policy of not carrying passengers single pilot in a jet. I also believe single pilots in a turbojet have a greater responsibility to choose the conditions they fly in, to receive more recurrent training, and generally act more cautiously in exchange for exercising single pilot privileges in a turbojet.
Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:42 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
George,
Good points all, perhaps. I would add that the Premiere is also a swept wing jet, with swept wing stall characteristics, and watching that thing stall was a classic illustration of how swept wing jets depart.
We were watching the "event" from not far away, and I didn't hear the engines come up till AFTER the plane splattered. I suspect that the airplane breaking in half pulled or pushed on the right controls to move those engines to max thrust, and I'm not sure that after the crash there was any control continuity to enable Roush to shut them down. The plane was broken in half. Who knows.
This one shouldn't be too hard for the NTSB to figure out in any case.
And, hopefully, the wife knew about the secretary in the right seat, or Jack's got waaaaayyyyy more problems than a wrecked jet and the FAA
I don't disagree with you regarding single pilot jet ops, BUT, I think it depends largely on the pilot and the environment.
I have said many times that this kind of environment (day, VFR, airshow, rules "wishy washy", etc) is a MUCH more dangerous environment than the single pilot IFR environment is. I argue that is ONE of the reasons that GA has a much worse accident rate than corporate or airlines. Only ONE of the reasons, but a compelling one. There are a lot of decisions to make in a VERY short time there, and lots of pressure. Under VFR, the pilot has to make a LOT of decisions. Under IFR and in the system, not SO MANY decisions are left to the pilot. As pilots, we are typically optimists, or we wouldn't get in the plane to start with, so press on becomes the watch word.
Too bad in any case. A beautiful airplane lost. But, nobody got hurt bad except the owner/pilot. Hopefully, he'll recover soon.
MTV
Good points all, perhaps. I would add that the Premiere is also a swept wing jet, with swept wing stall characteristics, and watching that thing stall was a classic illustration of how swept wing jets depart.
We were watching the "event" from not far away, and I didn't hear the engines come up till AFTER the plane splattered. I suspect that the airplane breaking in half pulled or pushed on the right controls to move those engines to max thrust, and I'm not sure that after the crash there was any control continuity to enable Roush to shut them down. The plane was broken in half. Who knows.
This one shouldn't be too hard for the NTSB to figure out in any case.
And, hopefully, the wife knew about the secretary in the right seat, or Jack's got waaaaayyyyy more problems than a wrecked jet and the FAA
I don't disagree with you regarding single pilot jet ops, BUT, I think it depends largely on the pilot and the environment.
I have said many times that this kind of environment (day, VFR, airshow, rules "wishy washy", etc) is a MUCH more dangerous environment than the single pilot IFR environment is. I argue that is ONE of the reasons that GA has a much worse accident rate than corporate or airlines. Only ONE of the reasons, but a compelling one. There are a lot of decisions to make in a VERY short time there, and lots of pressure. Under VFR, the pilot has to make a LOT of decisions. Under IFR and in the system, not SO MANY decisions are left to the pilot. As pilots, we are typically optimists, or we wouldn't get in the plane to start with, so press on becomes the watch word.
Too bad in any case. A beautiful airplane lost. But, nobody got hurt bad except the owner/pilot. Hopefully, he'll recover soon.
MTV
Fri Aug 06, 2010 8:57 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
I'm curious about one thing...maybe you all have some insight. This was my first trip to Airventure and I enjoyed every minute of it. We did a smart thing and placed our folding chairs front and center for the Airshow every morning at 8am. Mon-Thur, we had front row seats for the Airshow. Part of the fun came after the Airshow when they would open up the airport for arrivals and we would watch them land 3 or 4 planes at a time on 18. Each plane would be assigned a color and they would land near the dot they were assigned. Controlled chaos but it was a beautiful thing to watch.
I noticed that the turbine planes all used rwy 6 or 27. I would see King Airs and Lears coming and going along with some of the bigger twins and of course, the Tri-motor.
On the day of the crash, we elected to leave with the masses and get to dinner earlier. As we walked to the North 40 entrance, we stopped at the first row of Honey Buckets for a pit stop. As we waited, I saw the Premier coming directly at us on a low base for 18. He turned sharply, overshot the Runway, got slow and pulled up, porpoised and went behind trees so we couldn't see the crash. We heard two louds pops and looked at each other and said "uh oh"..
So, I'm wondering...did JR likely request 18 to do a hot landing in front of the crowd or did ATC send him over there??? I know most of the airshow planes land on 18 during the show but after-show arrivals were all bug smashers from my vantage point. Turbines used 6/27.
Thoughts?
I noticed that the turbine planes all used rwy 6 or 27. I would see King Airs and Lears coming and going along with some of the bigger twins and of course, the Tri-motor.
On the day of the crash, we elected to leave with the masses and get to dinner earlier. As we walked to the North 40 entrance, we stopped at the first row of Honey Buckets for a pit stop. As we waited, I saw the Premier coming directly at us on a low base for 18. He turned sharply, overshot the Runway, got slow and pulled up, porpoised and went behind trees so we couldn't see the crash. We heard two louds pops and looked at each other and said "uh oh"..
So, I'm wondering...did JR likely request 18 to do a hot landing in front of the crowd or did ATC send him over there??? I know most of the airshow planes land on 18 during the show but after-show arrivals were all bug smashers from my vantage point. Turbines used 6/27.
Thoughts?
- SixTwoLeemer offline
- Posts: 1285
- Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 10:53 am
- Location: Wasatch Front
Altitude is Time…. Airspeed is Life!
Fri Aug 06, 2010 9:27 am
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
First, I hope that Roush is OK. I understand that he was transferred to Mayo and is reported to be still inpatient there with multiple facial surgeries and injuries. I assume he was wearing his shoulder straps, but I am sure that will come out in the report.
Since you were there, I would be curious as to what you saw and think happened, and given how hard it is to sort this stuff out from a fleeting glance, it will be good fun to compare that to what the NTSB ultimately says after looking at all available photographs, video and data.
The Premier has a shaker and a pusher. Production test calibrates the system to make sure the pusher fires at the proper speed, but does not stall the aircraft. With the pusher, I am not sure how you get the aircraft to "depart" in that classic swept wing stall. It is certainly possible, if not probable, that the pusher fired in that tight turn and contributed to loss of control.
If you believe he was unable to shut the engines down because of airframe damage, how did the emergency folks shut them down -- wait for them to run out of gas? While the Premier isn't known for range
, I will make you a dollar bet that the engines could be shut down by either the power levers being put in cut off or with fire wall shut offs. More likely his injuries were the reason he didn't shut them down before exiting.
As to single pilot safety, this is from AOPA:
As a best effort, Breiling compared SP-certified Citation accident profiles with those of two-crew-certified Citations, and looked at the years from 1972 (the time of the introduction of the first SP Citation) to 2007. He concluded that the total accident rate per 100,000 flight hours (the standard measure for accident rates) of single-piloted Citations is 2.7 times greater than that of two-crew Citations—and that the fatal accident rate is 3.7 times greater than two-crewed Citations.
In this instance, a tight right circle, it would be very hard to see the runway from the left seat until rolling out on final, and this may have been a big part of the error chain.
As to less decisions needing to be made single pilot IFR, come fly in the non radar approach and departure environment of Alaska or the mountains of the US west and Canada, and I suspect you will feel differently.
Since you were there, I would be curious as to what you saw and think happened, and given how hard it is to sort this stuff out from a fleeting glance, it will be good fun to compare that to what the NTSB ultimately says after looking at all available photographs, video and data.
The Premier has a shaker and a pusher. Production test calibrates the system to make sure the pusher fires at the proper speed, but does not stall the aircraft. With the pusher, I am not sure how you get the aircraft to "depart" in that classic swept wing stall. It is certainly possible, if not probable, that the pusher fired in that tight turn and contributed to loss of control.
If you believe he was unable to shut the engines down because of airframe damage, how did the emergency folks shut them down -- wait for them to run out of gas? While the Premier isn't known for range
, I will make you a dollar bet that the engines could be shut down by either the power levers being put in cut off or with fire wall shut offs. More likely his injuries were the reason he didn't shut them down before exiting.As to single pilot safety, this is from AOPA:
As a best effort, Breiling compared SP-certified Citation accident profiles with those of two-crew-certified Citations, and looked at the years from 1972 (the time of the introduction of the first SP Citation) to 2007. He concluded that the total accident rate per 100,000 flight hours (the standard measure for accident rates) of single-piloted Citations is 2.7 times greater than that of two-crew Citations—and that the fatal accident rate is 3.7 times greater than two-crewed Citations.
In this instance, a tight right circle, it would be very hard to see the runway from the left seat until rolling out on final, and this may have been a big part of the error chain.
As to less decisions needing to be made single pilot IFR, come fly in the non radar approach and departure environment of Alaska or the mountains of the US west and Canada, and I suspect you will feel differently.
Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:06 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
George,
He was making left traffic--no right turn involved.
I wasn't in the cockpit, so I don't know how the engines were eventually shut down. They were initially brought from full thrust to idle after quite a while at high thrust after impact, then ran at idle for some time before they were actually shut down. It MAY well have been that the pilot was unconcious or semi concious after impact. He had a LOT of blood on him, and the fact that he's still in the hospital this long would suggest that his chimes were rang pretty hard on impact, and it may well have been that he wasn't able to shut the engines down, either because he couldn't see or was a little confused
.
One wild card in the single pilot vs two pilot crew discussion that AOPA apparently ignored is this: The vast majority of two pilot crewed private jets are crewed by professional crews, whereas a lot of the single pilot operations in private jets are in fact quite low time and relatively inexperienced pilots. So, as is often the case, these "compelling statistics" may be rather seriously skewed. Many of the two pilot crews I've run into are retired airline pilots with a massive amount of experience in the IFR environment.
I don't doubt for a moment that a two pilot crew CAN be safer than a single pilot crew, all other qualifications being equal. My point was simply that you can have two marginally qualified pilots in a jet and you probably wouldn't be as well off as having a very well qualified single pilot.
The Alaska IFR environment and approaches are still FAR safer than operating purely VFR in Alaska, even when operated as a single pilot under IFR. There are all kinds of statistics to illustrate that point.
MTV
He was making left traffic--no right turn involved.
I wasn't in the cockpit, so I don't know how the engines were eventually shut down. They were initially brought from full thrust to idle after quite a while at high thrust after impact, then ran at idle for some time before they were actually shut down. It MAY well have been that the pilot was unconcious or semi concious after impact. He had a LOT of blood on him, and the fact that he's still in the hospital this long would suggest that his chimes were rang pretty hard on impact, and it may well have been that he wasn't able to shut the engines down, either because he couldn't see or was a little confused
.One wild card in the single pilot vs two pilot crew discussion that AOPA apparently ignored is this: The vast majority of two pilot crewed private jets are crewed by professional crews, whereas a lot of the single pilot operations in private jets are in fact quite low time and relatively inexperienced pilots. So, as is often the case, these "compelling statistics" may be rather seriously skewed. Many of the two pilot crews I've run into are retired airline pilots with a massive amount of experience in the IFR environment.
I don't doubt for a moment that a two pilot crew CAN be safer than a single pilot crew, all other qualifications being equal. My point was simply that you can have two marginally qualified pilots in a jet and you probably wouldn't be as well off as having a very well qualified single pilot.
The Alaska IFR environment and approaches are still FAR safer than operating purely VFR in Alaska, even when operated as a single pilot under IFR. There are all kinds of statistics to illustrate that point.
MTV
Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:26 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
mtv wrote:The Alaska IFR environment and approaches are still FAR safer than operating purely VFR in Alaska, even when operated as a single pilot under IFR. There are all kinds of statistics to illustrate that point.
I can't speak for other than Arctic Alaska, but from a working pilot's point of view, there is no such thing as VFR up there. VFR turns into IFR minimums (and below) in a heartbeat, and you play single pilot "fake VFR" in that environment a whole lot. The workload can be huge, and that's an a single engine puddle-jumper, at very slow speeds. All in all, I'm really surprised the accident stats are as low as they actually are.
Gump
Last edited by GumpAir on Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:33 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Not rated in any of the airplanes being discussed... but I do have a question that may answer another person's question. Does the Premier have a breaker or cutoff switch to disable the stick shaker or stick pusher?
If someone was getting ready to demonstrate their incredible skills in front of a crowd by doing a slow short field landing in a Premier, perhaps their spectacular piloting skills would convince them to disable the shaker/pusher. Again, I have zero experience in anything like that airplane, so I'm guessing.
One thing I clearly noticed from the pictures published... the airplane was well on its way toward a snap-roll or spin entry when the wing hit the ground. If it had been about ten or fifteen feet higher it would have become a "cartwheel" type of crash instead of a "pancake" like it was. I'll bet that a cartwheel crash would have become a pyrotechnic event with nobody pulled out alive.
Driving by the wreck 10 minutes afterward on one of the trams, I couldn't help but notice how close this airplane came to dozens of airplanes tied down in the grass. It looked like a wingspan or two away from the stuff parked in showplane parking. Not only did Mr. Roush use up one of his nine lives that day, he used up about 50 more belonging to the folks tied down next to the runway.
Please God don't ever let me be responsible for any shit like that. Me's already done enough really stupid things in an airplane.
If someone was getting ready to demonstrate their incredible skills in front of a crowd by doing a slow short field landing in a Premier, perhaps their spectacular piloting skills would convince them to disable the shaker/pusher. Again, I have zero experience in anything like that airplane, so I'm guessing.
One thing I clearly noticed from the pictures published... the airplane was well on its way toward a snap-roll or spin entry when the wing hit the ground. If it had been about ten or fifteen feet higher it would have become a "cartwheel" type of crash instead of a "pancake" like it was. I'll bet that a cartwheel crash would have become a pyrotechnic event with nobody pulled out alive.
Driving by the wreck 10 minutes afterward on one of the trams, I couldn't help but notice how close this airplane came to dozens of airplanes tied down in the grass. It looked like a wingspan or two away from the stuff parked in showplane parking. Not only did Mr. Roush use up one of his nine lives that day, he used up about 50 more belonging to the folks tied down next to the runway.
Please God don't ever let me be responsible for any shit like that. Me's already done enough really stupid things in an airplane.
.
Fri Aug 06, 2010 5:55 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
RobBurson wrote:To kinds of pilots. Those who have bent one and those who are going to bend one.
I do believe Mr. Roush may be wise to hire a good pilot. The one he was using seems to be ah, um, how do you say it nicely..............lacking the needed skills.
It's not like he was at Mile Hi or Dewey Moore
Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it is required to have two pilots on a jet?
- Green Hornet offline
- Posts: 527
- Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 1:47 pm
- Location: No Where Land, USA
AKA SOJORRN
1997 Maule-M7-235C
I am a leaf on the wind watch how I soar! Hoban "Wash" Washburne, Firefly/Serenity
WOC SPOT
1997 Maule-M7-235C
I am a leaf on the wind watch how I soar! Hoban "Wash" Washburne, Firefly/Serenity
WOC SPOT
Fri Aug 06, 2010 6:45 pm
Re: First crash of 2010 Airventure
Green Hornet wrote:Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe it is required to have two pilots on a jet?
Any aircraft that requires a type rating and is +12,500 lbs gross weight. Hawker-Beech Premiere is considered a VLJ I think.
- Zzz offline
- Posts: 2855
- Joined: Fri Oct 08, 2004 11:09 pm
- Location: northern
- Aircraft: Swiveling desk chair
Half a century spent proving “it is better to be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”
DISPLAY OPTIONS
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Latest Features
-
Live to Tell
A Minnesota pilot is surprised to learn that the sudden asymmetric drag of an out-of-rig ski can…Read More -
Creators
Working in some of the Yukon's most beautiful and remote environments, photographer Simon Blakesley captures aircraft in…Read More -
Aircraft Ownership and Maintenance
Upgrading to big tires can make a huge difference in backcountry performance, but with those gains come…Read More -
Tales from Yesteryear
In this tale from bush flying yesteryear, Don Cogger signs up to help Atlee Dodge Jr recovery…Read More
Latest Knowledge Base
-
Destinations
A regional guide with ideas for winter camping destinations in California, Nevada, New Mexico, and Arizona.Read More -
Aircraft
Finding an affordable aircraft that can handle the backcountry for $80K or less? A challenge for sure, but with the…Read More -
Aircraft
01.29.2018 - Zane - Updated tire diameter graphic to add 8.50x10 Guide to tires for use in the backcountry and off-airport landing…Read More -
Pilots
12.22.2013 - Initial article format Operating aircraft on skis and negotiating a snow-covered landscape is an entirely unique skillset and environment.…Read More
