Lancair crash at SnF

AW&ST today had a small article that a Lancair piloted by Gerand
Schkolnk crashed moments after takeoff during the Sun and Fun AirShow.

He was director of Supersonic Technology Programs at Gulfstream.

Anyone have any data on accident other than what AW&ST had?

Big John

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 23:53:32 -0500, Big John wrote:

AW&ST today had a small article that a Lancair piloted by Gerand
Schkolnk crashed moments after takeoff during the Sun and Fun AirShow.

He was director of Supersonic Technology Programs at Gulfstream.

Anyone have any data on accident other than what AW&ST had?

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news..._197685-1.html

Ron Wanttaja

Big John wrote:
AW&ST today had a small article that a Lancair piloted by Gerand
Schkolnk crashed moments after takeoff during the Sun and Fun AirShow.

He was director of Supersonic Technology Programs at Gulfstream.

Anyone have any data on accident other than what AW&ST had?

Big John

A Lancair crashed just moments after takeoff here in Mesa, Arizona,
today, too. Plane was headed for California. There was smoke trailing
from the plane on takeoff and controllers cleared them to turn back
around and land. They tried -- they made the left turn but crashed into
the orange orchard. Three fatalities, all in their late 20s. Sympathies
and prayers to the families.

http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news..._197685-1.html


"Pilots familiar with Lancair designs speculate that an unlatched canopy
introduces a significant distraction to the pilot but should not in and
of itself result in complete loss of controlled flight for the Lancair
Legacy."

I could imagine that there might be some degree of disruption to the
airflow. Maybe this would affect the rudder and/or elevator response?

On Apr 24, 5:43*pm, Shirl wrote:
Big John wrote:
AW&ST today had a small article that a Lancair piloted by Gerand
Schkolnk crashed moments after takeoff during the Sun and Fun AirShow.

He was director of Supersonic Technology Programs at Gulfstream.

Anyone have any data on accident other than what AW&ST had?

Big John

A Lancair crashed just moments after takeoff here in Mesa, Arizona,
today, too. Plane was headed for California. There was smoke trailing
from the plane on takeoff and controllers cleared them to turn back
around and land. They tried -- they made the left turn but crashed into
the orange orchard. Three fatalities, all in their late 20s. Sympathies
and prayers to the families.

When will pilots learn to stop trying to do the impossible turn... and
go for a straight ahead landing on soemthing horizontal?

Cheers

On 2008-04-24, WingFlaps wrote:
When will pilots learn to stop trying to do the impossible turn... and
go for a straight ahead landing on soemthing horizontal?

Depends on what you mean by "the impossible turn". If you mean turning back
at 200 AGL, yeah, that one's pretty much impossible. If you mean 600 AGL,
it's pretty much possible in the average aircraft. (Hell, that's pattern
altitude at EFD!) The line lies somewhere in between.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)

On 2008-04-24, WingFlaps wrote:
A Lancair crashed just moments after takeoff here in Mesa, Arizona,
today, too. Plane was headed for California. There was smoke trailing
from the plane on takeoff and controllers cleared them to turn back
around and land. They tried -- they made the left turn but crashed into
the orange orchard. Three fatalities, all in their late 20s. Sympathies
and prayers to the families.

When will pilots learn to stop trying to do the impossible turn... and
go for a straight ahead landing on soemthing horizontal?

We don't know it was an 'impossible turn'. We don't even know what
altitude they were at, whether the engine was still developing power or
not, or whether the plane caught fire, or ... there simply isn't enough
information to condemn the PIC of this aircraft. There was obviously
enough time for ATC communications, so it's possible they had already
gained reasonable altitude from which turning around was eminently
feasable and not even difficult.

Define impossible turn. A friend of mine turned back from 600 feet in a
C150 after the engine ate a valve. (He kept the battered piston as a
soevenir).

--
From the sunny Isle of Man.
Yes, the Reply-To email address is valid.

Shirl wrote:
A Lancair crashed just moments after takeoff here in Mesa, Arizona,
today, too. Plane was headed for California. There was smoke trailing
from the plane on takeoff and controllers cleared them to turn back
around and land. They tried -- they made the left turn but crashed into
the orange orchard. Three fatalities, all in their late 20s. Sympathies
and prayers to the families.

WingFlaps wrote:
When will pilots learn to stop trying to do the impossible turn... and
go for a straight ahead landing on soemthing horizontal?

In this case, straight ahead would have been into a shopping center,
buildings, houses, etc. Having been through an engine failure, I try
not to second guess, but he *may* have thought he had a better chance to
at least turn away from all that.

Dylan Smith wrote:
We don't know it was an 'impossible turn'. We don't even know what
altitude they were at,

Reports said they were only 400 to 500 feet from the field, but don't
know how high.

whether the engine was still developing power or
not, or whether the plane caught fire, or ... there simply isn't enough
information to condemn the PIC of this aircraft. There was obviously
enough time for ATC communications, so it's possible they had already
gained reasonable altitude from which turning around was eminently
feasable and not even difficult.

Define impossible turn. A friend of mine turned back from 600 feet in a
C150 after the engine ate a valve. (He kept the battered piston as a
soevenir).

Weird, the souveniers we keep. I have the two "dead" sticks from my
totaled plane (oil cooler failure resulting in seized engine 6 min into
the flight...just long enough out away from the runways!).

In my checkride, the examiner said many pilots die landing straight
ahead on unsuitable off-field areas because of the "impossible turn"
myth when there is at least one and sometimes two perfectly good runways
right behind them. He advocated pushing the nose over and making the
turn. Of course, this guy was a retired ag pilot, too.
;-)

Depends on what you mean by "the impossible turn". If you mean turning back
at 200 AGL, yeah, that one's pretty much impossible. If you mean 600 AGL,
it's pretty much possible in the average aircraft. (Hell, that's pattern
altitude at EFD!) The line lies somewhere in between.
--

It is statements like this that get pilots killed.

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced. Any time a pilot askes me about
It I set up a scenerio to let them try it. I have yet to have a pilot
on their 1st try make it back to the runway from 500 feet. After a
couple attempts they usually can just make it back, Most of the time
we try this in a C-170 or C-172.

Then the question is can they do it at any runway under any wind
conditions and can the differentiate between the ones that they can
and can't do it at.

All to often I see pilots miss the runway when the power fails on
downwind. How in the world you expect these pilots to make it from a
climb at the departure end of the runway.

Brian
CFIIG/ASEL

On 2008-04-24, Brian wrote:
Depends on what you mean by "the impossible turn". If you mean turning back
at 200 AGL, yeah, that one's pretty much impossible. If you mean 600 AGL,
it's pretty much possible in the average aircraft. (Hell, that's pattern
altitude at EFD!) The line lies somewhere in between.
It is statements like this that get pilots killed.

There are lots of true statements that get pilots killed...

Your right in that many aircraft it is possible. But the problem is it
isn't possible for many pilots when the engine quits. It is not a
maneuver that is routinly practiced. Any time a pilot askes me about
It I set up a scenerio to let them try it. I have yet to have a pilot
on their 1st try make it back to the runway from 500 feet. After a
couple attempts they usually can just make it back, Most of the time
we try this in a C-170 or C-172.

I did this on the first attempt in a Warrior with my CFI from 400 AGL. It's
one of the things I intend to try (at altitude) with a factory CFI when I
get the Zodiac.

Then the question is can they do it at any runway under any wind
conditions and can the differentiate between the ones that they can
and can't do it at.

True. You do have to do it precisely, and even then the conditions may
defeat you.

All to often I see pilots miss the runway when the power fails on
downwind. How in the world you expect these pilots to make it from a
climb at the departure end of the runway.

Even if they miss the runway, would they have landed on the flat part of the
airport? It seems to me that would be a better outcome than crashing into an
office park.

Part of the pre-takeoff mental checklist (hell, part of the written one, if
you're making your own) should be a decision about what happens if an engine
is lost on initial climb, and at what altitude the answer changes. This will
be different for every pilot, every aircraft, and every airport (for an
extreme case, consider an airport with an elementary school a mile off the
end of the runway, as opposed to one with nothing but farmland). Once the
decision is made, stick with it unless you have a VERY good reason to
change, and (this one comes from the Kings) don't change your mind more than
once.
--
Jay Maynard, K5ZC http://www.conmicro.com
http://jmaynard.livejournal.com http://www.tronguy.net
Fairmont, MN (FRM) (Yes, that's me!)
AMD Zodiac CH601XLi N55ZC (ordered 17 March, delivery 2 June)