Let’s start over - Mooney caravan incident

[Skates97]

1 hour ago, steingar said:

What I worry about flying into Oshkosh is what kills pilots there, getting too slow and stalling out in the pattern.  So I keep my speed up as much as I can.  I had  big worry this last one, I was following a Cessna at 80 mph.  That's only 13 mph above my clean stall speed, not a big margin.  

 

I have come into the pattern at un-towered airports behind some really slow folks before. I normally don't drop gear and start putting in flaps until abeam my touchdown point, but if I'm behind someone slow I put the gear out and start adding flaps earlier than that. You may have done that in this case, but if I found myself stuck following the 80 mph Cessna I would have just dropped gear and added some flaps and flown along like a sad Cherokee with the tail put on the correct way, it buys you an extra 10 mph before stalling. (Granted if you haven't worked on slow flight recently it may feel odd)

[GeeBee]

Exactly Skates, work on slow flight is important. I really disagree with the FAA's recent standards on MCA flight as it does not build the skills and confidence needed to control the airplane at low speeds.

[steingar]

1 hour ago, Skates97 said:

I have come into the pattern at un-towered airports behind some really slow folks before. I normally don't drop gear and start putting in flaps until abeam my touchdown point, but if I'm behind someone slow I put the gear out and start adding flaps earlier than that. You may have done that in this case, but if I found myself stuck following the 80 mph Cessna I would have just dropped gear and added some flaps and flown along like a sad Cherokee with the tail put on the correct way, it buys you an extra 10 mph before stalling. (Granted if you haven't worked on slow flight recently it may feel odd)

Y'know, I probably shoulda done all that.  I was just a bit preoccupied with not sliding up that Cessna's six and keeping him in front of me.  That, and before I passed FISKE it was quite possible that I would have to boogie out and clean up the airframe.  I have no trouble with slow flight, I know what the aircraft can and can't do.  But slow flight a half mile behind another airplane with prop wash and distractions is another matter entirely.

[Shadrach]

8 hours ago, steingar said:

What I worry about flying into Oshkosh is what kills pilots there, getting too slow and stalling out in the pattern.  So I keep my speed up as much as I can.  I had  big worry this last one, I was following a Cessna at 80 mph.  That's only 13 mph above my clean stall speed, not a big margin.  

That’s 1.2xVs at max gross weight. Do you often find yourself landing at max gross or is using that number another way adding more margin? A better way to add margin is to configure the airplane appropriately for the regime. The simple act of deploying maximimum flaps would have taken your margin to 1.4. One of the nice features of any iteration of the M20 airframe is its ability to mix with traffic at both ends of the speed spectrum. It can sequence with jets at busy Bravo airports or work into a rural airport pattern with a C152 doing closed traffic work. You must be willing to adjust your SOP. Are you reluctant to adjust SOP for fear of forgetting something?

Edited August 28, 2019 by Shadrach

[GeeBee]

"OK.  I get lowering the flaps in order to lower the stall speed and increase your safety margins if caught behind slow traffic on Fisk arrival procedure.  But why also lower the gear?  Does the gear hanging down also lower the stall speed?"

It can have depending on the type of aircraft. In the Mooney I would guess little on span wise flow. Lowering the gear slows span wise flow (Think of it as strakes pointing down) but more important it acts as a pendulum to stabilize the aircraft in a regime where you are working the ailerons and rudder very hard. So gear allows you to work just a little less and any pickup in stability makes things easier. It also makes the throttle  less sensitive for speed adjustments.

[Skates97]

12 minutes ago, GeeBee said:

50 minutes ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

OK.  I get lowering the flaps in order to lower the stall speed and increase your safety margins if caught behind slow traffic on Fisk arrival procedure.  But why also lower the gear?  Does the gear hanging down also lower the stall speed?

 

It can have depending on the type of aircraft. In the Mooney I would guess little on span wise flow. Lowering the gear slows span wise flow (Think of it as strakes pointing down) but more important it acts as a pendulum to stabilize the aircraft in a regime where you are working the ailerons and rudder very hard. So gear allows you to work just a little less and any pickup in stability makes things easier. It also makes the throttle  less sensitive for speed adjustments.

That makes sense, I have always dropped the gear in addition to flaps for a couple reasons. First, the POH doesn't list stall speeds for flaps and no gear. Second, my VFE  is just 100 mph and  my VLE  is 120 mph. Without the gear out it is really easy to go past the 100 mph.

[0TreeLemur]

13 minutes ago, Skates97 said:

That makes sense, I have always dropped the gear in addition to flaps for a couple reasons. First, the POH doesn't list stall speeds for flaps and no gear. Second, my VFE  is just 100 mph and  my VLE  is 120 mph. Without the gear out it is really easy to go past the 100 mph.

@Skates97 this is a good point.  I view the landing gear in my C as "speed brakes" so I can get the flaps down!

 

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Thanks fellas.  I understand the theory but was fishing for additional airframe specific data beyond what little can be inferred from at least the POH / owners manual of the two Mooneys I have owned.  When you guys practice stalls do you lower the gear or leave it up?   I leave it up, personally.  Surely someone has done the tests to see if and how gear position affects stall speed in our Mooneys?

If you're below flap speed in level flight with the gear up, you’re likely going to be listening to the gear horn until you put it down. If you’re in a busy situation, you’ve now increased your chance of getting distracted and also put yourself in the exact situation that desensitizes you to audible warnings.  I’ve never had a gear up, but I did get distracted once by tower when abeam the numbers. I wish I could tell you that it is hard to tune out the gear horn but it’s not...

Edited August 28, 2019 by Shadrach

[Ned Gravel]

2 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

If you're below flap speed in level flight with the gear up, you’re likely going to be listening to the gear horn until you put it down.

Or... in mine, when the manifold pressure is less than about 12"  Essentially, my bird wants me to put the gear down when I purposely drop power that low.  On dive and drive descents, it is so annoying that I occasionally stick my finger into the down lock block, until I can level out and bring the power back up past 12".

[Shadrach]

11 minutes ago, Ned Gravel said:

Or... in mine, when the manifold pressure is less than about 12"  Essentially, my bird wants me to put the gear down when I purposely drop power that low.  On dive and drive descents, it is so annoying that I occasionally stick my finger into the down lock block, until I can level out and bring the power back up past 12".

We’re saying the same thing but different scenarios.

[carusoam]

8 hours ago, bluehighwayflyer said:

Thanks fellas.  I understand the theory but was fishing for additional airframe specific data beyond what little can be inferred from at least the POH / owners manual of the two Mooneys I have owned.  When you guys practice stalls do you lower the gear or leave it up?   I leave it up, personally.  Surely someone has done the tests to see if and how gear position affects stall speed in our Mooneys?

Jim,

I’m in the camp of two stall scenarios...

1) Landing... everything out, low / no power

2) Departure... everything in T/O position, high power

3) Gear and gear doors add plenty of drag as they are not aligned well with the wind... slowing the wind beneath the wings isn’t going to improve stall speed... the most noticeable thing is they act like brakes, slowing things quicker...

4) I guess we could really improve our stall speed during a GU landing... all flap, no gear... 

5) Gear is part of the slow flight regime... because we fly slowly most often during T/O and landing... with the gear down.

6) Stalls with the gear up, may have a measurable difference if you Have stall speeds memorized and compare to the ASI... the feel and procedure is going to be tough to tell the difference... CG shift by the nose gear... included.

PP thoughts only, not a CFI...

Best regards,

-a-

[steingar]

Actually, someone said it.  Didn't really want to drop the gear prematurely in case I had to suck it back up in a hurry, really not easy to do at 100 mph for this pipsqueak.  Didn't like the thought of flaps in case speeds went up, without the gear it's really easy to blow through your flap speed.  So I toughed it out. I was slow, but well above stall speed.  My airspeed indicator got some special attention during that period.  Had it got much slower I would've boogied.

[Gary0747]

I have spent a number of years conducting and reviewing major accident investigations not in the aviation industry so I don’t profess any expertise or interest in investigation this.  I will give my opinion that the attitude I was just reading from one responder that “shit happens let’s move on” will lead you no where in terms of preventing reoccurrence.   Saying that wing vortices caused this is not the root cause. 

[Hank]

Well,the report is official, bland and pretty uninformative. Only took a year to assign blame to both pilots . . . .

[carusoam]

Thanks for the post 1980...

Nice report: Bland and vanilla...

Lets avoid doing that again...

Best regards,

-a-

[kris_adams]

wow...pretty much the least informative write up I've seen lately.  Sometimes that's not a bad thing though. -K

[jetdriven]

Deleted 

Edited May 31, 2021 by jetdriven

[EricJ]

12 hours ago, jetdriven said:

Here’s the problem, without  honesty and reckoning, this is going to happen again.  
They had the chance to get out in front of this, own it, and then change things to where it never happens again. I’m disappointed. 

As an interested outside observer it does seem like this was handled very poorly.  I hope there are some productive changes that come out of it.

[MooneyMitch]

13 hours ago, jetdriven said:

Compounding the situation was that the factory pilot didn’t even attend the mandatory formation training because They figured he was an experienced guy. 

And once again, the infamous ASS U ME, raises it head! 

[N9201A]

Wasn’t a full accounting of what happened promised up at the time, along with any necessary changes in procedures?   Did that ever happen?   I haven’t been paying attention and genuinely don’t know.  

https://www.mooneycaravan.com/web/Mooney/Pages/Safety/2019.asp?Zr07Pyvpx=FDEM%20V0pvqr06%20f6n6rzr06&Zr07TPyvpx=fnsr6B

Blue, don’t worry, this is MooneySpace. Like most online forums (fora?), knowing nothing about a particular issue shouldn’t prevent you from opining on it, plenty of others have!

[N9201A]

As an interested outside observer it does seem like this was handled very poorly.  I hope there are some productive changes that come out of it.

As an outside observer, it would be difficult to assess anything except what’s posted here. So that’s understandable. Posting to social media is not a viable safety management strategy.

The Caravan has implemented significant additional internal processes and safeguards to enhance safety at future events, not just the mass arrival flight. Participants are using them now, and future participants will be aware of them.

In addition we have a specific presentation “Ruminations of a Midair Survivor” that has been presented at clinics. It is a detailed analysis using the Reason model and NTSB methodology as well as group discussion that has been well-received. If you’re at OSH, look for it. It’ll be presented there and announced here too.

And for those who are interested, come out and fly with us.

[EricJ]

39 minutes ago, N9201A said:

As an outside observer, it would be difficult to assess anything except what’s posted here. So that’s understandable. 

That would be an incorrect assumption.   There has been a lot of info elsewhere, and people who were there have discussed it and talked about it in person, there have been other assessments written, etc. 

Mooneyspace is not the sole depository of information on the topic.

[N9201A]

That would be an incorrect assumption.   There has been a lot of info elsewhere, and people who were there have discussed it and talked about it in person, there have been other assessments written, etc. 
Mooneyspace is not the sole depository of information on the topic.

Actually I’ve made no assumption. Who said MS is the “sole depository of information”? In fact, with respect to this incident, it’s not a depository of any information as l understand that word.

But there certainly is plenty of speculation, rumor, and a few (hopefully soon-to-be-corrected/retracted) outright falsehoods.

As far as people who “were there,” hundreds of thousands of people were at Oshkosh. Anyone who walked by the North 40 could see the involved aircraft...and would have the same information about the incident as just about anyone else.

The pilots who were “there” — meaning the incident, not the North 40 — would be limited to those who actually saw it. And none of them have posted what they saw here. So anything someone thinks they “know,” think again.

That someone expressed their opinion in writing validates it not a whit ... the postings here evidence that. I can write or “assess” that Amelia Earhart secretly lived a long life as a fortune teller in Lahaina, and that’s as valid a “written assessment” as has been done here.

As I wrote elsewhere, an actual causal analysis using NTSB methodology has been done and will continue to be shared with Caravaners who are interested. The organization has strengthened procedures and taken other steps to enhance safety, and has acted responsibly. Caravaners who’ve participated in that discussion have commented favorably, and so far (COVID having intervened) the revised processes (which are published on the site yet remain mostly unread, judging from some of these postings) seem to be well-received.

As for anyone who wants to speculate, it’s a free country. Likewise, anyone can have an opinion about formation flying, mass arrivals, the Caravan, or NTSB reporting. That one knows nothing about something shouldn’t deter an expression of expertise or opinion, that’s the American way!

But no one should intimate some “knowledge” or “information” beyond what’s reported by the NTSB. And certainly outright falsehoods are wrong, and consequential.

[Andy95W]

13 hours ago, N9201A said:

As an outside observer, it would be difficult to assess anything except what’s posted here. So that’s understandable. Posting to social media is not a viable safety management strategy.

The Caravan has implemented significant additional internal processes and safeguards to enhance safety at future events, not just the mass arrival flight. Participants are using them now, and future participants will be aware of them.

In addition we have a specific presentation “Ruminations of a Midair Survivor” that has been presented at clinics. It is a detailed analysis using the Reason model and NTSB methodology as well as group discussion that has been well-received. If you’re at OSH, look for it. It’ll be presented there and announced here too.

And for those who are interested, come out and fly with us.

The thing that bothered me the most- and I suspect others, as well- is that there is good information out there that the Caravan didn't divulge to those who aren’t members of their group.

Like many members here, I’ve done some simple formation flying generally for the purpose of in-flight photography.  I would love to know more about how to do so safely, but for a variety of reasons I have no desire to join the Caravan.  I suppose I’ll just infer the lessons I need from the scant information that is available.

It all struck me as a little petty, like when  chriscalandro had a fuel tank problem and refused to share the resolution here because of some childish snit he had with some of our members.

———————————-

EDIT: after reading @N9201A‘s post above, I looked at the safety section of the Mooney Caravan website.  There is a lengthy write up of the incident and lessons learned.  That wasn’t there the last time I had visited.

Thank you to the Mooney Caravan for posting that information to the website.

https://www.mooneycaravan.com/web/Mooney/Pages/Safety/2019.asp?Zr07Pyvpx=FDEM V0pvqr06 f6n6rzr06&Zr07TPyvpx=fnsr6B

Edited May 20, 2021 by Andy95W

[EricJ]

1 minute ago, N9201A said:

Actually I’ve made no assumption. Who said MS is the “sole depository of information”? In fact, with respect to this incident, it’s not a depository of any information as l understand that word.

You said, "As an outside observer, it would be difficult to assess anything except what’s posted here."    That assumes that only the information posted here can be assessed by an outside observer, which is clearly not correct.

1 minute ago, N9201A said:

So anything someone thinks they “know,” think again.

Yes, lots of people were there, in the flight, saw the aircraft, and, very importantly, experienced how the event was handled on site at the time.   Many of them have talked about it here and elsewhere, and all over the country after they went home.

Are you saying nobody who was there can be accurate about how they experienced how it was handled on site?

 

1 minute ago, N9201A said:

That someone expressed their opinion in writing validates it not a whit ... the postings here evidence that. I can write or “assess” that Amelia Earhart secretly lived a long life as a fortune teller in Lahaina, and that’s as valid a “written assessment” as has been done here.

As I wrote elsewhere, an actual causal analysis using NTSB methodology has been done and will continue to be shared with Caravaners who are interested. The organization has strengthened procedures and taken other steps to enhance safety, and has acted responsibly. Caravaners who’ve participated in that discussion have commented favorably, and so far (COVID having intervened) the revised processes (which are published on the site yet remain mostly unread, judging from some of these postings) seem to be well-received.

As for anyone who wants to speculate, it’s a free country. Likewise, anyone can have an opinion about formation flying, mass arrivals, the Caravan, or NTSB reporting. That one knows nothing about something shouldn’t deter an expression of expertise or opinion, that’s the American way!

But no one should intimate some “knowledge” or “information” beyond what’s reported by the NTSB. And certainly outright falsehoods are wrong, and consequential.

You're pretty much solidifying my opinion of how badly this was, and continues to be, handled.