HOME
REGISTER/LOGIN
FREE NEWSLETTER
XML|RSS
Advanced Search
PODCAST
VIDEO
AVWEB INSIDER
AVweb Insider

June 24, 2012

Roush Accident Take Away

By Paul Bertorelli

With AirVenture just weeks away, it's worth reading over our report on NASCAR owner Jack Roush's 2010 landing accident at Oshkosh. I discussed this topic in a previous blog, but I think it probably bears repeating before every AirVenture. Roush crashed his Premier jet while aborting a landing try, but stalled the airplane and impacted hard, injuring himself severely enough to lose an eye, among other injuries.

Last week, Roush told The Sporting News that he accepts the NTSB's findings declaring that the principle cause of the crash was pilot error. When the fact pattern indicates that the pilot stalled an otherwise correctly operating aircraft, that's the only conclusion that can be reached. But Roush also said something I find interesting: "I accept the findings. There are some omissions. I wish they had been more complete in the description of the things that were happening in the congested airspace that I was presented there in Oshkosh. They didn't do that, so that's a moot point."

I think I understand what Roush is getting at here, however inelegantly he stated it. I also happen to agree with him. I don't think he's offering an excuse. "Things that were happening" is another way of saying that during AirVenture week, ATC operations at Oshkosh are so busy and so intense that the normal margins we expect when operating into and out of towered airports aren't there. Controllers land multiple airplanes on the same runway at the same time, they stuff the downwind and finals with airplanes of varying speeds and often ask pilots who are rusty and flying less than ever to do spot landings and then get off the runway ASAP.

Further, wall-to-wall transmissions by controllers with occasional spankings when pilots don't catch the instruction the first time raises the tension level to the point of distraction. As pilots, we tend to sanctify controllers working in this environment; that they can do it at all much less do it well is remarkable. In my view, the entire operation—controllers and pilots working together—tends not to take this distractive dynamic into account before the fact. Pilots flying into OSH are sometimes confronted with an overwhelming volume of stimulus, from the radio traffic, to the sheer number of airplanes to the intense desire not to embarrass yourself before an audience of thousands. I'm guessing that Jack Roush felt this, even if he didn't say it so many words. It's too strong to say that AirVenture operations are a set-up for accidents. But it's hardly unfair to say if you venture into that airspace, you'll need to be as heads up, prepared, disciplined and focused as it's possible to be and sometimes even that won't be enough. The rustier you are, the worse it will be.

And if you can't do a thing that ATC asks, don't try to gut it out just to meet this imaginary high expectation that the whole place tends to engender. As is true in any other flight venue, the word unable still works. And if you're not comfortable being a little uncomfortable, there are other options to get to AirVenture. But if you are prepared to adjust to those distractions, it can be the most fun you can have in an airplane.


Comments

OSH is not for the inexperienced or rusty pilot nor for the rookie local controller. To increase safety, operations need to be reduced to the speed of the least skillful -no time for "student pilots". Accidents due to reduced separation or reaction to misinterpreted or inapprropiate ATC assignments are to be expected therefore one needs to be mentally prepared, healthy and skillful or just stay away. Depending on "UNABLE" does not cut it.

posted by Rafael Sierra on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I wonder if Jack Roush put himself in a predictably unmanageable position deciding to fly a jet in to OSH. The report shows he was not on top of his game, and deciding to mix his hot and heavy aircraft with Piper Cubs put him in a situation he couldn't handle. He could have decided to go into Fox Valley, just a few miles North of OSH, where the traffic and conditions were a lot more like those he was accustomed to facing.

Just in case there are a few readers here who don't really understand Oshkosh let me give a very short description. This is the biggest aviation event of the year every year. Last year there were over 10,000 airplanes parked there. All of them had to arrive and depart in just a few days. There are also several daily air shows that shut down all the runways for arrivals and departures. The amount of traffic and the mix of aircraft types makes Ohare look like a country airport.

I feel sorry for Jack and all the other people who have been injured or killed at OSH over the years. While it is indeed a special experience it is also an adventure that can kill you. My advice to anyone not really dedicated to having this particular experience is to avoid it by either flying into another airport for their visit or arriving at a time when traffic is light. I don't know if there is such a time, but I suspect 6 in the morning would work.

posted by Paul Mulwitz on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I hope we don't hear lots of "armchair hindsight specialists" leaping to criticize here. Mr Roush has accepted the finding that he was at fault - and he is to be commended for that. Little more needs to be said on the issue of "fault" or "blame", as neither of these worthless things achieve anything positive. In a recent editorial, I included several quotes that are highly relevant here:

"There are no solutions at the end of a pointed finger." (Ray A. Davis)

"To find fault is easy; to do better may be difficult." (Mestrius Plutarchus - 46-120 AD)

"When you blame others, you give up your power to change." (Robert Anthony)

These quotes sum things up perfectly. I am just happy Mr Roush is alive to join the rest of us in learning any lessons to be drawn from his crash. I have no doubt he feels badly enough without hearing know-all commentators tut-tutting and saying what "should have" or "could have" been done. the things that could have or should have been done weren't done - and they can never be changed. The crash happened.

Let's learn the lessons, apply them, and move on - and make aviation safer!

posted by Rob Neil on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I'm sorry, but I don't sympathize with any of this!

First, doing a go around with "a third of power" is like attempting a landing with only one wheel extended!!! In fact, what he did was not a go around--by definition.

Second, the argument that "things were happening" is very vague, and to me, unacceptable. If there is too much happening to be able to be handled, then such a situation (event) is unsafe and should not be allowed to take place!!

Otherwise, that will be a great excuse to use for anyone making mistakes while operating in high workload situations..

What about the possibility that this individual was in over his head and operating beyond his abilities? Sounds more rational to me, and sadly, is a more common occurrence than admitted, or reported.

posted by Paul Jaworski on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Too Low-Too Slow thats it .

posted by MICHAEL BROGAN on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I've heard it said that for a controller to have Oshkosh on his resume is a sign of status in the industry, like having a gold seal on your CFI. Perhaps some pilots feel the same way about their log books. I've flown a nordo Champ into Rockford (giving away my age) and later a variety of aircraft into Oshkosh. It was always one of the most intense experiences in my aviation career and one that I realized required equally intense preparation. There is literally no room or time to temporize. As with most things in aviation one needs a plan, an alternate, and a fall-back already in mind.

posted by Stan DeLong on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Placing blame notwithstanding, OSH IS a high workload environment and "stuff" does happen and usually does, year after year. Most pilots are up to the task but immersing themselves in the no margin for mistakes 3-D enviroment called Oshkosh increases that chance that something could happen. With AirVenture just four weeks away, Paul is right ... there ARE options.

A couple of years ago, when all the spring rains flooded Wittman Airport, many pilotss found Wautoma (Y50) just 35 miles West. No ATC, a grass 2nd runway, free camping, an accomodating EAA Chapter and friendly folks took most by surprise and many decided to stay away from Oshkosh again last year. Groups of Van's RV builders are now using Y50 as a home base and fly into OSH every day, as well. We aren't the only alternative, either. All the surrouding airports have their own individual uniqueness and should be considered.

This pilot would like to suggest that anyone who would like to get away from the maddening crowds (and exorbitant prices) of OSH consider these nearby airports. Those flying non-show airplanes -- who will find up in the back-40 anyhow -- should give it serious thought. Take the opportunity to experience the "real" Wisconsin while simultaneously enjoying AirVenture. There is much to do and see and non-interested spouses have other options, as well.

The best part ... no sweaty palm marks on your yokes.

posted by Larry Stencel on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

To me this comment by Ron Neil "Mr Roush has accepted the finding that he was at fault - and he is to be commended for that" is the most important "lesson learned".

I respect a pilot who accepts their responsiblity and shares it with others to learn from.

posted by Richard Ordowich on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I was there and I saw a fair amount of what happened and yes, everything that happened was split second stuff. in fact most everything that happens at OSH during that week is split second stuff. i am quite encouraged and glad that this person with such notable recognition has the integrity to say "It was my fault and I accept responsibility". We have a national senator who, a few years ago, landed on a closed runway who still has yet to accept his own responsibility for that. Bloody well time we all stop saying "it's someone else's fault".

posted by John Light on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

During 14 years as Oshkosh residents and 10 years since returning to work at Air Venture watching arrivals has been a mandatory spectator sport. We used to sit outside my hangar right next to the edge of the ramp on 09 - 27. We had an excellent view of both runways, traffic arriving from the west and the approaches. Listening to multiple handhelds we get an excellent overview of what's going on. Most pilots do fine. But some do not though fortunately relatively few result in accidents. Most memorable was a perfectly executed Tri Pacer stall spin precipitated by a Baron dragging it in to 18 directly in front of the Piper on 27, contrary to Tower instructions, and the Tri Pacer on 27 becoming fixated on the Barron. The Piper pilot walked away but his fixation and failure to fly the airplane, also contrary to Tower instructions caused the accident but the Barron, I think it was a Barron, was certainly a contributing factor. My observations: some arriving Air Venture pilots adopt the deer in the headlights posture, never read the NOTAM, and if they did don't understand it, become oblivious to ATC, loose situational awareness and you name it we saw it or heard it. Roush fits in there somewhere.

posted by Paul Hollowell on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Speculating that Roush didn't fly VFR patterns very often in that Premier Jet. He over flew base turn and must have been slowing significantly to get to stall speed. Flying a turbo prop for me resulted in nearly 100% IFR flight plans. I found myself getting rusty on VFR procedures particularly on the approach segment. I don't think Air Venture is a good place to not come rusty.

posted by Bob Lotter on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

First and foremost there is no substitute for currency particularly when operating any turbojet powered aircraft (that includes turbo fan). I was PIC in a Jet Commander 1121 landing at Pierre South Dakota, full flaps gear down, slowing down when a Piper Super Cub decided to enter the pattern at mid field turning base to final...right in front of me. I called gear up, flaps to takeoff and advanced to full power. The aircraft continued to sink for a moment before everything coupled up and it started to climb. (heavy airplane, smallish engines). We did pass directly over the Super Cub and gave him an E ticket ride in our wake turbulence. The point is that things happen, and gratefully they don't happen all that often but when they do there is no alternative to having well rehearsed procedures and the competence to execute them particularly when fling equipment in which things happen very fast and with harsh consequences when they are not executed properly. I am not criticizing Mr. Roush but there is no reason to not have a current, rated co pilot in the right seat, regardless of how much money you have. And of course landing at Oshkosh during the show the opportunities for problems are abundant.

posted by Billy Laatsch on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

One thought that comes to mind, and I don't want to paint with too broad a brush because I don't know if this comment is appropriate to Mr. Roush or not. I have no idea how many thousands of hours he has or what his experience level is in various high performance aircraft.

Wealthy people will purchase and operate aircraft which are beyond their experience level to safely fly. It's not surprising. Most self made wealthy people are highly accomplished, highly motivated, and willingly accept new challenges. Perhaps some might get in over their heads when it comes to operating high performance piston or jet aircraft.

The classic example is Thurman Munson, who crashed his Citation jet in the landing pattern approaching runway 18 at Akron-Canton(CAK) airport. Got high of final, pulled the throttles to idle with gear and full flaps, and pancaked in short of the runway. As a private pilot Munson went from a Bonanza to a Baron to the Citation. By chance I met his flight instructor who said he stopped giving him dual in the Baron when he told Munson that he was not ready for that airplane. The rest is history.

Hollywood types regularly indulge themselves with high performance airplanes. A few years ago Diane Sawyer did a little clip about her ride in the back seat of a famous Hollywood actor's P-51. That's scary to me. Much as I would like to ride in a P-51, I would be very selective about who I climbed in one with.

posted by Dennis Crenshaw on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I watched Roush's crash, but after several flights into OSH and more than a couple thousand hours PIC, I feel very comfortable being the PIC flying in there--but of an airplane I'm thoroughly familiar with and have many hundreds of hours in, my own hot rod 172 (180hp, CS prop, semi-STOL equipped). Even then, things happen.

Last year I was on short final and cleared to land on the first dot on 18L with 40 hanging out when an RV something or other who had just landed refused to follow the controller's instructions to exit the runway, instead taxiing to the first stub. Clearly he had not read the NOTAM, was not following instructions, etc. But stuff happens, and when the controller told me to go around, it was balls to the wall, milk up the flaps, retrim, and go around--a very easy maneuver I've practiced many times.

Flying into OSH is an adventure itself, but like all adventures, it takes preparation. If you can't take the time to practice steady slow flight, spot landings, go arounds from short final in landing configuration, distractions of airplanes only a short distance ahead and behind and beside you, drive. It'll be a lot safer for you and everyone else.

Cary

posted by Cary Alburn on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I think Paul's message - flying into OSH is "the show" for us pilots. Be on your game, be ready, and do it right, it's a busy environment with smaller margins for error. I couldn't agree more. If you're rusty, go shoot some practice patterns and spot landings with an instructor before you go. Be sharp on the radio. RTFN (read the...NOTAM)!

On those last two - it never ceases to amaze me the pilots who come blowing into the area, let alone the pattern, who clearly aren't used to using the radio, who don't know where they are, who can't follow instructions, and who haven't even read the NOTAM. They make it dangerous for the rest of us.

90% of the folks flying in are prepared and professional. The other 10% scare the crap out of me.

A few years back, I was flying the RIPON-FISK approach, some bozo in a Bonanza came blowing in from the west at 160 kts, didn't know where he was, yapping on the radio (didn't read the NOTAM, listen to the ATIS, or listen to the controllers who were telling him to depart north), and does a straight-in cutting me off on final. Don't be "that guy".

posted by Mike Pflueger on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Personally, it would have been best for Mr. Roush to have ended his comment with "I accept the findings." To imply that there was anyone else at fault is a cop out, in my opinion. He is an experienced,qualified pilot who chose to be one of the first (if not the first) to land his personal business jet on the "grandstand" runway at an airport which is full of smaller, slower aircraft on a hot, humid day. That demonstrates questionable judgement, in my opinion, regardless of who the pilot is. To fail to execute a go-around if there is ANY question about a safe landing is inexcusable. To fail to do so with as many spectators around is negligent. I was sitting on the taxiway hoping to get out early after the airshow ended, in my super cub, when the accident happened. I had friends who were quite close to the accident and who were fearful that the wreckage might put their lives at risk. The pilot in question put many at risk, and to learn that there was anything other than "I accept the findings" is disappointing. My two cents worth...

posted by Randle Corfman on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I was at the spectator line, and I was afraid for my life. The Premier was mushing toward us with the nose wandering back and forth so you couldn't tell which way to run. At least Roush got his plane a few feet away from the crowd of spectators and lines of classics before crashing.

posted by Rankin Whittington on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

In the late 90s, I was holding short of RWY 27 at Oshkosh and watched a Bonanza crash adjacent to the runway in just about the same way as Jack Roush. It was apparent while the Bonanza was on base that the landing was not going to end well. My right seater even exclaimed, "he's gonna crash!", twice before we watched him hit the ground.

Both accidents illustrate that pilots, regardless of airplane type, must bring their A-game to Oshkosh or plan their arrival to a less demanding airfield.

posted by William Kight on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

First, fly the airplane.

All's well that ends well, Roush losing an eye notwithstanding.

posted by Richard Sinnott on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

When I was in the army many years ago, we had a favorite saying: "P7," which stands for "Proper Prior Planning Prevents P#%$-Poor Performance." On my first fly-in trip to Oshkosh, I simply rode with one of our club members who had done it before, just to see what it was like and what it looked like and to get the general lay of the land. Before I flew it myself the following year, I got a copy of the NOTAM, copied it, cut it up, highlighted the critical info, and then took it to Kinko's, where I laminated and spiral-bound it in the order I expected to use the pages. Since it was my first time, I also printed out the procedure (including landmark photos) from the EAA web site and put it into a notebook for my right-seater to monitor as added insurance on the way in. I haven't needed the notebook since that first, but I still highlight and laminate the NOTAM each time. Oshkosh is a fun way to challenge your piloting skills, but you need to bring your "A" game and do your planning and homework ahead of time. Anything less is foolishness.

posted by Jan Jansen on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

After reading some of the comments here, I think it's a good thing that Jack Roush added his "things were happening" comment. "Pilot error" is the cause in most accidents, but rarely do the accident reports attempt to explain what caused the error. Even great pilots can error, and it does us little to not try to examine what caused it.

In the case of his KOSH accident, I can imagine there was some of the "let me show everyone I'm a good pilot and can save this thing" machoism going on. Something that may never have otherwise crossed his mind (or maybe it would have, I don't know) if not for the whole excitement of AirVenture.

What causes people to fly into extreme thunderstorms? Or trying to takeoff from too-short a runway with too much weight when they know it won't work? How about the cross-controlled base-to-final stall-spin? These are all clearly "pilot error", but what is it that caused the pilot error.

posted by Gary Baluha on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Jack Roush was indeed lucky to walk away from what was a 'perfect' stall/spin accident. Having been a witness to this particular accident I only have one comment: No matter what the pilots qualifications I don't believe he should have been put in the position he was. A high performance aircraft of this type is not supposed to be turning finals at 500ft a third of the way down the runway avoiding other aircraft.

posted by Peter Chamberlain on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

This reminds me of two articles Rick Durden Wrote about flying int OSH. The first is the aftermath of dealing with idiots, and the second is how not to be one, and it mirrors a lot of Jan Jansen's preparation and other comments about 'things going on.' Hell yes there are things going on, it's the busiest airport in the world. As Rick said: . . .your death has caused me to finally express some of the deep anger I feel over pilots who continue to screw things up for the rest of us. If that means that just one more pilot next year reads the NOTAM, or takes some dual before coming to OSH or does an honest self-assessment and decides to drive in, and saves one life, then your death is going to make a difference to people you never knew, just as your life made a difference to a lot of people who knew you.""

posted by tom connor on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

By definition, it becomes a high-risk affair when you mix high performance and low powered aircraft in the same environment. I am amazed how few accidents occur at the Oshkosh event.

I always find the NTSB reports to be incomplete--too much of a "just the facts, ma'am" mentality.

The displays and people are great at OSH. However, I find flying into OSH in late July to be too much of a risk for the simple reward of bad camping, nasty toilets, marginal food, terrible heat, rain and confusion. I land at Appleton and drive in.

posted by Mark Young on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Darn. I forgot avweb won't post URLs. Here's another post of Rick Durden's OSH comments plus how to use OSH landings as a training tool. Replace the asterisks with dots to get the links to work.

avweb*com/news/pilotlounge/182691-1*html

avweb*com/news/pilotlounge/pilots_lounge_128_oskhosh_arrival_198208-1*html

avweb*com/news/pilotlounge/193321-1*html

avweb*com/news/pilotlounge/pilots_lounge_129_landings_198534-1*html

posted by tom connor on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I've flown into OSH half a dozen times now, mostly in my Cardinal FG. It is, obviously, the most intense flying anywhere ever. That's available to me, anyway.

Focus. Study the NOTAM. Focus. Be prepared for surprises. Focus. Think it all through. Focus.

I love it. So intense.

posted by Lee Boekelheide on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

Thanks for the links! Rick Durden always has interesting and informative articles!

posted by Jan Jansen on June 25, 2012[report abuse]

I have to question that an aircraft using the Turbine/Warbird Arrival was assigned the left downwind or base to 18R. This requires a rather small radius turn from base to final. The blue dot, (just north of a line abeam the tower) is 1600 feet north of the pink dot, at which there is 4750 feet remaining and at which most aircraft are cleared to land (N6JR's landing clearance did not include a specific touchdown spot). The maximum speed at which a 30 degree bank turn from a base leg abeam the blue dot to align with the runway at the pink dot is 102 knots with no wind. The NTSB Full Narrative states that bank angles between 32 and 43 degrees were recorded in the final portion of the turn to final, and that the airplane overshot the turn. Also the NOTAM graphically depicts Turbine/Warbird arrival routes for RWY 9, RWY 27 and RWY 36L/R, but not to RWY 18R.

I think the lesson that could be learned here is that the left downwind/base for 18R should not be assigned to aircraft on the Turbine/Warbird arrival, nor should it be accepted by any aircraft that cannot be comfortably maneuvered at 95KTS or less.

posted by Brett Lovett on June 26, 2012[report abuse]

One thing I have found frustrating from my two flights into the EAA Convention is that the NOTAM states "Pilots are REQUIRED to adhere to all published OSH arrival and departure procedures AND to all ATC instructions." I have found that impossible on both visits as on both occasions ATC issued instructions contrary to the procedures in the NOTAM. On both occasions those instructions were blanket broadcasts to all aircraft. On the second occasion the instructions were also contrary to the instructions given in the pre-departure briefing (which agreed with the NOTAM). This resulted in some aircraft following the ATC instructions while others ignored the ATC instructions and followed the NOTAM.

posted by Brett Lovett on June 26, 2012[report abuse]

Unfortunately we often spend the majority of our discussion debating precisely who was at fault instead of trying to understand what actually happened. OSH controllers don't use normal procedures and can, and sometimes do, vector pilots into a corner that can be difficult to get out of. I thought at the time that vectoring N6JR into that arrival was questionable. In my opinion, we would be better served by accident reports that included all the factors.

posted by Rob Wyder on June 26, 2012[report abuse]

As much as people here are trying to assign blame, it might be good to think about what might have happened if Mr. Roush had NOT attempted a go-around. I wonder if that Piper Cub might have been affected by wake turbulence, or possibly even hit and the whole incident would have killed everybody involved.

posted by Earl Needham on June 26, 2012[report abuse]

Jets of any description cannot fit normally into a GA-type traffic pattern with other small aircraft. A jet needs to arrive on a long VFR straight-in or ILS. I realize it may not be possible to stop the normal OSH arrival process (which is designed for small propeller driven aircraft) and essentially clear a business jet for an ILS, but that is the most practical and safest thing to do. If the EAA and the FAA designed a jet ILS (or visual straight-in) arrival procedure to one runway at OSH, it would decrease pattern conflicts, align faster aircraft for go-around situations, and establish common terminology for this type of approach at Airventure. Disruptive is sometimes safer, and in this case the procedures need to be changed.

posted by John Bond on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

Paul is exactly right about the need to say 'unable' when the PIC's hair on the back of the neck starts standing up.

From reading the actual report, it's pretty clear that the accident pilot said he was going around, but didn't actually perform a real go around at all.

I wonder if there are too many pilots out there who think that executing a go around is some kind of display of weakness. Or maybe go arounds just are not taught as well as they should be in some training regimes.

posted by Jim Howard on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

"the accident pilot said he was going around, but didn't actually perform a real go around at all."

Right up to that point the situation was probably salvageable had he just gone to the firewall with the throttles. Considering the situation, I'd like to think my personal trigger for a go-around would have been the first moment the approach started to unravel. Oshkosh is certainly the poster-child for a likely go-around mindset, the time to show off your good judgement, not fantastic pilot skills.

posted by Richard Montague on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

This reminds me of one of the company pilots where I used to work. Chicago Midway tower asks a pilot to make a turnoff - instead of saying unable he gets on the brakes and blows both tires at the intersection of two runways! I wonder what THAT did for the controller's traffic flow!

I have come to the conclusion that ATC works for me - not the other way around. Be accommodating whenever possible, don't abuse the privilege, but if you don't like something "unable" should be the first words out of a pilot's mouth! Learning to tell ATC "no" should be part of every private pilot's training!

posted by Josh Johnson on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

I didn't read all the comments so I apologize for what I will assume is a repeat opinion. Either put the fast aircraft (stall speed over XXX knts) in specific time slots or on certain runway..........don't mix my 81 yr. old father in his homebuilt with the "Jacks" of the world. Leaving it wide open as it is today is asking for trouble.....as shown in this accident. Just one thought/solution....but please design something and publish the notam....we as attendees......we can handle it, thanks!

posted by Michael Lefever on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

In the June2012 issue of Aviation Safety Magazine on the subject of going-around, the 'staff' (probably Jeb Burnside) opines that a "go-around should begin by adding enough power to arrest the descent while trending the airplane into a climb." Note that he said 'enough' and not balls to the wall. He explained that going to full power in certain planes is a very bad idea primarily because of torque, P-factor, the need to re-trim and reset flaps. Recognizing the accident airplane was a jet, perhaps there was more going on than we are considering, such as AFM procedures, compressor stalls (someone reported the plane's nose moving laterally - possible asymmetric thrust problems?) asymmetric flap or gear problems? Then the statement "Things that were happening" takes on a whole new meaning.

posted by tom connor on June 27, 2012[report abuse]

"Is ... is 6JR gonna be okay with this?" "Affirmative." "I don’t think so."

This exchange certainly implies that the PIC, at least momentarily, deferred his final authority and responsibility for the operation and safety of the flight to ATC.

posted by Brett Lovett on June 29, 2012[report abuse]

Regarding Mr. Lefever's comments above: The left downwind/base pattern for 18R is the only arrival pattern that significantly limits the maximum distance between base leg and touchdown point (1600 feet) therefore requiring a very small radius turn to final. I consider assigning a jet aircraft to a traffic pattern requiring a less than 1600 foot radius turn to final a much more significant contributor to this accident than having higher approach speed aircraft utilizing the same runway and time period as slower aircraft (such as the one I've taken to Oshkosh with an 80 KT max & 55 KT approach speed). I've not witnessed or heard of any significant issues as a result of spacing due to speed differences, although I did have a rather impatient Bonanza pass me on the Fisk arrival (contrary to the NOTAM procedures).

posted by Brett Lovett on June 29, 2012[report abuse]

All things considered after reading the above I would rather fly from UK to Iceland, Greenland, Canada and then to USA than fly into AirVenture. Having transversed across most of Africa in small to medium aircraft (single and multi engined) the flight to USA would be a breeze. Flying into busy airports is not my scene and never has been. Sounds like to land at Oshkosh you need to think in the fifth dimension and as I'm not that great in multitasking doing the fifth is just too much. I take my hat off to those that do land there and do it safely.

posted by Bruce Savage on June 30, 2012[report abuse]

I agree with Brett, a six ton jet should never approach for landing directly at the crowd, as happened here. This maneuver would never be allowed in the airshow, I feel.

It could have been much worse, for example, if the pilot had aborted a bit sooner with more power and stalled into the crowd. I was right there and saw this jet tumble toward me and for a brief flash had fear for my life and wondered if I needed to run. The ATC people should talk to the airshow procedure people to develop crowd protection rules related to the aircraft trajectory. (I think that is the word I wanted) Bill

posted by Bill Berson on July 3, 2012[report abuse]

Roush should stay on the ground, and not pilot any type of aircraft, period. He's proven he's incompetent from the most basic type of aircraft to complex types. He crashed his ultralight many years ago and was saved by the thinnest margin, and now we see another example of his piloting skills. The FAA should revoke his license and also mandate he is not to fly an LSA or ultralight by special order.

posted by Ted Striker on July 9, 2012[report abuse]


Post a Comment
Already Registered?

E-mail Address:


Password:


Forgot your password?



Commenting Rules

AVweb welcomes responses to our blog postings. However, we ask that you follow some simple rules. We're not interested in flame wars, thanks. If you are, there are plenty of newsgroups to pick from.

Please keep it civil. Save the name-calling and insults for private e-mail or newsgroups.

No anonymous responses, please. If you feel compelled to comment on a blog, use your real name as registered with AVweb. (If your name isn't already associated with your account, see the blog section of our "Help" page for instructions on how to add it.) You can always keep your name out of the public conversation by sending us an e-mail instead of commenting.

Please keep it on topic. Focus on the topic at hand; this isn't an open forum for everything under the sun. (We have a letters column for that, and you're welcome to contact us there with any topic you like.)

 
New to AVweb? Register for Free!

* First Name:


* Last Name:


* E-mail Address:


* Password:
 (4-16 characters)

* Confirm Password:


 Subscribe to AVwebFlash

Yes!
Please e-mail me AVwebFlash every Monday and Thursday morning.

Subscribe to Avweb Biz

Yes!
Please e-mail me AVweb Biz twice a month (every other Wednesday morning).

Check this box to receive e-mail notifications when new comments are posted to this page. (E-mails contain a link to discontinue notifications.)
* Comments:



JavaScript Menus and DHTML Menus Powered by Milonic

Copyright Aviation Publishing Group. All rights reserved | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Contact Us | XMLRSS | Site Map | Top