Ottawa small plane crash. No injuries.

[Ehlectric]

http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/injur ... story.html

[YYZSaabGuy]

Bummer about the airplane - nice-looking Mooney.
Glad to hear the pilot walked away uninjured (apart possibly from her pride,
depending on the cause of the accident).
I love that the media now make a point of checking Flightaware to look into
the aircraft's recent utilization.

[Colonel Sanders]

One has to wonder how a Mooney was unable to successfully
utilize a 3300 foot paved runway. With the cool temps, the
density altitude would have been zero - or perhaps slightly
negative.

Either the aircraft was heavily overloaded, or something was
seriously wrong with the takeoff technique. It's possible the
engine wasn't making full power, too, I guess. I watched a
Mooney fly overhead which was obviously running on only 3
or 4 cylinders. Talked to the owner afterwards - he said that
it was flying a bit slower than normal

Hopefully someone would notice that they were running on
only 3 cylinders during start of the takeoff roll due to the
horrible resulting vibration, and abort the takeoff? This is
not rocket science - happened to me, a few years back.
Taxiied back in, found and cleared the blocked fuel injector
and off I went.

[woodzi]

Do you know something we don't know, because all the story says is that the plane hit a fence at the end of the runway?

Maybe she hit a bird and decided to abort? There a lot of things that might have happened that were not pilot error, and even if it was "the pilot walked away uninjured" so she did something right.

[Colonel Sanders]

I know that airport - and that fence - and that airplane really well.

Recently at Rockcliffe:

- a pilot ran a comanche out of gas on one tank, after I
specifically recommended to him that he fill up before he
take off. He did not bother to switch tanks, landed without
power, and hit that very same fence, destroying it

- a pilot bounced a 172 so hard during landing, he smashed
it into the infield, destroying it.

- a pilot landed a Waco fast, bounced it hard, and flipped it
upside down on the runway

- a pilot landed a 182 on the taxiway and struck a parked
airplane

I can't blame many of the above accidents on a bird strike,
but maybe this one will be different

Eyewitness says:

Skid marks through the grass, so the gear was down when she left the end of the runway.

PS Mooney are built like tanks. Ever pulled the upholstery out of one
and looked at the main spar underneath the front seats? That might
have had something to do with walking away, too.

[5x5]

That's a lot of accidents for one little airport. No wonder you feel that the training industry is so bad.

[Colonel Sanders]

You don't know the half of it.

Two pilots from that same airport died last winter
when they tried to fly the ILS 07 at CYOW.

At my airport, recent accidents, off the top of my head:

1) "texas taildragger" tailwheel conversion of
C150 destroyed during landing. Wind less than
10 knots at 45 degrees off. Pilot could not handle
crosswind, got sideways, flipped it inverted on runway.
Transient pilot - not based here

2) sonex loses control landing, wipes out our PAPI
for runway 06. Transient pilot - not based here

3) Two puppy mill pilots tried to land a 172 at night.
All runway lights working. Smashed it hard, wiped
the nose gear off, prop and engine totalled. Transient
pilots - not based here.

4) two hangars down from me, RV-7a pilot exceeds
Vne during low-level aerobatic tailchase and rudder
explodes during flutter, 1 fatal.

Pilot error, pilot error, pilot error and pilot error.

Anyone spot a pattern? Bueller?

Oh yeah, until the TSB found out the cause of the
rudder flutter on the RV-7A, it was blamed on a
"bird strike", too.

Lay off on the so-called "bird strikes" as the primary
cause of GA accidents.

A friend of mine had a "bird strike" a while back. Turned
out the bird was sitting on a wire crossing a river

[Colonel Sanders]

Oh yeah, also at my airport recently

- dinglenuts hand-propped with no one at controls. It
ran away from him across the ramp, and went nose-to-nose
with a nearly new 182, destroying it and scaring the crap
out of the young family inside of it. The poor kids.

- another dinglenuts hand-propped a cherokee. On ice.
He was trying to save $100 on a new battery, I am told.
Got away from him, it ran down the taxiway and smashed
into a hangar so hard it destroyed the hangar doors and
caused tens of thousands of dollars of damage to the
aircraft inside the hangar.

Pilot error, and pilot error. Didn't see too many bird
strikes when the empty airplane drove off by itself. I
personally witnessed BOTH of the above - one during
the summer, and the other during the winter.

[Colonel Sanders]

No wonder you feel that the training industry is so bad

What was your first clue?

Unfortunately I seem to be the only person that thinks that improved
skills is the answer - not ever-increasing mounds of paperwork which
does nothing to improve safety, and is merely another tax.

[woodzi]

I was only suggesting that there are possibilities other than pilot error. Yes, most "accidents" are caused by pilot error, but not all of them.

Regardless of the reason, she got (or kept) the plane on the ground and walked away. Lets give her credit for that and not speculate that she tried to take off on 3 cylinders until we know more about what happened.

[Shiny Side Up]

Lay off on the so-called "bird strikes" as the primary
cause of GA accidents.

Indeed. My home field has a freakin' bird sanctuary next to it and I can count on one hand how many bird strikes there's been with fingers left over. In only one of those was there any substantial damage to the aircraft (king air struck a Canada Goose on take off) and even that did not cause a crash. Birds are smarter than most pilots give them credit for and far more aware.

[iflyforpie]

What's so tough about Rockcliffe? Didn't they land a DC-9 there once?

[KK7]

What's so tough about Rockcliffe? Didn't they land a DC-9 there once?

Nothing is tough about Rockcliffe. I know this airport extremely well, and the most complex thing about this airport is the airspace around it.

When the DC-9 landed, they took down the fence at the start of the runway as a precaution, came empty with minimum fuel. They stopped the aircraft in less distance than the average PPL trying to do a short field landing in a C172, and it turned out there was no reason to take down the fence.

I know the pilot in this incident, and I will be curious to learn what happened. She is not a product of recent flight training, she's experienced and has been flying since the 70s perhaps? It's been a while since I was there, but she used to have a different Mooney, she's been flying Mooneys for at least the last 10 years if not more.

[Shiny Side Up]

I know the pilot in this incident, and I will be curious to learn what happened. She is not a product of recent flight training, she's experienced and has been flying since the 70s perhaps? It's been a while since I was there, but she used to have a different Mooney, she's been flying Mooneys for at least the last 10 years if not more.

While I'm not familiar with the person in question, there's some thing people need to remember, but people on this forum hate to admit.

a) Poor pilot training isn't exclusive to the current era of aviation.
b) Age does not automatically equal flying experience.
c) Ownership does not automatically give you flying ability.
d) Years of flying is far less important than frequency of flying.

I know plenty of guys who a) learned to fly years and some times decades before me, thus b) are far older than I and c) who feel that they are experts on their own aircraft which they beat the hell out of/ neglect. Because lets face it, flying once a month d) or less ain't a good way to maintain proficiency.

[Colonel Sanders]

I just found out what happened. The usual. Sigh.

I was only suggesting that there are possibilities other than pilot error

Well, you would be wrong.

[JayVee]

They should put up a sign at Smiths Falls (Miramar), "LOCALS ONLY"

[DanWEC]

Pilot aborted the takeoff at just about Vr. Plane might have been in the air for about 10 feet, if at all. Applied heavy braking and slid off the end of the runway, along the grass and into the fence.

[Beefitarian]

We painted a sign JayVee. http://www.clickdagger.com/wp-content/u ... only-1.jpg

Maybe those pilot guys didn't see it under the bridge.

[JayVee]

Ah, that's why I didn't see it. I haven't done my flying-under-the-bridge checkout.

[Rookie50]

Nothing at all is tough about smith falls or rockcliffe. Lots of room for light aircraft. Landing light aircraft -- i admit i have no tailwheel time -- is all about proper energy management. Too much energy, go around. Landing on a taxiway, night accidents with a vasi -- dont get those unless youre not night rated in the first place.

Speaking of, The only thing I dislike about rockcliffe is its partially lighted only. (I think 1700 feet) Taking off on 09 - I think -- east towards the dark side, when lifting off instant black hole effect on a dark night, with trees beyond. On the gauges immediately. Better be focused. Legal, sure, but guys light the rest of that runway! What's the big deal?

The ILS accident at CYOW was nothing short of tragic. Attempting an ILS, at night, in those conditions, in that airplane, with that level of experience ---- I simply just don't get it. I'm sure there are many top guns out there -- on avcanada -- who would say no big deal to do an ILS at night with VV 100 in forecast icing conditions in a C177 with 350 TT....well I would say -- do it without me. No thanks. Get me a hotel room and a football game.

[oldncold]

First one does BEFORE doing ils in yow or anywhere is BRIEF the approach especially if single peelot . second do you have all the whiz bang tools these days so if ya screw up your friend auto can possibley save your day. third don't accept a clearance in icing conditions if the aircraft peformance and or equipment are not more than capable to deal with the condition.


a ce177 is not f.i.k.i. machine. been into yow many times once refused a clearance to hold at 4000ft in in a pc12 moderate to severe ice for air canada inbound from yyz instead accepted clearance to hold at 6000 ft in the clear of cloud n icing . the controller was accomodating and just needed another 1min out bound to allow for the extra altitude before intercept the loc . once cleared for approach .

that was accident tragic and my condolence to all concerned with another silly season approaching ( sleet snow and crappy wx ) fly safe, brief, and cold wx corrections too,

[Rookie50]

Also not a fan of Ottawa ATC services. I have had issues with this sector, and only in this sector, where I shouldn't have, in IMC conditions. Horrible communication I have never seen in the US, for example. Yes pilot is responsible but clear communication from ATC should be there and expected!

[Siddley Hawker]

...who would say no big deal to do an ILS at night with VV 100 in forecast icing conditions in a C177 with 350 TT....well I would say -- do it without me. No thanks. Get me a hotel room and a football game.

Gather around children... Ahem! Once upon a time, back in the hoary days of aviation when the third wheel of the landing gear was located in its proper place at the rear of the aircraft, the kindly inspectors at the Department of Transport - as it was known in those far-off times - would issue a certificate called a Class 2 instrument rating. It was not unlike a learners permit, in that it allowed the novice instrument pilot to launch when conditions precluded VFR, but said novice would be held to higher landing and alternate limits than the ..ahem.. professional holder of a Class 1 instrument rating. Nowadays, of course, flight training is of such high caliber that the 'learners permit' has gone the way of the dinosaur and the same landing and alternate limits apply, whether one holds an ATR with 5000 hours of solid instrument time or one's license reeks of new ink. What does that have to do with the C177 accident I hear you ask? Well, if the 177 guy had held the learners permit he would have been illegal to launch. Not that an illegality might have stopped him, of course. If he did hold a Class 1, it may be assumed he was possessed of a certain amount of skill and smarts, maybe even enough to have said the hell with it and cancelled a flight into 100 feet and ice with a single engined Cessna.

[Rookie50]

This is a good idea, a class 2 IFR, and for myself too. I am not a professional pilot and while I train to minimums, my practical minimums I maintain as a single pilot, SE IFR are higher. As for night, I don't do any night IMC approaches. I simply don't fly enough actual for that. The safety record for amateur night IFR flights is horrible.

[cgzro]

Pilot aborted the takeoff at just about Vr. Plane might have been in the air for about 10 feet, if at all. Applied heavy braking and slid off the end of the runway, along the grass and into the fence.

Ok but anybody know "why" she aborted?
Presumably an engine problem ? in which case thats a very smart decision given the alternatives.