Tiger Moth down at Compton Abbas (August 2017)

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

14 years

Posts: 1,788

...I get pretty peed off with people getting injured or killed in stupid b. accidents

If the DH.82 pilot is the chap I flew with, he had significant military flight time, not to mention his considerable experience in Moths. I therefore find it highly unlikely that he'd have been the cause of a "...stupid b. accident".

Meanwhile my sincere condolences to families and friends. I shall await the full report before being so disrespectful as to apportion blame before any facts are known beyond here-say.

Apologies if that sounds rude but I have a very soft spot for Compton Abbas and all those who are involved in its running.

Member for

20 years

Posts: 3,902

I have for a while felt that a change of emphasis in forced landing teaching is overdue, because far too high a proportion ( prob over 40 % ) of engine failures result in serious injuries or death, due to to high energy impact. In such cases this is usually because control has been lost in the final seconds of flight.

Why? Because the pilot is under great stress, and probably acting below normal competence, and furthermore, flying in an unfamiliar flight regime ie low level, no power, and no airfield. The above Tiger Moth crashed and burned with enough energy to (seemingly) rupture the fuel tank.

If a light aeroplane can be placed in a field in a wings- level attitude, at a reasonable approach speed, it would be very rare for the occupants not to survive. It is the loss of control, stall / spin and falling which kills, I think there should be more emphasis on 'sod the aeroplane' point into wind ( minimise energy on touchdown) and put it down wings level, and if it runs into a hedge, or whatever, no matter.

A couple of years ago a Yak 52 out of Boscombe Down with two test pilots on board crashed fatally when control was lost on short finals. They were surrounded by huge fields, but tried to squeeze into a private grass strip which they spotted at the last moment, pulled too hard, stalled, spun.

Mark Levy showed us how, two years ago. Ignoring the lure of the runway just in reach ( perhaps ) he banged the Mustang down in a field, wings level, and now the aeroplane is flying again, and more important by far, so is he.

Given the intensity of Spitfire ride operations, it is very likely that there will be an engine failure on one of these at some stage, and the future of these enterprises will of course be much more assured with a good outcome. Keep the wheels up, place it on the ground, and it should work out OK. Don't dick around with steep turns at low level. If I were the Ops Manager at Goodwood or Biggin, I would make sure the pilots had sound knowledge of all the fields on the climb- out heading of all the runways including gradient, power lines etc, because those are the ones they may well end up in.

I am reminded of Alex Henshaw gliding down in a Spit during WW2 over the West Midlands, in an area totally build up. He touch down in a row of allotments, and hurtled through fences and sheds, dirt and cabbages flying, but still climbed out OK. As Bob Hoover famously said, fly it as far into the crash as you can.

Member for

15 years 1 month

Posts: 138

Propstrike - as a Flying Instructor I teach part of Exercise 16 (Forced Landings) exactly as you suggest. The (maybe not surprising) result is that the student concentrates exactly on the approach without having to worry about manouvring around a theoretical curcuit. Chance of loss of control is much reduced. All FIs should teach this technique, particularly for engine failures at low level. All my student are taught spinning too.

Member for

20 years

Posts: 3,902

Errol, I think the inbedded PDF is restricted viewing . Any chance of a copy/paste to non-members. I am interested to read that.

The AAIB summary and link where you can download the accident report. It looks like it was a very thorough investigation.

The aircraft was carrying out an introductory flight with the pilot and a passenger aboard. As it became airborne the engine was heard to misfire, but the aircraft continued to climb before making a left turn. Shortly afterwards, the pilot reported an engine problem and his intention to return to the airfield. The aircraft was on the base leg of an approach for Runway 26 when the nose pitched down, and it appeared to enter a steep descending turn to the left from which it did not recover before impact in a crop field. Both occupants were fatally injured.

Member for

8 years 8 months

Posts: 1

Re the NZ Harvard incident referred to above, I was in the front seat of the Harvard doing a type rating at the time. It was a partial failure due to a snapped bolt in the propeller hub causing the prop to go into full course pitch when I attempted to reduce prop rpm immediately after takeoff. The engine was still developing some power. The instructor in the back seat took control and had us initially set up for an off airfield landing however when he realised the aircraft was still maintaining altitude with the available power, he made a gentle turn and landed on the crosswind runway. A very nice piece of flying given the limited view from the back of a Harvard.

Member for

20 years

Posts: 3,902

As an addendum to thoughts discussed above, yesterday we heard of the very tragic fatal accident that befell a Luton Minor in Essex, the first ( yes, really ) fatality associated with the type since the prototype flew in the 1930's.

It burned on impact, so either experienced a mid-air fire, or struck the ground hard enough to rupture the fuel tank, which would suggest loss of control. All of that will become clear when the AAIB publish their findings.

Whatever happened, it reinforces my conviction that it is time for a real campaign of teaching and education/ instruction to inculcate piloting habits by which control is not so readily, lost, nor indeed lives.
As mentioned by Scotavia, this forum is not for pilots per se, but I will approach the LAA, and see if there is scope for some focus on this issue.

I wonder how many other recreational pursuits discuss and digest death and injury with such regularity as private flyers.

Member for

14 years

Posts: 1,788

I'm not sure that the possible cause of the Tiger Moth accident can be taught-out. It would appear that a very experienced pilot deviated from basic procedure and from instances in the past this would (in those cases at least) seem to be due to a number of reasons which are only becoming apparent in recent times - notably (a) It's not my aircraft or (b) It's valuable (monetary or historical).

Neither would have been a consideration during the service life of an aircraft but do seem to be factors nowadays which might cause experienced pilots to make unwise decisions.

Member for

20 years

Posts: 3,902

I am sure that ' protect the aeroplane' is a factor, yes, and it is this mindset which I feel may be disrupting a simpler, probably more damaging, but ultimately safer regime of simply presenting the aeroplane to the ground in a level attitude, and moderate rate of descent.

Member for

15 years 1 month

Posts: 138

I understand the sentiment of the above, however, implementation is less straightforward. Spinning was removed from the CAA syllabus many moons ago, it should be mandatory before moving onto training loss of control and recovery scenarios. It will be interesting to see if the LAA and AAIB look into the low speed characteristics of the Luton Minor as part of their investigation. Maybe the behaviour of the aircraft in certain circumstances (exceeding critical AoA with excessive skid or slip for instance) is not as benign as looks might suggest? Several Luton Minors have been comprehensively crashed in the past and often the fuselage breaks behind the cockpit, however, those accidents do not appear to have been accompanied by any serious injury hitherto. There is only a certain amount of training (briefing, video etc) one can give the pilot of a single seat aircraft before he flies it, however, given that the type has been in service for so long then it could be argued that a single death in 80 years is acceptable. Flying poses an element of risk and danger, our role as pilots is to minimise the severity of the outcome of any situation; even with experience and training the fact remains that some pilots will be better at dealing with emergencies than others.

Member for

12 years 11 months

Posts: 6,535

Chitts.

Based on personal experience, your last sentence is a good and accurate summary.