Bonanza crash caught on video

On Aug 31, 6:57 pm, Matt Whiting wrote:
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.

Wow, that was ugly. It looked like he was accelerating pretty good when
he went past the camera, but just couldn't quite establish a climb. I
did hear the one witness mention it being a downwind takeoff. Another
witness mentioned an engine sputter, so it also sounds like it wasn't
leaned at all for the altitude. Very unfortunate.

Matt

Even if it was 90 degrees outside, we're only at 1200 feet so the
density couldn't have been monsterous.

-Robert

"Ron Lee" wrote

Downwind? I just could not tell from the vegetation moving and I
never saw a windsock.

The reporter (or was it someone that he interviewed?) said that it was
downwind.

It did appear as though he was rapidly approaching the end of pavement
and may have lifted off with minimal airspeed. Note the wings soon
after liftoff and then right before the impact with terrain.

Shouldn't 4000' be enough at that elevation for that aircraft?

He could have had full fuel and too much passenger weight. One witness said
he heard the engine miss, but you never know if that is accurate, or not.
--
Jim in NC

"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.

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!!

Robert M. Gary wrote:

Even if it was 90 degrees outside, we're only at 1200 feet so the
density couldn't have been monsterous.

-Robert


A guy from the Cherokee Pilot's Association calculated DA at 4500. Not
sure where he got the relevant info...maybe there's a local weather
reporting station at someone's house in the area. Higher DA than normal
but no, definitely not HUGE.

I'm always using two notches of flaps in the Arrow when taking off from
3-4K ft. runways, any significant DA, or terrain such as exists at
Cameron Park.

This one will be interesting to follow up with when the NTSB report
comes out.

Sparky Imeson's rule of thumb here is a good reminder. He states that
you should have 71% of your takeoff speed at the halfway point of the
runway or abort the takeoff.

On Aug 31, 9:49 pm, NoneYa wrote:

No flaps!! No lift!!- Hide quoted text -

Keep flapping.

In article , says...
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!!

Lots of flaps, lots of drag!!

--
Duncan

In rec.aviation.piloting, on Fri 31 Aug 2007 09:40:01p, Mike Granby
wrote:

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

Yeah, they would hear the engine sputter even if it was a crash of a
glider.

You have to wonder on cases like this if it wasn't that they heard the
engine sputter as the prop started chewing up the terrain.

Sounds like it was a case of, "Come on baby... Come on... You can make
it... A little more... Ahhh ****!"

In rec.aviation.piloting, on Fri 31 Aug 2007 11:26:15p, "Maxwell"
wrote:

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.

Well, considering the outcome, he couldn't have really decreased his odds.
Oh well, hindsight is 20/20, right?

"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"

Just looking at the video, it did not look like he kept his right boot
firmly enough on the rudder pedal. This is in addition to the possible
issues of gross weight, mixture, and direction of takeoff which were
previously mentioned.

Peter