controlled… well, I meant that he steered the plane to the spot where he crashed.
A very lucky outcome since the lowering of the gear basically drove the plane into the stall.
FWIW the FAA states: AIRCRAFT CRASHED ON THE BEACH DUE TO ENGINE ISSUES, SHOREMAHM, NY.
Hmm, it doesn’t look like he was soooo close to the tree line.
In theory, shouldn’t he have traded altitude for speed and cross the tree line more closely? Then he would have had more energy for the flare.
At least that would be my game plan in this kind of situation. And then, with the increased speed, I would also leave the gear up and concentrate on a good flare.
Always easy to say from afar though…
Dan wrote:
controlled… well, I meant that he steered the plane to the spot where he crashed.
A very lucky outcome since the lowering of the gear basically drove the plane into the stall.
I don’t think he even steered it, the initiation of the turn to the left looks like it was caused by the left wing dropping due to a lack of coordination as the aircraft stalled.
Very hard to Monday quarterback this accident. The pilot made the beach probably by staying clean (flaps and gear up), hopefully remembering to bring the propeller into coarse which dramatically improves glide, and once he had the landing site ‘made’ extended the landing gear.
We can’t judge whether there was some shear or curl off the ridge which contributed to a loss of energy.
On balance of probabilities the PIC did a nice job selecting a safe landing spot and making a forced landing. I can’t tell if there is a departure causing the yaw, or if intentional. An incipient spin would have been much more dramatic with serious wing drop and uncommanded yaw/roll.
Well, anything much longer than this landing could have seriously endangered the people on the beach and as it has been said before: Any ‘landing’ you can walk away from…
I never was in such a situation and don’t dare to comment on the decision making, but nonetheless I wonder – why go over the hill instead of curving around?
I imagine it’s hard to go for the open water instead of what you have in sight in front and going at the sea cliff with the wind instead of parallel to it is also much harder, but there would have been speed reserves left.
Also, I feel it’s a bit of pull where he should have pushed to gain speed again and the height over the hill could have been somewhat reduced. But I admit that’s highly uncomfortable for someone not used to this.
I am convinced that regularily flying glider helps tremendously in staying ahead in such a situation.
Concerning the loss of lift – I imagine that the cliff might have something to do with it, too, unfortunate shear winds below the lip of the hill, combined with too little speed reserve.
Under the circumstances, I guess it could have gone better, but it also could have gone much, much worse.
It’s easy to imagine what we might have done….
When it happened to me, at 50’ on takeoff, some muscle memory / training / good luck caused me to push the stick mightily forward. I don’t know how long it was after the engine stopped that I did that, but it was long enough for the stall warner to get going. The remaining runway filled the windscreen in the steepest angle I’ve ever imagined and despite the stall warner still blaring there was enough energy to round out to a normal if firm landing, and even roll out to the end of the tarmac.
The moment the wheels touched, the engine started again! Close the throttle!
So watching this pilot, engine failure over the sea, just enough glide range, headland obstructing the beach, complex aircraft, what he pulled off is to me little short of miraculous. Perhaps not quite a ‘Sully’, but getting there. Well done that pilot!
