REFLECTOR: Plane hits an apartment building in NYC

[Andy Millin]

I know it was CNN, but, they interviewed witnesses on the street.  One
interview was very interesting.

Apparently the plane was originally headed toward another larger building as
it was making the turn.  They plane made an evasive maneuver that left it in
what sounded like and inverted spin. (my words, my interpretation of what
the guy said) Possibly they were just tumbling.  The plane hit the building
in a pancake fashion, not head on.  The belly smacked the wall.

The NY Times article said they were going 112 kts according the last radar
returns.  The experience of those on this list that have flown in the
corridor is very helpful in trying understanding the situation.

More fuel for useless conjecture:  Unusual attitude might explain the lack
of a parachute.  Time may be another reason.  They probably went from a
steep turn to "oh... sh&%#!" in seconds.  They were slow (for the Cirrus),
banking hard, and were possibly caught by winds funneling off the buildings.

Still a lot of questions to answer.  Some we may never get the answers to.

-----Original Message-----
From: reflector-bounces at tvbf.org [mailto:reflector-bounces at tvbf.org] On
Behalf Of Dave Black
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2006 4:22 PM
To: Velocity Aircraft Owners and Builders list
Subject: Re: REFLECTOR: OT Plane hits an apartment building in NYC


Richard,

> I have not followed the story, but I wonder why he did not pop the
> chute? My only guess is, everything happened too fast and did not give 
> any time to fire the rocket on the ballistic parachute.

It's only speculation, But I can think of several potential reasons for 
not popping the chute:

1) The aircraft was too low for the 'chute to be effective. Cirrus has 
demonstrated a 920 ft altitude loss in a spin, but recommends the 'chute 
be deployed at or above 2000 ft if possible.

2) Things happened so fast from the time they realized they needed to 
make a U-turn until the crash they didn't have time to consider deployment.

3) Deploying the 'chute would guarantee the plane is destroyed. Yes, its 
occupants would likely have walked away from the crash site, but it's 
really hard for a pilot to intentionally sacrifice his plane. [Note how 
many fatalities there are each year from pilots attempting to return to 
the runway following an engine failure on takeoff.] Unfortunately, I 
think it's human nature to try to save the bird -- right up until it's 
too late to save yourself.


Dave Black
_______________________________________________
To change your email address, visit
http://www.tvbf.org/mailman/listinfo/reflector

Visit the gallery!  www.tvbf.org/gallery
user:pw = tvbf:jamaicangoose
Check new archives: www.tvbf.org/pipermail
Check old archives: http://www.tvbf.org/archives/velocity/maillist.html