Virginia Accident

[Jeff H.]

Maybe they crashed a party?

 

I'll go get some more coffee now . . . 

[kpaul]

The crash was about 1/2 mile from the end of the runway.  just a slight right turn would have been a water landing for miles.  In this case the choice was not bad as there were no injuries, however imagine if someone were home or if a fire had started.

[gsxrpilot]

2 minutes ago, kpaul said:

The crash was about 1/2 mile from the end of the runway.  just a slight right turn would have been a water landing for miles.  In this case the choice was not bad as there were no injuries, however imagine if someone were home or if a fire had started.

That's what I'm thinking. If he had been a foot lower or six feet left or right it would have likely been fatal for everyone. Those are some very tight tolerances. I like to think that if I'd had any control at all, I'd have put it down Sully style right in the middle of that water.

[Alan Fox]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

The news reports are saying he'd just taken off from W75 which is only a few miles away. But the absence of any fire is suspect. Going between those two huge trees would have ruptured both tanks and 100LL would have been all over the trees, house, etc. I also wonder about the choice of location. It seems that just about anywhere would have been better than here. 

I watched a video of a Mooney landing on a street , the wing torn off , a 20 foot wide cloud of 100 LL vapor , and no fire ,   sometimes , it just doesn't burn...

 

[ArtVandelay]

I think the trees tore the wings off, leaving the fuel behind them. There are pictures that seem to show no damage except that caused by fuselage.

[Alan Fox]

3 hours ago, Hank said:

My comments on the Mooney accident had nothing to do with the experimental fatality, other than the reporter putting them in the same article with few details about either one. That would make me me more of an ass than I like to be . . . 

The "no chute neededed again" simply ties this accident with very minor injuries to chrixxer's night, urban off-field landing with no injuries and Dan's unconscious, night, off-field landing with only minor injury, and not a chute between all of them. It is very poor form to make fun of someone else's misfortune, but I'm glad to see that you think so little of me.

Yes , because the chute couldn't possibly be of any help to anybody.......

[CaptainAB]

1 minute ago, Alan Fox said:

Yes , because the chute couldn't possibly be of any help to anybody.....

Least of all Mooney, being outsold 32 to 1 by that other company that installs BRS on every plane they build.......

[aviatoreb]

Ugh.  So there were survivors and that is good.  I hope they are not so bad.

The physics of the situation strikes me like this.  That they plowed through the front door of the house and probably a bunch of wood beams buckled and then gave way...these are soft structures at that speed, and that dissipates energy.  So this means the airplane crash cage did not need to buckle instead.  I am not sure if the pilot was thinking that but this is how it worked out it appears.  And if someone had been home that would not have been so good, or if there had been a fire.  But for the grace of God.

Also, maybe the pilot was trying to do something else and not hit the house at all but perhaps there was just not a lot of time or energy to execute and it seems as if he kept the thing flying right through the crash which is the best possible.

How high did he get before loss of power?  Which person died -was it the pilot?

 

[N201MKTurbo]

I love the line in the news article about how he lost control and flew it between two trees. 

[Skates97]

1 hour ago, gsxrpilot said:

That's what I'm thinking. If he had been a foot lower or six feet left or right it would have likely been fatal for everyone. Those are some very tight tolerances. I like to think that if I'd had any control at all, I'd have put it down Sully style right in the middle of that water.

I thought the same thing looking at the water in front of the place. 

2 hours ago, gsxrpilot said:

 

I have two people on my ignore list. Tommy found his way there quite a long time ago. Life's too short to deal with strangers on the internet that lack common decency.

[Hank]

4 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

Ugh.  So there were survivors and that is good.  I hope they are not so bad.

The physics of the situation strikes me like this.  That they plowed through the front door of the house and probably a bunch of wood beams buckled and then gave way...these are soft structures at that speed, and that dissipates energy.  So this means the airplane crash cage did not need to buckle instead.  I am not sure if the pilot was thinking that but this is how it worked out it appears.  And if someone had been home that would not have been so good, or if there had been a fire.  But for the grace of God.

Also, maybe the pilot was trying to do something else and not hit the house at all but perhaps there was just not a lot of time or energy to execute and it seems as if he kept the thing flying right through the crash which is the best possible.

How high did he get before loss of power?  Which person died -was it the pilot?

 

No one in the Mooney accident died. The article I linked to at the beginning briefly mentioned two accidents. No one died in the Mooney. 

Tommy is unable to grasp the simple fact that I linked to an article about a Mooney crash and another unrelated crash, and that my comment about the structural strength of the Mooney is not a slam at the other guy. It is, however, part of why I own a Mooney.

Edited October 8, 2017 by Hank

[kpaul]

I do not

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[ragedracer1977]

Looking at the aerial view, I can't even figure out how he managed to pull it off.  It's a 90 degree turn just off the end of the runway.  https://www.google.com/maps/place/400+Eubank+Landing+Rd,+Topping,+VA+23169/@37.6099148,-76.4501188,1239m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x89ba0a0441fcfce9:0x74483f9e1449ef47!8m2!3d37.6096439!4d-76.4486899

[bradp]

Are we sure he had departed W75 - if so which runway?  The 90-degree turn to the arrival site is weird if he departed 1.  

Unless it was a departure stall and it so happened to recover pointing 90-deg left and at a House. 

[Alan Fox]

35 minutes ago, bradp said:

Are we sure he had departed W75 - if so which runway?  The 90-degree turn to the arrival site is weird if he departed 1.  

Unless it was a departure stall and it so happened to recover pointing 90-deg left and at a House. 

Departure stall is highly unlikely , probably would have spun...

[gsxrpilot]

The NTSB report on this one will be interesting.

[Tommy]

3 hours ago, Hank said:

 

Tommy is unable to grasp the simple fact that I linked to an article about a Mooney crash and another unrelated crash, and that my comment about the structural strength of the Mooney is not a slam at the other guy. It is, however, part of why I own a Mooney.

"The second landing is the good one" Do I need to keep repeating that? Why are you keep digging the hole, Hank? 

Without knowing the details of the first incident OR the second, I am just curious how do you conclude that it's good airmanship and structural strength that save the day?

Flying directly into someone's house after doing a 90 degree turn at the threshold isn't really a convincing evidence.

[Hank]

Ignore . . . You're the only one on my list, Tommy. I say A, you ask why did I say B, and can't understand that I've only been saying A.

[Tommy]

8 hours ago, aviatoreb said:

 

How high did he get before loss of power?  Which person died -was it the pilot?

 

No one died in that incident. There was another incident in Virginia, the pilot involved didn't fare so well. Details are sketchy but according to Hank, it's because he executed a bad landing in a plane that has no structural strength of a Mooney and has a useless chute instead...

I do agree with your assessment on how it is only by miracle that no one was hurt in this Mooney incident. If anything, flying directly into someone's house after doing a 90 degree turn at the threshold isn't really a convincing evidence of a controlled flightl but I will wait for NTSB's report.

Edited October 9, 2017 by Tommy

[Tommy]

4 minutes ago, Hank said:

Ignore . . . You're the only one on my list, Tommy. I say A, you ask why did I say B, and can't understand that I've only been saying A.

Care to explain then - this is the 3rd time that I've asked you - why do you think the second landing is a good one not the first? What happened in the first? And how did the structural strength and no chute make a difference?

I am asking for clarification of the "A's" that you had been saying all along, Hank.

 

Edited October 9, 2017 by Tommy

[Hank]

1 minute ago, Tommy said:

No one died in that incident. There was another incident in Virginia, the pilot involved didn't fare so well. Details are sketchy but according to Hank, it's because he executed a bad landing in a plane that has no structural strength of a Mooney and has a useless chute instead...

This post came in while I was figuring out how to ignore someone. All I have said is that the Mooney has great structural strength and doesn't need a chute, as demonstrated in the Mooney accident. Somehow in your mind that turned into me saying nasty things about the other accident in the original story, about which I know nothing and specifically said nothing . . . "Ignore User:  Tommy" is now active. Bye bye! 

[Hank]

4 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Care to explain then - this is the 3rd time that I've asked you - why do you think the second landing is a good one not the first? What happened in the first? And how did the structural strength and no chute make a difference?

I am asking for clarification of the "A's" that you had been saying all along, Hank.

 

In the original article, the first landing / accident (don't recall the aircraft) killed the pilot. This is not a good outcome.

In the original article, the second landing / accident (the Mooney), the three occupants all walked away. This is a good outcome. 

Thus, the "second landing" was a good one. Luck? Skill? I dunno, there's no details known yet, only the outcome. What is it we all say about "any landing you can walk away from"?

Did you even read the article? It makes the whole first / second thing obvious.

Apparently my "Ignore" settings weren't done right . . . .

[Hank]

Just now, Hyett6420 said:

Would have been my option as well, unless he tried and skipped up the bank into the house, still cant find the wings though.  

I tbought the trees broke the wings off?

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

But then surely they would be lying nicely innthe gsrden. And there would be marks on the trees, i can see neither, unless im blind.  Oh and can someone PLEASE cure my jet lag, its 02:00 here and im still on Boston time!

Andrew,

The jet lag explains the spelling, I thought you were having a stroke or something.

Clarence

[gsxrpilot]

18 minutes ago, Hyett6420 said:

Ok im intrigued.  Definitely left W75 as the Hartfield VFd vehicles bear this out. However, ive trawled through all the photos and what is missing for me is the wings.  They simply dont exist in any of the photos and more to the point neither do any wing impact marks either on the trees or the house itself.  The fueslage is VERY intact around the cabin, although in on photo taken from the front of the aircraft the "prop"? Looks remarkably straight and undamaged.  It might be something else but it looks prop like.  

Secondly are we sure the address is the eubank road?  Ive attached the google earth view off the end of the runway and I cant match a house to the photo im seeing "across the water". Note in the photo across the water to the accident site the trees on the upper left of the photo that show it was taken from a close by bank, not a large zoom lens.  In my photo the end of the runway is just to the middle right, the house hit has a neighbour with a BROWN roof boat house, now you see my issue, there is not one in the google earth.  

I'm sure this is the house. The photo could have been taken from a boat on the water. The arrow points to the brown roofed boat house.

I don't see the wings either. And it would be a hard left turn to hit that house.