C-47 Takeoff Groundloop and Crash

[C.W.E.]

. So all you speculators.....just STFU!

That is real class.

[Bacunayagua]

Ahhh.. those were the days when the Government inspectors were just ordinary guys who used common sense when doing check rides and were teachers not policy drones.

Ahhhh yes, those were the days indeed. When airplanes were falling out of the sky more often than there were thunder storms on a hot summer day. I made it out alive though, forget that I did similar things that killed many of my contemporaries. Because I made it through, it was the good ol' days when common sense prevailed! No survivorship bias here.

[98 Corolla]

Can anyone see the elevator move at all?

[cncpc]

Can anyone see the elevator move at all?

No, I can't.

[Siddley Hawker]

As a semi-insider in this thing, there are some things I can say with certainty. The engines were operating just fine - very smooth, appearing to make good power. The CG was near the center of the envelope. The gross weight at takeoff was slightly under our self-imposed limit of 25,200 lbs, which is more than 1000 lbs less than the normal max gross weight for this model of C-47. The gust locks had been removed and the controls were operating freely. The tailwheel was properly locked at the start of the takeoff run. So all you speculators.....just STFU!

There are still a number of current and ex-DC-3 drivers around, so there is bound to be a certain amount of speculation why an ostensibly flyable aircraft wound up crashing the way it did. You state "The engines were operating smoothly, the C of G was in limits, the airplane was over a thousand pounds under gross - if one uses 26,200 lbs of the -92 powered aircraft - the external locks had been removed and the controls were free." (The tailwheel lock is incidental, really. I worked for a company that operated castering gear DC-3's and you unlocked the tailwheel before takeoff, although they had sold the airplanes before I got there so I never had a chance to fly one.) The statement does more to encourage speculation than get rid it.

[C.W.E.]

And after watching the video's those of us who were/ are DC3 pilots find it unusual that it crashed the way it did and the STFU comment only makes us wonder more about why it happened.

So...

As Operations Officer for the Highland Lakes squadron, this flight was operated under my authority,

Did you train them?

The experts, the NTSB will take months or even years analyzing the facts of this accident to determine what happened,

If it takes them years to determine what happened given the pile of burnt airplane that remains I wouldn't give their opinion much credibility.

but many people seem to think they can watch a grainy video and know all sorts of things.

That video was good enough to show the take off was unorthodox and we are only wondering how it was allowed to continue to destruction of the airplane, especially reading this.

As a semi-insider in this thing, there are some things I can say with certainty. The engines were operating just fine - very smooth, appearing to make good power. The CG was near the center of the envelope. The gross weight at takeoff was slightly under our self-imposed limit of 25,200 lbs, which is more than 1000 lbs less than the normal max gross weight for this model of C-47. The gust locks had been removed and the controls were operating freely. The tailwheel was properly locked at the start of the takeoff run. So all you speculators.....just STFU!

You really seem to be defensive about the event , were you flying it?

[Siddley Hawker]

More info here. It's a FB video, I can't find it on YouTube.

https://www.facebook.com/dan.gryder/vid ... 184444866/

[PilotDAR]

Yes, the grainy video still shows a lot of what is needed to understand the path which the aircraft followed. The minute details which are not visible in the video, probably have much lesser relevance. I agree with ., the aircraft followed a flight path which pointed toward doom early in the takeoff run. If the engines were purring, all the more reason to wonder why the aircraft could not be/was not controlled into stable flight. If the tail was kept low on purpose, the purpose seems not to have been fulfilled. If the pilot did not or could not raise the tail early in the takeoff roll, the takeoff should have been aborted. I have observed that a pilot who is lax in controlling one axis adequately, is probably failing to exercise adequate control elsewhere too. So if the elevators were not being actively controlled, perhaps the rudder was not receiving adequate attention and effort either.

Decades ago, a pilot might get away with an error not being recorded, and gain the benefit of doubt. However, in today's world, particularly while flying an old/rare aircraft, you just gotta assume that someone is recording video of you, and there will be nowhere to hide if you get it wrong. Speculation is inevitable, and some of it is going to be very qualified speculation, so there's no point trying to suppress it.

I have nowhere near the experience flying DC-3's as many other posters here, but I would be scared to attempt to reproduce the takeoff technique I saw in the video - I know I'm not skilled enough to make a safe liftoff that way - even in the taildragger I own! I was nervous doing it at altitude, and two incipient spins later, I knew why!

But, what I write about the cause of this event is just my speculation......

[Siddley Hawker]

The guy in the video I linked to checked out the pilot who was flying right seat on the accident aircraft and who was doing the takeoff. Early on the roll the airplane yawed left, the guy in the left seat took control, the airplane then yawed right and headed for a culvert 1800 feet from the point where the takeoff began. The airplane was forced into the air to avoid the culvert, it stalled and the rest is history.

[C.W.E.]

Thanks for the comments PilotDAR it is sure nice having you here to make informed comments on these issues.

Like you I am not brave enough to attempt to fly a DC3 at critical alpha during a take off.

These forums can be a great teaching tool to help new pilots realise just how important it is to ensure you are flying any airplane within its safe operational limits.

[digits_]

More info here. It's a FB video, I can't find it on YouTube.

https://www.facebook.com/dan.gryder/vid ... 184444866/

So during the training for an IFR PPC you don't have to train taxi and take-offs properly?

And they did a great job during their training, but he wanted to give them more training on ground operations?

Seems a bit of a mixed message in that video. Good info on the accident though, if it is correct.

[C.W.E.]

As I understand what he said he gave one of the pilots his type rating.....however he did not give him sufficient training in how to fly the airplane safely, he trained him to pass the FAA IFR check ride.

[TG]

As the man said in his video, they did the basic stuff for a Type rating but since we are talking about a twin taildragger. Well, of course most of the work to learn how to handle this particular aircraft had to be when its wheels touch ground.

When I did my initial training at Basler, right from the bat Clare P. (Chief pilot) said:
« You have your ATP/ATPL. You are supposed to know your IFR gimmick. Your training will mainly consist of doing circuits with stop and go, starting with taxying, high speed taxi, etc...

That worked pretty well.
So blaming the FAA for their shortcomings in training is a bit weak.
He should blame CAF’s accounting department instead

[C.W.E.]

Type Rating::::

When you are issued a type rating on an airplane the type of airplane is written on your license.

DC3 type rating means you are trained to competently fly said type and have passed the proficiency ride to demonstrate you can fly it safely.

[Eric Janson]

It's probably changed now but there used to be a Type Endorsement and a PPC - two very different things.

For Type Endorsement it was a number of hours on Type. Said nothing about one's ability to fly the aircraft.

PPC was the proof that you could safely fly the aircraft.

[photofly]

So. From that video, I learn that the guy that did the type rating training for the pilot who was at the controls at the start of the accident takeoff said that the training focused on flying single engine ILS approaches and not on ground handling (and was therefore useless) and - that, he says, is the fault of the rating system, and not the person who provided the inadequate training?

[PilotDAR]

When I did my initial training at Basler, right from the bat Clare P. (Chief pilot) said:
« You have your ATP/ATPL. You are supposed to know your IFR gimmick. Your training will mainly consist of doing circuits with stop and go, starting with taxying, high speed taxi, etc...

Yes.

Clare did my training as well. I have never met a more competent instructor. He knows his role is to train competence on a less common type, rather than to train a pilot to pass a ride.

[valleyboy]

So let me understand this, Because they don't do VFR check rides anymore this is what happens because it's now an IFR check ride. I'm old and confused but my understanding is that training is training and checking is checking and why would you do a PPC if you are not trained properly, type of flight has nothing to do with it. Oh my, being this old is really confusing I can remember my pilot's number but not my name. BTW I always flew a DC3 with 2 hands on the yolk after setting power and used both hands in the flare as well and had no problem getting to throttles if needed. The only aeroplanes I didn't land with 2 hands were aircraft with spoilers. So I guess to each his own, never liked being in step anyway

[Victory]

Having a hand on the throttles has saved my bacon a number of times. I'm surprised people actually land airplanes without it. The split second it takes you to move your hand from the control wheel to the throttles can be the difference between saving a landing when the wind suddenly changes in the flare or driving the gear through the wings.

[C.W.E.]

The split second it takes you to move your hand from the control wheel to the throttles can be the difference between saving a landing when the wind suddenly changes in the flare or driving the gear through the wings.

And that is why I fly them with one hand on the wheel and the other hand on the throttle's.

I have yet to fly an airplane that had controls so hard to move I needed two hands to move them