Guest deanfi Posted December 4, 2019 Share Posted December 4, 2019 interesting how cleanly the wing came off http://www.kathrynsreport.com/2019/12/piper-pa-28-161-warrior-iii-n558pu.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted December 4, 2019 Share Posted December 4, 2019 The report says damage- light! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted December 4, 2019 Share Posted December 4, 2019 Textbook forced landing; that's what we are supposed to do. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 The report says damage- light! Yup, the landing "light", was in the wing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old man emu Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Have a look at the damage pattern on the outboard leading edge. That's clearly where the wing impacted the tree. I would have expected some sort of circular dent in the main spar, but the speed of the aircraft when it contacted the tree must have been relatively low - possibly towards the end of the landing roll. That would be enough to cause the plane to rotate around the point of contact, and maybe the wing spar failed at its attachment point. I'd love to see photos of the wing spar attachment and the end of the spar. Maybe the damage could be traced to https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2018/12/21/2018-27577/airworthiness-directives-piper-aircraft-inc-airplanes It seems this plane has been working hard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 It's gone back to the spar then acted as a hinge to slew the plane around and extend the damage along the spar as the tree position moved relative to the wing. There's only 3 attach points but surprisingly little distortion of the wing and the fuselage seems to have occurred. It may be worse than it looks , but should be able to fly again if it's an economic proposition and it's general condition merits it. Crappy old heaps don't qualify for spending much on.. unless they are rare and special in some way Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turboplanner Posted December 5, 2019 Share Posted December 5, 2019 Note the massively strong fuselage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim McDowall Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 Note the massively strong fuselage. Which is exactly why the MTOW for RAAus should be 1500kg. Time has shown that the inertia effects upon impact can be withstood by these CAR3/FAR23 certified types. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pmccarthy Posted December 9, 2019 Share Posted December 9, 2019 And that’s why I prefer my PA28 until RAA weight increase happens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now