Watch This Pilot Somehow Crash And Fly Away At The Same Time - FlightAware

← Back to Squawk list

25

Watch This Pilot Somehow Crash And Fly Away At The Same Time

送信時刻：5 年前

Sometimes pilots make mistakes. If they’re lucky, nobody gets hurt and you walk away to fly another day. This pilot somehow managed to make a series of bad choices and still managed to keep on flying. (flightclub.jalopnik.com) さらに...

72 人のメンバーからのコメント

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]

flyingj481 5 年前 13

We had someone do this in a Duchess at a flight school I worked at years ago. They too somehow put it back in the air and came back around for a landing. Left props curled while the right props broke off (one went through the nose of the plane). I never saw the point of trying to go around. You already cooked the props/engines and will need paint either way. Nothing was saved by doing a go-around.

All they did was risk their lives. If one of the props was unballanced enough to cause a strong vibration and possibly cause the engine to come off, then lives would have been lost, possibly more than thier own.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

bbabis 5 年前 6

Only 230 hrs since overhaul. Maybe that is why those engines survived the abuse though they now need major inspection. The vibrations on the way to FXE also had to be significant with the super Q-tips. This pilot should be so dead that I put it beyond luck. God just gave him a break!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Yeah, it would have been one thing to realize they weren't down, high enough to gas and go around, but once the props hit the concrete, he should have just set it down and took the lumps. As it is, if it does sell, somebody will get screwed if a buyer doesn't do some checking. LOL

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

I like your comment "that pilot should be so dead". LOL

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

linbb 5 年前 0

Insurance company's require crank replacement and if gear drive that too.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 4

He's selling it "needs props" Probably a little skin damage too. At any rate, a halfway knowledgeable buy would have to ask about the other props and insist on having a good A&P man look over the engines. He'd have been better off to call the insurance company, if he had any.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 3

An A&P cannot just look over the engine. See post above. Service Bulletin must be complied with by a shop capable of performing the tear down inspection. (Read: engine shop) Yes, letting the insurance company deal with it is best. Having gone thorugh this process a LOT, I always find it amazing that owners are so scared of the insurance company to the point they want to short cut everything! It does nothing for the image of our profession. Besides... There is more than one story of a prop strike shortcut ending up with a catastrophic engine failure many hours later that killed people. Is a short cut really worth killing yourself, or worse, someone else?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 2

No. They. Don't. I deal with this constantly. The details are clearly spelled out in the Lycoming or Continental Service Bulletins. Crankshaft replacement is only predicated by the findings of the inspection. There is no "automatic" crankshaft replacement.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

You got to admit though, them would have taken a hellacious jolt though.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Paul Smith 5 年前 1

Where the problems really come from in a prop strike accident is when the engine stops suddenly. Of sudden engine stop is cause for a complete engine teardown. Anyway I will not be in the market for an Aerostar that was based in Florida!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

Yeah that is true. Know of a Duke engine breaking the crank inflight, in 3 places. And that was not hitting anything but air! However, I guess dynamically, it is easier on a crank to take damage to the prop, as it is a more gradual event than ingesting a valve and trying to come to an instant stop.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

see my new post below, just below yours

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Paul Smith 5 年前 0

I would be willing to bet that Duke had a prop strike that went unreported and wasn't acted on.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

No. There is a service bulletin on that engine for a specific range of cylinders. After these engines were overhauled the list was expanded, with the instructions to replace upon overhaul or removal of cylinders. It ate the #3 intake valve, which caused all kinds of havoc. even knocked a hole in the case. I know the pilot, and he as well as the owner spare no expense in maintaining this aircraft. The engines were so clean you could eat off of them.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Torsten Hoff 5 年前 4

>> Update:
>>
>> This 1970 Aerostar 601 did in fact land safely but not without substantial damage to the props
>> and has recently been listed for sale with the disclaimer “needs props.”

I'm quite sure it needs more than just props.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 3

LOL. Just heat them props up and bend em back straight. :)

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Bernhard Reimer 5 年前 1

Props don't get heated to get straightened. But I knew what you meant. ;)

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Yeah. LOL

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Paul Smith 5 年前 1

probably needs a good reupholstering job on the pilots seat.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Jeff Lawson 5 年前 1

Apparently N7502S, and the event maybe occurred around Mar 15 of this year? Aircraft now for sale

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/detail/aircraft/Multi+Engine+Piston/1970/Aerostar/601/2076612.html

http://flightaware.com/live/flight/N7502S

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Philip Clifton 5 年前 1

Incident date was April 11: http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/apex/f?p=100:95:0::NO::P95_EVENT_LCL_DATE,P95_LOC_CITY_NAME,P95_REGIST_NBR:11-APR-15,FORT%20PIERCE,N7502S

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Torsten Hoff 5 年前 1

Wow -- he wasted no time putting it on the block.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

joel wiley 5 年前 1

Maybe he recognized his limitations?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Steve Whelan 5 年前 2

This is the ore likely end result:

http://www.ntsb.gov/_layouts/ntsb.aviation/brief.aspx?ev_id=20001212X21902&key=1&queryId=b500316f-3738-4a06-8564-ff26b6dd9720&pgno=12&pgsize=50

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

bbabis 5 年前 2

A similar accident happened in Cincinnati in the early 70's. A baron pilot thought that taking off with the gear selector in the up position was a great idea. He figured the WOW switch would keep the gear down and as soon as he broke ground the gear would come up which looked cool and increased performance. Well, late in the takeoff roll, he got light and the gear sucked right up and the aircraft settled back to the runway curling his props. He jerked it back off and attempted to bring it back around for a return but the left engine failed due to damage and the right engine could not provide enough thrust with the curled prop and two people wound up dying. Nothing was saved by pulling it back off and all was lost by two.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Brian Rushfeldt 5 年前 2

wing tips have shapes like those props - what is the problem ?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Matt LaMay 5 年前 2

"Eighty-five-year-old Chris Georgaklis"

"Eighty-five-year-old"

"Eighty-five"

According to him, he was coming in too fast, so he raised the gear 20ft agl...obviously to reduce drag as to go faster because that's what any sane aviator does when they are unstable at that altitude.

No...the old timer forgot to drop the gear. Probably disconnected the gear buzzer too. Time to give up that medical.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Paul Smith 5 年前 2

sometimes you have to know when to hang it up. His time is now!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

oowmmr 5 年前 1

Outrageous, exhilarating and a little scary.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

ADXbear 5 年前 1

Hey Look at my new Q-tip props. saves me fuel!... he got some splaining to do.. lol

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

ADXbear 5 年前 1

New Definition of "Standing on the props"...

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Down here somewhere is a link with an interview of the pilot.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

TWA55 5 年前 1

Maybe he should try gliders

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Joseph Brown 5 年前 1

Back in the early '80s I worked with a 135 freight hauler called Cal Air Charter (I say with because my paycheck came from the ground side of the company) at KOAK. We received notice that one of our Aztec's had damaged a taxi light at Tahoe airport. Manager didn't think anything of it and wrote up the pilot involved. Months later when the props were sent off to the prop shop for overhaul, they called and said that one of the props was a quarter-inch short on all blades. Turns out, the pilot involved bought a file, and spent his layover filing down the blades until they were balanced enough that no one noticed!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

John Satterfield 5 年前 1

I genuinely HOPE that the sale of this aircraft is a direct result of the pilot/owner reassessing his capabilities. No insult intended. Just a fact of life. Happy, very happy, to hear that he got home safe and sound.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Lance Neward 5 年前 1

Years ago, I watched a pilot do exactly the same thing in a Cessna 337 Skymaster. He was landing at Cable Airport in Upland, CA, an uncontrolled field, but with UNICOM. As we watched the airplane come onto short final, the FBO operator, who saw that the gear was up, picked up the UNICOM mike and said, "Your gear is up, go around, go around, go around!!" Unfortunately, the pilot in the right seat was concentrating on trying to sell the airplane and neither pilot was really paying attention to their knitting. The airplane settled, touched its belly to the runway at the same moment max power was applied. It staggered into the air, went around the airport and came back for a more-or-less normal landing with the gear down. Once on the airport, they taxied to the farthest reaches of the taxiway, behind some hangars, to hide their shame. Broken habit patterns will catch you some time.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Jim Quinn 5 年前 1

Yikes! I believe I heard the props clicking onto the concrete as the aircraft passed the camera position. Newly (self-) modified Q-tip props. I'm no expert, but it looked to me as though the aircraft was a bit mushy during the initial climb during the go-around and I wonder if he was fairly close to a stall. Knowing a little bit of the history of the 601, am I mistaken? I look forward to some comments from those of you who are more experienced than I. I think this was a close call.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

linbb 5 年前 2

Have heard that sound in a tail dragger one day as pushed forward a little too soon on the stick doing a wheel landing.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

royalbfh 5 年前 2

yes sir, if the Aerostar had an audible stall warning I am going to say it would have been blaring in his ear. He obviously knew his airplane and got it to blueline but in my opinion he made some really poor decisions. The Aerostar is truly a fantastic airplane, sturdy and built very strong. I currently fly one for a company. I couldn't have taken off like that guy did because both of my hands would have been covering my face in shame after the ground contact...

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

Not to mention the gear warning horn blaring in his ears. That would go off long before the stall warning would sound. It is possible the stall warning would not have sounded at all, until just prior to or after the "prop modification process" began.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Torsten Hoff 5 年前 1

I don't think I would have had the balls to firewall the throttle on what must have been really rough running engines, and then trusted them to bring me back around for another stab at landing with the gear down.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

According to the story he didn't come around. He went on to another airport and landed normally.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

David Boyd 5 年前 1

Accicent report dated 4/11/15. Copy and paste info below to browser address to view.

http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/apex/f?p=100:95:0::NO::P95_EVENT_LCL_DATE,P95_LOC_CITY_NAME,P95_REGIST_NBR:11-APR-15,FORT%20PIERCE,N7502S

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

David Boyd 5 年前 1

Did not realize link created. copy and paste of accident address not required. Should be able to just click on it.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Dolf Brouwers 5 年前 1

In the airforce you would loose your wing.....its bevond me that he flies another day....

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Miles Reese 5 年前 1

I was there and saw it. Say what you want, the guy is a hell of a stick. Plane was going into a roll. Left rudder, positive rate and at 70 feet it was gaining altitude. The most important thing taught to Multi Engine pilots is MANTAIN DIRECTION STABILITY and he did. I know more about it but we will leave it at this. I'm a 4200 hr. IFR SMEL pilot

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

Yes, a lot of people questioning his skill. I don't. That was some flying that most pilots could not have pulled off. As for judgment, well... That is were he is left exposed.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Brian Rushfeldt 5 年前 1

oh dammmmm I knew I forgot something.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Mike Hand 5 年前 1

Maybe turobfans....only the shroud will get damaged, not the blades.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

jbqwik 5 年前 1

This guy's motto is "rather be lucky than good".. .

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

bentwing60 5 年前 1

And he was!

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Dan Egelhoff 5 年前 1

Not only is he a skilled pilot but he is a Master Machinist to be able to dynamically balance the props "On the Fly" like that. That takes a fine touch on the stick.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Guy Cocoa 5 年前 1

Interview with the pilot: http://www.wsvn.com/story/28885459/pilot-takes-off-without-use-of-landing-gear

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

joel wiley 5 年前 1

Dog is my co-pilot?

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mike Hand 5 年前 1

My first flight instructor told me to "always be ready to go around." I guess he and I had the same instructor.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Do you reckon, at 85, he was trying to do away with the "NO OLD,BOLD PILOTS" saying

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Tuan Tran 5 年前 0

(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Aircraft landed gear up, struck bell and props, and took off.

The fed had a chance to chat with the super skilled pilot!
AIRCRAFT LANDED GEAR UP, STRUCK BELLY AND PROPS, TOOK OFF AND LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT

http://www.asias.faa.gov/pls/apex/f?p=100:95:0::NO::P95_EVENT_LCL_DATE,P95_LOC_CITY_NAME,P95_REGIST_NBR:11-APR-15,FORT%20PIERCE,N7502S

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

rickythepilot 5 年前 0

(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Plane skids, takes off without landing gear

A viral video shot in Fort Pierce shows a small plane skidding on its belly before taking off and flying 100 miles with damaged propellers. The man who shot the video told WPBF 25 News he was amazed when he found out the pilot, Chris Georgaklis, 85, was able to fly the damaged plane all the way to Fort Lauderdale and land safely.

http://www.wpbf.com/news/exclusive-plane-skids-takes-off-without-landing-gear/32514186

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

Robert Hirst 5 年前 0

I'm all in favor of older folks doing their thing but this 85(!) Year old guy is putting everyone in danger every time he gets into the seat in front.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

WhiteKnight77 5 年前 1

That is probably why he has the plane up for sale.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Your're being too kind. LOL. He probably doesn't have any insurance, at least that will cover that, and is trying to get out without too big a loss, as in 2 engines as well as props and probably some skin and/or at least paint.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 2

I'll give him $5... Two engines $55K each. Props $20K. Assorted damage repair, $xxxx! Paying someone to do it or disassemble to move. $!!! On second thought, if he paid me $20K, I might take it off his hands. Probably looking at somewhere between $125K to $200K event.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

Could it be we are all wrong about how bad the damage was? I think I read somewhere that he went on and safely landed at FXE, which is about 100 miles away.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 2

It is not really so much the damage that was caused, as much as it is the potential damage which may show up later. I remember the days when after a prop stirke the standard was to dial the crankshaft to see if the flange was bent. Then too many damaged airplanes started seeing engines fail. Some of which caused deaths. And that is when the manufacturers came out with service letters stating required inspections after prop strikes. Another point is that our aricraft engines are fairly robust and want to keep running. It is usually us who screws up the system. And in this case, this guy was exceptionally lucky. That actual damage done may in fact be not too significant. But there is really no way to know without opening it up to take a look.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 1

agreed

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 2

and sad part is, that is where most folks won't spend the money.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

True. And even more sad is if they are insured, as deductible is a deductible. It costs them nothing more. I have yet to see an insurance company raise rates in a prop strike incident. To them the cost of an engine teardown is much cheaper than paying for a hull loss. And most adjusters will gladly say, "Do what you need to do," and spare no expense in making it right. In fact, I have seen on more than one occasion an owner come out of the event with a free overhaul! That is rare, but it has happened. At the least they come out with new bearings and internals, with often at least new rings on existing cylinders that have been cleaned up. And in every case I have seen, the owner comes out with an improved engine. All at the expense of the insurance company.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

bbabis 5 年前 1

So, as far as the aircraft now being for sale, the present owner should make a claim with his insurance if he has any. He has probably paid plenty over 50 years. I don't think a new owner will be able to make a claim and therefor the inspections and repairs might be done on the cheap.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mark Jernigan 5 年前 1

That would be essentially true. No way a new owner would be covered for this guy's event. The only recourse a new owner would have is in court. And that never goes well... Due diligence is always best done before the purchase.

If the current owner did not have insurance, which I have to guess he does not, based upon him selling "as is", then I am assure you he is doing it on the cheap. I would pretty much run away from this seller as fast as my old knees could carry me.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

preacher1 5 年前 2

This definitely one of them BUYER BEWARE deals. LOL

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Mike Hand 5 年前 2

Did he land safely? Or just "without incident?"

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Parent•Report

Vern Hiebert 5 年前 0

That moment when you realize your arse is a lot closer to the runway then its supposed to be must be quite memorable, if somewhat unpleasant.

返信 ↓•パーマリンク•Report

ログイン

当ウェブサイトはクッキーを使用します。当ウェブサイトを使用し、サイト内を移動することで、あなたはこれに同意したこととみなされます。

閉じる

FlightAwareのフライト追跡は広告によりサポートされていることをご存知ですか？

広告表示を許可してくださることでFlightAware.comを無料で提供することができます。表示される広告は関連性の高い控えめなものを選んでいます。FlightAwareをホワイトリストに追加する方法はかんたんに設定していただくことができます。または、プレミアムアカウントのご利用をご検討ください.

閉じる