plugga

Thanks for putting up the link, IBob - somewhat more persuasive than untested old wives tales.  As with most of his work, Paul is pulling together the threads, pointing in a direction and providing the benefit of his experience and research, not providing a definitive instructional treatise.  Still a useful read.

For those lacking a functional google app, here's another with several further links embedded.  It is a little dated in regard to epirb and plbs, but the aircraft and underlying message remain the same.

http://www.equipped.com/aopa-ditch-rebut.htm

Now Student Pilot, I'm not sure why you found it necessary to make comments about correcting grammar, nor indeed why you feel the need to sink the barb about leaving this to the experts.  Every one of us who aviates over or near water may face the dilemma one day and have to do the best we can.  And no, this has nothing to do with the Hudson ditching, airline pilots have entire training departments to tell them what to do in that event.  You may have noticed that I referred to light aircraft. I'm sure you are a perfectly nice chap face to face and have plenty if wisdom to share, however, do not expect dangerous old wives' tales to go unchallenged.

7 hours ago, Student Pilot said:

No such thing as a gentle turn over in water, you will be most likely incapacitated when the windscreen caves in. Bit hard to egress when your unconscious. 

😄 There is pretty extensive research to suggest otherwise; somewhere approaching 90% of pax and pilots in light aircraft successfully egress with minimal injury after ditching.  I think I'll stick with that in place of an off the cuff opinion thanks.

https://gulfnews.com/world/americas/video-plane-crash-lands-on-california-beach-1-dead-1.92869728

US accident, but potentially of wider interest, given the scenario.  Sad outcome for the passenger, not clear whether shoulder straps fitted or worn, but from a distance it certainly looked survivable, although I guess a 95yo neck and/or skull may be a little more prone to damage.

This caught my attention because a very experienced mate and I were low level over the beach in his RV and he idly asked what my plan was if it went quiet up front.  He was a bit taken aback when I pointed to smooth water behind backline. My reasoning was that unless an obviously smooth, hard and clearish beach presented itself (unlikely, the beaches in this area are notoriously soft), I would be far more comfortable getting out of even an inverted aircraft in deeper water and swimming for it, than battling a tip up canopy in the shallows or on a deserted beach.  YMMV

Mmm, that took me down a bit of a rabbit hole concerning the way flightaware et al obtain and interpret their data.  

Interesting that the ADSB data doesn't jibe with the actual height that the aircraft collected the powerlines at.  Finger trouble or misheard QNH when resetting to local?  It sounds as though he probably shouldn't have been trying to get in there, given the reported weather; whatever he's used up a lifetime's worth of luck in that little little exercise.

As to the Morgan at Old Bar, it was a botched go around from a downwind landing attempt after a prior touch n go.  Aside from the ferriswheel being within the runway splay, there is a further long list of ommissions and errors on the part of the pilot, training organisation and manufacturer, which contributed to to a good old military cluster.

There is video doing the rounds showing a green R44 going in, reportedly on the Central Coast today.  Looked as if things had gone wrong before the powerlines intruded.

The PA-28 was initially reported as first solo.😮 Seems unlikely given the number of circuits.

34 minutes ago, Blueadventures said:

Hard to see in image, but doesn't look to have a tow hook.  Also webb page says tug is a C150G.

Yeah, subsequent reports have retracted that version, I see.  It did seem odd.  The rego was visible in at least one news report, sad, I didn't know the pilot but have seen the aircraft at more than one flyin.

Looks a bit more substantial than a Hummelbird to me, but I guess looks can be deceptive with that level of damage. 

I was sent a link to a Daily Fail piece which claims that it was a towplane and glider under tow that collided, sounds odd but I suppose stranger things have happened.

Difficult to tell from the video, but I'd be inclined to put my money on him underestimating his turn radius in the wind and trying to tighten it up when the brown bits started filling the windscreen. There's a horrible sense of inevitability when that inside wing stops flying and no amount of rudder and/or throttle is going to fix things. Shades of the Mallard in Perth a few years back. 

The jungle drums are beating out the unwelcome, but not entirely unexpected news that the airshow has been canned.  Apparently thanks to the sodden state of the ground. 😒

That's about my understanding of it. I'm more familiar with Messrs Pratt & Whitney's finest, but I saw an AC 690 do something similar outside the hangar, many years ago and was told that it is something that can happen.

I think the flames were related to an emergency shut down of the two Garretts, rather than friction between alloy and runway.

I'll play devil's advocate here; what was the purpose of the message, to write a technical piece on decision making, or to provoke discussion or introspection amongst the pilot body?  If the latter, then I believe it achieved its purpose and quibbling over the details amounts to attempting to remove the fly spots from the pepper.

The problem with quoting hard numbers is that a percentage of the readership will immediately adopt them as "the rulez" and abdicate personal decision making. Marginal is a concept which pilots recognise in relation to weather and visibility in particular and I read "too strong" as beyond my personal limits.

As to the timing of decision, I'm not sure why you'd fault an early call.  There may well have been other factors playing into that decision.  Had the call on Wed been go, then clearly you would re-evaluate on Thurs before depsrture, but if it's "no", the matter ends there.

Risk vs reward; the RFDS example is a red herring,  the writer was obviously across the reasons for the flight and I read only a recognition of the fact that the reward side of the equation may subtly influence decision making.

So no, it's not a technically perfect piece of writing, but I believe it probably resonates better with most of the readership than a university level technical treatise.

I see the pilot's name has been released and aircraft type reported as Jabiru, model undisclosed.  I don't know the area, but dr google's satellites disclose a lot of cane fields and fairly straight, flat rural roads which should have given a reasonable chance of pulling off a successful landing. RIP

13 hours ago, Teckair said:

 I am wondering what the weather was like in that area today. 

Saw screenshots posted elsewhere from local cameras connected to Windy; not good, few 100 feet ceiling in the valleys at best.