Towpilot fatality in Oregon

"Larry Goddard" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote:
Craig wrote:
More bad news in a tough year. Heartfelt condolences to all
involved. http://kezi.com/news/local/138726

The tow pilot was Scott Henderson. An article on him:

http://www.kval.com/news/local/54590042.html#IDCThread

He did a lot to advance the club - basically finding it a new home,
expanding the days that towing would be available, and kept everyone
in the loop on club activities.

Here's a story on his efforts last year:

http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/...?story_no=6008


My condolences to all!

In looking at a video shot earlier in the day of a glider launch, it
appeared to me that the pawnee was not climbing very well... Creswell
elevation is only 540 feet. And the temperature only got up to the
low 70's that day. http://www.kval.com/news/local/54613062.html

Yes - the climb angle does appear low - at least compared to last year when
we launched off an 1890 foot grass airstrip (OG48) with the same tow plane
and glider (but different tow pilot.) The asphalt airfield (77S) you see in
that video is 3100 feet.

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
...
"Larry Goddard" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote:
Craig wrote:
More bad news in a tough year. Heartfelt condolences to all
involved. http://kezi.com/news/local/138726

The tow pilot was Scott Henderson. An article on him:

http://www.kval.com/news/local/54590042.html#IDCThread

He did a lot to advance the club - basically finding it a new home,
expanding the days that towing would be available, and kept everyone
in the loop on club activities.

Here's a story on his efforts last year:

http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/...?story_no=6008


My condolences to all!

In looking at a video shot earlier in the day of a glider launch, it
appeared to me that the pawnee was not climbing very well... Creswell
elevation is only 540 feet. And the temperature only got up to the
low 70's that day. http://www.kval.com/news/local/54613062.html

Yes - the climb angle does appear low - at least compared to last year
when
we launched off an 1890 foot grass airstrip (OG48) with the same tow plane
and glider (but different tow pilot.) The asphalt airfield (77S) you see
in
that video is 3100 feet.

I think it is very difficult to come to any conclusions about the climb rate
from looking at the video. I have towed behind many towpilots that fly low
(perhaps in ground effect) while gaining a bit of excess airspeed and then
eventually starting their climb. From the video it is tough to tell whether
that is what is happening or not. They may have started climbing nicely a
few seconds later... but we don't know.

Paul Remde

"Paul Remde" wrote:
I think it is very difficult to come to any conclusions about the
climb rate from looking at the video. I have towed behind many
towpilots that fly low (perhaps in ground effect) while gaining a bit
of excess airspeed and then eventually starting their climb. From the
video it is tough to tell whether that is what is happening or not.
They may have started climbing nicely a few seconds later... but we
don't know.

Agreed. My recollection is that we used much steeper climbouts from the
grass airstrip - probably because the shorter strip sort of demanded it.
But since I had not gotten around to resuming glider lessons this year at
the new field I can't offer any first-hand comparisons. :-(

When I looked at the video, I did not get the impression of a low climb out.
It appeared normal to me.

"Jim Logajan" wrote in message
...
"Larry Goddard" wrote:
"Jim Logajan" wrote:
Craig wrote:
More bad news in a tough year. Heartfelt condolences to all
involved. http://kezi.com/news/local/138726

The tow pilot was Scott Henderson. An article on him:

http://www.kval.com/news/local/54590042.html#IDCThread

He did a lot to advance the club - basically finding it a new home,
expanding the days that towing would be available, and kept everyone
in the loop on club activities.

Here's a story on his efforts last year:

http://www.thecreswellchronicle.com/...?story_no=6008


My condolences to all!

In looking at a video shot earlier in the day of a glider launch, it
appeared to me that the pawnee was not climbing very well... Creswell
elevation is only 540 feet. And the temperature only got up to the
low 70's that day. http://www.kval.com/news/local/54613062.html

Yes - the climb angle does appear low - at least compared to last year
when
we launched off an 1890 foot grass airstrip (OG48) with the same tow plane
and glider (but different tow pilot.) The asphalt airfield (77S) you see
in
that video is 3100 feet.

Jim Logajan wrote:
"Larry Goddard" wrote:
In looking at a video shot earlier in the day of a glider launch, it
appeared to me that the pawnee was not climbing very well...
Creswell elevation is only 540 feet. And the temperature only got up
to the low 70's that day.
http://www.kval.com/news/local/54613062.html

Yes - the climb angle does appear low - at least compared to last year
when we launched off an 1890 foot grass airstrip (OG48) with the same
tow plane and glider (but different tow pilot.) The asphalt airfield
(77S) you see in that video is 3100 feet.

I need to correct myself: the tow plane that crashed is _not_ the same one
that was used to tow the glider last year. The tow plane that I flew behind
last year was a Lycoming O-540 (235 HP) powered Pawnee. The tow plane in
the video is a Lycoming O-320 (160 HP) powered Pawnee. That is why the
takeoff looked "anemic" to me. My perception was colored by only seeing
tows behind the higher powered Pawnee. The takeoff in the video is normal
for that Pawnee.

Since I never got around to seeing any of the takeoffs at the new runway,
and because I recalled Scott telling me last fall that he was interested in
possibly buying the 235 HP Pawnee, I incorrectly assumed that he had bought
that one. Obviously I hadn't kept up to date.

Why can'ty you vultures just wait for the official accident report instead
of using unbased hypothesis and dragging it all out for the bereaved who
may also be reading this string ?

Shame on you

MW

At 21:37 27 August 2009, Jim Logajan wrote:
Jim Logajan wrote:
"Larry Goddard" wrote:
In looking at a video shot earlier in the day of a glider launch, it
appeared to me that the pawnee was not climbing very well...
Creswell elevation is only 540 feet. And the temperature only got up
to the low 70's that day.
http://www.kval.com/news/local/54613062.html

Yes - the climb angle does appear low - at least compared to last year
when we launched off an 1890 foot grass airstrip (OG48) with the same
tow plane and glider (but different tow pilot.) The asphalt airfield
(77S) you see in that video is 3100 feet.

I need to correct myself: the tow plane that crashed is _not_ the same
one

that was used to tow the glider last year. The tow plane that I flew
behind
last year was a Lycoming O-540 (235 HP) powered Pawnee. The tow plane in

the video is a Lycoming O-320 (160 HP) powered Pawnee. That is why the
takeoff looked "anemic" to me. My perception was colored by only seeing

tows behind the higher powered Pawnee. The takeoff in the video is normal

for that Pawnee.

Since I never got around to seeing any of the takeoffs at the new runway,

and because I recalled Scott telling me last fall that he was interested
in
possibly buying the 235 HP Pawnee, I incorrectly assumed that he had
bought
that one. Obviously I hadn't kept up to date.

On Aug 28, 3:00*pm, Mark Wright wrote:
Why can'ty you vultures just wait for the official accident report instead
of using unbased hypothesis and dragging it all out for the bereaved who
may also be reading this string ?

*Shame on you

MW

Perhaps, Mark, because some of us vultures also fly Pawnee towplanes
and have a certain interest in what happened. Nothing in the
discussions in this thread have been in poor taste - just pilots
asking each other "what happened?"

To me, as a pilot who has lost many friends in aviation accidents, not
saying anything about an accident is much worse than open discussion.
I sure hope if something ever happens to me that people will ask why
and try to learn from it!

Your little comment, on the other hand, strikes me as somewhat mean
spirited - a bit of an overreaction, I hope.

Kirk
66

On Aug 28, 11:27*pm, "
wrote:

some of us also fly Pawnee towplanes
and have a certain interest in what happened. *

not saying anything about
the possible causes of
an accident
does not help those of us still practising the activity!

First, forgive an input on this tragic event from “the other side of
the pond”, but I am a towplane pilot, too.

I appreciate that in the long term there will be a formal report, but
in the short term it must be possible to say SOMETHING about the
circumstances. If only to (probably) rule out some causes. This
should not be difficult or embarrassing, if done sensibly.

When I was in the military I was involved in quite a few inquiries
into accidents. The RAF system is that the Board of Inquiry has to
make a "48 hour report" of what is known at that time, and whether any
immediate measures could be recommended at that early stage, to lessen
risks to others. Early recommendations might include inspections,
changes of components or to operating procedures, even "grounding" in
extreme cases. The "48 hour report" does not compromise any long-term
findings or recommendations, and the system works well.

Turning to this tragic accident, in very general terms, what happened?

That cannot be "secret", surely?

In particular, what were the approximate flight paths of the towplane
and also of the glider? That will indicate a lot, and rule out some
causes such as structural failure (my club uses a 235hp Pawnee amongst
others, so I have a definite interest!)

A possible cause could be engine failure (full or partial, the latter
often being more difficult to deal with), although landing straight
ahead should not normally have fatal consequences. Did the towplane
turn after releasing the glider? Someone must know.

Also, with any towplane fatal I always wonder whether it was one of
those "tug upsets" caused by the glider getting too high, pulling the
tug tail up to the extent that the tailplane stalls, with consequent
large loss of height to the tug. Many years ago in the UK we had some
of these, and the BGA changed its instruction for aero tow and also
for tug pilots. We have not had a "tug upset" on this side of the
pond for some time, but tug pilots now watch the rear-view mirror much
more carefully for the glider getting high, particularly near the
ground. If so, the hand moves towards the release in case the glider
pilot does not correct, and glider pilots are now taught to sit just
above the towplane slipstream rather than higher, as in the past.

There seems to be a dearth of basic information about what happened in
this tragic case. Since the issue has been raised in this forum, it
would be useful to use the same forum for other towplane pilots to
know more.

Ian Strachan
Lasham Gliding Centre, UK

I just put together and signed off as airworthy our Pawnee and am
being towed behind it with commercial ride passengers. I want all the
info I can get to perform my tasks to the best of my ability. thank
you, Haven

Ian Strachan wrote:
On Aug 28, 11:27 pm, "
wrote:

some of us also fly Pawnee towplanes
and have a certain interest in what happened.

This may already be known to you, and it may have nothing to do with
this accident, but it appears that Pawnees have been built with three
different types of fuel tanks, with one type accounting for a
disproportionate share of post-crash fires. In 1987 the U.S. NTSB issued
the following recommendation to Piper Aircraft regarding the higher
incidence of post-crash fire fatalities of those aircraft having a
fiberglass fuel tank:

http://www.ntsb.gov/Recs/letters/1987/A87_100.pdf

The accident aircraft had a serial number of 25-468, so if the NTSB
recommendation was not followed for that aircraft and it still had the
same tank, it may have had a fiberglass fuel tank and therefore among
the group showing the highest percentage of fatalities and injuries due
to post-crash fires.

Turning to this tragic accident, in very general terms, what happened?

That cannot be "secret", surely?

Gary Boggs' posts have the most pertinent information. Also, see news
video link I include below.

In particular, what were the approximate flight paths of the towplane
and also of the glider? That will indicate a lot, and rule out some
causes such as structural failure (my club uses a 235hp Pawnee amongst
others, so I have a definite interest!)

A possible cause could be engine failure (full or partial, the latter
often being more difficult to deal with), although landing straight
ahead should not normally have fatal consequences. Did the towplane
turn after releasing the glider? Someone must know.

The towplane landed approximately straight ahead into a field at the
north end of the runway. There is a local TV news video at the following
URL, and in it they have a shot from a helicopter where you can see the
area of blackend burned grass where he landed at about 1:28 into the
video:

http://kezi.com/news/local/138834

Here's a Google map link of the airport:
http://maps.google.com/maps?hl=en&ie...66047&t=h&z=15