So stupid! This is a C172 and this airfield is 7000 ft. That means they were flying with a density altitude of about 10,000 feet! This is assuming an outside air temperature of about 90 degrees. The plane would be lucky to be capable of 200 feet per minute climbing. This pilot killed themself and three people who trusted him/her to keep them safe.
Flying a 180 horsepower trainer plane at 85% of its service limit and then trying a bank at 50-100 feet of air clearance, what on earth was he thinking!? š¤¦š»āāļø
I donāt think he was trying to bank. i think he was pulling back on the stick trying to get altitude after takeoff, then he got an outer wing stall on one side and lost aileron authority
Well, turning had something to do with it, the left wing clearly stalled first and the plane was banked to the left when it happened - this is a classic wing drop stall. The pilot likely tried to correct with opposite aileron, which only worsened the stall. You are supposed to jam opposite rudder to fix it, but... at that DA, altitude and speed, the pilot never really had a chance.
I mean, people are pretty desensitized on reddit and also on this specific subreddit, for obvious reasons. If someone looks at your screen at work, they don't necessarily want to just casually watch four people die. I think that's a reasonable take
Not interested in an argument and I'm not the arbiter of what NSFW entails, but from Google's Gemini:
"NSFW stands for "Not Safe For Work" (or "Not Suitable For Work"). It is a common internet acronym used as a warning label for contentāsuch as images, videos, or websitesāthat is inappropriate, explicit, or sexual, and should not be viewed in a professional, public, or school setting.
Wikipedia
Wikipedia
+4
Key Aspects of NSFW Content:
Purpose: It alerts users to avoid opening content in, for example, a workplace where such material could cause trouble with supervisors or HR.
Content Types: Generally includes nudity, graphic violence, intense profanity, sexual content, or adult humor."
The closest thing on this list that we have is violence, but this was not in the slightest bit graphic, and in fact no violence is seen on camera at all
how come u not know this š¤”š”š” u no have basic physics?? š”š”š¤š¤š¤š¤šš u shall chatgpt begore asking what everebody is highly aware of!!! š š š¤š”š”ššššš
Too slow; power-on stall of the left wing. Looked up Peubla, airport is at about 7k ft, which makes stalling even easier. Warm day, high altitude, 4 people on board. All adds up to a risky situation.
Because the air is too thin in these conditions for the weight of four people? How many people would be reasonable in a 172 in these conditions?
If what they did is unreasonable, I wonder why they would try it. Maybe we shouldnāt speculate, especially me (not a pilot), but if this is something thatās obvious to pilots I wonder why they made this decision.
TL;DR: While it may seem safe to assume that 4 people decided to do this thing (fly a fully loaded C172 on a hot day from a high altitude departure), we can't speculate that. While a trained pilot should know, passengers may not have had that information when deciding to fly. So all we can maybe assume is that at least 1 person should have known the risks.
Also not a pilot but to be fair, we only know that 1 person made that informed decision. It's reasonable to assume that the pilot most likely was aware of the altitude's effect, as any trained pilot has to know these things just to operate a normal flight even from a low altitude departing airport (because as they climb, they lean their fuel mixture when they get up to cruising altitude anyway, as one example).
But, we should not assume that "4 people decided to do this" and go on to ask "so is it really believed to be unsafe?" Because the other 3 people could have been passengers with less knowledge of the amount of effects of weight, heat, and altitude would really have.
The intent behind my question was NOT to put any blame on the passengers. My intent was to question why this happened at all, if itās so clearly wrong, according to rtd131ās comment.
Iām not a pilot myself, so my first thought after reading rtd131ās comment is to wonder why this was allowed to happen in the first place. I have flown on small planes before, planes with 8 passenger seats, and I never questioned the safety because I assumed the pilots did that for me. Iām not trying to place blame, Iām just wondering, based on the comment I replied to, how this couldāve happened at all.
The max takeoff weight of a Cessna 172 is 2300 pounds. The empty aircraft probably weighs around 1400 pounds. That leaves 900 pounds available for 4 people, whatever those people brought with them, and critically, the fuel. If the tanks were full, thatās 240 pounds taken right there. Now we are down to 660 pounds for 4 people (165 each)
So, if they were overweight, the plane is already going to struggle to get off the ground. Add onto that the high altitude and hot day. You are correct that the thinner air is the reason. Hot air is less dense than cold air and the density decreases as altitude increases. This has a predictable, measurable impact on performance. At max weight, they would only climb at 330 feet per minute at 8,000 feet altitude and 20 c air temp. That rate would decrease by about 50 feet per minute for every 1,000 feet they climbed.
For comparison, a solo pilot with full tanks on a cold winter day at sea level will be closer to 1000 feet per minute. Thatās a very noticeable difference.
I think itās fair to say that the moment they had taken off they were already near the performance limit of the aircraft just to get off the ground.
You're supposed to do Weight and Balance calculations (which means knowing the weight of people, baggage and fuel in the plane, and their position relative to the centre of gravity - for some small planes the final centre of gravity must be within a range as small as three-four inches), AND calculate your performance relative to the air pressure (determined by altitude and temperature).
In commercial planes all these calculations are done on computers, but on a small plane, you have to do them manually. Where I fly, W&B is a requirement to have for the insurance company to even speak to you after an incident, it is that serious.
In practice (and I'm not saying this was the case), people do overload their planes and fly in various sketchy ways until something happens. Often high-hour pilots too.
In summary: when the air is thinner, you need more speed to stay up (because you still need to push a certain number of molecules downwards). At a certain point you either can't generate enough speed (engine not strong enough), or the structure of the plane can't take enough speed (coffin corner).
For anyone curious, the reason why is because of density altitude. On a hot day at high elevation, your plane is working at like 60-70% of its normal power out put.
This means takeoff is very very unforgiving, slow, with very low pitch. The plane just wonāt have the same power especially if you have less than 200 horsepower.
An Air Force helicopter pilot flew his girlfriend to Telluride to propose and he used a smaller plane to do it. He didnāt properly account for density altitude and stalled on the return flight and killed them both.
Thank you! just spit balling here but you mentioned the left wing lost lift, and I know nothing about this but the right wing still had lift just not enough obviously. So there must be a percentage of lift on each wing depending on speed im guessing and the attack is like the angle of the wing into the air at speed or wind..i think.
Tragic, so would this disaster be preventable with less weight like maybe the pilot was used to solo and not the weight of 3 more people or just bad combo of things? Doesnt seem like anything failed or flew off
I mean it probably would not have happened if they were lighter because they would have had better climb performance, but all the pilot needed to do was push the nose down to try to build airspeed before resuming the climb.
Nothing flew off, this wasn't a structural failure.
Can someone who knows explain why a large bank close to stall speed causes this? I realize the sentence is self-explanatory but not everybody here is a pilot.
The more you bank the more vertical (useful) lift you lose.
Lift \~= cos(bank angle) so for instance at 60 degrees bank you have 50% left of your vertical lift.
If you're already flying slow (pitching nose up, airspeed) it means your lift is decreasing very fast but also drag is increasing exponentially which also drops your airspeed even further, which drops your lift even further.
At that attitude and height the smallest bank or even a gust => guaranteed hole in the planet.
Ok, in simple terms the lift generated by the wings is a function of airspeed and angle the wing is to the air that's hitting it.
As you slow down you generate less lift. Pilots will pitch up to attempt to create more lift.
This works for a while, but the smooth flow of air over the wings starts to fall apart when the angle the wing is pitched up to gets too big (this is all front back, not roll side-side).
Eventually one wing before the other stops flying and drops. The instinct, if poorly trained, is to try to steer out of it with your hands.
THIS MAKES EVERYTHING WORSE and goes from a little difference in wing level to what you see here.
Itās not airspeed specific. You can stall at any speed.
You can stall perfectly fine without yaw. Yaw causes one wing to unstall and one to go deeper into a stall due to changes going relative air flow to the wings. So one wing suddenly produces little to no lift while the other produces lift. This tips you over.
Btw an engineer can likely explain this better. Pilots are not always taught the total story.
A spin is simply when one wing is stalled or stalled more than the other.
It's not the bank specifically that causes a spin - but the yaw rate that comes from from uncoordinated flight (inappropriate amount of rudder for the turn).
Turning stalls are a thing. If you stay coordinated with the rudder you can stall in a turn and not enter a spin.
Instead of pointing upwards your lift vector is tilted diagonally. So in order to achieve sufficient lift to not lose altitude you have to increase lift (and therefore angle of attack).
That was a stall/spin. When the plane stalls one wing often stalls more than the other. Pilot pulled back because it is over weight for the temperature and latitude, accelerated departure stall, left turning tendency in a high p-factor climb, left spin. Every student pilot (in the US anyway) learns this if their instructor isn't incompetent.
Not sure if youāre a pilot or not but Iāll say it anyway. It feels just as wild as it looks. We practice these at altitude to feel it happen and practice recovering from it. The stall horn starts screaming and then the left wing drops and you just fall out of the sky. Once you enter the stall the recovery process is to nose down hard and full throttle, which isnāt very helpful if youāre already this low.
you can break a stall though with very little loss of altitude. at least in a 172 the wing shouldnāt drop if youāre on your rudder game , or drop only a little
Looks like they were trying to correct the dip and increased the angle of attack on the left wing causing it to stall even quicker. Never had this issue personally (thank god!) while flying a Piper Warrior, but had this happen a few times in r/C planes I flew as a kid.
sort of, a stall spin like in this video is from not maintaining adequate airspeed and angle of attack for the given weight and density altitude. you absolutely can turn and land after an engine failure if youāre high enough and maintain that proper airspeed.
I can do it in an otherwise empty plane at 500 feet if itās cold out and Iām near sea level. maybe.
Pitch down, drift down, air speed and altitude are your friends. Clean up, get altitude and then figure it out. A turn around when you donāt have altitude is death. Pitch up when you donāt have engine power is death.
Iām not a pilot, this is just what I read online from other pilots
Only way I would imagine making it back in a C172 or similar is if I had taken off into a brisk headwind and I had already gotten up to 1000 feet or so
I'd rather get to pavement faster than do a min run landing in the dirt. Unless you're taking off from a 3000 foot runway it shouldn't make much difference at the end of the day.
Wasnāt there a plane recently that had one engine set on fire shortly after departure, and they returned to the same airport they departed from? Iād imagine an engine fire would mean the engine is lost. What could the circumstances be in that case that allowed them to return to where they departed from? Is it just that the physics is different with larger planes? Or is it that the engine was still functioning enough to allow them to turn around? Iām not familiar with these things, Iām just curious and thinking out loud.
āJust becauseā the engine is fire, doesnāt mean itās not producing thrust.
At my company if we have an engine fire weāre expected to wait till 400ft before actioning the engine fire drill.
In our CRM training the Concorde crash is mentioned - how the flight engineer pulled the fire handle for one of the engines, which was still producing thrust, just before the other engine went. If heād waited something like 12 seconds they probably wouldāve been able to make it to another airport.
Yeah, if youāre close to stall speed and bank you can cause a spin, which at that altitude is obviously impossible to recover from in time. No idea what they were trying there but yeah
Iāve flown aerobatics with an old timer, a really experienced one.
We stalled that plane every way possible.
He drilled into me learning to feel my butt.
As ināfeeling my butt and if Iām flying coordinated. IF you enter a stall coordinatedāeven in a steep bank, the plane will dip the nose much more than it dips a wing. Iām telling you, stalling in a 45 degree bank is very docile IF coordinated. It is also very helpful to stomp on the opposite rudder pedal the instant a wing breaks and dips.
If youāre coordinated in a pattern-work stall, I estimate it being 2-4x more survivable. Once that wing tucks under (beyond 90degree bank) into an incipient spinā¦ That is going to require more than 1000ā to level out of.
itās not crazy at all, itās exactly what youād expect. flying too slow at high altitude overloaded, one wing will randomly stall first. which causes a bank which further reduces lift if you try to maintain altitude. you canāt correct for it with ailerons , you have to dive to recover airspeed first. which is fine if you have a few hundred feet to play with
This thread is full of people who have done 2-3 turns in a spin once for their instructor rating or none at all or arenāt even pilots. The left bank has absolutely nothing to do with this loss of control and is more than likely a result of the actual issue. It is very subtle but this aircraft pitches up and goes from less than critical angle of attack to greater than. That may not be apparent because the aircraft is so close to critical AOA already that a fraction of a degree is all it took. At that point all the left turning tendencies of a full power prop plane cause an un-commanded left yaw. This causes the left wing to become more stalled and results in a spin to left ( the rapid left roll and nose down pitch.) banking in this situation will not cause a stall without pitch input. Stalling with proper rudder input to control the yaw will not result in a spin. Pitching up, and failing to add rudder are the two things that cause this crash as we see it. Many other factors got them to the point where those two errors occur.
Yeah right decision here is aelerons neutral and stick forward. Tough to fight instincts to pull back especially at this altitude but that is exactly why stalls are part of flight school from the very beginning.
That went from totally survivable to not survivable in just a few seconds, thanks to a terrible decision to not just land ahead in the field. Tragically common.
Sadly, classic spin stall. Nose too high, wing low, recipe for a bad time. RIP poor souls.
For the curious, you can stall at any airspeed. All that's required is exceeding the critical angle of attack. Warm day (thin air) high altitude (even more thin air) fully loaded (requires more lift, higher AoA) and then in a turn (turning / banking reduces available lift, trading vector for 'up').
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!
There is a video taken shortly before the crash by one of the occupants, Emilio Gil RamĆrez, who died on the way to the hospital later (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1976745819937633). Apparently, they were sightseeing.
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
A prime example of why putting control inputs in especially near stall speeds need to be done carefully. It's really easy to stall out one wing leading to what we saw here. Too much rudder and aileron lead to this accident. Always just try to fly it down tot he ground staying above your stall speed. Hopefully they survived.
Treetop height over an industrial park in town. Not many options.
Approximately 3 miles northwest of runway 03 at Puebla Intl Airport. One of the passengers was posting live video of the flyover just before the crash, so it appears the low flyover may have been intentional.
Damn. I thought it was an engine out/forced landing situation. Instead itās extremely poor airmanship and even worse decision-making in a high and hot overloaded 172. Those poor passengers, RIP.
I was wondering if I was seeing thingsā¦I thought the same thing. It looks like almost full in-spin left rudder? This unfortunately looks like a pilot who got himself in way over his head at low altitude and took 3 people with him. Obviously tragic.
This is sadly a very classic stall/spin scenario. Left wing stalled before the right, likely because of the high power setting. It began the spin entry and there was no altitude to recover.
The only cure for their situation was to lower the angle of attack and trade what altitude they had for airspeed. In doing so would have probably resulted in a likely survivable off-airport landing based on the terrain and surroundings
Literally yes. Stalls happen from angle of attack, the difference in angle between the oncoming air and the chord line of the wing.
People are saying airspeed, and that is a huge portion of the equation, but you can actually stall at any speed. You could be doing 100, and if you yank the stick back too fast you can still stall the wing.
But... As you lose speed, the plane fails to climb or even sinks. That makes the oncoming wind hit the wing from below at a high angle of attack. There is a critical angle where the wings no longer provide lift. You need your wings pointed down into the oncoming wind to maintain lift and speed. Not up and away from the wind. You can't win that fight.
That means push the nose down immediately.Ā
A second problem happens when you try to use the ailerons to try to correct the roll of a stalled wing. A plane rolling to the left will cause the left wing to fly slower than the right wing, pushing closer to stall conditions. If you try to pull the left wing up, you make matters worse. You increase the angle of attack on an already stalled surface. The wing loses lift entirely, drops, drags, and you enter a spin. This takes several hundred feet to recover. The correct action is right rudder to arrest the spin and get the left wing flying again before it stalls.
You have to fight your instincts to pull up and roll right, because that will get you killed.
Nose promptly down, ailerons neutral, and keep the plane straight witn rudder. Immediately. Keep the airplane flying even if you have to sacrifice altitude. Maintain speed and glide. Pitch down for best glide speed. Find your safest ground that you can reach without stalling and set it down as softly as possible. Keep flying the plane until you have stopped.
I knew what a stall was, but this is a lot of good info. Especially the bit about trying to keep level, neutral alierons and ruddering over. I wouldn't have thought of that, well, ever. Very counter intuitive.
Left wing stalled before the right, likely because of the high power setting.
High power setting and insufficient right rudder to compensate for the left-turning tendency. More rudder and they might have still stalled but probably wouldn't have spun. Stalling/mushing into the ground from that height might have been survivable if you are upright, but once you start to spin, it's over.
Exceeded the critical.AoA, which on a light GA is around 14ā° to 18ā°. Hot weather and high ground elevation increased the chances of this accident happening.
The is the aviation sub. While watching fatal crashes sucks, thereās something to learn from every mistake. Smart pilots shouldnāt shy away from this sort of thing.
Weekly-Grapefruit119@reddit
RIP. No way anyone walking away from that.
Neeko111@reddit (OP)
Sadly 4 souls
Lavasioux@reddit
Fk! Malfunction? Nobody would try a turn that low, right?
sonnytron@reddit
So stupid! This is a C172 and this airfield is 7000 ft. That means they were flying with a density altitude of about 10,000 feet! This is assuming an outside air temperature of about 90 degrees. The plane would be lucky to be capable of 200 feet per minute climbing. This pilot killed themself and three people who trusted him/her to keep them safe.
Flying a 180 horsepower trainer plane at 85% of its service limit and then trying a bank at 50-100 feet of air clearance, what on earth was he thinking!? š¤¦š»āāļø
doubletaxed88@reddit
I donāt think he was trying to bank. i think he was pulling back on the stick trying to get altitude after takeoff, then he got an outer wing stall on one side and lost aileron authority
Itaintall@reddit
Yup; accelerated stall.
OracleofFl@reddit
Very few C172s even have 180hp.
Misophonic4000@reddit
Have some class
legendarygap@reddit
Turning has nothing to do with it. They stalled.
Horatio-Leafblower@reddit
WTF? What rubbish, learn basic ! Why is this getting upvotes?
hawkeye18@reddit
Well, turning had something to do with it, the left wing clearly stalled first and the plane was banked to the left when it happened - this is a classic wing drop stall. The pilot likely tried to correct with opposite aileron, which only worsened the stall. You are supposed to jam opposite rudder to fix it, but... at that DA, altitude and speed, the pilot never really had a chance.
Skeknir@reddit
And what does turning do to our stall speed?
JoJack82@reddit
The left wing stalled and there was no chance of recovery that low
my5cworth@reddit
Classic sign of a stall is the left wing dipping
namesarenotus@reddit
This is tragic, please mark this NSFW.
CRAWLINGxCHAOS@reddit
??? this is categorically not NSFW
Ficsit-Incorporated@reddit
Four souls lost their lives. That clearly makes it NSFW. Not every terrible event looks as terrible as it is.
LandscapePenguin@reddit
In what context would this be inappropriate to watch at work?
salazar13@reddit
I mean, people are pretty desensitized on reddit and also on this specific subreddit, for obvious reasons. If someone looks at your screen at work, they don't necessarily want to just casually watch four people die. I think that's a reasonable take
unpluggedcord@reddit
They meant NSFL
CRAWLINGxCHAOS@reddit
Not interested in an argument and I'm not the arbiter of what NSFW entails, but from Google's Gemini:
"NSFW stands for "Not Safe For Work" (or "Not Suitable For Work"). It is a common internet acronym used as a warning label for contentāsuch as images, videos, or websitesāthat is inappropriate, explicit, or sexual, and should not be viewed in a professional, public, or school setting. Wikipedia Wikipedia +4 Key Aspects of NSFW Content: Purpose: It alerts users to avoid opening content in, for example, a workplace where such material could cause trouble with supervisors or HR. Content Types: Generally includes nudity, graphic violence, intense profanity, sexual content, or adult humor."
The closest thing on this list that we have is violence, but this was not in the slightest bit graphic, and in fact no violence is seen on camera at all
Hamburger_pizza@reddit
Snowflake ahh comment
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
This content has been removed for breaking one or more of the r/aviation rules.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
a_bored_lady@reddit
If not liking to see real people with families, hopes, and dreams, die... is being a snowflake, go ahead and call me a blizzard.
No im not gonna lose it over this, but its sad, and possibly triggering for some. Your comment makes you sound like a tool.
lyricaldorian@reddit
Ok sociopath
stickysharticus@reddit
I have a limited knowledge of airplanes flying and a question please dont attack me:
Did this happen because the plane was going to slow and lost lift?
BirdLooter@reddit
how come u not know this š¤”š”š” u no have basic physics?? š”š”š¤š¤š¤š¤šš u shall chatgpt begore asking what everebody is highly aware of!!! š š š¤š”š”ššššš
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
This content has been removed for breaking one or more of the r/aviation rules.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail. Thank you for participating in the r/aviation community.
captainklaus@reddit
Too slow; power-on stall of the left wing. Looked up Peubla, airport is at about 7k ft, which makes stalling even easier. Warm day, high altitude, 4 people on board. All adds up to a risky situation.
rtd131@reddit
4 people in a 172 in those conditions is insanity.
TheBeesKneed@reddit
Because the air is too thin in these conditions for the weight of four people? How many people would be reasonable in a 172 in these conditions?
If what they did is unreasonable, I wonder why they would try it. Maybe we shouldnāt speculate, especially me (not a pilot), but if this is something thatās obvious to pilots I wonder why they made this decision.
Melech333@reddit
TL;DR: While it may seem safe to assume that 4 people decided to do this thing (fly a fully loaded C172 on a hot day from a high altitude departure), we can't speculate that. While a trained pilot should know, passengers may not have had that information when deciding to fly. So all we can maybe assume is that at least 1 person should have known the risks.
Also not a pilot but to be fair, we only know that 1 person made that informed decision. It's reasonable to assume that the pilot most likely was aware of the altitude's effect, as any trained pilot has to know these things just to operate a normal flight even from a low altitude departing airport (because as they climb, they lean their fuel mixture when they get up to cruising altitude anyway, as one example).
But, we should not assume that "4 people decided to do this" and go on to ask "so is it really believed to be unsafe?" Because the other 3 people could have been passengers with less knowledge of the amount of effects of weight, heat, and altitude would really have.
TheBeesKneed@reddit
The intent behind my question was NOT to put any blame on the passengers. My intent was to question why this happened at all, if itās so clearly wrong, according to rtd131ās comment.
Iām not a pilot myself, so my first thought after reading rtd131ās comment is to wonder why this was allowed to happen in the first place. I have flown on small planes before, planes with 8 passenger seats, and I never questioned the safety because I assumed the pilots did that for me. Iām not trying to place blame, Iām just wondering, based on the comment I replied to, how this couldāve happened at all.
Melech333@reddit
I wasn't talking in terms of blame, but just pointing out what you said in your second paragraph: that they might not have known the risks.
Gwthrowaway80@reddit
The max takeoff weight of a Cessna 172 is 2300 pounds. The empty aircraft probably weighs around 1400 pounds. That leaves 900 pounds available for 4 people, whatever those people brought with them, and critically, the fuel. If the tanks were full, thatās 240 pounds taken right there. Now we are down to 660 pounds for 4 people (165 each)
So, if they were overweight, the plane is already going to struggle to get off the ground. Add onto that the high altitude and hot day. You are correct that the thinner air is the reason. Hot air is less dense than cold air and the density decreases as altitude increases. This has a predictable, measurable impact on performance. At max weight, they would only climb at 330 feet per minute at 8,000 feet altitude and 20 c air temp. That rate would decrease by about 50 feet per minute for every 1,000 feet they climbed.
For comparison, a solo pilot with full tanks on a cold winter day at sea level will be closer to 1000 feet per minute. Thatās a very noticeable difference.
I think itās fair to say that the moment they had taken off they were already near the performance limit of the aircraft just to get off the ground.
PropOnTop@reddit
You're supposed to do Weight and Balance calculations (which means knowing the weight of people, baggage and fuel in the plane, and their position relative to the centre of gravity - for some small planes the final centre of gravity must be within a range as small as three-four inches), AND calculate your performance relative to the air pressure (determined by altitude and temperature).
In commercial planes all these calculations are done on computers, but on a small plane, you have to do them manually. Where I fly, W&B is a requirement to have for the insurance company to even speak to you after an incident, it is that serious.
In practice (and I'm not saying this was the case), people do overload their planes and fly in various sketchy ways until something happens. Often high-hour pilots too.
In summary: when the air is thinner, you need more speed to stay up (because you still need to push a certain number of molecules downwards). At a certain point you either can't generate enough speed (engine not strong enough), or the structure of the plane can't take enough speed (coffin corner).
TheBeesKneed@reddit
Thank you so much, this is incredibly informative. Exactly the kind of answer I was looking for.
ordo259@reddit
4 people in general in a 172 can be sketchy
BirdLooter@reddit
what is "power on stall"? is it, that for the warm air moving upwards, there is too little wing "real estate" for the full weight of the plane?
like when you turn sideways you must either add way more power or accept a decline for your turn?
sonnytron@reddit
For anyone curious, the reason why is because of density altitude. On a hot day at high elevation, your plane is working at like 60-70% of its normal power out put.
This means takeoff is very very unforgiving, slow, with very low pitch. The plane just wonāt have the same power especially if you have less than 200 horsepower.
An Air Force helicopter pilot flew his girlfriend to Telluride to propose and he used a smaller plane to do it. He didnāt properly account for density altitude and stalled on the return flight and killed them both.
Hoover on Pilot Debrief did a video about it.
Cheeto-dust@reddit
High density altitude.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=FD1T97UqMMU&t=33s&pp=2AEhkAIB
duggatron@reddit
Yes, the angle of attack was too high and the left wing stalled.
stickysharticus@reddit
Thank you! just spit balling here but you mentioned the left wing lost lift, and I know nothing about this but the right wing still had lift just not enough obviously. So there must be a percentage of lift on each wing depending on speed im guessing and the attack is like the angle of the wing into the air at speed or wind..i think.
Tragic, so would this disaster be preventable with less weight like maybe the pilot was used to solo and not the weight of 3 more people or just bad combo of things? Doesnt seem like anything failed or flew off
duggatron@reddit
I mean it probably would not have happened if they were lighter because they would have had better climb performance, but all the pilot needed to do was push the nose down to try to build airspeed before resuming the climb.
Nothing flew off, this wasn't a structural failure.
flightwatcher45@reddit
Yes. Barely enough lift with wings level, the bank causes huge loss of lift and resulted in stall. RIP
stickysharticus@reddit
I see. Damn.
Regular-Schedule-168@reddit
A wing can stall at any speed, typically its when the plane is slow.
Gbhphoto7@reddit
Is there an investigation. We can sit here guessing but for all you known the pilot had a heart attack.
idkwhattonamemine@reddit
Totally lived he just reloaded last save
WirelessWavetable@reddit
That's crazy how fast it goes from a slight bank into full loss of lift.
AbeFromanEast@reddit
Can someone who knows explain why a large bank close to stall speed causes this? I realize the sentence is self-explanatory but not everybody here is a pilot.
stickJ0ckey@reddit
Lift is good, it's what keeps a plane flying.
The more you bank the more vertical (useful) lift you lose.
Lift \~= cos(bank angle) so for instance at 60 degrees bank you have 50% left of your vertical lift.
If you're already flying slow (pitching nose up, airspeed) it means your lift is decreasing very fast but also drag is increasing exponentially which also drops your airspeed even further, which drops your lift even further.
At that attitude and height the smallest bank or even a gust => guaranteed hole in the planet.
Ausgeflippt@reddit
They were stalled well before they lost the left wing.
Icy-Bar-9712@reddit
No, they were still flying and probably had the stall horn screaming at them, but the first second they actually stalled was when that wing dropped
Icy-Bar-9712@reddit
Ok, in simple terms the lift generated by the wings is a function of airspeed and angle the wing is to the air that's hitting it.
As you slow down you generate less lift. Pilots will pitch up to attempt to create more lift.
This works for a while, but the smooth flow of air over the wings starts to fall apart when the angle the wing is pitched up to gets too big (this is all front back, not roll side-side).
Eventually one wing before the other stops flying and drops. The instinct, if poorly trained, is to try to steer out of it with your hands.
THIS MAKES EVERYTHING WORSE and goes from a little difference in wing level to what you see here.
Antique-Kitchen-1896@reddit
Itās not airspeed specific. You can stall at any speed.
You can stall perfectly fine without yaw. Yaw causes one wing to unstall and one to go deeper into a stall due to changes going relative air flow to the wings. So one wing suddenly produces little to no lift while the other produces lift. This tips you over.
Btw an engineer can likely explain this better. Pilots are not always taught the total story.
perplexedtortoise@reddit
A spin is simply when one wing is stalled or stalled more than the other.
It's not the bank specifically that causes a spin - but the yaw rate that comes from from uncoordinated flight (inappropriate amount of rudder for the turn).
Turning stalls are a thing. If you stay coordinated with the rudder you can stall in a turn and not enter a spin.
_Makaveli_@reddit
Instead of pointing upwards your lift vector is tilted diagonally. So in order to achieve sufficient lift to not lose altitude you have to increase lift (and therefore angle of attack).
No-Geologist6859@reddit
Basically the wing stops providing lift causing the plane to tip more
OracleofFl@reddit
That was a stall/spin. When the plane stalls one wing often stalls more than the other. Pilot pulled back because it is over weight for the temperature and latitude, accelerated departure stall, left turning tendency in a high p-factor climb, left spin. Every student pilot (in the US anyway) learns this if their instructor isn't incompetent.
Ds1018@reddit
Yup. Stalls are wild like that.
Not sure if youāre a pilot or not but Iāll say it anyway. It feels just as wild as it looks. We practice these at altitude to feel it happen and practice recovering from it. The stall horn starts screaming and then the left wing drops and you just fall out of the sky. Once you enter the stall the recovery process is to nose down hard and full throttle, which isnāt very helpful if youāre already this low.
jawshoeaw@reddit
you can break a stall though with very little loss of altitude. at least in a 172 the wing shouldnāt drop if youāre on your rudder game , or drop only a little
Complex_Bet7311@reddit
If youāre on your game, you wouldnāt have stalled in the first place.
MidwestFlyerST75@reddit
One does not, as you say, āfall out of the sky.ā Thatās just not how it works.
Antique-Kitchen-1896@reddit
Full throttle for spin recovery? You are no pilot. Or a ghost.
oFlyingDutchman@reddit
He did say stalls, which you do recover with power, and not spin
Antique-Kitchen-1896@reddit
Power is after you lower the nose. If you slam in the power nose high you can P factor into a spin.
Stall is not due to low airspeeds, but exceeding critical angle.
sweetgrace_6@reddit
I am not a pilot but love airplane things so I appreciate your explanation on this
Legal-Machine-8676@reddit
Looks like they were trying to correct the dip and increased the angle of attack on the left wing causing it to stall even quicker. Never had this issue personally (thank god!) while flying a Piper Warrior, but had this happen a few times in r/C planes I flew as a kid.
Fit_Definition1583@reddit
Somebody should have known that a slight bank makes it easier to stall
xdr567@reddit
Really ? That quick ?
hawkeye18@reddit
Critical bank angle for a wing drop stall is 15Ā°. That's it.
rabelsdelta@reddit
Yes. Thereās a reason why if you lose an engine soon after takeoff you never turn around and try to land on the runway you departed from.
You will not make it back
jawshoeaw@reddit
sort of, a stall spin like in this video is from not maintaining adequate airspeed and angle of attack for the given weight and density altitude. you absolutely can turn and land after an engine failure if youāre high enough and maintain that proper airspeed.
I can do it in an otherwise empty plane at 500 feet if itās cold out and Iām near sea level. maybe.
sonnytron@reddit
Pitch down, drift down, air speed and altitude are your friends. Clean up, get altitude and then figure it out. A turn around when you donāt have altitude is death. Pitch up when you donāt have engine power is death.
Iām not a pilot, this is just what I read online from other pilots
allowableearth@reddit
FAA changed it from āimpossible turnā to āimprobable turnā. You can make it back in certain circumstances
IM_REFUELING@reddit
Only way I would imagine making it back in a C172 or similar is if I had taken off into a brisk headwind and I had already gotten up to 1000 feet or so
rostov007@reddit
Doesnāt that give you a brisk tailwind for an engineless landing?
IM_REFUELING@reddit
I'd rather get to pavement faster than do a min run landing in the dirt. Unless you're taking off from a 3000 foot runway it shouldn't make much difference at the end of the day.
TheBeesKneed@reddit
Wasnāt there a plane recently that had one engine set on fire shortly after departure, and they returned to the same airport they departed from? Iād imagine an engine fire would mean the engine is lost. What could the circumstances be in that case that allowed them to return to where they departed from? Is it just that the physics is different with larger planes? Or is it that the engine was still functioning enough to allow them to turn around? Iām not familiar with these things, Iām just curious and thinking out loud.
flyingkea@reddit
āJust becauseā the engine is fire, doesnāt mean itās not producing thrust. At my company if we have an engine fire weāre expected to wait till 400ft before actioning the engine fire drill.
In our CRM training the Concorde crash is mentioned - how the flight engineer pulled the fire handle for one of the engines, which was still producing thrust, just before the other engine went. If heād waited something like 12 seconds they probably wouldāve been able to make it to another airport.
unpluggedcord@reddit
That plane had 2 engines. and they were JET engines.
DiscoDiscoB00mB00m@reddit
No there was recently a video of an instructor with student doing this after an engine failure at like 500 ft after takeoff
unpluggedcord@reddit
This person is talking about "larger planes". I have to assume they are referring to the recent A330 incident.
Stonkpilot@reddit
In short, the airplane with 2 engines can climb and fly with only 1 engine.
Complete_jackass9999@reddit
Glider pilots would like a word.
TheAgedProfessor@reddit
You... uh... ever notice how wide the wingspan of a glider is... for exactly this reason?
emptyfuller@reddit
All of the "gliders would like a word" people have apparently never heard the old "if my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle" argument.
rabelsdelta@reddit
I was specific to say if you lose an engine so that wouldnāt apply to gliders
Complex_Sherbet2@reddit
Gliders lose an engine each time they detach from the tow...
mainsequencehuman@reddit
Is it hard being that obtuse or does it come to you naturally?
GayRacoon69@reddit
Powered gliders would like a word
rabelsdelta@reddit
I am available for powered gliders
punkslaot@reddit
This is not the same
I_love_my_fish_@reddit
Yeah, if youāre close to stall speed and bank you can cause a spin, which at that altitude is obviously impossible to recover from in time. No idea what they were trying there but yeah
gnowbot@reddit
Iāve flown aerobatics with an old timer, a really experienced one.
We stalled that plane every way possible.
He drilled into me learning to feel my butt.
As ināfeeling my butt and if Iām flying coordinated. IF you enter a stall coordinatedāeven in a steep bank, the plane will dip the nose much more than it dips a wing. Iām telling you, stalling in a 45 degree bank is very docile IF coordinated. It is also very helpful to stomp on the opposite rudder pedal the instant a wing breaks and dips.
If youāre coordinated in a pattern-work stall, I estimate it being 2-4x more survivable. Once that wing tucks under (beyond 90degree bank) into an incipient spinā¦ That is going to require more than 1000ā to level out of.
Butts. Iām talkinā BUTTS!
MisLeadingUserPost@reddit
I believe you forget they were at around 8000ft at ~20*C . I believe you havenāt done many bases at that altitude
CodeNameCobra666@reddit
The VERY Impossible turn.
DiscoDiscoB00mB00m@reddit
As someone who wing stalls Rc planes all the time yes it is that quick and infuriating
IntergalacticPodcast@reddit
That's like the first thing they teach you when flying.
taft@reddit
apparently
jawshoeaw@reddit
itās not crazy at all, itās exactly what youād expect. flying too slow at high altitude overloaded, one wing will randomly stall first. which causes a bank which further reduces lift if you try to maintain altitude. you canāt correct for it with ailerons , you have to dive to recover airspeed first. which is fine if you have a few hundred feet to play with
LigerSixOne@reddit
This thread is full of people who have done 2-3 turns in a spin once for their instructor rating or none at all or arenāt even pilots. The left bank has absolutely nothing to do with this loss of control and is more than likely a result of the actual issue. It is very subtle but this aircraft pitches up and goes from less than critical angle of attack to greater than. That may not be apparent because the aircraft is so close to critical AOA already that a fraction of a degree is all it took. At that point all the left turning tendencies of a full power prop plane cause an un-commanded left yaw. This causes the left wing to become more stalled and results in a spin to left ( the rapid left roll and nose down pitch.) banking in this situation will not cause a stall without pitch input. Stalling with proper rudder input to control the yaw will not result in a spin. Pitching up, and failing to add rudder are the two things that cause this crash as we see it. Many other factors got them to the point where those two errors occur.
BigJellyfish1906@reddit
Goddammit, they has open ground in front of them. NEVER let airspeed get too slow. EVER. It doesnāt matter where you land. Land under control.
3MATX@reddit
Yeah that went from being a bad landing and potential death to certain death really quick. Ā
Flat-Barracuda1268@reddit
Yeah right decision here is aelerons neutral and stick forward. Tough to fight instincts to pull back especially at this altitude but that is exactly why stalls are part of flight school from the very beginning.
you_are_transparent@reddit
That went from totally survivable to not survivable in just a few seconds, thanks to a terrible decision to not just land ahead in the field. Tragically common.
DependentEchidna87@reddit
Pulling the stick back hoping things improvedā¦.
Cheetawolf@reddit
Perfect analogy for the trajectory of the world as a whole.
perplexedtortoise@reddit
I feel like I can see the rudder cranked hard to the left at 0:04. A skidding left turn is textbook spin territory
bfly1800@reddit
Itās hard to tell, the shadow of the horizontal stabiliser obscures the position of the rudder. It could be but itās hard to say definitively
MoldyWorp@reddit
It was quick, is the best thing I can say about this. RIP.
Old-Library5546@reddit
RIP to those lost
Netolu@reddit
Sadly, classic spin stall. Nose too high, wing low, recipe for a bad time. RIP poor souls.
For the curious, you can stall at any airspeed. All that's required is exceeding the critical angle of attack. Warm day (thin air) high altitude (even more thin air) fully loaded (requires more lift, higher AoA) and then in a turn (turning / banking reduces available lift, trading vector for 'up').
YuriRosas@reddit
Your knowledge is overpowered
post-explainer@reddit
Please provide a source by replying to the message that was sent to you. Failure to respond to that message will result in the automatic removal of this post. Please feel free to reach out to the mod team through modmail if you have any questions or concerns.
r/Aviation is trialing new measures to prevent karma farming. Please feel free to provide feedback through modmail. Thank you for participating in the community!
PropOnTop@reddit
There is a video taken shortly before the crash by one of the occupants, Emilio Gil RamĆrez, who died on the way to the hospital later (https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=1976745819937633). Apparently, they were sightseeing.
rocketrex504@reddit
Well this is too close for comfort as I flown in the airport several times
ITRedWing0823@reddit
Damn a little warning before I was people die
Heavy_Team7922@reddit
The titles says thereās a fucking crash. If youāre that much of a baby donāt click titles that say that.Ā
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
ITRedWing0823@reddit
Shut the fuck up. NSFW is what should have been put pussy
Heavy_Team7922@reddit
^ this guy did Reddit Cares on me lolĀ
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
ITRedWing0823@reddit
Whatās Reddit cares?
aviation-ModTeam@reddit
Your comment has been removed for breaking the r/aviation rules.
This subreddit is open for civil, friendly discussion about our common interest, aviation. Excessively rude, mean, unfriendly, or hostile conduct is not permitted. Any form of racism or hate speech will not be tolerated.
If you believe this was a mistake, please message the moderators through modmail.
CharAznableLoNZ@reddit
A prime example of why putting control inputs in especially near stall speeds need to be done carefully. It's really easy to stall out one wing leading to what we saw here. Too much rudder and aileron lead to this accident. Always just try to fly it down tot he ground staying above your stall speed. Hopefully they survived.
Denim-Luckies-n-Wry@reddit
Treetop height over an industrial park in town. Not many options.
Approximately 3 miles northwest of runway 03 at Puebla Intl Airport. One of the passengers was posting live video of the flyover just before the crash, so it appears the low flyover may have been intentional.
SeaMareOcean@reddit
Damn. I thought it was an engine out/forced landing situation. Instead itās extremely poor airmanship and even worse decision-making in a high and hot overloaded 172. Those poor passengers, RIP.
erosnemesis@reddit
It's a Cessna 210 from what I can tell.Ā
_Makaveli_@reddit
Skidding turn and subsequent excessive left aileron, you can see the rudder being what appears to be fully deflected.
erosnemesis@reddit
The Rudder looks like it's not being touch at all
West-Organization450@reddit
I was wondering if I was seeing thingsā¦I thought the same thing. It looks like almost full in-spin left rudder? This unfortunately looks like a pilot who got himself in way over his head at low altitude and took 3 people with him. Obviously tragic.
HeatTiny7041@reddit
Stall....
Silly-Low6019@reddit
Is it due to too much āslipā ? The R wing seems to have suddenly lost lift .
DCS_Sport@reddit
This is sadly a very classic stall/spin scenario. Left wing stalled before the right, likely because of the high power setting. It began the spin entry and there was no altitude to recover.
The only cure for their situation was to lower the angle of attack and trade what altitude they had for airspeed. In doing so would have probably resulted in a likely survivable off-airport landing based on the terrain and surroundings
asoap@reddit
Laymen here.
Is this caused by pitching up by too much and not having enough speed for that angle?
massunderestmated@reddit
Literally yes. Stalls happen from angle of attack, the difference in angle between the oncoming air and the chord line of the wing.
People are saying airspeed, and that is a huge portion of the equation, but you can actually stall at any speed. You could be doing 100, and if you yank the stick back too fast you can still stall the wing.
But... As you lose speed, the plane fails to climb or even sinks. That makes the oncoming wind hit the wing from below at a high angle of attack. There is a critical angle where the wings no longer provide lift. You need your wings pointed down into the oncoming wind to maintain lift and speed. Not up and away from the wind. You can't win that fight.
That means push the nose down immediately.Ā
A second problem happens when you try to use the ailerons to try to correct the roll of a stalled wing. A plane rolling to the left will cause the left wing to fly slower than the right wing, pushing closer to stall conditions. If you try to pull the left wing up, you make matters worse. You increase the angle of attack on an already stalled surface. The wing loses lift entirely, drops, drags, and you enter a spin. This takes several hundred feet to recover. The correct action is right rudder to arrest the spin and get the left wing flying again before it stalls.
You have to fight your instincts to pull up and roll right, because that will get you killed.
Nose promptly down, ailerons neutral, and keep the plane straight witn rudder. Immediately. Keep the airplane flying even if you have to sacrifice altitude. Maintain speed and glide. Pitch down for best glide speed. Find your safest ground that you can reach without stalling and set it down as softly as possible. Keep flying the plane until you have stopped.
asoap@reddit
Thank you very much for the details write up.
I knew what a stall was, but this is a lot of good info. Especially the bit about trying to keep level, neutral alierons and ruddering over. I wouldn't have thought of that, well, ever. Very counter intuitive.
Thanks.
DCS_Sport@reddit
Essentially yes. Airspeed is life - you can trade altitude for airspeed (pitching down), but in this case there wasnāt a lot of that either
notcarefully@reddit
Too slow
Joker328@reddit
High power setting and insufficient right rudder to compensate for the left-turning tendency. More rudder and they might have still stalled but probably wouldn't have spun. Stalling/mushing into the ground from that height might have been survivable if you are upright, but once you start to spin, it's over.
_Makaveli_@reddit
The opposite actually. They were skidding and applying to much aileron, stalling the wing. At least that's what it looks like.
Silly-Low6019@reddit
Got it , that makes sense
Negative-Box9890@reddit
Exceeded the critical.AoA, which on a light GA is around 14ā° to 18ā°. Hot weather and high ground elevation increased the chances of this accident happening.
CMDR_Winrar@reddit
You people have an unhealthy obsession with aircraft accidents.
wearthedaddypants2@reddit
Sir, what do you mean by you people?
CMDR_Winrar@reddit
The weird users of this subreddit. Just love watching deaths and obsessing over accidents.
captainklaus@reddit
The is the aviation sub. While watching fatal crashes sucks, thereās something to learn from every mistake. Smart pilots shouldnāt shy away from this sort of thing.
CMDR_Winrar@reddit
You learn from NTSB reports. This is not educational, you just want to watch people die.
Red_Brox@reddit
Project harder, buddy
Ecthelion-O-Fountain@reddit
Learning from accidents is how we keep you safe
CMDR_Winrar@reddit
Yeah? What did you learn from it?
Ecthelion-O-Fountain@reddit
Me? Nothing. But lots of people here will learn how deadly getting slow can be
latelyimawake@reddit
I notice youāre here too, and taking the time to comment.
KeyboardGunner@reddit
An aviation accident posted to the aviation subreddit. So weird.
OntarioBanderas@reddit
yeah just like those SICKOS at the FAA
they even write perverted little essays about them
a_bored_lady@reddit
Guys not wrong. I'd say over half the posts I see from this sub that make it to my home feed are some form of aviation malfunction/accident/crash.
KayaLyka@reddit
Push that nose down and maintain lift at all costs. Fly through the crash.
RIP
strtbobber@reddit
That's harsh! š¤¦š¼āāļø
punkslaot@reddit
4 people are there and seconds later they're gone. That sucks
Bananasinpajaamas@reddit
Just awful.
davidspdmstr@reddit
Dios mio
Plastic-Serve5205@reddit
That's horrific.
HJSDGCE@reddit
Okay, why did the pilot(s) do that? That's such a steep turn for a low altitude.Ā
DamNamesTaken11@reddit
I was thinking āstraighten up, donāt turn, donāt turn!ā Sadly, a classic spin stall, with nowhere near the altitude to recover.
My condolences to the poor people on board.
Delicious-West7665@reddit
The Reddit main page shows the video in the thumbnail and then when you click on the post it gives you a nsfw warning.
Good job Reddit
devxcode@reddit
How is there someone always filming an aircraft crash?
cleverkid@reddit
One of the guys says " I told you it was going to 'fall' fatso"
flightwatcher45@reddit
Maybe they new it was overweight or saw them struggling to get airborne, maybe they knew those onboard and just wanted to record. RIP
Tacomaguy24@reddit
Everyone is carrying a video camera.
Constant-Try8690@reddit
Hard to see but improper flap setting? Speed too low for that bank angle?
utlayolisdi@reddit
Sad. Very sad