Mooney crash in NY area

[Lionudakis]

I look forward to hearing the survivors explaination of what happened. From what I gathered from the various pieces of information in all the news casts combined with pictures, there was probably several contributing factors. Unfortunatly it sounds that the fire was the final factor, if one survived, the others might have.

I never met or communicated with Patrick, but would recognize the plane anywhere as with most others that frequent this forum, in the electronic age, we have friends that we have never met face to face, but know just by association. Reading the articles and seeing pics/videos of him is still shocking and numbing, saddening for all involved. As a survivor of an aviation accident, things happen fast, and the conditions he was in are so detrimental to split second desicion making, regardless of equipment and training. Prayers are with him, his passengers, and their families, and everyone here.

[231Pilot]

Patrick's plane was for sale...he wanted to move up to a twin.  The link is still up on Controller.  It was well equipped, but he was having electrical problems as evidenced on the earlier referenced thread.

http://www.controller.com/listingsdetail/aircraft-for-sale/MOONEY-M20J-MSE/1995-MOONEY-M20J-MSE/1232353.htm?

 

[ArtCraft]

"Like a bird singing in the rain, let grateful memories survive in time of sorrow".

Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and friends.

ArtCraft Paint, Inc

[Earl]

Quote: davewilson

Ehscott and john. Please be assured that my post on beechtalk, re: risktaker, was NOT intended to be malicious or arrogant.  Yes, It could have been better stated.

 

[jetdriven]

Quote: davewilson

Some here think that a faulty charging system is not cause for an accident. But, after reviewing one of the videos, The plane landed up inverted. A tarp partially covers the belly,  Not sure, but I thought I saw the nose wheel extended. If the battery pooped out, and Patrick could not retract the gear on take off, a short runway, this could be a key factor on poor climb performance! Just my thoughts.

[fantom]

Rest in peace, Patrick.

There is much to learn about judgement from this accident. A stall just after take-off in a plane that had more than it's share of problems can, and in this case, be deadly. Flying should not be taken as casually as most of us, at times, take it.

As burned as the plane was, and with the likelyhood of the survivor's family lawyering up, having a fact based learning lesson is problematic, but we can hope. Just be careful out there, my friends, and good judgement is just as critical as flying skill, IMO.

I just got back from TX, and a 5+ hour flight with Parker. Lots of fun with the usual crappy WX and more than a little soul searching about Patrick. I'm amazed about the number of us, and others, who have talked and PM'ed with him as I have. He certainly lived for flying, and died doing something he loved to do.

I hope there's a place, way up in the sky,

Where pilots can go, when they have to die.

A place where a guy could buy a cold beer

For a friend and a comrade whose memory is dear.

A place where no doctor or lawyer could tread,

Nor a management -type would e'er be caught dead!

Just a quaint little place, kind of dark, full of smoke,

Where they like to sing loud, and love a good joke!

The kind of a place where a lady could go,

And feel safe and secure by the men she would know.

There MUST be a place where pilots go, when

Their wings become weary, when their airspeed gets low;

Where the whiskey is old, and the women are young,

And songs about flying and dying are sung.

Where you'd see all the fellows who'd "flown west" before,

And they'd call out your name, as you came thru the door,

Who would buy you a drink, if the thirst should be bad,

And relate to the others, "He was quite a good lad!"

And then thru the mist you'd spot an old guy

You had not seen for years, though he'd taught YOU to fly,

He'd nod his old head, and grin ear to ear,

And say, "Welcome, my son, I'm pleased you are here!

For this is the place where true flyers come,

When the battles are over, and the wars have been won;

We've come here at last, to be safe and afar,

From the government clerk, and the management czar,

Politicians and lawyers, the Feds and the noise,

Where all Hours are Happy, and these good ol' boys,

Can relax with a 'cool one', and a well deserved rest.."

"This is Heaven, my son: You've passed your last check!"

[flhelo]

Nicely said Gary

[M016576]

Quote: jetdriven

Accident pictures are on the kathrynn report, and yes it is strange the nose wheel appears down and locked.  I can't think of a normal reason the gear wouldn't come up, so did he put it back down, or leave it extended?  Perhaps he wanted to maneuver back for a landing?  Did he have a problem?  Perhaps our lone survivor can recall what happened so we can all learn from this.

[flyboy0681]

Quote: fantom

Flying should not be taken as casually as most of us, at times, take it.

[PTK]

Quote: fantom

There is much to learn about judgement from this accident. A stall just after take-off in a plane that had more than it's share of problems can, and in this case, be deadly. Flying should not be taken as casually as most of us, at times, take it.

...good judgement is just as critical as flying skill, IMO.

[ToddDPT]

Here's the Kathrynn Report link. 

http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2012_05_10_archive.html

The survivor is doing well and attended his graduation. It states that after take off he heard the stall horn and then the accident occured. He did not mention any other malfunction. 

[Becca]

[M20F]

God speed

[mulro767]

I hate all this speculation but there's just too much to overlook.  As a J model owner, I always struggle with a useful load of 3 adults on an average length flight.  But even an average adult of 180 lbs has been an issue for me.  Patrick and Evan are both bigger guys and I'd say 220 lbs each.  Plus passenger number three who I'm assuming around 170. I can make it work for an hour long flight with 12 gallon reserves. But throw in bags, their route, and IFR reserves I just can't make it work. Has anyone else thought this is pushing it?  I hope I'm not being insensitive this early into the accident, but there are a lot of big clues here.

[231Pilot]

Quote: Mulro767

I hate all this speculation but there's just too much to overlook.  As a J model owner, I always struggle with a useful load of 3 adults on an average length flight.  But even an average adult of 180 lbs has been an issue for me.  Patrick and Evan are both bigger guys and I'd say 220 lbs each.  Plus passenger number three who I'm assuming around 170. I can make it work for an hour long flight with 12 gallon reserves. But throw in bags, their route, and IFR reserves I just can't make it work. Has anyone else thought this is pushing it?  I hope I'm not being insensitive this early into the accident, but there are a lot of big clues here.

[jelswick]

I've re-read this thread many times since the original post and haven't posted because so many people have expressed the horror and sadness of it better than I ever will; PK and Gary, I'm no poetry guy in the least, but loved both of the ones you shared, wonderful and highly appropriate.  I will be anxious to see what they come up with, but just feel horribly and slightly sick each time I read this.  It was one of the prompts on why I finally posted the fuel issue from last weekend.  Many great, wonderful, sharing pilots on this site and aviation is a tremendous blessing I know we're all thankful for, but as others have said, it can be horribly unforgiving if something is overlooked or the risk played down too much.  I am deeply saddened by the loss of someone on here and pray to God we don't have anyone else that we lose.  Have a good week all and safe flying.

[Bennett]

The posts have all been gentle and sensitive.  Never met the man, but he was a human being and one of our Mooney family. I am sad for his family. I've now read all the articles that have been attached to the various posts, and until the NTSB makes their report, everything is speculative, yet there are a couple of facts that all M20J pilots should consider when planing their own flights. With the empty weight of N335BB I cannot meet weight and balance norms with three full size males and full fuel. That is a simple fact. M20Js are not Cessna 182s or Piper Dakotas. Great aircraft, but not known for their (official) load carrying ability. The photographs and various posts suggest that the pilot and and both his passengers were, how shall be say it, somewhat larger and heavier than the FAA 170 pound person. No idea how much fuel was on board, or what was in the baggage compartment (and with that horrific fire there probably is little liklihood of knowing; unless the airplane was fueled before takeoff). There have been times when I have flown my Mooneys over gross, but I picked my situations carefully, and the passengers were Mooney pilots who agreed to what we perceived to be acceptable risks. I suspect that most Mooney pilots have done this as well, but I urge all to fairly and realistically evaluate the risk.  Perhaps this accident was caused by something else not related to weight and balance. Nevertheless, overloading M20Js is taking a risk that some would not find acceptable.

[jetdriven]

Don't forget that Patrick's was a later model M20J which has the factory gross weight increase. It is quite possible he had a 1000# useful load.  So, given the situation of 650 lbs in the cabin, if he had less than ~55 gallons onboard, he quite likely was within weight and balance limits.  Still, a short field takeoff requires excellent technique and precise aircraft control. 

[Bennett]

I didn't realize the crash aircraft was the later model M20J wiith the gross weight increase.  Wish there was an STC for increaing earlier models, but I understand that at least a couple of the fuseluge tubes were made larger, and the gear "beefed up". Other than that I assume there were no other changes to the wing or powerplant.  A bit frustrating that the changes cannot be retrofitted.  The fact that there is so little difference between the older and newer M20Js tempts one (OK, me) to occasionally take a bit of risk with a minor overload, so long as the CG stays in the envelope. But still 3 big guys in any M20J with full fuel (not saying this was the case) is pushing the gross weight limits.  So far as a "short field" is concerned, San Carlos (KSQL), my home field, is 2600' and our neighbor, Palo Alto,KPAO is 2443', and lots of Mooneys operate out of both airports. Both are very close to sea level, and the weather is generally moderate. To my knowlege, no Mooney at either airport has had a "not long enough" to take off problem, but when landing at either  airport, you really do have to nail the landing speed. We don't have trees st the ends of the runway, we have power lines for the approach to rwy 30, and buildings not too far off the departuere end. This is hardly a difficult airport for Mooney pilots, but it does take attention, and if there should be an emergency on takeoff, there are not too many really good options.  I only wanted to suggest to the group that one should not ignore takeoff weight, and that few M20Js can (legally) take off with three (or more) full size adults, some baggage , and full fuel.

[Bennett]

I didn't realize the crash aircraft was the later model M20J wiith the gross weight increase.  Wish there was an STC for increaing earlier models, but I understand that at least a couple of the fuseluge tubes were made larger, and the gear "beefed up". Other than that I assume there were no other changes to the wing or powerplant.  A bit frustrating that the changes cannot be retrofitted.  The fact that there is so little difference between the older and newer M20Js tempts one (OK, me) to occasionally take a bit of risk with a minor overload, so long as the CG stays in the envelope. But still 3 big guys in any M20J with full fuel (not saying this was the case) is pushing the gross weight limits.  So far as a "short field" is concerned, San Carlos (KSQL), my home field, is 2600' and our neighbor, Palo Alto,KPAO is 2443', and lots of Mooneys operate out of both airports. Both are very close to sea level, and the weather is generally moderate. To my knowlege, no Mooney at either airport has had a "not long enough" to take off problem, but when landing at either  airport, you really do have to nail the landing speed. We don't have trees st the ends of the runway, we have power lines for the approach to rwy 30, and buildings not too far off the departuere end. This is hardly a difficult airport for Mooney pilots, but it does take attention, and if there should be an emergency on takeoff, there are not too many really good options.  I only wanted to suggest to the group that one should not ignore takeoff weight, and that few M20Js can (legally) take off with three (or more) full size adults, some baggage , and full fuel.

 

Sorry about the duplicate

[PTK]

The published takeoff minimums for runway 23 is minimum climb of 240'/NM to 2600. I assume he was taking off on 23 because I read somewhere that he crashed south of the airport. The question in my mind is with a 2400' runway in rain and assuming gross, could he attain the required gs to make this climb. I'm not so sure. As much as I want to believe it was a mechanical problem. I'm not speculating or second guessing. Just thinking it through to try and learn and see what I would have done in this situation.

[Shadrach]

I did not know Patrick well, though we did PM a bit when he was looking at OH'ing his mags. I am so sorry to learn of his fate. He was a true enthusiast!

[aviatoreb]

Quote: davewilson

Ehscott and john. Please be assured that my post on beechtalk, re: risktaker, was NOT intended to be malicious or arrogant.  Yes, It could have been better stated.

 

[M016576]

Quote: Bennett

I didn't realize the crash aircraft was the later model M20J wiith the gross weight increase.  Wish there was an STC for increaing earlier models, but I understand that at least a couple of the fuseluge tubes were made larger, and the gear "beefed up". Other than that I assume there were no other changes to the wing or powerplant.  A bit frustrating that the changes cannot be retrofitted.  The fact that there is so little difference between the older and newer M20Js tempts one (OK, me) to occasionally take a bit of risk with a minor overload, so long as the CG stays in the envelope. But still 3 big guys in any M20J with full fuel (not saying this was the case) is pushing the gross weight limits.  So far as a "short field" is concerned, San Carlos (KSQL), my home field, is 2600' and our neighbor, Palo Alto,KPAO is 2443', and lots of Mooneys operate out of both airports. Both are very close to sea level, and the weather is generally moderate. To my knowlege, no Mooney at either airport has had a "not long enough" to take off problem, but when landing at either  airport, you really do have to nail the landing speed. We don't have trees st the ends of the runway, we have power lines for the approach to rwy 30, and buildings not too far off the departuere end. This is hardly a difficult airport for Mooney pilots, but it does take attention, and if there should be an emergency on takeoff, there are not too many really good options.  I only wanted to suggest to the group that one should not ignore takeoff weight, and that few M20Js can (legally) take off with three (or more) full size adults, some baggage , and full fuel.

 

Sorry about the duplicate

[fantom]

Patrick had a '95 MSE. Mine is a '94 MSE with about the same equipment.

On Saturday I had a five hour IFR flight from TX to FL with two 'light' passengers, a full baggage compartment and full fuel. We were right at our GW limit, TO was OK, if not blazing, and climb to 7,000 was slower than normal.

Point being, at night, in rain, I'm not sure I would have made that GO decision, and I've been flying longer than Patrick was alive. He had zero room for anything to go wrong.