Mooney down in Arizona

[DaV8or]

Yes, I know about Santa Monica, way sad. I was referring to the ntsb and FAA comments as well as I hope the three in the mooney in Sedona are ok. Seat belts helped in Sedona for sure.

 

Oh, OK. Yes shoulder belts are crucial in our planes. In addition, I wish the airbag belts were available for the whole fleet.

[flyboy0681]

My wife and I had a fabulous breakfast at Sedona airport today. I wasn't able to see the spot where the Mooney went down because it's beyond the road that parallels the airport. I did watch the windsock while eating and it did go all over the place and most aircraft were landing hot and long.

 

The airport itself is located on a mesa above the town. Attached is a picture of a plane on short final, as taken "below" the airport.

[OR75]

I landed( and took off) in SEZ twice.

A fantastic airport with great scenery around for the passengers.

A great restaurant on the field. A great hotel walking distance from the terminal and a very nice town full of hippies converted to business.

The airport is not tough to land at. Plenty of runway although the fear of being long and running out of runway can be there. A mooney can stop very quickly once all three wheels are on the ground.

Best to land / leave early in the morning or very late afternoon to avoid strong gusty winds.

[Bennett]

A friend sent me this video:  http://www.myfoxphoenix.com/story/23652929/2013/10/10/sedona-plane-crash-caught-on-video#.Uld1eLVJ88A.gmail

 

Long add at the front, but an eyewitness who took the video also reported that he saw the Mooney bounce on the runway before running off the end of the runway.  If you don't know Sedona, watch the video all the way through. 

[chrisk]

Now, that is the best reporting I have ever seen on a small plane crash.

 

With the angle that the video was taken, it is hard to tell, but it looks like he touched down way to long.

[DaV8or]

Now, that is the best reporting I have ever seen on a small plane crash.

 

With the angle that the video was taken, it is hard to tell, but it looks like he touched down way to long.

 

That seems to be the consensus. He floated, went too long and then botched a go around.

[Shadrach]

Please forgive the following as I don't have all the facts. However, barring a mechanical failure, it appears the pilot was way behind the airplane both in controlling the AC and his decision making. If during landing, a touchdown results in a 10 to 15 ft bounce, follow the airplane's lead and go around...the consequences of trying to salvage a lousy approach are far greater.
It appears that the vantage point from where the video was shot is about 2100 ft (2300+ including the DT) from the approach end of the runway.
Excuse my speculation here, but looking at the video it looks as though this guy had nearly 4000ft (maybe more) of the 5100ft available behind him when he finaly touched down and bounced back into the air. 3500 to 4000 ft of runway is a lot of distance to make a decision.

There is no legitimate reason to be over the threshold at a speed greater than 1.3xVso (or whatever flap setting you're using) at your weight. I normally use 1.2xVso for standard ops and 1.1xVso for strips under 2000ft. 1.3xVso offers a nice margin over stall in windy conditions without extending air distance to touchdown too much. If 1.3xVso feels too slow than your butt needs to be recalibrated.

If you find yourself high and at a speed greater than 1.2xVso with over half of your runway behind you (I'd be willing to bet most of us have at some point), your decision has been made for you, it's called a go around. This guy appears to have been trying to salvage a lousy approach all the way to the bitter end. It is so sad and was likely very avoidable. I hope all recover quickly. I feel bad for his passengers who likely felt highly confident in his ability to handle the situation (don't all our passengers believe that?), only to suffer this fate...

[Smiles201]

Flown into sedona many times, always land uphill, rwy 3, takeoff 21, unless wind is very strong, over 20/25 knots. I forget the exact figure, but very steep slope. He was attempting to land downhill with ten knot headwind, obviously unfamiliar with the airport and perhaps with the effects of density altitude. There can be alot of traffic at times, sometimes more than one aircraft on the active, tour flights, all of which might result in rushed approached.

[201er]

There is no legitimate reason to be over the threshold at a speed greater than 1.3xVso (or whatever flap setting you're using) at your weight.

Well for all those flying without an AOA, not knowing their exact weight at that moment, etc.... there is reason.

 

However, in this case I'd bet he's closer to gross weight and this is less likely the cause. Not being able to land a Mooney twice on a 5000ft runway is obviously a cause for alarm. However, having been flying around Arizona the same day as the accident, I just wanted to point out that DA makes getting off the ground much harder than it looks. For someone used to flying at sea level and in super cold winters, it takes some getting used to the amount of distance that needs to be flown in ground effect before speed builds up sufficient for climb. So while 5000ft of runway would by no means be necessary for a landing, I'd bet at least 2000ft of remaining runway would be necessary to initiate a go around if not more.

[jetdriven]

I landed on that same runway when I blew the right tire at Sedona. The winds were a left direct crosswind at 15 gusting to 20 and it was variable meaning a 3-5 knot tailwind component at times. I also crossed the threshold at around 85-88 mph which is quite fast for what I normally do but the visual left me high and I had the power off. It wasn't landing any sooner. Plus the brakes seem to have air in them, they are quite difficult to modulate.

Anyways I got it on the ground on speed at 1500' from the threshold and now was going downhill. I stood on the brakes to make the turnoff at the ramp which was still 2000' from the end. That was looking iffy then a strong gust blew from the left and I countered with too much crosswind correction on the ailerons. That lifted the right wing and locked the tire. It came to a stop about 50 feet from the ramp turnoff. Plain old sloppy airmanship but it appears this guy was still in the air and flying good at the point I stopped.

[Shadrach]

Well for all those flying without an AOA, not knowing their exact weight at that moment, etc.... there is reason.

 

However, in this case I'd bet he's closer to gross weight and this is less likely the cause. Not being able to land a Mooney twice on a 5000ft runway is obviously a cause for alarm. However, having been flying around Arizona the same day as the accident, I just wanted to point out that DA makes getting off the ground much harder than it looks. For someone used to flying at sea level and in super cold winters, it takes some getting used to the amount of distance that needs to be flown in ground effect before speed builds up sufficient for climb. So while 5000ft of runway would by no means be necessary for a landing, I'd bet at least 2000ft of remaining runway would be necessary to initiate a go around if not more.

 

 

I don't know what happened to this guy, What do I know is that if you are having trouble getting the plane to land 1/2 way down a 5100ft runway, it's probably a better idea to add full power and try again vs. hoping it will slow down and land. Ground effect could screw you either way. In a high DA situation, you could: 1) Float down the runway in ground effect power off and into the gully or 2) Float down the runway in ground effect power on and into the gully. Since the airplane is already flying, I'd likely choose option 2. But that's easy to say while seated at a computer.

 

An AOA indicator is a fantastic device and will give you a direct indication of your lift reserves. However, it is not a required instrument to fly an accurate approach into a 5100 foot strip (or any strip) even if the DA is 7XXXft. One not need an AOA to have a reasonable idea of stall and approach speed... See my math below, I always round up. Also note that the speeds should be CAS, but at approach speeds we're talking a delta of +/- 2mph:

 

I know my plane stalls at approximately 54kts at gross weight (2740lbs)

 

2740lbs Vso= ~54kts

So for 2740lbs I want to cross the threshold at the following:

 

Short field

1.1 x 54kts =60kts or ~69mph

 

Standard conditions

1.2 x 54kts=64kts or ~75mph

 

Windy conditions

1.3 x 54kts=70kts or ~81mph

 

 

Let’s say I estimate that I’ll be around 2250lbs when arriving at my destination.

2250/2740 = 0.821

Square root of 0.821 = 0.906

0.906 x 54kts= 49kts or 56MPH

 

2250lbs Vso= ~49kts

 

So for 2250lbs I want to cross the threshold at the following:

 

Short field

1.1 x 49kts = 54kts or ~62 mph

 

Standard conditions

1.2 x 49kts = 59kts or ~68mph

Windy conditions

1.3 x 49kts =64kts or ~74mph

 

It's not a lot of work, and after you crunch the numbers at a few common weights, estimating becomes easier.

I stand by my "no good reason to be above..." statement. This is not to say that I've not found myself in such a situation, it's just that I did not have a good reason...

 

  

[fantom]

<<<<'Shadrach An AOA is a fantastic device and will give you a direct indication of your lift reserves. However, it is not a required instrument to fly an accurate approach into a 5100 foot strip (or any strip) even if the DA is 7XXXft. One not need an AOA to have a reasonable idea of stall and approach speed... See my math below, I always round up. It's not a lot of work, and after you crunch the numbers at a few common weights, estimating becomes easier. >>>> Excellent post. Any so-called pilot who hasn't crunched the numbers for his plane, and isn't familiar with them, is in dire need of some more ground school. Rely on a new AOA to land at Sedona only if your view is obstructed by a couple of parrots on the glare-shield

[Hank]

I do it a whole lot easier:

 

Vso = 57 mph at gross with Full flaps, or 64 mph with Takeoff flaps.

 

Then I estimate weight, and subtract 5 mph for every 300 lbs below gross.

 

          57 x 1.2 / 1.3 = 68 / 74 mph

 

          64 x 1.2 / 1.3 = 77 / 83 mph

 

I know these numbers, so my range is usually between 69 and 78, with 75 a frequently-used compromise if I'm not really heavy. That gets me over the trees and on the ground usually between the 2nd and 3rd stripe at my 3000' home field.

[kmyfm20s]

Flown into sedona many times, always land uphill, rwy 3, takeoff 21, unless wind is very strong, over 20/25 knots. I forget the exact figure, but very steep slope. He was attempting to land downhill with ten knot headwind, obviously unfamiliar with the airport and perhaps with the effects of density altitude. There can be alot of traffic at times, sometimes more than one aircraft on the active, tour flights, all of which might result in rushed approached.

I my Back Country flying past that what all the bush pilot would say! Almost always land uphill and take off down hill.

[Shadrach]

I my Back Country flying past that what all the bush pilot would say! Almost always land uphill and take off down hill.

Well, that's a good point...except for the airplane doesn't really give a $hit until it touches down on the runway, or touches down hot with 1000 feet left. I agree that there are times when a tailwind landing make sense, but it's rare. A fat winged back country STOL aircraft the Mooney ain't. The uphill does you no good if you're skimming above it with a 15 knot tail wind... a lot of runway can dissappear in short order. My preference is to always land into the wind unless I'm operating out of a place like Courcevel (which is unlikely). It's my opinion 95% of the time it's best to land into the wind. I learned this the hardway at Clearview Airpark many years ago after taking the advice of a Tripacer pilot told me to land up hill unless the tail wind component was > than 10kts. After I got it stopped, I had to shut down and have my IA (rt seat pax) get out and push the plane back as I could not turn in either direction without hitting posts in the grass off the end of the runway. Unless you nail your short field technique (which when done properly is very uncomfortable for most non-pilot passengers), you're going to float in ground effect for a bit, how much depends on how far off your speed is. Very few airports in the states have a constant grade of more than 1.5%. Sedona shows 1.9% but I'm curious to know if it's concentrated at one part of the runway. Sometimes it's a Sophie's choice...on those days it's probably smarter to stay home.

.

[DaV8or]

 Any so-called pilot who hasn't crunched the numbers for his plane, and isn't familiar with them, is in dire need of some more ground school.

 

Ya know, I did the FAA approved written tests and oral tests and flight tests for a couple of ratings and then I've done a whole bunch of type check outs and endorsements and BFRs... and I've never been instructed to calculate using the square root of anything. Ground school isn't going to do it, you'll need some algebra at the city college I think.

 

Thank God somebody somewhere along the line invented the AoA indicator. Given how long the device has been around and how simple it is, it almost criminal that GA planes haven't had them long ago. Probably because old pilots have been saying that the airspeed indicator and a slide rule is good enough for so many years.

 

I really do think the FAA has made a very wise choice streamlining the process for us all to get one on our planes. IMO, it will make a huge difference in the accident record if we can get enough pilots to get equipped and trained in the use. I can't wait to have one and I bet these foreign tourists wished they had one too.

 

In the mean time, yes, if you don't have an AoA indicator, go and do some calculations, the ASI is vague and the POH is limited.