My thought on the plane accident

[johnnie]

There is a lot of fucktard calling around here, but from what we know, Lidle had 7 or 8 months of experience and he crashed into a building in the middle of Manhattan. Yes, it is tragic that this happened, but in my opinion, this guy should never have been flying that plane where he was.

You can all call each other fucktards or whatever, but someone put a lot of people lives at risk for some reason. Either an inexperienced pilot or an instructor that let an inexperienced pilot fly where he shouldn't have been.

Of course this was a tragedy and not funny, but I think that some anger is being spent on the wrong people. Today's accident could have been a hell of a lot more tragic than what it ended up being and it wasn't due to anyone here at DU.

Of course we don't know all the facts, but would everyone here still be as sympathetic had this been a drunk driver slamming a car into a high school?

[qnr]

1. Perhaps, but I seriously doubt he chose that path on a lark. I would

think there was something wrong with the plane itself, that left him little choice.

[johnnie]

2. Well, I don't live in New York

I wonder how many small planes are flying that close over the city.

[qnr]

4. Quite a few. I can't say what the story is now, but I used to live in a

building overlooking the East River between the Brooklyn and Manhattan bridges. I'd see planes taking that route all the time.

Edit: s/on/in/

[johnnie]

7. The I would have to ask the question..

How much experience do you need in this country to fly in populated places such as New York City?

I found this interesting:

"Lidle told the Times in an interview last month that Yankees fans should not worry he would suffer the same fate, insisting his plane was safe.

"The whole plane has a parachute on it," Lidle said. "Ninety-nine percent of pilots that go up never have engine failure, and the 1 percent that do usually land it. But if you're up in the air and something goes wrong, you pull that parachute, and the whole plane goes down slowly.""

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061012/ts_nm/crash_newyork_dc_13


Maybe he had too much of a false sense of security up there.

[qnr]

9. I can't comment on that, just on the fact that is isn't (or wasn't)

unusual. It used to be a popular thing for me to do in my various flight simulators, so I imagine it interests real pilots too.

[deadparrot]

3. Definitely tragic,

but I'll wait and see what the investigation finds out. Right now it's hard to tell what the hell happened, if it was human or instrument error, or a combination of the two...:shrug:

Right now, my thoughts are with the friends and families of everyone involved.

[johnnie]

5. Yeah, it is tragic

I do feel bad for the families and friends, but since it happened I have read some pretty wild posts here.

[Squatch]

11. Not tragic. The Spartans getting beat at Thermopylae was tragic.

This warrants no more attention than some asshole getting into a motorcylce wreck without a helmet a few weeks before the NFL season kicks off.

[deadparrot]

17. Still, I heard that Lidle had a wife and a young son.

Who knows how many other victims of today's crash left behind young families?

Do parents of young children die every day? Sure. Is this one husband and parent's death any more significant or important than that of any other parent? No. But it's still sad. That's all I'm saying.

[Squatch]

25. If I called every death "tragic" that occured

on a daily basis in which children and wives/husbands were "left behind", I wouldn't know what to call the *real* tragedies that occured that day.

[deadparrot]

48. Okay, so it's a semantics thing.

The thought of a young child losing a parent so suddenly is depressing as hell for me. If you don't want me to use the word "tragic," I won't, but it's still awful, and my heart aches for those who lost loved ones today, whether they were famous or not.

[ScreamingMeemie]

6. It appears that he was with an instructor from the comments of his

friends and teammates. What bothers me most, and I have called no one a fucktard-although I admit to thinking it about those who choose to make ill timed and completely inappropriate posts-is that a man died...leaving friends, family and fans behind...and we here at DU (again in my opinion) should at least hold off the truly sick and disgusting posts.

[Haole Girl]

12. Well said.

[johnnie]

26. Well, I didn't see any posts that were truly disgusting

But I didn't read them all. I agree that it is sad that someone's father, husband and friend died, but this is not a national tragedy.

[ScreamingMeemie]

28. It is tragic enough to make the news.

I don't see anything wrong with the coverage.

[Squatch]

32. So, that's the measure of tragedy nowadays?

If it makes the news, it's tragic.

I guess the State Police shutting down Rte 125 after the rains we had can be considered tragic, since it was on the news.

[ScreamingMeemie]

35. You misunderstood me...In my opinion it's tragic enough to be

on the news...not the fact that it's on the news making it tragic. People who are in the news (i.e. baseball players) are going to make the news when they die. I don't have a problem with that. I feel very badly for his family.

[johnnie]

41. Originally it made the news because it was a plane that hit in NYC

There was a small plane crash in PA the other day and a man and his wife died. That didn't really make the news though because it wasn't in NYC. These crashes happen every few weeks. They are all tragic.

[ScreamingMeemie]

43. Let me restate, I have no problem with it being on the news.

[Squatch]

8. Just an FYI...the Instructor was on the plane, as well.

[johnnie]

10. Like I said in my OP

"You can all call each other fucktards or whatever, but someone put a lot of people lives at risk for some reason. Either an inexperienced pilot or an instructor that let an inexperienced pilot fly where he shouldn't have been."

[Squatch]

13. If an instructor is on board the single safest small aircraft ever built

he/she takes over in an emergency. That instructor was flying the plane when it struck the building.

[Oeditpus Rex]

18. And you know this how?

Unless you were in the airplane or monitoring its radio traffic, all you have are assumptions. They may prove to be true, but until the investigation is complete, we know almost nothing.

[Squatch]

21. Know what, how?

Do I know that he was in an aircraft equipped with terrain avoidance warning systems?

Do I know that he was in an aircraft equipped with a parachute?

Oh, do I know that he was in an aircraft with a licensed instructor?

Do I know that when you're in an aircraft with a licensed instructor, that instructor will take over the control of said aircraft in declared emergencies?

Nah...you're absolutely right. I'm just making this shit up. :sarcasm:

[Oeditpus Rex]

23. This:

That instructor was flying the plane when it struck the building.

You can assume that. There's no way you can know it unless you were there or heard radio transmissions to that effect.

[Squatch]

27. I can also assume, based on years of experience,

that the plane was painted white. But, there's no way of knowing that unless I was actually there.

[Oeditpus Rex]

40. Now you're gettin' it

[qnr]

14. True, but consider. Flying over the east river isn't inherently putting a

lot of people in danger. What happens if you're driving down a US highway at highway speeds? You're not doing it to put people in danger, however, suppose you have a blowout and plow into a restaraunt? Should you have known better than to be passing a busy area at highway speeds?

[cobalt1999]

15. as a private pilot myself...

I disagree.

I personally HATE flying in busy congested areas, but that's because I avoid those situations. I would be much more comfortable if I had more experience in those areas. Alas, the only way to get comfortable is by gaining experience and the only way to get experience is to get out there, and it sounds like he had an experience instructor with him.

It's like when you learned to drive. First you had someone teach you in empty areas, then you moved to side roads and then highways. Eventually, you were out on a highway alone. Scary, yes, but that's how you learn.

Also, 7 or 8 months experience does not mean he shouldn't have been flying there. Shoot, I was soloing after 3-4 WEEKS, flying over condos, highways, shopping centers, etc. I don't believe I was a danger or should be compared to a drunk driver. He had all the training, passed the tests, had instructor and checkout pilot validate his skills, and gained his license. As long as he was in VFR conditions, he had no reason not to be flying.

It looks like a problem with the aircraft, not the pilot or his experience.

[Squatch]

19. Cirrus SR-20.

You should check out the safety features that plane is equipped with.

I wish an airplane was invented that included terrain avoidance systems. Ooh! Ooh! And a parachute. Could you imagine an airplane with a parachute to lower it safely to the ground in case of an accident? That'd be really cool.

[cobalt1999]

30. I know that plane well.

Read about them when they first came out and seen them at a couple of air shows. Amazing, but initially it was pilots were the biggest opponents to the parachute system.

I wish I could afford one or use one.

[Squatch]

34. And, apparently, it's *still* the pilots that are opposed to using the

parachutes in emergencies.

[cobalt1999]

45. That's the $64,000 question.

Why didn't they deploy the parachute?

I have two theories.

1) When a problem happens, you instinctively go through the steps you've been taught to do. Those steps do NOT include going for the parachute. It could be as simple as not thinking about it. Sounds weird, but in emergencies, people don't think like they do sitting around on a computer.

2) The instructor may have been the issue. Alone, he may have quickly given up and deployed the chute. The instructor may have taken over and he may have assumed the instructor could handle the situation.

We'll probably never know.

[Squatch]

46. I tend to agree with that.

Far more than "trying to navigate between buildings in the middle of a city is not an appropriate place for the use {of the parachute system}".

I think it was a case of vapor lock on the part of the PIC. Especially in class B airspace, over NYC, AMONGST (What in the hell happened to minimum altitude separation?) the myriad buildings...

[qnr]

50. Look, I'm not a pilot. I just pointed out one thing, you happen to

believe there might be another valid reason. The thing is, there are valid reasons. And technically, my point about the navigating deals with the same thing... there could have been too much on his mind for him to consider the chute.

[conscious evolution]

56. He most likely didn't have time.

A parachute on a plane cant just be opened in a flash.It takes time for one to deploy.
Also,a parachute on a plane is mainly for engine failure at higher altitudes.Or the freak occurrence of a wing falling off.
I think it was a fuel problem,as reported.Jet fuel and av-gas are not interchangeable.unfortunately,though,when the wrong fuel is used,sometimes it is not apparent until the unmixed fuel in the fuel lines runs out and and the contaminated fuel hits the engines.I know of at least one pilot who found out the hard way right after take-off.
There was also a plane full of skydivers in Florida that crashed on takeoff due to bad fuel.


Parachutes would have saved none of them.Parachutes on planes that is.A couple of the skydivers actually made it out.

[bridgit]

16. you got that right johnnie, didn't he have a flight instructor on board...

wasn't someone able to figure, "gee, that building sure is getting bigger." i had a pilots license at 17, had some hours logged, clipped a wing or two on descent, bounced around all floppy & all that, but i would have been no where near where i couldn't have at least barrel rolled out from sure disaster that dude smacked that thing square...yeah its a tragedy, but one that should have been avoided in due course imo

[qnr]

20. Yeah, but from the eyewitness reports, it seems that a steep climb was

made to avoid hitting the building in front of it. While I have no pilot experience, it sounds like they said it stalled after that steep climb.

[bridgit]

24. i can see that as all too possible, lift fails glide, some aero...

component is sheared off and you stall, no longer 'flying'...that's desolation row right there imo

[Squatch]

29. UNLESS you're in an aircraft equipped with a PARACHUTE!!!

When the airplane can no longer fly...why a person might want to consider using that little nifty feature. Eh, but that's just me.

[qnr]

33. And a parachute would have a chance to deploy in time before hitting

a building on the 26th floor? I don't think it would.

[Squatch]

37. Well, let's see what the AIRCRAFT BUILDER has to say on that:

"Within seconds, the 55' diameter canopy will unfurl to assist the aircraft descent. The final impact of a textbook deployment, comparable to jumping off a 10 foot ladder, is absorbed by the specialized landing gear, a roll cage and Cirrus Energy Absorbing Technology (CEAT) seats."

[qnr]

38. You're bound and determined to follow the chute angle. How, again, how,

does that answer the question as to whether the chute would be able to attain a "textbook deployment" in the fraction of a second, to few seconds time before stalling over one building and crashing into the next building? If you're running, jump over a hurdle and there is a rock in front of you, where you're landing, are you going to pull a chute if you had one? Think it would make any difference?

[Squatch]

39. You're absolutely correct.

It's far better to leave the safety equipment an aircraft is built with stowed rather than "stalling over one building and crashing into the next building?"

"You're bound and determined to follow the chute angle"

Um....eh....scratches head....uh.....

What the F***?

[qnr]

42. Well, every place I look, you're pointing out how idiotic he was for not

using the chute.

I happen to think the chute is a great idea, and should be used in appropriate places. Trying to navigate between buildings in the middle of a city is not an appropriate place for the use, it would cause more problems than it solved, due to loss of control while it was deploying in such tight quarters.

Edit: s/ivery/every/

[Squatch]

44. Oh, Jeebus. I am ROTFL right now. Let me help you finish this:

"Trying to navigate between buildings in the middle of a city is not an appropriate place for the use" of a Cirrus SR-20 aircraft.


I'm sure they were cleared to "navigate between buildings".

[qnr]

47. No, they weren't. But having a blowout, causing your car to enter the

oncoming lane of traffic doesn't imply that cars were made to drive against oncoming traffic. If you think that I was claiming that he should have been there, then obviously you haven't been paying a lot of attention.

[Squatch]

49. Here's what the aircraft operator's manual considers "appropriate"

for the CAPS.

"Several possible scenarios in which the activation of the
CAPS would be appropriate are discussed in Section 10 -
Safety Information, of this Handbook. These include:
• Mid-air collision
• Structural failure
• Loss of control
• Landing in inhospitable terrain
• Pilot incapacitation"

[qnr]

51. Sorry, that still doesn't answer the question as to whether there would

have been time in such hectic circumstances. All of those imply that you are in open air and have time to react, as opposed to being in a situation where you have to worry about hitting the oncoming building in three seconds.

[Squatch]

52. It's a BIG huge button you smash with your hand.

Smash button, chute deploys. No checklists, no complicated procedure. Just mash that f***er, and float to terra firma.

[qnr]

53. Ok, let us not torture the electrons any more. You say yes while in

(not over) a city, and I say no, and we're not going to convince each other otherwise.

[Squatch]

54. Let's see:

uncontrolled flight into terrain (building) while not deploying chute?

-or-

uncontrolled flight that may lead to loss of airframe and/or life, deploy parachute?

It's really a no-brainer.

I'm off to bed.

[qnr]

55. You're right, it's a no-brainer. Go rest your big brain for tomorrows

battles and I'll make sure the vacuum seals on my head are secure.

[bridgit]

36. or an escape pod, but that may be little comfort for people catching...

the pieces...but true, i hear it was a selling point

[johnnie]

22. Like I said, it is tragic

But something doesn't sound right about the whole thing and it makes me wonder how this could have happened like it did. I'm not a pilot so I really don't know rules and regulations, but this is New York City and you would think that a small plane like that should not be there.

[bridgit]

31. it is, it's a terrible tragedy, but like Bloomberg was mentioning...

pilots fly all about NYC; tour, sight-seeing flights, etc, it must be a glorious experience...till something goes f.u.b.a.r. x( i'm sure the reg's mention something about it as well though