« You can judge a blog by the nature of its enemies | Main | You want plans, we got 'em »

Helicopter Small Airplane Crashes into New York City High-Rise

newt1.1502.fire.wnyw.jpg
Photo from CNN.

***Scroll to see updates***

Fox News is covering it now. It happened in the Upper East Side. According to Drudge, the address is 524 E. 72nd Street at York, near East River. It's not believed to be terrorism related.

Update: According to Shepard Smith of Fox News, the FAA is holding a press briefing right now and says that it was a small aircraft but they don't know what kind.

Also there are reports of people being trapped and possibly one person killed.

Update II: Again from Shep Smith: the FDNY confirms that people are trapped and two people are dead.

Update III: The FAA is now reporting that it was a fixed wing aircraft flying under visual flight rules or VFR.

Update IV: John Scott is speculating that the plane stalled, which means that the air flow going over the wing of the plane may have been interrupted, causing it to lose altitude suddenly and spiral downward. The way to solve this problem is to push the yoke down to get air over the wing of the plane to bring it out of the stall. If this is what happened, the pilot may have brought it out of the spiral, just in time to hit the building. Who knows. It's just speculation.

Update V: The FBI's joint terrorism task force is responding but the FBI still says that there's no indication that terrorism was involved.

Update VI: According to an eye witness, there's a point of impact against the building and a streak of black going down the side of the building indicating that the plane hit the building and fell down.

Update VII: Witnesses described the plane doing aerobatics and then leveling off. It sounds like the plane may have been having problems.

Update VIII: Flights have been restricted within a one mile radius around the crash scene.

Update IX: Ms. Underestimated has video of the Fox News coverage.

Update X: NORAD has scrambled fighters over several US cities. This is still believed to be an accident, but NORAD wants to make sure everything is covered.

Update XI: Allahpundit reports that there are two bodies and luggage on the ground in front of the building. More indication that it was an accident.

Update XII: NYPD confirms two dead.

Update XIII: A witness said a wing was sticking out of the tree in front of the building. She also said that at least 10 apartments were on fire and that people were screaming as she worked to get out of the building. Also a man had to be tackled by the police as he tried to get in to save his pregnant wife. Oh my.

Update XIV: Floors 42 and up, the top eight floors, are cleared of all people. Thank God. Now we're waiting to hear about the floors immediately above and below.

Mary Katharine Ham is also covering this.

Katie Favazza is as well.

So is Suitably Flip.

Update XX: 4HD WNBC.com reports that the plane was a Cirrus SR20.

I found this on a Cirrus SR20 owner's website about the plane:

A pilot with 800 hours in the SR22 noted that in his experience it is not nearly as docile as the Cessna 172 and Piper Arrow that he had trained on. A CFI ("certificated flight instructor") who now flies the $3 million Pilatus PC-12 says "The Cirrus is a plane designed to go fast. You shouldn't be flying it slow. It is trickier to handle in a stall than a 172 or the Pilatus."


Once in a spin the SR20 and SR22 are virtually impossible to recover, according to the test pilots. Remember that spin testing in certification is done with a special tail parachute for breaking the spin that can then be cut away inflight. NASA puts this best:

"Because unrecoverable spins may be encountered during initial aircraft stall/spin flight tests, spin test aircraft are commonly equipped with emergency spin-recovery parachute systems, which can be deployed to terminate the spinning motion and reduce the aircraft angle of attack to below stall conditions. The parachute is then jettisoned by the pilot and conventional flight resumed."

-- http://oea.larc.nasa.gov/PAIS/Concept2Reality/spin_technology.html (contains some photos of spin-recovery parachutes)

This is very important information since this aircraft was flying very low near high-rise buildings.

Update XXI: According to Fox News, the plane was registered to Yankee pitcher Cory Lidle.

Update XXII: From Fox News: we now have confirmation that Cory Lidle was on the plane and has been declared dead.

Apparently, Cory just got his pilot's license and had about 200 flight hours. With what we learned about the instability of the Cirrus SR20, it sounds like he lost control. It was meant to be flown fast. And he was low and probably slow. Perhaps he was flying too slowly and stalled the plane. As a result, not enough air was making it over the leading edge of the plane's wings and it may have stalled. From what we have learned from the above information, it would have been impossible to come out of the spin in New York City at only 800 feet above sea level - if that information is correct. (I corrected a bunch of typos. Sorry. I was typing too fast for my fingers to keep up)

lidle.jpg

Update XXIII: Lidle was the subject of a September 8th New York Times article in which he addressed the risk of his flying (hat tip Drudge):

A player-pilot is still a sensitive topic for the Yankees, whose captain, Thurman Munson, was killed in the crash of a plane he was flying in 1979. Lidle, acquired from the Philadelphia Phillies on July 30, said 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."

It sounds like he never pulled the parachute, at least from what we know right now. Then again, he was awfully low and too close to buildings. The parachute probably wouldn't have helped him.

Update XXIV: This is heartbreaking. Cory's wife and son were on a flight from New York to LA when the crash took place. So while the rest of the world was reeling from the shock of Cory's death, his wife and son had no idea. A priest was supposed to meet them in LA to break the news to her.

Update XXV: Was Lidle trying to avoid a mid-air collision? See for yourself.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Helicopter Small Airplane Crashes into New York City High-Rise:

» Keep Austin Corporate linked with BREAKING: Small plane crashes into building in NYC

» Stop The ACLU linked with Pandemonium As Plane Strikes High Rise In NYC

» Badger Blog Alliance linked with BREAKING!! AIRCRAFT HITS NYC APARTMENT BUILDING

» The American Mind linked with BREAKING!! AIRCRAFT HITS NYC APARTMENT BUILDING

» Katie Favazza linked with Breaking news: NYC plane crash (with updates)

» La Shawn Barber's Corner linked with Plane Crash in NYC

» Macsmind - Conservative Commentary and Common Sense linked with Plane crashes into highrise in NY

Comments (45)

Let's hope everyone is ok! ... (Below threshold)
Joe:

Let's hope everyone is ok! It brings bad memories though... Anyway, I do hope that New Yorkers are more precautious now. It's incredible how being proactive and carrying a simple Breath of Life emergency escape mask can save your life in a situation like this.

By COLEEN LONGAssoci... (Below threshold)
J-Ho:

By COLEEN LONG
Associated Press Writer

"The crash struck fear in a city devastated by the attacks of Sept. 11 five years ago."

"devastated"????

Yes, yes, I understand that the word can mean "overwhelmed." But was the (entire) city really "devastated?" (laid waste). Sorry, I live in New Orleans and it just struck me the wrong way.

ahhh, just ignore me.

J-Ho,Yes, she mean... (Below threshold)
Heralder:

J-Ho,

Yes, she means devastated in the emotional sense rather than the physical sense, New Orleans obviously got both.

Of course New Orleans had f... (Below threshold)
bob:

Of course New Orleans had five days warning in advance so that people could prepare and evacuate. 9/11 hit New York without anyone having a clue it was coming.

Didn't some kid crash a pla... (Below threshold)

Didn't some kid crash a plane into a highrise in Florida a couple years back in a suicide attempt?

Pray for our brother fire f... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Pray for our brother fire fighters that have to enter the building and initiate an interior attack on the fire. The nations finest will handle it.

How long will it be until t... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

How long will it be until the moonbats figure out that Carl Rove had someone fly into the building to bring 9/11 back to the forefront of public attention just before the elections? Seems like he could/should have waited a couple of weeks.

>Of course New Orleans had ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

>Of course New Orleans had five days warning in advance so that people could prepare and evacuate.

Um, no it didn't. Please get you facts from somewhere other than your behind next time.

Devastated as in emotionall... (Below threshold)
jack oneil:

Devastated as in emotionally. Lets not make this a victim pageant, both 9-11 and Katrina were disasters of different kinds that laid waste emotionally and physically on both of our cities.

So it looks to me like the ... (Below threshold)
Cousin Dave:

So it looks to me like the impact occurred around the 20th floor. That would make it about 250' AGL. Obviously, no fixed-wing aircraft has any business flying at that altitude across Manhattan. That does tend to add to John Scott's theory about the plane stalling and then hitting the building during the recovery, along with the eyewitness reports of the plane doing "tricks" (probably a spin that it fell into when it stalled).

One question, though. I was under the impression that all of Manhattan was Class D(?) airspace now, and that VFR flight over it is highly restricted. Is this still the case? Or has a VFR corridor been opened up?

... Watching this on FOX ne... (Below threshold)

... Watching this on FOX news on AFN (American Forces Network)...I have to weigh in that the damage is too tiny, and the whole thing reeks of completely accident. Why they focus so much time on it I have no freaking idea. One more reason why MSM is complete baloney. Why they feel they have to have a complete running commentary throughout the entire "stock" repeat video footage.

I can understand the first thing you think "terrorism", however when you see it...you think "what the hell this is too freaking small to be a terrorist incident"


Bah I'm sick of the news, I'm going to go get ready for watch.

I have no idea the rules in... (Below threshold)
Paul:

I have no idea the rules in that airspace but I find it completely inconcievable that it was doing aerobatics over Manhattan.

As for the plane "stalling" in mid-air... That does doesn't happen that way. To stall you have to be doing extra ordinary. You have to lose an engine or be doing something beyond the limits of the craft or the pilot. It's not like the he was just up there flying along and "a stall happened."

Actually I questioned the u... (Below threshold)
J-Ho:

Actually I questioned the use of "devastated" in the "CRISIS IN NEW YORK!" mentality - the media overdramatizing everything. It wasn't a comparison.

>Of course New Orleans had five days warning in advance so that people could prepare and evacuate.

People had 3 minutes warning in the case of the sham levees failing. Check the facts about Katrina and when people were told to evacuate.

This sounds like a JFK Jr. ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

This sounds like a JFK Jr. Deal to me...

Too much plane on an inexperienced pilot, doing something beyond his limits.

Sad, but it happens.

Why the f**k was a guy who ... (Below threshold)
Tom in Texas:

Why the f**k was a guy who had only been a pilot for 7 months allowed to fly over Manhattan in the first place?

Actually, Paul, it's pretty... (Below threshold)

Actually, Paul, it's pretty easy to stall a plane. Just point its nose too high and the plane will stall. Stalling is simply interrupting the flow of air over the wings. This plane is meant to be flown fast. If it's too slow, the plane, or the wings, will stall.

As for the plane "stalli... (Below threshold)
Brian:

As for the plane "stalling" in mid-air... That does doesn't happen that way.

Actually, it does. All he had to do was slow down to under the stalling speed. Many inexperienced pilots pull up on the wheel as an instinctive reaction to gain immediate altitude, but that just slows you down and could put you right into a stall.

Look at the hole and the wa... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Look at the hole and the way it burned. That was a missile and the Yankee's pitcher ploy is a White House diversion to get back at rich liberals. If we kill OBL, none of this could happen and the Yankees would be playing tonight.

Too much plane on ... (Below threshold)
Too much plane on an inexperienced pilot, doing something beyond his limits.

I heard that the plane JFK Jr. was flying is called the "doctor-killer" because of that very phenomenon: pilot with just enough experience to move to new plane, then gets in trouble with new plane.

Kim:You are correc... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Kim:

You are correct in your description of a stall (air too slow over wings and lift is lost). At this point you go astray a little. In a slight stall the plane will continue ahead, but will loose altitude rapidly. As the stall increases, the plane will loose stability and fall off on one wing or the other, and simply fall out of the sky. However, with enough altitude, since it will fall nose down, it will gain enough airspeed to enable the pilot to regain control. A full stall at low altitude is usually fatal. A small plane is almost imposible to get into a spin unless you know how. Don't believe the movies that all the shot down planes in WWII went down in spins. Since, the plane in NY hit the building pretty much horizonaly, I doubt that a stall was the cause, however, recovery from a stall could have been the problem.

A witness saw the plane smo... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

A witness saw the plane smoking just before impact. I believe the Sirrus may be wireless. I know you fly it with a joy stick off to the side. Fire could quickly result in loss of flight controls in this new type of light aircraft with glass cockpit (mostly electronic). Just a hunch. Newbie pilot in a plane that can cruise near 200 mph not a good combo in a crisis. Been there, done that. Stop flying in the smoke and put your head down for 10 seconds and the plane is out of control.

News Flash: Flying your own plane is dangerous.

>Actually, Paul, it's prett... (Below threshold)
Paul:

>Actually, Paul, it's pretty easy to stall a plane. Just point its nose too high and the plane will stall.


No folks, stalls just don't "happen" out of the blue. You have to actually try pretty hard to stall a plane.

-- Pointing the nose up will not magically stall a plane or (duh) they'd all fall out the sky when they climbed.

Even a rookie pilot whould hit the gas if he tried to climb -- and a SR20 has the power to climb at a very steep angle.

None of us know what happend but to say "well the plane must have stalled" is just silly. Stalls don't happen, they are caused.

A Cirrus SR20, as suggested... (Below threshold)
Da Bear:

A Cirrus SR20, as suggested already, is designed for speedy cross country flying, not slow sightseeing. A fatal combination of a low hours pilot with an overmatched plane.
Furthermore, a 200 hour pilot often has just enough hours to be cocky, without the experience to recognize impending stalls and the skills to recovery from a low altitude incident.

Just a few notes from a gen... (Below threshold)
StevenH:

Just a few notes from a general aviation pilot.

1. The news media ALWAYS gets the details of incidents like this wrong.
2. A wing stalls when airflow exceeds the critical angle of attack. It can happen at any speed, though it is easier to fly the plane into a stall at low airspeeds. Sometimes, stalls can develop into spins. All pilots practice stalls, few pilots practice spins.
3. The Cirrus was the first production aircraft to be fitted with a ballistic recovery parachute which could be used if the airplane were in an unflyable condition.
4. The Cirrus is not fly by wire. It does have a side joystick control, but uses a mechanical push rod system to control the flying surfaces.
5. Speculation: The 'smoke' reportedly seen by the witness (see point 1) may have been the parachute deploying. Or not.
6. 200 hours of flying experience is about like 10,000 miles of driving experience. Still inexperienced, but generally capable of driving across town safely. By the time a GA pilot has 200 hours experince, he's probably flown 25,000 miles.
7. Sometimes things break, sometimes people do stupid things. In an airplane accident, it's not always immediately apparent which it is. Again, see point 1.

Hey, "Red Fog". The term y... (Below threshold)
Calvin Dodge:

Hey, "Red Fog". The term you're looking for is "fly-by-wire".

The Cirrus has "glass cockpit" displays, but I'm certain it does not have fly-by-wire controls.

At present fly-by-wire is found only in some airliners and military aircraft (maybe in some corporate jets, but none that I'm aware of). Reliability (and liability) concerns will probably preclude its use in small aircraft for some time to come.

The fact that he didn't use the aircraft's parachute seems to point to a "loss-of-control" issue - especially if the pilot's attention was occupied by mechanical problems (the alleged "smoke").

That's why anecdotal emergency checklists list "fly the airplane" as every other line.

Regarding the comments about Manhattan airspace, it appears he was flying over the Hudson River, which has just a 1000 foot AGL (above ground level) limit. His flight over Manhattan seems unintentional - loss of control or a sudden turn to avoid other traffic.

No folks, stalls just do... (Below threshold)
Brian:

No folks, stalls just don't "happen" out of the blue. You have to actually try pretty hard to stall a plane.

It's not that hard, especially when you're in a reaction situation.

-- Pointing the nose up will not magically stall a plane or (duh) they'd all fall out the sky when they climbed.

You don't point the nose up to climb. You increase the throttle.

Even a rookie pilot whould hit the gas if he tried to climb -- and a SR20 has the power to climb at a very steep angle.

In an emergency situation, where you feel that you need to climb IMMEDIATELY, it's easy to understand a rookie's instinctive reaction to pull up hard on the stick. That's how stalls turn into spins.

None of us know what happend but to say "well the plane must have stalled" is just silly. Stalls don't happen, they are caused.

I don't know what kind of piloting experience you have. I have some, you seem to have less, others on here seem to have more. I'd suggest deferring to those who know.

According to WNBC (video):<... (Below threshold)

According to WNBC (video):
Video from WNBC: This is the best-selling model of private plane, have been involved in 20 fatal accidents, but all have been pilot error. The plane is like a fast race car with sophisticated avionics, more sensitive handling than the type of plane student pilots usually train on. News anchor says it's like training in a Toyota Corolla then driving a Porsche.
The flight path was a typical sightseeing path, circling the Empire State Building, then flying up the East River, where one is supposed to make a tight U-turn, which requires some skill to execute without a stall.

Lidle only got his license in April. They are interviewing some guy at Teterboro who says this plane is often used for training new pilots. He does say that this manouver on the East River is tricky. One is supposed to "climb and confess," rise up out of the turn and tell the air traffic controller you are having trouble. But there is so much traffic there that they might have feared a collision with another aircraft.

>I don't know what kind of ... (Below threshold)
Paul:

>I don't know what kind of piloting experience you have. I have some, you seem to have less, others on here seem to have more. I'd suggest deferring to those who know.

hmmm 1989 how about you?

You made a bunch of smart assed replies but you have not disproved my point....

Stalls just don't happen. And no, assuming reasonable flight parameters, simply pulling back on the stick does not cause a stall.

If you are a pilot as you claim, you no doubt have stalled and recovered a dozen times or more.

I highly doubt you are a pilot if you don't understand something as basic as a stall.

Fox is now reporting that a... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Fox is now reporting that a CFI was PIC and that a source in the NTSB told Fox (off the record) the plane ran out of fuel.

This (IMO) does not mesh too well. It was my understanding they just took off... It is obviously possible but improbable that a CFI would not check his fuel before take off and/or that he would lose control of the craft. -- but everyone makes mistake.

The jury is still waaaay out.

sorry...CFI= Certi... (Below threshold)
Paul:

sorry...

CFI= Certified Flight Instructor

PIC = Pilot in Command.
(The guy who is ultimatly responsible for the craft.)

There has been some discuss... (Below threshold)

There has been some discussion in this comment thread on how a plane stalls and how easy/difficult it is for a pilot to create a stalling situation. For those who are unfamiliar with aviation, here's a link which explains the basics of stalls.

As was mentioned earlier by several commenters, novice pilots can point the nose of the plane up thinking that will increase the altitude. In reality, that can create a stall, but not automatically. Power controls altitude; pitch controls speed. Pointing the nose of the plane up without sufficient airspeed can stall the plane. That doesn't mean that by just pointing the nose up the plane will fall out of the sky. There are other factors at play.

But as the above link also notes, a plane can stall even though a plane's wings are straight and level. That occurs if the plane is flying too slowly. That may have been the case with Cory's plane. The Cirrus SR20 is a plane that is meant to be flown fast. If Cory's airspeed wasn't sufficient, then the plane could have lost lift and stalled even though his wings were level with the horizon. And as we learned from a link in my post, the Cirrus SR20 is difficult to recover from a stall, even for test pilots.

Paul mentioned that there's a report that says the plane ran out of gas. I, too, am a little skeptical of that. For a CFI to not know how much gas the plane had sounds a little fishy. Not only that, but the CFI and Cory both would have known or should I say they should have known the plane's glide speed and would have gotten to that speed immediately to give them as much time as possible to find a place to land. A pilot does that by pointing the nose up or down, which ever is necessary to get the airspeed to glide speed. For example, the glide speed for a Cessna 172 is 65, which means that if a pilot is flying at 95 knots, he must point the nose up, not too much because he doesn't want to stall the plane, until he reaches 65 knots. Once he reaches that speed, he keeps the plane at the right pitch to maintain that speed. That provides the pilot with the most amount of time in the air. That can be a little difficult if the pilot is also looking out the window trying to find a descent spot to land.

If Cory's plane ran out of gas, that's what I would expect the CFI would do. Running out of gas doesn't cause a plane to smash into a building.

Anyway, for those who are currently pilots, feel free to pick apart or correct anything I've written here.

test...... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

test...

Paul...Stalls are ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Paul...

Stalls are not hard to do, just slowing down enough will do it. When planes land, just before they touch down, they stall to lose altitude.


Why do you have to be such an arsehole when you post, anyway? There are a number of pilots who are posters here, and it would be best to defer to them. Just because one poster threw you into a fit of pique regarding Katrina/New Orleans (perhaps they didn't have that many days notice, they sure had much more notice than Manhattan did!).

So, do us a favour. Calm the hell down. Thanks.

Now,as to the theories sugg... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Now,as to the theories suggested by the other posters. I agree...that plane is designed for fast flying, and I suspect that since he was close to LGA, I'm suspecting he was probably in a proceedure turn, and went off course. I'll have to hunt around for the approach plates for LGA, but that's my gut feeling. Probably slowed down too much, started to lose altitude. Should have throttled to raise the nose, but might have panicked and pulled the yoke up, exacerbating the problem. Are there specs for the stall speed for this plane?

Also the weather was a bit marginal today.

Hm...this approach takes yo... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Hm...this approach takes you right over the accident site:

http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0610/00289VDH.PDF

Right along the 134 radial for LGA-VOR. Could he have stalled on his final?

I'll try this again.<... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

I'll try this again.

I was looking at some approaches to LGA, and the VOR-DME H approach from Teterboro, takes you straight over the accident site on the 134 radial. Perhaps he stalled on the final?

So it looks to me like t... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

So it looks to me like the impact occurred around the 20th floor. That would make it about 250' AGL. Obviously, no fixed-wing aircraft has any business flying at that altitude across Manhattan. That does tend to add to John Scott's theory about the plane stalling and then hitting the building during the recovery, along with the eyewitness reports of the plane doing "tricks" (probably a spin that it fell into when it stalled).

I agree...the Approach Theory I was throwing about (VOR-DME-H) starts the glide at 2800Ft at 9 miles out of LGA, FAF is at 4 mil (CHUGG intersection), which would be very near the accident site, the minimum there is 1400. My theory is he was hella below the glide slope, going too slow, and started to stall and couldn't recover. Perhaps he was attempting a MAP (turning climb left) when he smacked the building. At DME-2.2, the minimum would only be 740 Ft.

(http://204.108.4.16/d-tpp/0610/00289VDH.PDF)

James, Cory was on... (Below threshold)

James,

Cory was on his way to Nashville, so it wouldn't make sense that he would be on final into LGA. Who knows, perhaps he was trying to get his way back there for some reason.

Kim...I see, well ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Kim...

I see, well it was just a theory...

Oh, I'm posting this through a proxy, I tried to paste a link to the approach plate, and the spam filter kicked me out the last time...can someone fix/unblock please? Thanks.

(or perhaps when my dynamic IP changes, the problem will be fixed...I dunno)

Well, it looks like he was ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Well, it looks like he was heading up the East River instead of an approach, so it looks like I'm wrong, and with Paul's new post, it looks like an attempt at avoiding a mid-air collision.

>Stalls are not hard to do,... (Below threshold)
Paul:

>Stalls are not hard to do, just slowing down enough will do it.

Are you saying a guy with 900 hours and a CFI just flew so slow they fell out the sky?

Be realistic. My point has always been that Stalls just "don't happen" something extra ordinary causes them. Flying so goddamn slow you fall out the sky would qualify as extra ordinary.

Birds into props "just happens." Stalls don't.


>When planes land, just before they touch down, they stall to lose altitude.

Planes stall on landing? Ya don't say? Is that that damn noise I keep hearing?


>Why do you have to be such an arsehole when you post, anyway?

Hmmmmmmmm Because I have to answer people like you?

Hmmmmmmmm Because I have... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Hmmmmmmmm Because I have to answer people like you?

Well, no, because you seem to be on "defensive mode" all the time. Your first response was beligerent in the thread. As I posted in your new thread, when you put your mind to it, you can really do great research. But, dude, you need not take every (perceived) remark about NO/Katrina as a personal attack. It's bad enough when the Lee and his gang come in spoiling for a fight. I usually like your topics, just not your beligerence, that's all.

And that's all I need to say in this regard.

Planes stall on landing?... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Planes stall on landing? Ya don't say? Is that that damn noise I keep hearing?

Define "noise"...the spoilers? A bit of throttle if the sink rate is too great? Isn't the point of the final flare at the threshold to raise the nose to let the plane sink down to the tarmac? Sounds like a stall to me.

At the risk of beating a de... (Below threshold)
StevenH:

At the risk of beating a dead horse, planes do not stall on or after landing. I can operate my aircraft for years without stalling.

Stalling before landing 'to lose altitude' nearly always break the airplane.

If you are interested in seeing what the aviation press has to say about the accident, see the articles on AvWeb.

Hi Steven.Yeah, I ... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Hi Steven.

Yeah, I think I was being a bit too simplistic about the landing. I think what I meant to say is that during the final flare, the rate of descent is reduced by transitioning to a stall state, then pitches down...the forward speed is reduced and no more lift is generated, and the wheels sink down to the runway. This is what I had in mind. Okay, not exactly a stall, per se, but with similar effects. Jet planes, of course have reverse thrusters...but your average Piper wouldn't. :)




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy