Corey Lidle Crash (My opinion on what Happened)

[Felix]

I'm sure this was discussed for a while after it happened...I wanted
to bring this up again...I was just reading an article that I came
across explaining how Corey Lidle's crash into a Manhattan Building
could have happened. Some people say it was mechanical failure, others
say it because he flew into a cloud...So i started thinking about it
and I came up with this explanation:

The east river is a very narrow corridor. Continuing flight north
would put him in LaGuardia Airspace. To Avoid the airspace Lidle
needed to make a 180 degree turn back. Since the East River is so
narrow a turn of 30 or more degrees would probably be needed to avoid
flying over Manhattan. Once you bank an airplane over 30 degrees, you
would no longer see the tops of any building. Your line of sight
would be towards the bottom of the building. He probably didn't even
bother looking to the left to see if there are any obstacles before
starting the turn. He also probably didn't realize that his rate of
turn wasn't quick enough to avoid the building until it was too late.

Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?

Felix

[Dan Luke[_2_]]

"Felix" wrote:

> Some people say it was mechanical failure, others
> say it because he flew into a cloud...

Who says that? What mechanical failure? What cloud?

>
>
> He also probably didn't realize that his rate of
> turn wasn't quick enough to avoid the building until it was too late.
>
> Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?

That appears to be what happened, but not because he wasn't looking. Most
likely he ran out of room in the turn because of the crosswind that was
pushing the ground track of the airplane towards the buildings.

--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

[Felix]

The article said that it might have been mechanical failure, or he
flew into a cloud and got disoriented. It was an old article I
suppose.

I always avoid flying down the East River, it's just too narrow. Even
the Hudson River needs a large bank when making a 180 after the George
Washington Bridge.

On Jul 13, 3:09 pm, "Dan Luke" > wrote:
> "Felix" wrote:
> > Some people say it was mechanical failure, others
> > say it because he flew into a cloud...
>
> Who says that? What mechanical failure? What cloud?
>
>
>
> > He also probably didn't realize that his rate of
> > turn wasn't quick enough to avoid the building until it was too late.
>
> > Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?
>
> That appears to be what happened, but not because he wasn't looking. Most
> likely he ran out of room in the turn because of the crosswind that was
> pushing the ground track of the airplane towards the buildings.
>
> --
> Dan
> T-182T at BFM

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Felix wrote:
> I'm sure this was discussed for a while after it happened...I wanted
> to bring this up again...I was just reading an article that I came
> across explaining how Corey Lidle's crash into a Manhattan Building
> could have happened. Some people say it was mechanical failure, others
> say it because he flew into a cloud...So i started thinking about it
> and I came up with this explanation:
>
> The east river is a very narrow corridor. Continuing flight north
> would put him in LaGuardia Airspace. To Avoid the airspace Lidle
> needed to make a 180 degree turn back. Since the East River is so
> narrow a turn of 30 or more degrees would probably be needed to avoid
> flying over Manhattan. Once you bank an airplane over 30 degrees, you
> would no longer see the tops of any building. Your line of sight
> would be towards the bottom of the building. He probably didn't even
> bother looking to the left to see if there are any obstacles before
> starting the turn. He also probably didn't realize that his rate of
> turn wasn't quick enough to avoid the building until it was too late.
>
> Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?
>
> Felix

You are probably exactly right. At in the wind that was there and you are
even more right. There has been no evednce that there was a mechanical
failure and I never even hear the cloud theory. If it were true it would
still me pilot error.

[Ron Lee[_2_]]

"Dan Luke" > wrote:

> Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?
>
>That appears to be what happened, but not because he wasn't looking. Most
>likely he ran out of room in the turn because of the crosswind that was
>pushing the ground track of the airplane towards the buildings.
>

I am not familiar with the buildings but had he flown around the one
he hit he might have been fine.

He could have flown along the west side and turned right (if
appropriate).

He could have talked to ATC and been cleared into a bit of airspace he
tried to avoid.

He could have started the turn from the east side of the river and
banked steeper.

Bottom line: He screwed up.

Ron Lee

[kontiki]

Ron Lee wrote:
>
> Bottom line: He screwed up.
>
Therefore: sue the manufacturer of the airplane, the FAA,
the family of the instructor that was with him and the owner
of the building that he hit.

[Gatt]

"kontiki" > wrote in message
...
> Ron Lee wrote:
>>
>> Bottom line: He screwed up.
> Therefore: sue the manufacturer of the airplane, the FAA,
> the family of the instructor that was with him and the owner
> of the building that he hit.

Everybody take a dollar out of their wallet and pass it to the left. Take
the dollar from the person to the right and put it in your wallet.

Corey Lidle and the instructor are still dead, and a bunch of money got
shuffled around. The only difference is, a bunch of lawyers didn't take it
all.

-c

[Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe]

..
"Felix" > wrote in message
oups.com...
<...> Once you bank an airplane over 30 degrees, you
> would no longer see the tops of any building. Your line of sight
> would be towards the bottom of the building.
<...>

HUH???

Since when?

Perhaps in a simulator where you only have a little screen to look at...

--
Geoff
The Sea Hawk at Wow Way d0t Com
remove spaces and make the obvious substitutions to reply by mail
When immigration is outlawed, only outlaws will immigrate

[Montblack]

("Felix" wrote)
> Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?


My take on this crash is:

If they could have a do-over ...at the moment they decided to turn around,
they would choose (this time) to bust the airspace, and write up a NASA form
later.

I think they got a little behind the situation, decided NOT to bust ANY of
the airspace around them, and things went south from there.


Paul-Mont

[Peter Dohm]

"Montblack" > wrote in message
...
> ("Felix" wrote)
> > Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?
>
>
> My take on this crash is:
>
> If they could have a do-over ...at the moment they decided to turn around,
> they would choose (this time) to bust the airspace, and write up a NASA
form
> later.
>
> I think they got a little behind the situation, decided NOT to bust ANY of
> the airspace around them, and things went south from there.
>
>
> Paul-Mont
>
>
>
That pretty much sums up all that we really know.

The report(s) can be found at http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/query.asp by typing
in the registration number N929CD and selecting any or each of the three
reports. However, none depict any reconstrucion of the exact flight
path--so all that can really be said is that your solution, advanced by many
of us at the time, would have worked.

Peter

[[email protected]]

Having flown in the area quite a few times, I would highly recommend
contacting LGA tower for the Class Bravo transition, either north up
the East River and then west across Central Park, or the same route
opposite direction.

As long as you are efficient with your airtime on the radio, LGA tower
have always been very helpful to me indeed. And it's comforting to be
operating with a clearance and traffic advisories from them rather
than squinting down the Hudson scanning for traffic.

My advice: don't avoid LGA tower and the Class Bravo round there. Yes
they are busy but they are very nice and the views are great.

Tom


>
> I always avoid flying down the East River, it's just too narrow. Even
> the Hudson River needs a large bank when making a 180 after the George
> Washington Bridge.
>

[Peter R.]

On 7/13/2007 8:36:23 PM, "Montblack" wrote:

> I think they got a little behind the situation, decided NOT to bust ANY of
> the airspace around them, and things went south from there.

Literally and figuratively.

--
Peter

[mycpilot]

Every body I fly with or even just asks me the same question. I have
this simple answer to anyone, especially those who don't know anything
about flying...

"You're flying along, fat and happy, doesn't matter where or how high,
for that matter, and you decide for whatever reason that you want to do
a u-turn and go back the way you came.

You look out of the window and on the left side, you see a boatload of
buildings. You look on the right side, and you see open air.

So, which way do you turn ? "

Like I said, no discussion about LGA, airspace ownership, radio usage,
just simple common sense...

Ray

Felix wrote:
> I'm sure this was discussed for a while after it happened...I wanted
> to bring this up again...I was just reading an article that I came
> across explaining how Corey Lidle's crash into a Manhattan Building
> could have happened. Some people say it was mechanical failure, others
> say it because he flew into a cloud...So i started thinking about it
> and I came up with this explanation:
>
> The east river is a very narrow corridor. Continuing flight north
> would put him in LaGuardia Airspace. To Avoid the airspace Lidle
> needed to make a 180 degree turn back. Since the East River is so
> narrow a turn of 30 or more degrees would probably be needed to avoid
> flying over Manhattan. Once you bank an airplane over 30 degrees, you
> would no longer see the tops of any building. Your line of sight
> would be towards the bottom of the building. He probably didn't even
> bother looking to the left to see if there are any obstacles before
> starting the turn. He also probably didn't realize that his rate of
> turn wasn't quick enough to avoid the building until it was too late.
>
> Is this a possible explanation or am I completely wrong here?
>
> Felix
>