Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Note to self: no climbing aileron rolls at 200 ft. It's amazing the number of young men who die doing silly things. The fatal Foxbat accident a few months ago had someone doing wingovers at 100 ft. I saw a pic of a Eurofox that hit so hard it left a depression in the ground and the rear of the fuselage concertinaed.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having trouble grasping what went wrong there? Did he stall it during an attempted somersault? The aircraft airspeed decay didn't appear to be that bad, that it would lead to a stall.

I wonder if there was a control failure, due to over-enthusiastic movements of the controls?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if there was a control failure, due to over-enthusiastic movements of the controls?

Maybe another possibility is that his harness wasn't tightened enough and when he went inverted, he's lost control or accidentally caused the wrong control input right at that critical moment.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm having trouble grasping what went wrong there? Did he stall it during an attempted somersault? The aircraft airspeed decay didn't appear to be that bad, that it would lead to a stall.

I wonder if there was a control failure, due to over-enthusiastic movements of the controls?

Looked Stalled at the last frame before it crashed into the ground

Link to post
Share on other sites

If you watch the video at around 0.34 you hear a backfire and again at 0.36 just as he enters the dive the engine misfires again and a puff of smoke trails the aircraft. I suggest he had a power decrease mid roll and lost thrust causing the roll to enter the dive. Maybe?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the pass was on the slow side, then pulling up prior to the roll further decayed the speed. Part way through the LH aileron roll the RH wing stalled resulting in an over the top (while upside down) RH spin entry. Some poor decision making here.

  • Like 1
  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like the pass was on the slow side, then pulling up prior to the roll further decayed the speed. Part way through the LH aileron roll the RH wing stalled resulting in an over the top (while upside down) RH spin entry. Some poor decision making here.

YOU really think.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Alf, please read post #3 above.

I seen post 3 OME before I wrote it.

I’m not making fun of him in any way, he killed himself by his own hand without any help from others.

If you feel what I wrote is insensitive we are totally different people.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The accident video almost looks like really bad CGI at the end.... I am doubtful if this is real footage......

Link to post
Share on other sites

This looks very much like what has caught many pilots attempting impromptu low level rolls over the years. The roll starts well, then the roll rate reduces about 180 degrees through the roll, followed by a desperate attempt to pull through - which is when the spin starts in this accident. This is quite a common error during early aerobatic training as pilots reduce, rather than increase aileron input - often referred to as “barrelling out” of the roll. ie the second half of the roll resembles a barrel roll rather than an aileron roll (without the spin as in this accident). In a Citabria/Decathlon/Chippy type aeroplane it’s easy to lose over a 1000’ during recovery. There’s often a marked increase in speed which risks exceeding VNE and/or load limits.

If the pilot had kept rolling and not tried to pull through I’m confident he would have made it around the roll.

Edited by Roundsounds
  • Agree 1
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here’s an extract from a report by UK AAIB into an accident in 2007 at Shoreham UK.

 

“The Hurricane aircraft, G-HURR, was taking part in a flying display and was following another Hurricane in a tail chase. Both aircraft flew past the spectators along the display line at a height of approximately 200 ft before tracking to the north-west and climbing. The lead Hurricane climbed to approximately 1,100 ft above ground level (agl), pitched nose-up about 45º and rolled to the left through 270º, before pulling into a right turn to rejoin the display line. The second Hurricane, which was approximately 700 ft agl, pitched nose-up about 15º, before rolling to the left. As it reached the inverted position, the roll stopped, the nose dropped and the aircraft entered a steep dive. It struck the ground, fatally injuring the pilot.“

  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bunnies. Aeros on 200ft, where they had no possibility to recover if something goes wrong. True Russian way, with true Russian result. Better result could be achieved only by failed stall turn with tailslide and then true vertical dive.

 

All this happens due to traditional Russian government strict regulations. Formally you have to submit fly plan for ANY flight, register everything etc, so it makes almost impossible to use civilian aircraft for fun and sport. So - everybody just drops all these stupid Stalins rules and do whatever he wants, until he is far enough from government (80 km from Moscow, deep in Kaluga region, deemed to be enough). Fly aeros on 200ft (not on 3000 where you can be spotted by radars etc), repair aircraft with sledge hammer in suspiciouse garage etc. If rules are dumb strict - they chucked out at all, together with all critical limitations.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I wondered where all the graduates from the Arthur "Bud" Holland School of Flying, ended up - Russia! This bloke wrote himself and a Yak-55 off, during an aerobatic display at Podstepki, Stavropol (near Tolyatti) in Aug., 2019.

 

"At the helm of the plane was 49-year-old Sergey Khimich, a real ace, senior aviation chief of the airfield located two kilometers from the village of Podstepki, Stavropol region, where the fatal accident occurred."

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the pilot of the Corvus, stalled while inverted. You can see the sudden pitch, increasing angle of attack followed by a power on spin to the right. Was he really going to try a half roll followed by pull through a half loop? This might cause him to pull the stick back far enough to stall. A simple push while inverted and keep the roll going and he's have been OK.

My AFR instructor reckons you'd be surprise by the number of people who get inverted and simply pull the stick into their laps instead of push or pull to horizon and roll upright.

 

Aircraft stall when the pilot pulls the stick back too far. Airspeed and attitude have nothing to do with it. The stick is connected to the elevator which controls the angle of attack. I've long thought a direct readout of elevator position, say a rod that sticks up above the glareshield coaming when you pull the stick back to near the position that commands the stall angle would be a good idea.

 

Yes, I've heard that there is a lot of "unregistered" or Guerilla aviation in Russia. Same in Alaska I'm told and in Australia it begins west of Dalby I'm told also.

This is the problem with official regulation. Unless you have a fair bit of experience it is hard to know which regulations are the ones that prevent crashes and which are bureaucratic rubbish.

Army aviator friend says the Army knows then as "red" and "brown" regulations.

  • Like 2
  • Informative 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The story behind the Corvus Fusion crash is that the owner, Yevgeny (Eugene) Poletaev, was wanting to sell the aircraft, and was putting on a display for a potential purchaser.

Of course, the Corvus is sold as an LSA aircraft, and the design is closely aligned with other high performance Corvus aircraft, particularly the Corvus Racer 540 and the Corvus Racer 312.

 

The Corvus 540 was designed specifically for air racing - so you buy a Corvus, because it's the GT Falcon of the skies.

I'm wondering if the low-level aerobatic attempt was planned to let the potential buyer see the aircrafts performance close-up, rather than straining to see it at 3000'.

 

https://ok.ru/yevgeny.poletaev

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe another possibility is that his harness wasn't tightened enough and when he went inverted, he's lost control or accidentally caused the wrong control input right at that critical moment.

Yes maybe this.... everything looked ok until the inverted position for what was obviously going to be a rolling manoeuvre - can’t think of a logical reason why he’d try to pull back on the stick at that point. Loose straps could result in gripping stick backwards.

 

Unfortunately yet another example of level aeros not being a bright idea. Far too many over the years.

 

RIP to this poor fellow. I felt sick for his mate on the video camera...

Link to post
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...