The are always "good pilots"

[3WE]

Discisson points, not suggested causes.

So, is a low pass a bold, wreckless maneuver?

Engine quit and he lost it climbing out (as has happened many many times)?

Pilot made passes over party before NV plane crash

5 die in plane crash By MARTIN GRIFFITH, Associated Press Writer Martin Griffith, Associated Press Writer – Sun May 10, 9:16 pm ET

RENO, Nev. – The pilot of a small plane that nose-dived into a northern Nevada cow pasture, killing all five people aboard, was making low passes over a party shortly before the crash, a federal investigator said Sunday.

National Transportation Safety Board and Federal Aviation Administration investigators on Sunday combed the wreckage for clues as to whether human error, weather or a mechanical problem caused the crash a day before near Gardnerville, about 50 miles south of Reno.

"It's way too early to determine the cause," NTSB investigator Van McKenny told The Associated Press. "We haven't ruled out anything at this point. We still need to continue to examine the aircraft."

Investigators were unable to examine the engines because both were buried in the ground, he said. They will be examined at a Sacramento, Calif., warehouse after the wreckage is removed from the site Monday.

McKenny said witnesses told him that the pilot, Gary Annas, 58, of Minden, was making low passes over the party shortly after taking off from the nearby Minden Tahoe Airport when his twin-engine Beechcraft BE95 made a steep turn and crashed.

Annas had earlier stopped by the party to ask if anyone wanted to accompany him on the flight that was to start and end at the airport, McKenny said.

The crash occurred about 12 miles from the airport in the rural Carson Valley along the eastern base of the Sierra Nevada mountain range.

The passengers were identified as Paul Dallas, 43, of Minden; Leia Denner, 40, and Brent Fahey, 30, both of Gardnerville; and Beau McGrath, 30, of Kirkwood, Calif.

Witness Douglas Bradshaw, a former pilot, said the plane appeared to be flying normally at a relatively high speed before it crashed about 100 yards from his house.

He said the plane passed about 200 feet over his home as he and his wife were sitting on the patio, then suddenly climbed, lost lift and spun into the ground.

"The engines were roaring and working great. It sounded like he had full power," Bradshaw said. "The mystery is why would someone suddenly pitch up into a vertical climbing position. It was pretty frightening because it just happened so fast."

Mark Faucette, a National Weather Service forecaster in Reno, said gusts of up to 25 mph were reported at the time in the Carson Valley.

Investigators also have requested Air Traffic Control and radar data, saying it could help provide clues. The small craft had no black box.

Annas, owner of GMA Aircraft Sales at the Minden airport, was an experienced pilot who had been flying since he was a teen, said Al Gangwish, president of Hutt Aviation in Minden.

"I was very shocked to find out about the crash because he has a lot of experience," Gangwish said. "Gary had a very successful business and was very well liked and did it the right way. He'll definitely be missed."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090511/ap_ ... lane_crash

[Giles]

Discisson points, not suggested causes.

So, is a low pass a bold, wreckless maneuver?

this has all the makings of a "hey look at me" show-off type.

Sec. 91.13

Careless or reckless operation.

(a) Aircraft operations for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.
(b) Aircraft operations other than for the purpose of air navigation. No person may operate an aircraft, other than for the purpose of air navigation, on any part of the surface of an airport used by aircraft for air commerce (including areas used by those aircraft for receiving or discharging persons or cargo), in a careless or reckless manner so as to endanger the life or property of another.

[ZeroAltitude]

So, is a low pass a bold, wreckless maneuver?

Everybody hopes so.

[Gabriel]

[quote="3WE"]Discisson points, not suggested causes.

So, is a low pass a bold, wreckless maneuver?

Engine quit and he lost it climbing out (as has happened many many times)?
A low pass maybe is not a reckless meneuver per se, if done with careful planning, including knowing forehand entry and exit path (both vertically and horizontally), speeds to be flown, obstacles in the area, etc...

Now, intentionally flying at 200ft over populated areas or over a group of people, other than as needed for take-off and landing, is prohibited.

And this doesn't sound like an engine quit and loss of control due to assymetric power. It rather looks like too much pull up, stall-spin-crash-die.

[Digger]

Witness Douglas Bradshaw, a former pilot, said the plane appeared to be flying normally at a relatively high speed before it crashed about 100 yards from his house.

He said the plane passed about 200 feet over his home as he and his wife were sitting on the patio, then suddenly climbed, lost lift and spun into the ground.

"The engines were roaring and working great. It sounded like he had full power," Bradshaw said. "The mystery is why would someone suddenly pitch up into a vertical climbing position. It was pretty frightening because it just happened so fast."

3WE, did you read this part before posting?

Normally, eyewitness reports aren't worth a whole lot, but one would think that guy might have a clue...

[3WE]

Witness Douglas Bradshaw, a former pilot, said the plane appeared to be flying normally at a relatively high speed before it crashed about 100 yards from his house.

He said the plane passed about 200 feet over his home as he and his wife were sitting on the patio, then suddenly climbed, lost lift and spun into the ground.

"The engines were roaring and working great. It sounded like he had full power," Bradshaw said. "The mystery is why would someone suddenly pitch up into a vertical climbing position. It was pretty frightening because it just happened so fast."

3WE, did you read this part before posting?

Normally, eyewitness reports aren't worth a whole lot, but one would think that guy might have a clue...

Dig dug:

Normally, eyewitness reports aren't worth a whole lot [/quote]

To "suddenly" pitch up "so fast" to "vertical" is a bit extreme, and opens the door that maybe something went wrong mechanically....or then again, it was just an eyewitness report and he might have left off the part that it seemed totally under control, pulled up just like they do at the airshow, and slowed and slowed untill it fell off into what looked like a textbook stall/spin....two slightly different things.

But, normally, eyewitness reports aren't worth a whole lot [/quote]

Yeah, there's a clue there, but to what?

Guess we'll have to wait for the final report.

[Digger]

To "suddenly" pitch up "so fast" to "vertical" is a bit extreme, and opens the door that maybe something went wrong mechanically...

But at the same time, it opens the door that he was being a hotdog, and ended up killing himself and four other people. The rest of the story opens the door to that as well. Remember Occam's razor, which boils down to, “The simplest explanation for a phenomenon is most likely the correct explanation." Sure, it's possible that something went wrong mechanically, and we can hope for the sake of the dead pilot's reputation that it was something mechanical and not reckless flying.

Something mechanical? Maybe it was a jammed elevator, or maybe he pulled up so sharply that he failed some part of the airframe? The eyewitness account doesn't discount either of those possibilities; it doesn't even address them. It does address the engines, which a pilot, not a person with zero aviation experience, reported as sounding as if they were producing full power.

Your post mentioned only engine failure as a possible mechanical cause. Is it unreasonable that I'd question how throughly you read the article?

Dig dug:

Was that an example of the "show disrespect to the other poster by changing the username" game that's so popular here? I wouldn't have expected you to try to engage me in that game. Maybe I'm taking it wrong, but there's Occam again...

On edit: To address the question you asked initially--In and of itself, maybe, maybe not, but to stop by a party and grab a planeload of people, and then go make repeated low passes at said party, uh, yeah, it probably was bold and reckless...

[Giles]

Is it unreasonable that I'd question how throughly you read the article?

no, it is not. 3w evidently has a mental disability of some sort where he tends to either gloss over facts, or pick and choose facts that suits him.

[Dmmoore]

"Hot Dogging" is not dangerous unless!
It's the "UNLESS" that kills people. A hot dogging pilot has a greater chance of an accident because there is less room for error when something unexpected happens.
Pilots who risk their own necks doing stupid stunts is one issue, placing others in danger is another.
I classify this one as a stupid stunt that ended tragically.
The Travelair is a very nice flying light twin. Compared to it's big brother (the Barron) it's a bit under powered but still has reasonable performance without the Barron's engine out and stall behavior.

[3WE]

Dig dug:

Was that an example of the "show disrespect to the other poster by changing the username" game that's so popular here?

Yes, it was "biting back" after being accused of not reading the article. Make no mistake, I enjoy your posts.

Like you said, it's an eyewitness report. Yes, I bet a beer that it's a botched zoom climb,, but to suddenly go vertical is enough abnormal to ask about other problems (especially at this stage).

And, I don't think it's ok to be claiming Occam's razor logic to say I'm wrong until you know all the facts you can reasonably gather (which neither of us have at this phase).

So, I hope you will write this off to a little mutual bickering.

I don't think I'm off base having a shred of doubt that a "good pilot" would suddenly and delibarately pull up to vertical and do a hammerhead stall....

As an NTSB rep would tell any news conference, "We have not discounted nor focused on any possible cause at this time"

The main point of the post is how pilots are so often said to be "good". Making low passes over a party brings his judgement into suspicion.

Still, going vertical in a twin full of passengers is grossly bad judgement as compared to a low pass which Don just said was not dangerous in and of itself.

[Digger]

"Hot Dogging" is not dangerous unless!
It's the "UNLESS" that kills people. A hot dogging pilot has a greater chance of an accident because there is less room for error when something unexpected happens.

Or unless they try a maneuver that exceeds their ability. And sometimes, the something that happens is that the limits of their ability get demonstrated...

Yes, it was a little "biting back" after being accused of not reading the article. Make no mistake, I enjoy your posts.

It wasn't an accusation as much as it was a request for clarification. I hope my explanation of why I had to ask made sense. No big deal.

And Occam says "most likely", not "certainly", which still leaves room for further discussion and enlightenment on the way to whatever the findings may be.

I don't think I'm off base having a shred of doubt that a "good pilot" would suddenly and delibarately pull up to vertical and do a hammerhead stall....(here OR in a Q-400)

No. you're not. And the "eyewitness report" thing cuts both ways too. It might've been a steep climb, but well short of vertical. The witness may have been at an angle that made it appear different than it actually was, or he may have been exaggerating in the telling of the story. I was only pointing out that I'd give more credibilty to a witness with aviation experience than I would to one without.

The main point of the post is how pilots are so often said to be "good". Making low passes over a party brings his judgement into suspicion.

Still, going vertical in a twin full of passengers is grossly bad judgement as compared to a low pass which Don just said was not dangerous in and of itself.

Indeed. See my reply to Don above.

Question to those who know more than I do--would the fact that there were four passengers plus the pilot raise any questions about weight and balance? Or is a load of five people (presumably without luggage) undoubtedly within that aircraft's capability?

[Dmmoore]

The useful load of a typical Travelair is between 1500 and 1600 pounds. Five 200 pound American total 1000 pounds. Full main tanks (80 gallons X 6 ppg) = 480 pounds of fuel. If the load was only pax and fuel the aircraft should have been within weight and balance limits. The actual load may be outside the limits.

[Digger]

Thank you, Don.

[Giles]

until you know all the facts you can reasonably gather (which neither of us have at this phase).

in other words, wait for the final report.