Bonanza crash caught on video

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:49:10 -0400, NoneYa
wrote:

Maxwell wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
http://fox40.trb.com/

In an amazing coincidence, a Sacramento TV station was at Cameron Park
airport filming background for a story about the crash of a plane that
had departed earlier in the day and caught a second crash on video. Go
to the web site and click on "Cameron Park Plane Crash" on the right
side.

It sure looks like the pilot was taking off from a high-density
altitude airport with no flaps, downwind.
--

Looks like he could have increased his odds a bit, if he had used the rest
of the runway, and/or stayed in ground effect a bit longer.



No flaps!! No lift!!

Many if not most Bonanzas don't use flaps even for short field and
this didn't look short. As some one from there mentioned it's 4000
feet at 1200 MSL. There is no take off maneuver even short field at
high altitude in mine that calls for any use of the flaps.

As to gas, the capacity varies over a wide range. With a newer plane
it varies from 75 to 100 or so depending on the tanks installed and
the size of the Aux tanks.. I can put 600# of fuel in mine and with
1000# useful load it's at best a 3 passenger plane if they are skinny
and no baggage. The F33s reached 1400# useful load so depending on
lots of variables It may or may not be a 4 passenger plane.

They reported it to be a 4 seat, but it sure looked like an A36. Try
as I might I could not come up with a valid N number to check. Nor
could I find anything listed for a Walter Norwood.

Even on a hot day at 1200 feet it should have had the ability to get
in and out of a 4000 foot strip with only moderately rising terrain
and a *light* tail wind.

I can only guess, but two guys I know flew a Cherokee 180 into a grass
strip in the UP of Michigan for a fishing trip. On the day they came
home it was HOT and humid. Basically they were high, hot, humid, and
heavy. The pilot was trying to give the trees at the end of the
runway a wide berth, but they had neither the speed nor power. The
right seater kept telling him to keep the nose now as he was easing it
up. The almost cleared the trees. OTOH they didn't go down, but they
did leave the position lights from both wing tips in the trees and
they still had brush in the landing gear when they got home. Actually
they had a 6" dent just inside the last rib. The pilot once made the
statement, had the right seater kept forcing him to keep the nose
down, they'd never have made it.

I wonder if this wasn't a similar situation but without some one
reminding the pilot to keep the nose down.

Roger

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:40:01 -0700, Mike Granby
wrote:


Another witness mentioned an engine sputter

Whatever the cause of a crash, there's always someone who hears the
engine splutter...


My thoughts exactly. You could sell that person as stock footage.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:44:54 -0700, Jay Honeck
wrote:

http://fox40.trb.com/

In an amazing coincidence, a Sacramento TV station was at Cameron Park
airport filming background for a story about the crash of a plane that
had departed earlier in the day and caught a second crash on video. Go
to the web site and click on "Cameron Park Plane Crash" on the right
side.

It sure looks like the pilot was taking off from a high-density
altitude airport with no flaps, downwind.

Cameron Park is 1287' from Sea Level. There is probably more of an
issue here than density altitude. I have flown in and out of
Leadville, Colorado and at 9,927' is the highest airport in the US.
Try flying out of there with 3 people in a Piper Cherokee (140).

Here is Cameron Park:
http://www.airnav.com/airport/O61

Here's the aircraft, Roger. It was an A-36:

Check for printing
N-number : N1098F
Aircraft Serial Number : E-3059
Aircraft Manufacturer : RAYTHEON AIRCRAFT COMPANY
Model : A36
Engine Manufacturer : CONT MOTOR
Model : IO-550 SERIES
Aircraft Year : 1996
Owner Name : AEROMETALS LLC
Owner Address : C/O MR WALTER NORWOOD
: 2202 W CHARLESTON BLVD STE 7
LAS VEGAS, NV, 89102
Type of Owner : Corporation
Registration Date : 03-Jul-2001
Airworthiness Certificate Type : Standard
Approved Operations : Utility


On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 04:56:17 -0400, "Roger (K8RI)"
wrote:

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:49:10 -0400, NoneYa
wrote:

Maxwell wrote:
"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ps.com...
http://fox40.trb.com/

In an amazing coincidence, a Sacramento TV station was at Cameron Park
airport filming background for a story about the crash of a plane that
had departed earlier in the day and caught a second crash on video. Go
to the web site and click on "Cameron Park Plane Crash" on the right
side.

It sure looks like the pilot was taking off from a high-density
altitude airport with no flaps, downwind.
--

Looks like he could have increased his odds a bit, if he had used the rest
of the runway, and/or stayed in ground effect a bit longer.



No flaps!! No lift!!

Many if not most Bonanzas don't use flaps even for short field and
this didn't look short. As some one from there mentioned it's 4000
feet at 1200 MSL. There is no take off maneuver even short field at
high altitude in mine that calls for any use of the flaps.

As to gas, the capacity varies over a wide range. With a newer plane
it varies from 75 to 100 or so depending on the tanks installed and
the size of the Aux tanks.. I can put 600# of fuel in mine and with
1000# useful load it's at best a 3 passenger plane if they are skinny
and no baggage. The F33s reached 1400# useful load so depending on
lots of variables It may or may not be a 4 passenger plane.

They reported it to be a 4 seat, but it sure looked like an A36. Try
as I might I could not come up with a valid N number to check. Nor
could I find anything listed for a Walter Norwood.

Even on a hot day at 1200 feet it should have had the ability to get
in and out of a 4000 foot strip with only moderately rising terrain
and a *light* tail wind.

I can only guess, but two guys I know flew a Cherokee 180 into a grass
strip in the UP of Michigan for a fishing trip. On the day they came
home it was HOT and humid. Basically they were high, hot, humid, and
heavy. The pilot was trying to give the trees at the end of the
runway a wide berth, but they had neither the speed nor power. The
right seater kept telling him to keep the nose now as he was easing it
up. The almost cleared the trees. OTOH they didn't go down, but they
did leave the position lights from both wing tips in the trees and
they still had brush in the landing gear when they got home. Actually
they had a 6" dent just inside the last rib. The pilot once made the
statement, had the right seater kept forcing him to keep the nose
down, they'd never have made it.

I wonder if this wasn't a similar situation but without some one
reminding the pilot to keep the nose down.

Roger

"Robert M. Gary" wrote:

On Aug 31, 7:40 pm, Mike Granby wrote:
Another witness mentioned an engine sputter

Whatever the cause of a crash, there's always someone who hears the
engine splutter...

All aircraft engines sputter, that's just the nature of how they work.
They don't sound like BMV engines.

Is it possible the pilot decided to abort after he was airborne? The engine
sounded strong and the airplane came off fine at rotation, then it seems to
run out of steam. Or was that simply due to its climbing out of ground
effect?


--
Dan
T-182T at BFM

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message ps.com...
http://fox40.trb.com/

In an amazing coincidence, a Sacramento TV station was at Cameron Park
airport filming background for a story about the crash of a plane that
had departed earlier in the day and caught a second crash on video. Go
to the web site and click on "Cameron Park Plane Crash" on the right
side.

It sure looks like the pilot was taking off from a high-density
altitude airport with no flaps, downwind.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"



Looks like the max temp yesterday was 98°f, pressure was 29.8 or so, winds were out of the south or south-south west.
Don't know what time this happened.
(http://www.weatherunderground.com/hi...sta tename=NA)

DA, worst case was 4360' (http://www.airspace-v.com/ggadgets/densityAltitude.htm)

Also looks like they were taking off 13, so they had a right cross wind.
(http://www.airnav.com/airport/O61)

Don't have a takeoff performance chart for that plane...

Many if not most Bonanzas don't use flaps even for short field and
this didn't look short. As some one from there mentioned it's 4000
feet at 1200 MSL. There is no take off maneuver even short field at
high altitude in mine that calls for any use of the flaps.

That's interesting -- I never realized that Bo pilots didn't need to
use flaps for departure.

I presume there is something about the wing that makes them
unnecessary?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

"Dan Luke" wrote

Is it possible the pilot decided to abort after he was airborne?
Surely not. There was not a place to land, anywhere. Plus, he did not push
the nose down, at all.

The engine sounded strong and the airplane came off fine at rotation, then
it seems to run out of steam. Or was that simply due to its climbing out
of ground effect?

That would be my guess. It also looked to me like he pulled the nose up, a
tiny bit more, and without the ground effect, that was all it took to get on
the back side of the power curve.

That in itself is a good lesson to be learned. Try to practice recognizing
the back side of the power curve, in slow flight.
--
Jim in NC

"Airbus" wrote in message
...
I'm voting for overweight.
After what appears to be a relativly long roll, you can see the plane
mushing
and stalling trying to climb.

I saw the video on a computer without sound, so I don't know if they said
how
many people were on board, but this plane, even with no flaps, should
climb out
just fine.

Three survivors and one dead, is what was said, along with a light wind
downwind takeoff. The pictures appeared to me to be anything but light,
from how much the trees were moving. My guess is 10 to 15 knots, with gusts
higher.
--
Jim in NC

On Sep 1, 7:42 am, Jay Honeck wrote:

That's interesting -- I never realized that Bo pilots didn't need to
use flaps for departure.

I presume there is something about the wing that makes them
unnecessary?

Don't know about the Bonanza, but the Cessna 150 I learned in didn't
use them either unless the field was short, soft or rough -- and even
then the POH said not to use flaps if there was a significant obstacle
to clear. The reduction in distance-to-clear from a shorter takeoff
roll was more than compensated for by the poorer climb rate with even
10 deg of flap. For some airplanes the drag from any amount of flap
deployment really saps power.