PLANE CRASH in Neighborhood Front Yard | Both Occupants Survive
Вставка
- Опубліковано 16 жов 2024
- Your support is really important and appreciated to keep these videos coming! =)
-- / vasaviation
-- paypal.me/VASA...
Become a VIP member of VASAviation! -- / @vasaviation
Flying Eyes 10% OFF: flyingeyesopti...
Join VASAviation's Discord -- / discord
Twitter/Facebook/Instagram -- @VASAviation
Audio source: www.liveatc.net/
Accident occured on 24/JUL/2024
Watching that security camera footage over and over again and I still can't believe how both occupants onboard survived with minor injuries.
EDIT: The student was released from the hospital same day with minor stitches. The Flight Instructor is going into surgery today with an estimated 6 week recovery time.
Wishing a good recovery to both! Also Monitoring possible official reports on the cause of the accident.
Did all the waiting around "for safety" run them out of fuel?
That footage is insane!! So lucky they both got to walk away from that!
This happened about a half mile from where I live; still shocked to see that crash and damage and know they both walked away with minor injuries & no post-crash fire. Darned lucky for everyone involved, that’s a very populated residential area and it happened on a state holiday when a lot of folks were off work.
It is always amazing when folks survive a significant crash. My son and his instructor once crashed a Cessna 152 that flipped and went straight in during a go around in a strong cross wind with the instructor flying. The 152 looked like a crushed soda can yet my son walked away and the instructor only shattered his leg. When my son later went to flight training for the AF his flight mates kidded him about being the only one to have already survived a crash.
@@brettbuck7362they said they had 2 hours of fuel. I don’t think they were waiting that long. Curious tho
This is so interesting to see after the fact. I'm the home owner and I'm glad everyone was able to make it out ok first and foremost. I can replace my yard and trees you can't replace people.
Did the tree survive?
There must be a guardian angel overseeing your property. The photo deems is almost unbelievable that only minor injury or property damage took place. Blessings to the plane occupants and your family. Good luck with the "yard cleanup"....
@@JackCraft-tm9hjI feel sorry for everyone who knows you………
@@carvinylizbeth5110 Lol! Now that's the kind of talk that interests me, brutal honesty, none of this saying what you think you are supposed to say in a given situation. I mean how many times do we have to see pilots say "any landing you walk away from is a good landing"? A bit of my soul dies everytime I hear it, utterly unoriginal, average Joe, office water cooler, speak. 💤 😴
@@JackCraft-tm9hj who shat in your cereal? It's a simple truth that you can replace non-sentient material property but not people.
Minor injuries is damn good for the circumstances. And he even managed to find a nice, shady spot to park.
That nice shady spot is why the plane couldn’t be seen by the other one circling & trying to help ATC.
1° No right gear indication
2° No comments on any other issue
3° Inmediate request to land
4° Not enough alt to make the circuit and land
5° Crashing backwards and heavily.
This is a very strange situation, hope they can recover soon and my congratulations on the pilot to land in that situation and to the controller that cleared the runway in case anything worst could happen. At the end it did happen and could not make it to the runway, but maybe a few more seconds and they could habe just landed perfectly. Really, well done.
5. probably struck something right before touch down that turned the plane around.
@@darkiee69That's what I was thinking, they're next to at least one tree and power pole.
Yes, we saw the video.
So I'm not the only one missing how they go from a gear issue to 'landing' short of a runway.
Right side prop is clearly feathered.
Fun fact: Axe5, N736PY back in January of 2022 had an engine out and landed on I-15 near Brigham City, UT.
Axiom Aviation has had quite the number of planes go down over the past few years.
The homeowner got pretty lucky, but not as lucky as the pilot and passenger
walk away alive is the most important thing
Minor injuries, i'd say they got pretty lucky all things considered
Lucky!? Their house was destroyed out of hundreds around it. They lost everything including a one of a kind ming dynasty vase, their mother's ashes, and thousands of rare baseball cards they had been collecting for 55 years!
How is that lucky? This is one of the worst days in their lives!
@@JackCraft-tm9hj The news stories don’t indicate any homes being destroyed. Are you sure you are talking about the this incident?
@@DrPharmaTox Oh yes, I was thinking of the world trade center plane crashes.
Wow, that did not look like a "minor injuries" crash. Very lucky.
How? How does one survive that kind of up down deceleration? They werent even gliding, they just....fell out of the sky vertically.
@@joebaxter6895 I’ve been an aviation enthusiast for years and I have to say that there are some people out there that gotten really lucky in the physics department. Whether obstacles were slowly breaking their fall on the way down or the angle at which they crashed took the force of the impact rather than the cockpit, but yeah on camera that didn’t look very survivable.
They’re probably going to need PT once the muscle tension subsides (certainly by now).
Many people are confused as to how the plane went from a gear position concern to crashing into a neighborhood. I went to the crash site and talked to someone who talked to the NTSB person inspecting the plane, so I’m hearing this second hand. But apparently the NTSB inspector suspects (based only off a preliminary site inspection) that due to the excessively hot day and the long flight time at low altitude, in-flight vapor lock could’ve shut down one or both engines. Whatever the cause, the situation clearly escalated from a landing gear issue. I’m just glad they’re both okay and no one on the ground was hurt.
Thanks
no way
Vapor lock typically starts when you shut down an engine. Generally, if you experience vapor lock, it's when you try to start your plane after a quick turn (shut down and restart within ~30 minutes).
No vapour lock when the engine is on.
Vapor lock can also be a technical way of saying out of fuel
Very happy to see you just straight up putting in those keywords about fatality or injuries in the latest videos, after the one reqest in the comments. You the best mate, much love and keep it up!
That was pretty cool how he backed up into the driveway like that :)
Lot of very professional attention from the controller, he did a great job .
Was his name Launchpad McQuack?
Judging by the final image of the Seneca, the left engine was not producing power on impact - this is evident by the lack of damage/bending to the propeller. The damage to the right engine’s prop suggest it was still operating.
Thank you so much for sharing this. I've an aviation nerd/enthusiast (from the ground) and my dream job would be an NTSB investigator. These two sentences are extremely informative!
That was a fast two hours of fuel!
If he left his gear down, burn rate would go up. If the gauges are not super accurate (the reason you always double check the level visually by peering in the tank and/or with a dipstick before flight) 2h reading might be 1.5... If the distracted pilot is quickly estimating from memory that also introduced opportunity for inaccuracy. What we do know is that there was no fire on impact.
Time flies when you’re having fun.
Kudos to you for typing all these captions out. I do that for my own videos and I dislike it but I have to do it for accessibility reasons.
Filmora by Wondershare does it for you, uses AI. (Assuming that you can use it for whatever special format you may have.)
You just need to tweak where needed.
@@angelinasouren I’ve thought about it but everything’s gotta be spelled a certain way, especially callsigns and waypoints…..I just figure I’d rather do it myself. I have one more video that I’ve been putting off editing from my July 1 flight (as a passenger) 😂
@@angelinasouren good luck having IA typing what an aviation amateur radio says.
@@VASAviation exactly.
@@angelinasourenturn on the auto generated captions for any youtube video and see for yourself how shit a job the robots do.
Wishing a speedy recovery to both occupants
What impresses me here is how professional and respectful everyone is. I guess because when you normally see this stuff is when a pilot or controller is acting... Suboptimally. Kudos to everyone. Glad the folks on board survived.
This is evidence that you should fly your airplane as far into the crash as possible, maintaining control as slow as you can. Even if you don’t have a field or long, straight road your chances of survival increase, even if you hit a bunch of stuff.
No fire.... no fuel? That was one heck of a hard landing.
Really wonder how a holding pattern for a gear issue turned into a crash short of the runway. Ran out of fuel?
yeap or forgot to switch tanks. Plus no fire on impact.
Maybe a little too focused on one problem. If so, it reminds me of that L-1011 crash in the Everglades some decades ago.
@@markmaki4460 good guess, but I don’t think so, this was during VMC conditions in daylight. That L1011 crash happened because it was pitch black with no reference to the ground.
@@ZIGZAGBureauofInvestigation you don't switch tanks in a Piper Seneca
Maybe overestimated how long his fuel would last seeing as he had the gear down
Well that went wrong real quick. What seemed like a simple mechanical problem probably with a sensor turned into the aircraft not making the field. Strange.
I don't think it's as strange as it seems. Crashes are fairly common in general aviation, add in the distraction & stress of a landing gear issue and the odds of a crash are increased.
No report of having an engine problem. Landing gear up on a runway isn’t as dangerous as it sounds. Agree it is strange to go from wonder if my gear is down to crashing short of the runway. Would be interesting to know exactly what did happen. 🤔
@@marlinweekley51 Agreed. Pilot sounded fairly calm and in control, also quite a big aircraft. Part of me wonders if the gear issue was a precursor to a larger electrical fault.
Great video and thank you for including the outcome in the title
everyone super cool on the mics, what a treat to listen to. glad everyone's okay and that no one got pasted
What I see from the picture shown at the end of the video:
Left engine propeller, the blade at the bottom pointing to the left (from pilot's view) seems to be feathered, while the other two blades seems not feathered (technically strange), propeller tips not bent.
Right engine propeller seems similar, bottom left blade also looks feathered, but not the other two. My guess at the moment is that both engines failed at the same time - for whatever reason - and a second before impacting the ground the pilot initiated feathering.
Good to hear that both occupants have minor insuries and no one else was hurt.
Greets from Germany, retired FI (but never flown a Seneca)
Can't wait for @blancolirio to weigh in on this one.
What is the purpose of your comment? If you are so damned in love with the white lily, go camp on his channel. We don’t care about what you can’t wait for.
He's an information thief. Just grabs up stuff from other folks and NTSB prelim and puts his own spin on it.
@@MikeB0001 exactly
@@MikeB0001 welcome to journalism 101
Plus, Juan has loads of real-world experience and pure brilliance to sift out the noise.
Big change from worrying about a landing gear not extending, to suddenly saying he's not going to make the runway without any warning.
This controller has his act together. Well done.
Could be one engine quit, mechanical or fuel starvation with gear and flaps down. In that configuration the plane cant maintain altitude. The ground elevation of 4400 feet and probably hot temperatures made things even harder and they came down fast after the engine failure.
You can hear an alarm go off in the background when he's talking to the tower. is that alarm normal for gear indication, or is it a signal that something else is wrong?
That wasn’t gear. Probably their avionics or iPads yelling about their altitude
Be interesting to see the final report on this, how it went from a gear indication to crash in such a short time. I'm just glad everyone survived, and we'll figure out what lessons need to be learned later.
"35 of the hill" should be "35s at Hill" (Hill Air Force Base nearby)
Wait, a gear indication ended in an immediate landing request and crash? I’m missing something in between there.
Went from a minor gear sensor issue to a crash wtf
Yeah … what the hell is what I thought too ! Damn , Fuel ? What ? How , really ?
@@bobwilson758No fire
No fire, no fuel? What in the world! Stalled too?
Can’t wait for an analysis
Just read the comments section. They all have the answers apparently
Speedy and full recovery to the flyers. Note to self: never buy a property close to an airfield!
Check out the list of crashes around Fullerton Airport!
I'm going to flight school right now at Ogden Hinckley and from what I've heard one or both of their engines overheated because they didn't retract the landing gear. It was a Cornerstone Seneca with a CFI and a student onboard. They also didn't climb much after they overflew the field so when they did have the failure they couldn't make it to the runway.
Your videos are awesome. Only complaint is city was not mentioned once in the whole video. I think usually in the beginning you put what city it's in.
Ogden Utah is where this incident occurred, KOGD
It's mentioned multiple times
How did they survive with just probable back injuries? That video is mind blowing.
Any landing you can walk away from... but I've had serious injuries from car crashes that didn't look as bad as this
Looks like they struck something on the way down, maybe brushed a tree, that's why they got turned around backwards when the hit the ground.
Pure guess, but the fact that neither prop is curled from the landing likely means they weren't running when they hit the ground. That plus no fire means fuel exhaustion is likely. Faulty gear indicator, so maybe they more than just one indicator with issues and their fuel reading was incorrect.
This crash is so mysterious.
Remind anyone of that scene from Hot Shots where the plane is cleared to land and drops like a rock onto the carrier? Seriously tho I'm glad the occupants were not seriously injured.
Tower: Landing in the middle of the neighbourhood with no runway will be at your own risk.
Uhhh yeah, I think they knew that and didnt have much option
Wow, so glad they are going to be ok, but what the heck happen, from a gear warring to a crash, that sucks!!!
Phenomenal handling by the atc controller! Even had presence of mind for "own risk."
"OK, but crashing is at your own risk".
I imagine the controller is second-guessing having them hold for the fire trucks. 9 out of 10 times that was the correct call, though.
What's the alarm in the background of the accident aircraft transmissions? I noticed it about the 4 minute mark. It's real faint but present.
Not a pilot, don't know the aircraft but it does sound similar to a stall warning except there's no audible "Stall warning". Could also be a warning that he has his landing gear down and is doing "normal" speed.
listened to it a LOT.... I am a pilot, and ex-ATC... that's just radio squeal, it's rythmic though, so likely from a crappy noise suppressor on one of the alternators. VERY common.
@@MrZrryan2 Are you familiar with the Seneca? I ask because I have a theory about the sudden emergency on downwind to base.
@@MrZrryan2 That is one downside of using AM transmissions despite its advantages with aviation. With FM you'd get the capture effect drowning out all but the strongest signal if two were talking over one another. With AM you get interference from anything from an alternator to a thundercloud or failing transformer acting as a spark gap. I can imagine though, does aviation use AM so if one is talking over another you can still somewhat hear whats going on? Or just because its stayed a standard?
Just looking at the still pictures... I think they ran out of fuel. The blade tips aren't curled like they'd be if they were making power when they hit. (Too many episodes of "Mayday", I know)
right side was clearly feathered
And, look at the still shot near the end, about 7:49.... neither blade is curled. Neither engine was producing power, and right side was feathered on impact.
@@MrZrryan2 I mostly agree. I think the #2 engine was spinning at least 800RPM and does show curling of a blade. There's something odd here though. What looks like a clearly inop #1 engine has no curling, but is not feathered. While the #2 with curling does appear feathered.
The seneca uses centrifugal force to feather the prop. This requires a minimum of 800 engine rpm for the procedure to be effective. So a dead engine with feathered props would be intentional (planned procedure). A dead engine without feathering would be sudden. Catastrophic failure, fuel starvation.
Did he starve #1, then shut down the wrong engine (#2)?
How did he starve #1 though? Senecas provide fuel to each engine from it's own corresponding tanks. Left feeds Left engine (#1)Right tanks feed Right engine (#2).
There are fuel selector valve controls though these are only used to supply fuel to each engine or crossfeed during single engine flight. Not a standard tank selector system of LEFT RIGHT BOTH.
thats a weird way to test your gears but i dig it
so it was a training flight. And the right prop was feathered when they hit. Do you suppose they were flying around single engine with right side shut down, and the cross-feed messed up somehow? Did having the right side feathered somehow cause the initial gear indication problem? I'm a pilot and ex-ATC, but, not enough time/experience in a Seneca to know the answeres. They did NOT run out of fuel, the lack of fire does NOT mean NO fuel. It means they got lucky.
100%. So tired of hearing the "no fire, no fuel" pronouncements. No fire merely means the fuel wasn't exposed to the necessary conditions for ignition. It is not automatic that a crash produces such conditions.
Yep. No fire could simply mean no sparks found their way into a fuel/air mixture. It may have dumped 20 gallons of fuel on that lawn, but without sparks, no fire.
No fire, no fuel?
I hope Juan Browne covers this. He always has good insights to what may have happened.
It appears they were so worried about the gear they appear to have run out of fuel!
I’m glad they waited for the fire trucks to show up at the airport…before landing earlier . Geez
i was AX8
I was the plane
I was Spartacus.
Look at me, I'm the Captain now!
Minor injuries with the plane being wrapped around the tree like that, they were so lucky. Wonder what happened to cause the crash, I'm guessing some type of hydraulic loss?
These flight controls are cable. What kind of hydraulic loss do you suggest that would affect airworthiness to make it fall?
How would a hydraulic loss cause them to land short of the runway?
@@VASAviation Only thing I can come up with is double engine failure due to fuel pump failure; and the prop feathering mechanism failed resulting in severe loss of lift. But it's a wild guess and I won't be surprised to learn I'm wrong.
@@joshuahudson2170 I went to the crash site and talked to someone who talked to the NTSB person inspecting the plane, so I’m hearing this second hand. But apparently the NTSB inspector suspects (based only off a preliminary site inspection) that due to the excessively hot day and the long flight time at low altitude, in-flight vapor lock could’ve shut down one or both engines. Whatever the cause, the situation clearly escalated from a landing gear issue. I’m just glad they’re both okay and no one on the ground was hurt.
Out of gas. That was along time circling on a hot evening
Ironic call sign considering that landing.
Hard to completely tell, but the photo at 5:54 would indicate the left engine was not turning at impact, and appears at least partially feathered from that angled. That following no right main indication is very peculiar. Thankfully, no serious injuries, and we will quickly know what happened.
Considerations: If I recall correctly, some or all Seneca 3's are counter rotating, so there isn't a critical engine. But, a quick search of data for the Date/Time at Ogden shows a density altitude of around 7600ft. Not sure where that falls in single engine service ceiling, but there is a good chance, that plane, on the 24th around 3PM local, cant stay in the air on a single engine.
Pilot needed to express his desire to get down earlier. He was working with the controller and waiting for emergency equipment. But dang, was that equipment coming from Dallas?
You're assuming that the pilot was aware of an issue earlier, there's nothing so far to suggest that he was concerned with anything but the landing gear. If the fuel report was correct, he should've had a large amount left when he crashed.
The trucks at the crash site were prob the same one's heading to the airfield.
Assuming that there was time, and that this failure didn’t happen immediately prior to “we’re not going to make it”.
Any hydraulics on that plane for control or is it cables? Electric gear? Fuel reading wrong? Stall in turn? Props look weird. How would a gear problem be a symptom of this?
If you pull the throttles to idle and do not get a gear warning horn, the gear is down and locked regardless of what the lights say. If the horn sounds, the gear is unsafe. The gear horn is independent of the lights.
The light shows up on the sensors and the throttle lever warning works with the locking sensors too
Saw the thumbnail and wondered how it missed the house. Did not imagine it came from the other direction and flipped.
So I assume he either did not have 2 hours fuel, or somehow starved both engines? Wrong tank selected?
You don't select tanks in a Seneca
@@VASAviation You can crossfeed tanks. For example in prolonged single engine operation to balance weight. Left to Right, or Right to Left. You can not crossfeed both at the same time, though I believe it's possible to inadvertently select this.
At least they didn't have that Boston guy from the other one yesterday.
How to turn a faulty indicator into a crash that almost kills you.
This reminds me of United 173, the DC-8 that crashed in Portland due to Captain McBroom's insistence that they not land lest the gear collapse on landing and a fire ensue as a result of excess fuel. He flew the plane until the tanks ran dry and crash landed in a Portland neighborhood, a few miles from Portland Int'l Airport. As most here know, the airlines developed CRM in the wake of this crash. But unlike that crash, this one had encouragement from the tower, as they did not want the plane in question to land without backup from the fire department. And while Captain McBroom was held responsible for Flight 173, I have wonder how things will shake out here.
10 minutes of flight from "2 hours remaining" was not using excessive amounts of time/fuel.
I flew for United as a flight attendant. They used to use the example of "no fuel Mc Broom" in our emergency training. It is very disturbing and reflects why CRM is so incredibly essential.
Reminds me of Hot Shots.....I'M coming in for landing!!
That turned ugly... Glad safe
Is it the news transparency or is the general aviation accident rate up dramatically?
Vasaviation is doing its part in raising awareness of what's happening all the time. Plus it's summer time when people are traveling a bit more.
More information availability, lower accident rate per flight hour, similar accident rate per year. NTSB has good graphs on their General Aviation Accident Dashboard.
So if they weren’t messing around waiting for the emergency services to take their time and be on standby the plane would have landed minutes earlier and likely ok. No one else seems to mention this so I assume I’m missing something.
Have you read other comments?
Almost back her right into the driveway.
Looking like fuel starvation. Never trust your gauges even if you have JPI or similar device. Glad they survived but this was avoidable.
Probably ran out of fuel. Thankfully not another stall spin or it would have been fatal. Glad they're okay.
I’d guess fuel exhaustion caused by extra drag and density altitude anomalies being higher than normal.
This isn’t on the controller for telling them to wait. Waiting was the correct call when you have a potential Alert 3 due to gear issues.
Two hours of fuel in ten minutes?
That is a lot of extra drag!
Good thing they waited for the firetrucks that long otherwise it could have gone wrong...
Left engine had two undamaged prop blades, looks like that engine was not running when he hit the ground. The right prop was damaged on all three blades. Has a caused been mentioned, I am just guessing here?
Why does he get to be called Rock 30? How do bug smashers get cool callsigns?
Maybe I missed something here. If they had 2 hours of fuel and a gear issue.
How the heck did they end up crashing into someone's lawn?
No fire? Can I guess somebody ran out of fuel while they were screwing around with a different issue?
That CFI needs retraining. As a glider pilot I’m baffled that you can go from an overhead racetrack to not making the runway.
I went to the crash site and talked to someone who talked to the NTSB person inspecting the plane, so I’m hearing this second hand. But apparently the NTSB inspector suspects (based only off a preliminary site inspection) that due to the excessively hot day and the long flight time at low altitude, in-flight vapor lock could’ve shut down one or both engines. Whatever the cause, the situation clearly escalated from a landing gear issue. I’m just glad they’re both okay and no one on the ground was hurt.
@@AeroTechie I’ve read all the other times you posted it. You seem a touch invested in this. Color me skeptical.
You are a glider pilot but have you flown a Seneca ever?
@@VASAviation just my dad’s that I did my multi in
Did the 40 gallons get used up that fast. I don't understand it
Does Ogden have on-airport CFR? That response time to an alert aircraft is way too slow, if they do.
Maybe not, maybe they have a deal with Hill AFB to supply CFR services if they're needed. If that's the case, you're still right, the CFR is supposed to respond QUICKLY, that's almost entirely the whole point of having a separate fire department an airport in the first place.
This, to me, seems the root cause of this incident. Because of the lack of fire assets, the controller is put in the difficult position to make a call to delay a potential emergency situation. The pilot in command did not assert an emergency due to the gear problem and seemed satisfied that the visual check may have confirmed to the PIC that it was a landing light sensor issue. There may have been enough doubt about that in the pilots mind to take the prudent approach to wait for fire trucks to arrive at the airport. It will be interesting to know what the time was from the decision to hold off landing to the crash was - I'm assuming the video here has been trimmed. So glad both crew members survived and this will be one to watch for post incident analysis as to why this escalated so quickly. Let's hope Ogden put in at least the minimum fire cover in place now to make a start until backup arrives - and what is the tested response time for that backup?
Did they land or did they get thrown out of the sky.
Totally good with monetizing with ads but that ad placement was incredibly annoying on this video. Cut out RIGHT before the crash happened on the ring camera so when it came back it happens before you realize it. Have to rewind.
They were being watched over.
No fire. Wonder if he was so distracted by the gear issue he wasn't watching the fuel quantity.
Must have been one hell of a pilot to walk away from a twin with whatever failure they had
Hey...I need an interior for my Lance. Think I can make a deal ?
Do you want brown seats?
@@pdutube Hey, thanks...Great comeback !
Left prop no S-bending, right prop uncertainty. Fuel exhaustion?
*MINOR INJURIES???*
Very lucky, look like a flat spin.
Anyone got any ideas how the plane slides backwards?? Did a wingtip hit something and they did a 180 just before crashing?
They definitely hit something before that footage that turned them around
Yeah, they definitely went through several trees before impact; one limb even broke free and damaged a neighboring home’s roof.
If you go frame by frame you can see that they're spinning clockwise. The spin is stopped when the right wing grabs the tree trunk. So I'm guessing they hit a different tree with their right wing that sent them spinning. If that last tree isn't there I'm guessing you would see the plane spinning on its belly until it hits the house.
Wonder if he was lower on fuel than he thought?
It's still gets logged as a landing....
Would the situation have been different if a fire dept was at the airport? Who knows. Did he run out of fuel waiting for clearance to land? Who knows. Main thing is they had minor injuries. Could have been much worse.
What caused him to come down? He was all set for landing after his fly past.
So what was the cause of crash? I didn't understand....
I went to the crash site and talked to someone who talked to the NTSB person inspecting the plane, so I’m hearing this second hand. But apparently the NTSB inspector suspects (based only off a preliminary site inspection) that due to the excessively hot day and the long flight time at low altitude, in-flight vapor lock could’ve shut down one or both engines. Whatever the cause, the situation clearly escalated from a landing gear issue. I’m just glad they’re both okay and no one on the ground was hurt.
@@AeroTechie Thank you very much indeed for the detailed comment!
Retired 747 crew here😉
Can you get any radio from the one today in Wyoming?
What happened
@@VASAviation PT-12 went down with a gospel singing family in it. 7 fatalities. N357HE
40 gallons / 2 hours of fuel???
Dude, I think he WAY misunderstood how much fuel because no fire on impact? There had to be something going on with that wheel sensor affecting something else too. When he said "40 gallons, 2 hours of fuel" my first thought was "Is he flying a paper airplane?".
Piper Seneca burn rate is 10 gph per side when maintaining about 140 but if you're having to climb a couple times and maneuver, you're looking at easily 16-17 gph per side and that's not account for a minor math miscalculation or minor rounding issue.
@vasaviation
@@Suplyndmndthe whole scenario occurred in about 15 minutes if you listen to the full ATC archive. Even at a 17 gallon burn rate each side that gives him just short of an hour. The engines would have to burn 80GPH a piece to burn 40 gallons onboard in ~15 minutes. I suspect they had less fuel than the 40 gallons stated (leak, mistake, etc) or something entirely different happened.
So wait....what? Did he run out of fuel?
No post crash fire...
i literally just saw this on the news lol
Vasaviation is so fast that an incident could occur on July 25, 2024 at 10 am eastern time and have it uploaded at 9:30 am eastern.
Standard procedure is to check VASAviation just before takeoff to make sure you're not there.
So how does a right gear problem turn into a off-airport crash?
I'm thinking an electrical issue that took out the gear indication AND the fuel sensors.