What's new
Van's Air Force

Don't miss anything! Register now for full access to the definitive RV support community.

NTSB posts preliminary reports on the three Fatal RV mishaps in September

dabney

Well Known Member
Friend
I just noticed that the three fatal mishaps last month that resulted in the loss of some fine VAF people are posted on the ntsb. gov monthly accident reports website.

Don't know how to put the link into this thread but you can find it by searching "ntsb monthly accident reports"
 
Here is the prelim report for our most recent tragedy

On September 20, 2013, about 1651 eastern daylight time, an experimental amateur built Vans RV-7A, N174BK, was substantially damaged when it impacted terrain while maneuvering near the Hamilton Township, New Jersey. The private pilot was fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the local personal flight conducted under Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91, which departed Cross Keys Airport (17N), Cross Keys, New Jersey.*
*
According to preliminary radar data provided by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), the airplane departed 17N at approximately 1640, turned to an approximate magnetic heading of 120 degrees, and climbed to an altitude of 6,500 feet above mean sea level (msl). Approximately 13 minutes later, the airplane turned right to a southeasterly heading. It then rapidly lost altitude while reversing direction before descending through 300 feet msl where it was lost from radar as it descended below the floor of radar coverage.
*
According to witnesses, the airplane was observed traveling in a northwesterly direction and “pieces” of the airplane were observed to fall to the ground.*
*
Examination of the wreckage path revealed that it was approximately 1 mile long and contained three distinct areas of debris.*The first area contained the lower half of the rudder. The second area contained numerous pieces all of which were separated from their mounting locations. This included the vertical stabilizer (which was found in the top of a tree), the rudder balance weight, the left horizontal stabilizer, the left elevator, the left wingtip, the left elevator balance weight, and the cockpit canopy. The third area contained the main wreckage (the fuselage, engine, and wings), which had remained attached to each other until striking the top of a tree, falling to the forest floor and coming to rest inverted, where they were further damaged by exposure to a postcrash fire.

According to FAA records, the pilot held a private pilot certificate with ratings for airplane single-engine land. His most recent FAA second-class medical certificate was issued on July 11, 2013. He reported that he had accrued approximately 400 hours of total flight experience on that date, 85 hours of which was in the previous six months.
*
According to FAA and maintenance records, the airplane received its special airworthiness certificate on June 6, 2006. The airplane’s most recent conditional inspection was completed on March 15, 2013. At the time of the accident, the airplane had accrued approximately 461 total hours of operation.
 
I understand the moderator concept on VAF - but why can't the moderators get together via telecon and come up with a consistent procedure for addressing Safety posts?

We have one. DR has posted numerous references to it. From what I've seen the mods all pretty much let the envelope get stretched to the max.

Hey, I get deleted from time to time. It's worth it to keep things reasonable, because that's why the good people stay here. Shrug, take a guess why you got deleted, re-write and re-post. It's easy.
 
Rule 6

I made an initial post on this subject last week immediately after I reviewed the monthly NTSB aviation accident postings. I specifically asked if anyone had any info regarding the NJ accident - not opinions, just info or links to info. It never appeared on the forum.

I understand the moderator concept on VAF - but why can't the moderators get together via telecon and come up with a consistent procedure for addressing Safety posts?

I am the moderator who deleted your post.

There are two reasons why I deleted it.

First, I had the clear impression that you had not read the posting rules which are clearly linked on the main page of the forums. But in case you missed it, here's the link. Specifically, you are encouraged to read Rule 6 where Doug emphatically requests folks to wait until the NTSB PROBABLE CAUSE or FINAL REPORT is published before speculating on the cause of an accident. Your statement, "...Anyone have any insight into what happened? ..." , in my opinion would have immediately led the thread down the road of speculation.

Doug has good reason for this rule, and, as owner and Chief Potentate of these forums, he makes the rules. It's his sandbox, and we can play here as long as he's happy.

Secondly, the other reason I deleted your post is that there is plenty of factual information in at least three other threads in these forums that answer a significant portion of what you were asking for. Perhaps you had read those threads, but I saw no reason to waste bandwidth with a parallel thread.

I agree; it's not easy for all the moderators to be consistent. I hope this satisfies your question.
 
Last edited:
I made an initial post on this subject last week immediately after I reviewed the monthly NTSB aviation accident postings. I specifically asked if anyone had any info regarding the NJ accident - not opinions, just info or links to info. It never appeared on the forum.

I understand the moderator concept on VAF - but why can't the moderators get together via telecon and come up with a consistent procedure for addressing Safety posts?

I didn't delete your post but I did send you a PM the same day explaining why it was deleted. Check your private messages.

I don't see how a phone conversation could make things any firmer or more understandable than the forum rules that have been consistently posted for all to read.
 
I am the moderator who deleted your post....
Specifically, you are encouraged to read Rule 6 where Doug emphatically requests folks to wait until the NTSB PROBABLE CAUSE or FINAL REPORT is published before speculating on the cause of an accident.
Thanks for stepping up and explaining this. What's confusing to me and I suppose others is, I've seen speculative accident threads go on for days in VAF with not a hint of NTSB info, and no deletion of posts or threads. So the rules are applied quite unevenly.
 
NTSB

it's good to have the preliminary report in a timely manner. cudo's to the NTSB. a tragic event I will not forget. my thoughts are with the family. it was a very bad day.
 
Respectfully Disagree

Don, I certainly understand the posting rules - but still don't agree with you.

An RV-7 falling out of the sky in pieces in NJ is a uniquely tragic event. There was nothing in the forum posts at that time that I could find that related to that specific event.

The NTSB Preliminary report was already posted describing the same stuff posted online today - including the description of three debris fields. That's what caused me to post.

I try to do some acro and pull 3 - 3 1/2 g's on every flight - so an inflight breakup of an RV in benign conditions with no preliminary indication of excessive maneuvering is a big deal. Having some idea of what was going on (thus the request for any additional info) beyond the NTSB preliminary report was worth the chance of a forum posting war.

This is not like a primer war - this is serious safety stuff. I doubt if we'll ever know what exactly happened, and I think it will end up being one of those threads where we'll have X number of posters, but 10X number of opinions. Even if 90% of those opinions are bogus, getting access to the 10% that apply is worth the effort. Of course, everyone will have a different opinion as to which bucket a particular post fits into.
 
By the parts I've seen and what I learned about Tony I don't think the end result will surprise anyone. I just hope the NTSB comes up with a reason and describes what happened to each part.
 
- so an inflight breakup of an RV in benign conditions with no preliminary indication of excessive maneuvering is a big deal.

Paul, here is where you are running up against forum rules against accident speculation before the facts are known.

Do you know positively that conditions were "benign" and that there was no "excessive maneuvering" preceding this accident? If not, then your statement is purely speculative.

We need facts that are not yet in public circulation before assumptions can be made about flight conditions and performance. Without these facts all anybody can do is speculate.
 
Do you know positively that conditions were "benign" and that there was no "excessive maneuvering" preceding this accident? If not, then your statement is purely speculative.

[Sorry, I know this is going to hack off some folks, but I deleted statements that have not been confirmed by a final accident report; S. Buchanan]


We also know the lower portion f the rudder was damaged by winds prior to this. I am not speculating as to whether or not this contributed to this accident, just stating it is a fact that we currently know.

This isn't meant to come off as anything other than stating that these are the facts as we now know them.

A question for the VAF brain trust, is this the third inflight breakup of an RV? I remember reading about a 4 that lost its wings, I think coming out of a loop. The 7 in Canada that exceeded Vne and now this.

[The Vans RV-8 demonstrator shed a wing after being subjected to excessive flight loads, there were also some loses of early RV-3's; S. Buchanan]

Please excuse the typos as I typed this on my phone.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
[statements from edited post above deleted; S. Buchanan]

We also know the lower portion f the rudder was damaged by winds prior to this. I am not speculating as to whether or not this contributed to this accident, just stating it is a fact that we currently know.

The bolded part appears to be factual. I believe that there is/was a post about it on this site. Whether it was a factor in this event is unknown. However, other than checking certain hardware, I am not afraid to fly my -6A.

That apparent damage generated some useful discussion on securing control surfaces.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Still Raw

I went to the service on Saturday as part of a group from KPTW to pay our respects to Tony's family.Amy asked "How do you know my husband?", I answered "Through the VAF". "What model do you fly?" I answered I'm building a 7a. Long pause... She told me what ever happened was catastrophic and if anybody could land that plane it was Tony. I agreed,"Tony was a very good stick,in the prime of life and in good health,I am Very Sorry for you loss",by the time I got to Tony's son and Father all I could do was shake there hand and give them a look that I acknowledge there pain. Vlad made us all proud. This is still very Raw and the NTSB/FAA,I have no doubt will investigate this to the fullest,Tony was one of there own as well as one of US. Inspect you tail group.Respect Tony's memory,Please Wait for the final report.
RHill
 
Last edited:
I went to the service on Saturday as part of a group from KPTW to pay our respects to Tony's family.Amy asked "How do you know my husband?", I answered "Through the VAF". "What model do you fly?" I answered I'm building a 7a. Long pause... She told me what ever happened was catastrophic and if anybody could land that plane it was Tony. I agreed,"Tony was a very good stick,in the prime of life and in good health,I am Very Sorry for you loss",by the time I got to Tony's son and Father all I could do was shake there hand and give them a look that I acknowledge there pain. Vlad made us all proud. This is still very Raw and the NTSB/FAA,I have no doubt will investigate this to the fullest,Tony was one of there own as well as one of US. Inspect you tail group.Respect Tony's memory,Please Wait for the final report.
RHill

Thanks for the report Mr. Hill. Yes, let's wait. The preliminary report had no new information. Lots of time for discussion when the final is posted.
 
Back
Top