Back to Squawk list
  • 12

Tahoe plane crash

제출됨
 
At an elevation of 5900 feet, this can be a tricky airport to use. A local pilot indicated this is an airport where you must make a visual landing. There were clouds with moderate fire smoke at the time of the crash. Specific safety warnings are posted at the airport. https://truckeetahoeairport.com/aviation/safety (sacramento.cbslocal.com) 기타...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


WeatherWise
From my perspective, looks like an unstable approach from the get go. Too fast, too high, hence the need for the 360. Overshot the center line and instead of executing a missed, banked it too steep for the speed and stalled it. This guy should have taken it to Reno instead.
WeatherWise
To understand now that he was on an RNAV approach to Runway 20 (4,654 feet) and then went VFR to a circling for Runway 11 (7,001 feet) for length, makes his approach even more dangerous, especially at that elevation and over that terrain.
bentwing60
Spot on! His ref + 10 maneuvering speed, fully configured, (absolute min. for a corporate jet) would be around 130 to 140 Knts. and to contain the impact area in that small a space says the vertical velocity greatly exceeded the horizontal, trees or no trees. Not your average GA fail.
jbqwik
jbqwik 3
agree. All the earmarks of a stall and steep dive.

[This comment has been downvoted. Show anyway.]

jbqwik
jbqwik 5
Don't think it was hotdogging. I believe factors such as density altitude, reduced vis, and what bentwing60 has identified.
punkrawk78
For the love of all that is holy please stop drinking and posting.
punkrawk78
That wasn’t a 360, it was a holding pattern while waiting for an approach clearance. The rest is probably accurate, given the high density altitude groundspeed was higher than normal which probably led to an overshoot on final and the dreaded stall/spin while trying to tighten the turn. But if you look at the track the impact is on base as they were starting the turn to final, they never even made it onto final. Most traditional base to final accidents occur after the aircraft crosses the extended centerline and is attempting to correct back. So it’s possible they mismanaged airspeed and stalled early in the turn, or became disoriented with the poor visibility. And you can never rule out mechanical failure or some other factor(s) until the investigators do their thing.
WeatherWise
Yes, I stand corrected on that, as more info came in and the audio was made available.
TorstenHoff
For reference, here is the track:

https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N605TR/history/20210726/1700Z/KCOE/KTRK
sgbelverta
As of 2 hours ago, local news stations are reporting 6 people on the plane. Until this time, it was 4 people on board: 2 crew and 2 passengers. It just seems odd that it took 48 hours to figure out how many souls were on board. The smoke they experienced on Monday shifted west today, over my house. I figure I have less than 1 mile visibility at sea level.
bbabis
bbabis 1
I don't know what the cloud layers were that day but they came out of the freezing level just a few minutes before the crash. A load of tailplane ice may not have come off before full flaps were selected. The C600 series is quite susceptible to tailplane stalls and it puts your nose down in a hurry. No room for recovery.

May all RIP
punkrawk78
Highly unlikely for 2 reasons: the extraordinarily dry air in the western US, and the air temperature on the ground was around 90 degrees. Even if they had somehow picked up any ice on descent it would’ve quickly melted as they descended into warm air. The freezing level in that area is currently over 14,000msl, so around 10,000agl.

로그인

계정을 가지고 계십니까? 사용자 정의된 기능, 비행 경보 및 더 많은 정보를 위해 지금(무료) 등록하세요!
FlightAware 항공편 추적이 광고로 지원된다는 것을 알고 계셨습니까?
FlightAware.com의 광고를 허용하면 FlightAware를 무료로 유지할 수 있습니다. Flightaware에서는 훌륭한 경험을 제공할 수 있도록 관련성있고 방해되지 않는 광고를 유지하기 위해 열심히 노력하고 있습니다. FlightAware에서 간단히 광고를 허용 하거나 프리미엄 계정을 고려해 보십시오..
종료