Mooney in the water in Palo Alto

[MyNameIsNobody]

10 hours ago, apenney said:

According to a Redit post:https://www.reddit.com/r/flying/comments/9cyp9q/mooney_down_near_palo_alto_airport/

[–]deftoneuk 20 points 6 hours ago 

There is a guy on Facebook that was in the pattern when it happened. Apparently porpoised it, prop strike and when he tried to go around couldn’t climb.

• permalink
• embed
• save
• report
• reply

 

 

load more comments (3 replies)"

 

 

 

If this information is correct this gentleman had a lot of experience conducting “Angel Flights”.  Much discussion on 31 being the prevailing runway and he landed on 13.  While 2400 feet is adequate for a pilot that is on their game I would not land with that length with passengers and unfamiliar.  (Personal minimum exceeded).  I am so pleased that his passengers survived.  I hope they recover from the injuries sustained quickly and the issue that made them travel there as well.  Possibly a touch of tailwind?  I have been there and done that.  My E floats like crazy in summer with even a couple knots quartering from behind.  So many factors playing against our fellow Mooney pilot.  He was doing a service and paid th ultimate price.  My heart weeps for his family and friends.  Definition of a very bad day.

[jhbehrens]

I have flown an Acclaim in and out of Palo Alto a few times and indeed its a short field. Very possible when 'on speed' but not long enough for a float, a few bounces and then a go-around. Without wanting to speculate on what may have happened in this case, one note-to-self is not to even attempt putting it down when there too much speed on short final for a short runway but just go around early and try again.

[gsxrpilot]

My brother, a low time Mooney pilot (very high time 737 captain) brought my 252 out to me once at KSQL. It's 150 feet longer than KPAO and he had fun getting it down and stopped. 

These airplanes aren't forgiving of short runways if you're not familiar with the wing, and on your game.

I've never been into KPAO, KSQL is short enough for me.

[Marauder]

My brother, a low time Mooney pilot (very high time 737 captain) brought my 252 out to me once at KSQL. It's 150 feet longer than KPAO and he had fun getting it down and stopped. 
These airplanes aren't forgiving of short runways if you're not familiar with the wing, and on your game.
I've never been into KPAO, KSQL is short enough for me.

I was based at 9G0 and S37 for a few years. Both airports had their challenges of being short and with some challenges. 9G0 had trees off of the end of RWY24 which made for an interesting go around.

S37’s RWY10 had a displaced runway that had you flying over greenhouses and then dealing with a downslope of a percent on one end and then wires and a displaced threshold on the other side.

Once I moved to the long runways at KILG and later to the 3700’ runway at N57, I noticed you can start to lose the edge you need to fly into shorter runways. I learned that every year when I flew my plane back to S37 for annuals.

Stay proficient and know your limitations.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[pdxphil]

Sorry to hear the news...definitely hits home. I think I saw vis was 5 miles in haze and I listened to ATC as they told the pilot he'd flown through the final approach course. A reminder also to never hesitate to ask for assistance when flying into unfamiliar airspace / airports and request vectors early and often if need be. I realize this doesn't seem to be the direct cause of the incident, but I also know how stress can build and make things more difficult as time progresses.

Phil

[rahill]

1 hour ago, MyNameIsNobody said:

If this information is correct this gentleman had a lot of experience conducting “Angel Flights”.  Much discussion on 31 being the prevailing runway and he landed on 13.  While 2400 feet is adequate for a pilot that is on their game I would not land with that length with passengers and unfamiliar.  (Personal minimum exceeded).  I am so pleased that his passengers survived.  I hope they recover from the injuries sustained quickly and the issue that made them travel there as well.  Possibly a touch of tailwind?  I have been there and done that.  My E floats like crazy in summer with even a couple knots quartering from behind.  So many factors playing against our fellow Mooney pilot.  He was doing a service and paid th ultimate price.  My heart weeps for his family and friends.  Definition of a very bad day.

Wind was 6 kts at 040 so 90 degrees to 13 (which was the runway in use at the time, not 31).  He was clearly unfamiliar with the airport - requested assistance finding the KGO towers when asked to fly there, then later requested help finding the runway.  Finally found the runway on ~2 mile final - not a lot of time to set up for a relatively short field.  

The prop strike comment is speculation, we'll have to wait for the report to find out.  

[Shadrach]

On 9/5/2018 at 12:34 AM, JohnB said:

This is terribly sad news.  As Marauder mentioned, Palo Alto is a short runway that I am reluctant to fly into, and won't if there's any significant crosswind or gust  because of this fact. According to his communication to ATC, he came in too fast, (and may have been high as he couldn't initially find the airport?).   Either or both are not a good combination with our laminar flow Mooneys particularly at short runways. Perhaps this terrible accident emphasizes the go around with a simple pattern entry even before attempting to land if your approach is not stabilized, or if you don't see the airport with enough time to make your approach stable.  Prayers to his family and the survivors.

None of the above may have happened, but I am really saddened by this and I would not like to read about anyone of us having anymore accidents, ok?

I can appreciate all of the above.  2443' is really not that of a short runway for a J model, but it doesn't leave a lot of margin for sloppiness either.  I don't know if he received vectors to final, but at a little airport like this, it's best to be slowed down and configured for landing early. I've been guilty on many occasions of not wanting to slow down early enough. Any Mooney will fly comfortably at 80kts  (the mid and short bodies even slower) but so many of us stay fast longer than needed.  The pressure of finding the airport, getting the passengers to their destination and seeming like a pro is more significant then it might seem while sitting in front of a computer...but it is significant.  I can see how adding an unknown approach to a shortish runway that washes out in the urban environment could cause overload. There are few good reasons to force a Mooney that's too high or too fast or both onto a runway.  My body usually gives me signals that my subconscious is sensing heightened levels of risk, even and perhaps more so when I've rationalized what I'm about to do.  I've tried to get better at listening to those signals because I've a long and distinguished history of rationalizing bad ideas...mostly outside the cockpit, thankfully.

Edited September 7, 2018 by Shadrach

[jaylw314]

Sadness.  A little extra disturbing for me, because I just signed up for Angel Flight West and recalled seeing that flight request to PAO.

I've flown into PAO once, it's definitely no problem if you're on speed.  That being said, getting into the area is tricky as it is tight quarters with other controlled airspace and noise abatement if you're VFR, and that can certainly be enough distraction to throw you off.

[steingar]

During my prop strike (not caused by a porpoise, by the way, but the opposite of coming in too slow and steep) I asymmetrically bent the prop and broke the crankshaft.  Had I tried to take off I would have likely met the same fate as the fellow at PAO.  Then again, it wasn't the prop strike that brought down his airplane.  It wasn't the engine failing either.  Had he maintained flying speed and flown the aircraft all the way to the crash he'd have had an expensive repair bill that he could have complained about to all his friends.  Never stop flying the airplane.  Never loose airspeed.  If you keep it together your Mooney will protect you from just about anything except flying into the side of a mountain.

[jetdriven]

53 minutes ago, steingar said:

During my prop strike (not caused by a porpoise, by the way, but the opposite of coming in too slow and steep) I asymmetrically bent the prop and broke the crankshaft.  Had I tried to take off I would have likely met the same fate as the fellow at PAO.  Then again, it wasn't the prop strike that brought down his airplane.  It wasn't the engine failing either.  Had he maintained flying speed and flown the aircraft all the way to the crash he'd have had an expensive repair bill that he could have complained about to all his friends.  Never stop flying the airplane.  Never loose airspeed.  If you keep it together your Mooney will protect you from just about anything except flying into the side of a mountain.

well said.

[HighFlyer]

I have based my Mooney and flown out of KPAO for 30 years, arrived at the airport minutes after the accident and having spoke to an eye witness, have some perspective on this sad tragedy.  First, my thoughts and prayers are with the family and loved ones during this terrible time.  Secondly, I offer these thoughts hoping to influence a positive outcome from the tragedy.  

I hope the NTSB and FAA consider the roll of the deteriorating runway in the accident chain of events.  Runway 13 approach end is generously considered a washboard due to the uneven pavement, it has been unsafe for years.  The Runway 31 approach end (normally used) was "repaired" ~ 2 years ago to remove 3 major bumps.  The runway bumps are so bad that take-off roll requires keeping forward pressure on the nose until passing the bumpy area to avoid premature launching airborne.  I have landed on 13 many times and always get an unpleasant bounce and have to work to maintain the landing.   Landing long beyond the washboard is not practical as the runway is too short. 

The facts we know: (1) the pilot was unfamiliar and needed tower assistance to find the airport, (2) 701JM was high on final, (3) 701JM did not have speed brakes, (4) Managing speed is essential, (5) Mooney's porpoise, (6) eyewitness noted the airplane hit hard and bounced, (7) eyewitness reported a prop strike, (8) Listen carefully to the Live ATC recording and you can hear the stall warning horn during his last radio communication (9) Unless you are based or operate @ KPAO its hard to know about these unsafe runway conditions.

This may very well be a case were a pilot, unfamiliar with the runway conditions, was high and fast and encountered a nasty washboard runway surprise followed by the well known Mooney porpoising behavior that resulted in a prop strike, then was unable to develop power to successfully go around thus resulting in a stall spin.  

The airport sits on the bay and the tide goes in and out twice daily thus causing the runway to move.  The Runway 13 end is closer to the bay than 31.   The tidal affects on the asphalt are strong.  The holes in the asphalt on the airport will show signs of salt residue many days.  The asphalt and base layers are so thin the weeds grow prodigiously in the many cracks.   The runway was constructed years ago, long before the civil engineering practices and finances were in place to stabilize the surface. 

The airport has started a 3 - 4 year project to repair the apron and just completed the first phase.  This consists of removing all the asphalt and "base" layers, and replacing the base layer with a mixture of compacted granite and concrete  (25% concrete) to create a stable base, then laying new asphalt.  I am not certain what are the plans to address the runway.  

Those of us whom operate out of KPAO are thrilled the City has a plan to upgrade the airport and repair the deteriorating facilities.  Perhaps this tragedy will prompt discussion to understand the runways potential involvement in the accident and if it is credibly determined to be in the accident chain, prompt prioritization of repair.  

[MIR2018]

I may be overreacting but if the conditions at this airport can be even partially blamed for a fatal accident then at the most it should be closed until repairs can be made, at the least a permanent Notam should be issued warning of those conditions until they can be corrected. My airport was closed for 2 weeks just to resurface the runway...a very good runway even without the resurfacing... The conditions of the runway at PAO may warrant being bulldozed and completely reconstructed with the ...

37 minutes ago, HighFlyer said:

civil engineering practices and finances in place to stabilize the surface!

 Note: above quote slightly modified to complete my sentence...

[jaylw314]

1 hour ago, HighFlyer said:

I have based my Mooney and flown out of KPAO for 30 years, arrived at the airport minutes after the accident and having spoke to an eye witness, have some perspective on this sad tragedy.  First, my thoughts and prayers are with the family and loved ones during this terrible time.  Secondly, I offer these thoughts hoping to influence a positive outcome from the tragedy.  

I hope the NTSB and FAA consider the roll of the deteriorating runway in the accident chain of events.  Runway 13 approach end is generously considered a washboard due to the uneven pavement, it has been unsafe for years.  The Runway 31 approach end (normally used) was "repaired" ~ 2 years ago to remove 3 major bumps.  The runway bumps are so bad that take-off roll requires keeping forward pressure on the nose until passing the bumpy area to avoid premature launching airborne.  I have landed on 13 many times and always get an unpleasant bounce and have to work to maintain the landing.   Landing long beyond the washboard is not practical as the runway is too short. 

The facts we know: (1) the pilot was unfamiliar and needed tower assistance to find the airport, (2) 701JM was high on final, (3) 701JM did not have speed brakes, (4) Managing speed is essential, (5) Mooney's porpoise, (6) eyewitness noted the airplane hit hard and bounced, (7) eyewitness reported a prop strike, (8) Listen carefully to the Live ATC recording and you can hear the stall warning horn during his last radio communication (9) Unless you are based or operate @ KPAO its hard to know about these unsafe runway conditions.

This may very well be a case were a pilot, unfamiliar with the runway conditions, was high and fast and encountered a nasty washboard runway surprise followed by the well known Mooney porpoising behavior that resulted in a prop strike, then was unable to develop power to successfully go around thus resulting in a stall spin.  

The airport sits on the bay and the tide goes in and out twice daily thus causing the runway to move.  The Runway 13 end is closer to the bay than 31.   The tidal affects on the asphalt are strong.  The holes in the asphalt on the airport will show signs of salt residue many days.  The asphalt and base layers are so thin the weeds grow prodigiously in the many cracks.   The runway was constructed years ago, long before the civil engineering practices and finances were in place to stabilize the surface. 

The airport has started a 3 - 4 year project to repair the apron and just completed the first phase.  This consists of removing all the asphalt and "base" layers, and replacing the base layer with a mixture of compacted granite and concrete  (25% concrete) to create a stable base, then laying new asphalt.  I am not certain what are the plans to address the runway.  

Those of us whom operate out of KPAO are thrilled the City has a plan to upgrade the airport and repair the deteriorating facilities.  Perhaps this tragedy will prompt discussion to understand the runways potential involvement in the accident and if it is credibly determined to be in the accident chain, prompt prioritization of repair.  

I have to admit, I don't recall noticing any of that being a problem, I was there about 6 months ago, and that was the first time I'd ever landed there.  That being said, I landed on 31, so maybe it's more noticeable from the other direction

[thinwing]

Pilot was based out of placerville and had taken the mission to pickup patient in Redding 150 miles north.Visabilty due to smoke out of Pville and down the valley and especially arround Redding had to be a stressor for a single pilot.Ad the patient loading ,takeoff in low vis plus 250 mile flight North into class B airspace and short GA airports difficult to pick out due to ground clutter.Neither Palo Alto or SAN Carlos exist on a lot of bare land and don't really look like airports till you are right on top of them.locals familiar to them use local landmarks like sloughs or prominent buildings to set up for the landing pattern.Since these flights have to arrive and depart timely to make scheduled appointments there is pressure to complete the landing on time.Add the runway condition to the accident chain and it is remarkable that Angel Flight has not suffered and accident in 75000 mercy flights.RIP to  mr Spencer ,he has helped a lot of people .

[65MooneyPilot]

I had my Mooney based in PAO for several years in the early 90’s. It can be a challenging airport but not anymore challenging than any other airport. The ATC environment is also a challenge. 

First of all my heart also goes out to the families and passengers that survived and wish them a speedy recovery.

Here are some things I have learned as a professional pilot and have been written about for many years. First and foremost slow down.

Load in an approach to the runway you will be landing on as a reference if you have a GPS. Even a VFR GPS you can put the airport in and observe how many miles away you are from the airport. I still do this in the Boeing. Using 3 to 4 times your Altitude to calculate distance needed to descend usually works. I use 4 times when decending from cruise because The Mooney wings are so slippery and on approach 3 times the altitude. 

Don’t wait until it’s to late to go around. When you find yourself on an approach that resembles the space shuttle it’s time to go around. And believe me I am speaking from experience. I too have porpoised my Mooney more than once. Do not hesitate to put the power back in immediately to stop it. 

I don’t like Monday morning quarterbacks and I am not in anyway judging what happened. I just wanted to share a few techniques that may help one of us in the future.

[Marauder]

I had my Mooney based in PAO for several years in the early 90’s. It can be a challenging airport but not anymore challenging than any other airport. The ATC environment is also a challenge. 
First of all my heart also goes out to the families and passengers that survived and wish them a speedy recovery.
Here are some things I have learned as a professional pilot and have been written about for many years. First and foremost slow down.
Load in an approach to the runway you will be landing on as a reference if you have a GPS. Even a VFR GPS you can put the airport in and observe how many miles away you are from the airport. I still do this in the Boeing. Using 3 to 4 times your Altitude to calculate distance needed to descend usually works. I use 4 times when decending from cruise because The Mooney wings are so slippery and on approach 3 times the altitude. 
Don’t wait until it’s to late to go around. When you find yourself on an approach that resembles the space shuttle it’s time to go around. And believe me I am speaking from experience. I too have porpoised my Mooney more than once. Do not hesitate to put the power back in immediately to stop it. 
I don’t like Monday morning quarterbacks and I am not in anyway judging what happened. I just wanted to share a few techniques that may help one of us in the future.

I do think the new visual approach capability of the GTN has added a level of awareness to help identify the path to the airport and the vertical/horizontal guidance to navigate to it.




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[flyboy0681]

18 hours ago, Marauder said:

I do think the new visual approach capability of the GTN has added a level of awareness to help identify the path to the airport and the vertical/horizontal guidance to navigate to it.

 

At first I was skeptical of the new feature but am now sold on it. One of the greatest advantages of it is being on the base leg and having the glide slope available whereas the normal approach mode won't allow the user to configure the approach when close in. It's also great for use at airports that don't have a published approach.

[Marauder]

 
At first I was skeptical of the new feature but am now sold on it. One of the greatest advantages of it is being on the base leg and having the glide slope available whereas the normal approach mode won't allow the user to configure the approach when close in. It's also great for use at airports that don't have a published approach.

Yep, I agree. The only things that I found I needed to pay attention to was the glide slope. My airport has wires and a road before it and I fly the final higher than the 3% slope it presents (my picture). The other thing is coupling it to the autopilot. When you select the visual, it defaults to the runway as the default waypoint. To get the autopilot to couple, I found I need to select the 3nm waypoint for the coupling to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[flyboy0681]

5 minutes ago, Marauder said:

 

Yep, I agree. The only things that I found I needed to pay attention to was the glide slope. My airport has wires and a road before it and I fly the final higher than the 3% slope it presents (my picture). The other thing is coupling it to the autopilot. When you select the visual, it defaults to the runway as the default waypoint. To get the autopilot to couple, I found I need to select the 3nm waypoint for the coupling to happen.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

One thing that users have to be careful of is when on an actual approach. When setting up an approach on an IFR trip I mistakenly hit the Visual Approach to the runway. My friend/pilot caught my mistake. Garmin should highlight the visual approaches on the screen, such as reverse image or a different color.

[Marauder]

One thing that users have to be careful of is when on an actual approach. When setting up an approach on an IFR trip I mistakenly hit the Visual Approach to the runway. My friend/pilot caught my mistake. Garmin should highlight the visual approaches on the screen, such as reverse image or a different color.

Have you flown it coupled yet? It took me a bit to figure out that runway versus 3nm waypoint leg thing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[flyboy0681]

4 minutes ago, Marauder said:

Have you flown it coupled yet? It took me a bit to figure out that runway versus 3nm waypoint leg thing.

 

No I haven't, but now I'll know what to expect.

[Herlihy Brother]

Prayers for the pilot, passengers and family.  I passed my pp checkride with Gary Tweety landing on 13 at pao--there is a large levee on that approach as well that could encourage a long landing.

What works for me in the E when a few thousand feet too high on short final (like a west approach into Burbank at 3-4k agl or San Diego between airliners) is to Pull up to 65mph, get dirty, prop forward, throttle idle, and slip. Feels like you're in an elevator dropping like a rock. Be sure and lower the nose to accelerate to 75mph ias over the numbers before its too late.

[steingar]

3 hours ago, Herlihy Brother said:

Prayers for the pilot, passengers and family.  I passed my pp checkride with Gary Tweety landing on 13 at pao--there is a large levee on that approach as well that could encourage a long landing.

What works for me in the E when a few thousand feet too high on short final (like a west approach into Burbank at 3-4k agl or San Diego between airliners) is to Pull up to 65mph, get dirty, prop forward, throttle idle, and slip. Feels like you're in an elevator dropping like a rock. Be sure and lower the nose to accelerate to 75mph ias over the numbers before its too late.

Just remember to put in some power before you try and flare, or your in for the mother of all nasty surprises.  Don't ask me how I know.

I was trained to do the gear and flaps a few miles out, before I ever hit downwind.  I really like this approach.  I spend most of my time in VFR patterns looking out the window, not at my panel.  I assume that I'll be making IFR approaches, once I start that training, at 90 knots or so, so I'll be slowed down once I enter the airport environment.  I've found that energy isn't the easiest thing to loose in a Mooney, so its best done earlier than later.  My M20c will happily fly around 90 knots all day, I proved that big time at Oshkosh.  Actually, I shouldn't say happily, it sure burns a lot of oil flown like that.

[MyNameIsNobody]

4 hours ago, Herlihy Brother said:

Prayers for the pilot, passengers and family.  I passed my pp checkride with Gary Tweety landing on 13 at pao--there is a large levee on that approach as well that could encourage a long landing.

What works for me in the E when a few thousand feet too high on short final (like a west approach into Burbank at 3-4k agl or San Diego between airliners) is to Pull up to 65mph, get dirty, prop forward, throttle idle, and slip. Feels like you're in an elevator dropping like a rock. Be sure and lower the nose to accelerate to 75mph ias over the numbers before its too late.

You left out flaps.  You have full flaps too, right?

[jaylw314]

3 hours ago, steingar said:

Just remember to put in some power before you try and flare, or your in for the mother of all nasty surprises.  Don't ask me how I know.

I was trained to do the gear and flaps a few miles out, before I ever hit downwind.  I really like this approach.  I spend most of my time in VFR patterns looking out the window, not at my panel.  I assume that I'll be making IFR approaches, once I start that training, at 90 knots or so, so I'll be slowed down once I enter the airport environment.  I've found that energy isn't the easiest thing to loose in a Mooney, so its best done earlier than later.  My M20c will happily fly around 90 knots all day, I proved that big time at Oshkosh.  Actually, I shouldn't say happily, it sure burns a lot of oil flown like that.

90 KIAS is a little on the slow side for the approach phase, too close to best glide sped (where the backside of the power curve starts).  I'd suggest 95-100 KIAS, that works all the way down to 250 feet--if you cut power and slow down on final from that height, you'll cross the threshold around 80-85 KIAS.  Not good for short runways, but you're not going to be coming down to 250 feet without an ILS or LPV