Bystanders Shocked Watching Plane Stall!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 29 ก.ย. 2024
- A De Havilland Beaver stalled and crashed on takeoff in Lake Hood but this isn't the first time a Beaver has crashed while trying to take off from this lake. This pilot debrief will uncover the reasons why both of these crashes happened.
#aviation #seaplane #pilotdebrief
Check out this other video about a float plane that stalled on takeoff:
• Bystanders SHOCKED See...
Support the channel:
/ @pilot-debrief
Sources:
• de Havilland Beaver Pl...
• How to Take Off a DHC-...
Copyright Disclaimer Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing. No copyright infringement intended. All rights belong to their respective owners.
This channel is for entertainment purposes only and represents solely my opinion and not the opinion, views, or position of anyone else.
Ah, Alaska... where half the people are pilots, and half the pilots have licenses.
I lived and flew in Alaska for a few decades. Alaska has some great pilots, they also have a lot of pilots with too much money, and not enough time to spend flying.
🤔
It wasn't the pilots fault. There was wind, and sun, and nature,..... and jesus. He can't be held accountable for all that.
I ❤ the Beaver! I grew up flying to Canada in one then when I grew up, I learned to skydive out of the only Jump Beaver in North America in Kentucky. It's so reliable!
A wiser man said that the road to inner happiness is where one avoids the beaver and the bush
You know, I don't like flying I've never wanted to be a pilot and I only made one and a half model jets when I was a kid. That said, you explain things so understandably that I have found your channel one of my favorites. You're a natural storyteller and for a layman like me that's essential. Good job and great videos.
Hoover, it's often mentioned about the number of hours of flight time that these pilots have. I've only got about 750 hours of flight time, private pilot with an instrument rating and I am current and proficient. I do a meticulous preflight, use checklists, always do a run up, brief for engine out, meticulous planning, always have at least two instrument approaches set up in case I can't use one, and I don't stall my airplane. I don't do anything dumb, different, or dangerous. I make sure to do meticulous weight and balance before every flight. I know my takeoff distance and I add 20% . I calculate any differences that may arise due to density altitude. I never, never and that means never have my plane overweight or out of balance. If I'm taking a relatively full load I have friends meet me at a longer airstrip rather than a closer short one. If conditions aren't right I cancel. I had one engine out two years ago and landed safely. My Cessna 182P and I have been "married" for nearly 10 years. Most of my post training hours are in her. Sometimes we may not have the hours of commercial pilots but we can still be very safe if we train to a very high level and maintain currency and proficiency.
What flap setting is used to optimize acceleration on water. Are flaps further increased to match takeoff phase?
Just no excuse for either of these incidents.
"The wind is what made them crash" Sheesh.
I can't believe 2nd crash pilot made his 1st solo in beaver with kids/wife. Unbelievable.
100 percent agree. You hear this often. Some want the glory, others want to grow old and not kill their family. The amount of tragic stories you hear about people doing this are crazy. There was a guy in Midland who had more money than sense, and went and bought a Cirrus. Started training, but then just...quit calling the instructor. But since he already had a solo endorsement, just kept right on flying. His family all assumed he was just a pilot now. Well, he wasnt. And he ended up killing himself and his 13 year old son in a stall spin accident less than five miles from the field. The son was the only victim in that plane crash. The dad was a volunteer to his own stupidity.
And 2 dogs!
Pretty dumb ....right
I suspect this is the kind of guy who has "gotten away with it" all his life...... till now.
And he NEVER got on the step.
And he said that with a straight face. A true professional.
Wise words to live by 😂
I was wondering what the heck you're talking about....then all the sudden, I knew!
there was a slight smirk. lol
It's really shocking 😮
"That's it! I am never flying again!" a wise and selfless choice. Clearly he should have had that moment earlier, but at least nobody was injured. He got the second chance most people don't get to have. The world is probably a safer place thanks to that choice.
Turns out that being a doctor doesn't automatically qualify you to maintain proper directional control of a DHC-2.
@R2Bl3nd - Yeah Buddy!! '90s Up in Yankee Territory, Capt on approach @0mph as just to transit between 150 knot Headwind to 160 knot Tailwind. He saw Crazy Hwy Trk w/news, went full gas/flaps, nose slight down, 1st Ofcr screamed all the way down into the woods, out of the woods, Capt tippy toed back to airport, & upon touch said, "And we're down". 1st Ofcr changed scream to whimper, & never flew again, even passing on Company ride home. Was this the mindset of, "I am never flying again"??
@@erwinschmidt7265 Captain Crunch. We had someone at LDJ airport with that name due 2 good airplanes he crashed..
Am I correct in saying that this was supposedly his THIRD accident mishap?? Dude, the universe is definitely telling you something.
@@scapilot1980 Naah,, FAA will only suspend his license for 6 months more until he kills a few people.
The sad part is that he had a fair bit of altitude to work with and leveling off temporarily to gain speed would have been easily and safely done.
He didn't stall until he was in the bank. He couldn't level the wings because he was in a stall. Remember a stall is where there is not enough air moving over the wing. If you don't have lift in many cases, you won't have all your control surfaces either. If he was already level, ya he probably would have had use of the elevators but in this case would not have helped him he needed ailerons and they were not creating lift.
@@kennethjohnson4280 No, @LTVoyager is right - he needed to keep the nose down and fly level for a bit to pick up speed after the initial rotation, which would then give him control authority. Just before the stall he tried to climb, which washed off what little speed he had, and induced the stall.
Trying to pick up the low wing with aileron could easily worsen the situation, due to adverse yaw (the down-going aileron increases both drag and angle of attack on that wing). At low speed near stall directional control is mostly by rudder (and he'd already need a boot-full to overcome the P-factor of the prop, which is what pulled both aircraft into stalls to the left when they got too slow for rudder authority).
Clearly you know nothing about stall recovery to making a comment here. You are incorrect that he didn't stall until he was in the bank, the bank was caused by the stall, because the downwind wing had less lift than the upwind wing, he did roll back to the right to wings level and if he had at the same time pushed the nose down, he would have GAINED speed and control authority but once he rolled wings level he pull the nose UP, and bled off what little airspeed he had and exacerbated the situation putting the plane into a departure stall without sufficient altitude to recover.@@kennethjohnson4280
@@boydw1i think all 3 of you are sort of right and speak around a different timeline of events. In my opinion all of you guys key message seems to be the same and correct: Future accidents can be prohibited
1. by strictly watching the Airspeed while not turning nor climbing before a safe airspeed is reached, unless terrain (which can be a better accident then stall)
2. Do so while turning and climbing to make sure to NOT bleed off Airspeed below safe speed
@@kennethjohnson4280I disagree. The initial small turn shortly after getting off the water appears to be intentional, but the steep bank prior to the crash was due to the stall, not the cause of the stall. And I am quite familiar with the aerodynamics of flight. In a stall you still have your rudder and elevator in all but a few swept wing, T-tail aircraft that can suffer from elevating blanking in a deep stall. He could have used elevator to decrease AOA even in the bank if he had acted quickly enough. He simply was climbing out too steeply after takeoff. Why he did this is the big question. Did he have an aft CG or did he simply screw up? I don’t know, but hopefully the NTSB will sort it out.
He did not need ailerons. Elevator is what he needed and didn’t use apparently.
The angle of attack was so high he turned his plane into a rock. It was that simple.
you cannot see angle of attack
Having a pilot's license does not mean that person is proficient enough to fly a plane anymore than a driver's license makes a person proficient enough to drive a car, yet many do believe this. In other words, a license doesn't make you a qualified person who will operate said machine safely and effectively every time.
Not even the same. You can get a driver's license with 3-5 hours of driving and a lot of book knowledge. You don't get a pilots license without many many more than 3-5 hours.
A pilots license takes a minimum of 40 hours flying time (not including taxiing) but the average person does it closer to 60 hours, to get a float plane endorsement can take another 6 to 8 hours after you are licensed. This is not including Ground School which is separate to flight time
Exactly. Just because someone is licensed, doesn’t mean that person is fully proficient and capable. I know a few bus drivers who used to work for us.
Having a driver's license means you can operate a car. Not necessarily very well, but you can get it going.
I think the point here is that the license hourly requirement ALONE will not typically be enough hours, enough reps, Malcolm Gladwell 10,000 hours, yes enough hours in live practice or simulation to account for preventing the main causes of crashes, which from memory: gethereitis, vfr into imc, not flying straight and level for as long as possible in a beaver, choosing a takeoff that doesn't require an immediate left turn, I dont' know, I am not a pilot, poor planning, no takeoff plan review, not planning possible landing sites on aborted takeoff. etc.
In my mind, taking care of those issues alone would require well more than 40 hours or whatever of flying, whatever the initial hourly barrier to getting a pilot certificate requires.
The masses in the world expect to achieve proficiency in a minimum amount of time. While time isn't the only variable (ability to focus is probably most important), it takes EVERYONE at least some time rehearsing each scenario (even planning an aborted takeoff option is a scenario) in order to be able to deal with it in real time, in the air. I mean, am I right or am I right?
It's worth noting that it is entirely possible to extend a southeast departure into the east takeoff lane at Lake Hood. It's pretty common to request a "Southeast with east option" and even if not explicitly cleared for that, the "southeast" is a very general direction , the pilot has pretty wide discretion where to line up exactly. you can depart on a "southeast" such that only a very gradual turn is required once airborne.
Gee when I was a 16yo Student pilot I learned to never turn when low and slow, that was 53 years ago, guess no one learns that today.
wow, great explanation. You and the channel owner should have your own YT Q&A Podcast. Thanks so much!
"You can do without the bush but not the beaver." Love it.
Bwah!..Hah!..that's the funniest thing I have ever heard on ANYONE'S crash analysis channel!...🤣
Arguably somewhat inappropriate for the theme of the channel.
😂😂😂
What is the difference…technically? Probably the wrong channel for that discussion.
@@deoeers Hoover's words, not mine.
0:51 That turn seems VERY early. He barely had enough time to verify positive rate.
Yes, and as someone who flies a float plane out of that seaplane base, there was no pressing need to turn that soon.
@@andrewalexander9492thank you for confirming that thought.
Your channel and content is presented in a very concise and respectful manner. Your knowledge and pilot experience helps the viewer to understand dynamics of flight, and what can happen if those said dynamics become unbalanced. Being a USAF Veteran, I had the privilege of being stationed at Bitburg AFB, (at that time, West Germany), where the F-15 Eagle flew out of. Thoroughly enjoy your channel! Have a blessed day!
Hoover presents information in a very concise and understandable manner.
My instinct from bush flying was to get clear of the water and just stay right on the deck and accelerate until I had oodles of excess energy. Especially important when having to penetrate burble from air flowing over high shorelines. The Beaver was designed around a Canadian bush pilot survey of most desired characteristics. What makes it so amazing: An 80 year old design, and still the preferred business tool to use to make money in its niche in 2023. Nearly everything else of that age is now a museum piece or part of a flying collection. Only the DC-3 can top it, age wise. The story of its procurement by the US Army was quite unusual, and included a bizarre flyoff against completely unsuitable competitors from the big US manufacturers. By the mid 60s after the Beaver, Otter and Caribou, DeHavilland Canada was effectively "official supplier of tactical utility aircraft" for the US Army. Until they lost most of their fixed wing ops to the Air Force following a bitter interservice dispute, just as the Buffalo had finished a Vietnam pre-production aircraft trial for US Special Forces support.
One of my all time fav planes, the Beaver! Please, don't crash them, as they don't produce them anymore...
"That's it. I'm never flying again!" Pilots everywhere say "Whew!"
I think if I just survived my 3rd crash, I'd give up flying too.
*"That's it! I am never flying again."*
Sir, from all pilots on Earth - rotary wing, fixed, and lighter-than-air, General Aviation, commercial, and military......a big - *THANK YOU.*
Ohhhhhhhhh 😅
Unfortunately the wife and kids and 2 dogs probably said the same thing.
That's kind of a dick thing to say to anyone with so few hours. He was inexperienced, not an asshole. Take your ego somewhere else. Let the man learn to fly another day. Everyone makes mistakes, even you Mr GOD. Get off your high horse.
That was his Best choice! Two accidents and no loss of life should be enough to decide Not to fly again!
@@barbarachambers7974 👍
I think most pilots agree the Beaver is one of the best aircraft ever built. You would have to work real hard to end up like in these instances.
I have heard it called the F350 of bush planes.
Eh, the old beaver is extremely draggy and also heavy. It has a much higher wing-loading than the heavier Cessnas like the 185.
But due to its large flaps, it can get just as slow or slower than the others. What this means is it can fly and cruise at a much higher Lift Coefficient than airplanes most people are used to. This means they have a substantial amount of lift induced drag. As CDi is:
((CL^2)/(Aspect Ratio*Pi*Oswald Efficiency Factor)).
So, the higher the Lift coefficient, the higher the induced drag. And induced drag is the one that goes up to the square of angle of attack (it goes up to the square when reducing speed). And is therefore a real trap for pilots with an affinity for tanking and banking at low speed and altitude.
$ ≠ lift @@TheJustinJ
@@k9er233 I have heard it called the Columbia of bush planes...
But...still a floatplane with all the limitations that necessarily implies. If I have to go somewhere by floatplane, I think I'll walk instead.
I lived in Anchorage, Alaska from '75-'86. My dad was an avid duck hunter and would often drag me along, so I flew on a lot of float planes, especially Beavers. During one of those duck hunting trips, we were loading up the Beaver with gear, at Lake Hood, and watched another float plane takeoff, stall, and crash. They crashed into a parking lot next to the lake from probably 150-200 feet, nose almost straight down. I was stunned to hear later that all three survived, one with only minor injuries, but the pilot was left in critical condition. My dad's hunting buddy was an Alaska game warden and a pilot, and after the crunch he looked at Dad and said "they're all dead, Jake." I was scared shitless while taking off a half hour later and never flew on a float plane again after our return.
That’s unfortunate about the fear instilled in you but I can fully understand.
In the vast VAST majority of these incidents it’s pilot error. Any aircraft is designed to fly ‘within its limits’
Above all, keep the plane flying! I would much rather fly it as far into a crash as possible then climb climb climb only to stall and auger in.
The last video of the
wet-between-the-ears pilot on his FIRST flight without an instructor and with his family onboard, I hope he is relegated to only fly Guillows Balsa gliders.
It is wonderful that everyone in both of these crashes survived!
@@57Jimmy I agree, having his family on board was criminal. He had plenty of time to just plain abort and retry. Also don't understand the hurry to nose up. If i was failing to climb the last thing i would do is pull back on the stick. Nose down for speed! Ands I am only a former hang glider pilot. - Cheers
Wow I’m glad you made it, that’s terrifying
Yeah. He definitely wasn't up on step. You could see the floats plowing through the water. They look like an Unlimited Hydroplane when you're properly up on step.
I lived in AK from 1970-'88 and grew up in a 185 on floats. We had a friend do exactly what the 2nd pilot did; Make a ton of money. Go buy too much airplane, and crash with his whole family onboard. He was the only survivor, unfortunately. I've lost a couple friends to crashes in AK, all from lack of experience. @@joeshmoe7967
This comment baffles me lmao
An *_Alaskan_* who describes going on hunts with their dad as "being dragged along"...
Followed up by "being scared shitless" and *permanently* scarred from flying ever again in bush plane all because you "saw" _someone else's crash_ (where they all *lived)* before your own flight, even while knowing you had the best pilot you could probably hope for, an Alaskan game warden...
And as a 🍒 on top, the date given would put you from an earlier generation, *before* everyone became a bunch of overly medicated, socially disconnected, genderless p•ssys...🤔
This sounds like a story coming from someone in Portland last week, not an Alaskan in the 80's!!
The only _possible_ ways this story doesn't break the laws of the universe is the either A. you're a girl & were a lot younger at the time then I was picturing or B. You're girl & were a lot _older_ at the time of this story than I was thinking meaning you weren't an Alaskan native 🧐
Whatever the wind speed and direction, he was airborne but slow, but had altitude to trade for more speed, yet did not put the nose down, even though he was easily going to clear the hazards. So the whole episode is inexplicable.
I'm very familiar with the area, I fly a floatplane out of Lake Hood. The sad thing about this is that there was no real urgency to have either climb, or to turn left. From where he lifted off, he could easily have leveled off 4 ft above the water and allowed speed to build, and made a much more gradual left turn and still stayed well within the Lake Hood airspace.
@@andrewalexander9492 That is what I was thinking while watching the video. I caught myself saying "nose down... nose down... keep that wing flying." I do not understand why he did not just build airspeed in ground effect (water effect?) before starting to climb out. He had plenty of real estate to do so. Puzzling. And sad.
@@k9er233 Well, this is speculation on my part, and I will preface this by saying that I have *not* flown the beaver. However, I do know some pretty high time beaver pilots, and what I have heard is that the beaver climbs out at a much different attitude than your average Cessna. I'm not sure if it's because of the fat airfoil, the angle of incidence of the wing, the drooping ailerons, or all of the above, but from what I have heard, the correct climbout attitude seems nose-low, compared to the climbout attitude of a Cessna, and this guy, not being terribly experienced maybe was subconsciously reverting to his Cessna experience and pitching up a bit more.
@@andrewalexander9492 That makes a lot of sense.
I was told by an experienced DHC-2 pilot that they climb well with a pretty much flat attitude with flaps deployed. The video seems to show a lot of pitch here. If you're used to flying a Super Cub, this might seem normal enough to be dangerous in a Beaver.
I grew up near here and used to drive past Lake Hood on a regular basis. It's an important transportation hub since people can travel from Anchorage to anywhere float planes can land
Julian, I worked at US Fish and Wildlife Service in Anchorage with a social scientist named Taylor. Any relation?
Wait who shows up with a surprise cargo of 400lbs of mortar?!
Welfare scammers.
You should have seen the list of stuff the passengers brought with them
@@pilot-debrief I have.
The back story, is that these were people who were living in the bush and living off public welfare. The live on a lake which is not accessible by road. A couple of things about living in the bush in Alaska, there's not a lot of income opportunities, so their plan is living off public assistance, and 2, transportation is expensive, because it's by air. This was the mother, accompanying her minor son to town for a dentist appointment. Medicare (or medicaid) paid for a seaplane charter to bring them to town, then another charter to return them. In reality, it could have been a much smaller floatplane to transport one adult and one child, but I guess one was not available, so your tax dollars chartered a Beaver for them to go back to the remote lake. And they showed up for the charter, *surprise* with a bunch of really heavy building materials for their "luggage" the 800 lb of redimix mortar was just part of it. The pilot, regrettably, didn't have the presence of mind to tell them, nope, sorry, this is too much, you have to leave some of it behind.
Both accidents the pilots were behind the power curve the entire time and never rectified that.
Shit happens but in most cases it is not the air frame but the pilot. This also applies to vehicle accidents which far exceed those related to GA.
Human error is the primary source of failures in any well-designed system. I'm a software engineer, and we call it "PBCAK" -- "Problem between chair and keyboard". 🙂
I can’t believe you said what I told my wife last night, I don’t need the bush but I need the beaver!
I remember my first solo in a beaver...
amazing! I told your wife the same thing!!
No wonder she’s not interested in ‘flying’ with you.
Looks like he was hanging nose very high on that prop!
Ailerons are less effective than is the rudder directly aft of extra relative wind blast from the prop. He gave up free level in low ground effect acceleration energy well before obstructions required pitch up. The nearness of the land runway may have been a factor, but climb out was well over obstructions prior to the turn. Pitch up to Vx or Vy as appropriate is simply not usually appropriate when runway is still available. Pitching to just over obstructions, saving zoom reserve airspeed, for maneuvering is safer than pitching to a fifty feet over obstructions and stalling, falling into them or beyond. He cleared by more than necessary but did not release back pressure for a 1 g turn when beyond. He could have traded some of that fifty vertical feet for enough airspeed to prevent stall in the turn. The design of the airplane is to fly with dynamic neutral stability. It cannot stall itself, a pilot pulling back on the yoke is necessary. The critical angle of attack is when it stalls, not why.
Doing a very slow bank feet off of the water looks like it can be a bit unnerving, but it's how sea planes operate. They really are boats (bad pun) and don't respond to sudden changes well.
Yeah, that last pilots quote is very appropriate. Those kinds of, completely avoidable, crashes make flying look bad as a whole. I hope he does follow through with it.
That he was a flight instructor is discouraging.
Glad everyone was relatively okay. Whenever a Beaver is lost, I feel as though I just lost a day of my life.
You can do without the bush.....but not the beaver.
Tell your AF bud, that I'll be using that line a lot, if he doesn't mind.
Keep up your channel, great stuff.
A left hand turn immediately after takeoff of a float plane, while still in the initial SECONDS of climb out?? With unpredictable winds in the environment?
Whoever thought that was a good idea, and whoever approved that procedure, all need to stop and think again… maybe consider going back for some more education in aerodynamics, and safety of flight.
I wish pilots would stop destroying Beavers.
Airspeed is life, but hard to build airspeed with the nose pointed skyward. The Beaver is less forgiving of bad technique than a Cessna it has been said. Not the case here but virtually a fatality per year has happened in a Beaver from a stall out of a climbing turn after take-off, they don't give much warning with buffet, so keep your speed up!
Obey the rules = Life.
@@BrianWMayif by rules you mean the laws of physics, yes.
If by rules you mean something daddy government lays out for you, no.
The initial climb looked promising, but picking up that tailwind as well as trying to get out of ground effect was the cause. I think it's nearly impossible once you're commited and over hangars etc to release the back pressure. Perhaps alternatively if we say it doesn't matter how much you miss objects on the ground by as long as you miss them. I.e. he doesn't need a positive climb he just needs to keep it flying wings level with minimal manoeuvring. I have had a couple of scares on hot days where they trees are much closer than I was happy with, but better that than stall.
Perhaps a technicality (I know Pilot Debrief said the same thing you said), but unless the pilot encountered windsheer, a tailwind (while having no contact with the water) due to the changing direction of the Beaver, would have no bearing on the stall. The changing direction was likely because he may have not had enough right rudder, thus having more drag on climbout than normal, increasing his stall speed. In any case, once stalled, torque took him into a left spin.
My assessment is that when you are at a high AOA and not generating much lift then the winds can make the aircraft turn because the control surfaces are not going to be effective and you go from having some headwind component that's helping you stay airborne to a tailwind then it's not going to help.
@@SkyborneVisions Yep. I'm not sure why some people still think winds will "shear" when you change direction when already airborne. This happens in the first couple seconds of flight as you takeoff, but after that it's not a thing, because you are moving along with the "river" of air. Unless that river changes direction, an actual significant difference in windspeed or direction, turning left or right has no bearing on the aerodynamics of the aircraft. Not sure why this myth keeps going.
The "downwind turn" is mostly a myth. But I have seen mathematical analysis regarding inertia and momentum that might prove that it could affect aircraft with low mass and rapid heading change. The math was above my paygrade.@@JamesNoBrakes
@@jamesmurray3948 Unless you are experiencing rapid windshear, this is a physical impossibility. This is the basic principle of relativity. Velocity is relative, once you are "in" the airstream, you are stationary as far as turning and lift is concerned. You'll have the same amount of lift no matter which direction you turn. This is why it's a myth that there's such thing as a "downwind turn". There are high AOA stalls caused by excessively low speed and high bank angles, which tend to happen close to the ground when people try to avoid objects and maneuver outside of the capability of the aircraft. This is typically what happens.
This was caused by one thing and one thing only. thing everyone overlooks. the thing the pilot forgot about and does not treat with respect as he should, and the thing you do not even Mention. That thing is the sudden loss convection lift. This pilot was literally flying on lake effect convection lift and when he went over the hangers, it was gone. it would be like the bottom of the plane falling out. this is the same thing that cause planes to crash on leeward side of mountains and more. Whenever you are less than 500 ft, anywhere. the ground or terrain convection lift is in action on your plane. You must always consider what it is and your current situation with respect to it. This guy was barely above minimum airspeed. The convection lift was his safety net and as soon as he went over the hanger, he initiated a climbing turn, at the worst time. The turn that needed either more airspeed or the convection lift to remain in effect in order for him to keep that thing flying. , BUT He lost that benefit of convection left over a structure and land where there is none. The stall resulted and he was done for.
How was he getting convection while over the cold water? Only lift to begin with was ground effect and that’s not a lot of height anyway.
@@oo0Spyder0oo There is not a single body of water anywhere on the planet that does not produce convergence lift below the convergence zone above the water, no matter how hot or cold the water is. NOT ONE.. It is the differential zone between the water temp and the air temp. and the moisture content of air. That zone has a radical change in moisture in the air, that effects the hydrostatic component of lift on the airfoil. In a sea plane there is more than Aerodynamic lift there is also a hydrostatic lift component. Close to the water and as high as 500 ft there is greater moisture (inversely proportional to the altitude) in the air that gives the airfoil greater lift. Especially sea water where they are temperature gradients in the body of water that will allow it to evaporate at high rates even if it is colder than the air at the surface but much warmer at a depth of 10 ft or more. This completely changes above the convergence zone, and it completely goes away over land where there is no convergence zone. You have no idea what you are talking about.
@@josephkaminski1857you're giving that piece of the equation way too much credence in this case. The air 50 feet off to the side of the water is not going to be that drastically different than it is directly over the water. The hanger is basically on the shore
@@MidwestFarmToys You have no idea who you are talking to or my credentials. You are lost pal, totally lost. not worth even trying to help a person like you who makes up stupid stuff.
Frank: “Nice Beaver!” Jane: “Thanks, I just had it stuffed!”
I professionally flew Floatplanes in Canada for years. The Beaver takes a lot of good technique especially if it is heavy.. Stay on the step until airborne... NO ROTATION, fly level for as long as possible. He is airborne too soon and did not allow acceleration.. Inexperience.
Would be interested to see where he sat the pax depending on weight, looks like a C of G issue
Oh, never considered cg invovled, damn , could have been prevented
@@dabneyoffermein595 most can be prevented and G of G is a major issue in this type of GA flying as people tend to think if it fits in, we can go. All planes will fly overweight with enough take off distance BUT, incorrect C of G, NO. Incorrect C of G puts the center of Lift behind the C of G or the lever arm of the elevator becomes insufficient... all 4 forces are out of balance, you are then a test pilot and a not very good one. So you have an uncontrollable aircraft
@@mijo3642 wow, you know your physics , did you take engineering in college? That lever arm stuff is sophisticated. when building R/C planes , we have to really work on C of G and some of those mechanics but not to the degree you know them, again, just wow. Overweight planes can be scary... i believe that's what took down American singer and actress Aaliyah (2001 Marsh Harbour Cessna 402 crash), not 100% on that though.
@@dabneyoffermein595 I fly a 200 ton Airbus 321. Didn't help that the pilot in that Marsh Harbor crash was spaced out on drugs really.
@@mijo3642 wow, a little heavier than an R/C plane. Airbus 321 Didn't know about the Marsh Harbour pilot.
Who put two aeroports beside each other?
the seaplane base was there first. The international airport was built later.
Those float-equipped Beavers are quite common in western WA State. We boat and run into (figuratively) them quite often. Always interesting to see them land and take off amongst heavy boat traffic. Lots of private docks with them tied up. I’m sure they’re all over Alaska & BC too.
There's 2 docked on my lake in Ontario Canada, great way to access the untold thousands of lakes in thr northern part of the province. I don't know much about planes but they seem to be held in high regard by those around me who are experienced with them. Cheers
There are plenty in BC for quick easy access to lakes and sea. Fine way to travel if your pilot is good!
@@martinross5521 my buddy is a pilot. I always send him pics of private planes tied up to docks with the comment, “Must be nice…”.🤣
My dad and I flew with that pilot the day before the crash. Thankfully he aborted our take off when he didn't use flaps, and then he drove the plane into the boats on the river at the lodge we were going. We felt lucky not to be in this crash!
What?!? Crazy!
That's crazy! What the hell are they doing up there? Must be a underwater junkyard.
You got lucky, my family and I didn’t. Pilot was an arrogant ass in my opinion. I got the really fun experience of being in the copilot seat. 1st crash btw
Are you taking about the first or second crash in this video? Either way you were lucky!!
Comforting to know that luck is the determining factor in what pilot you get to take your chances with.
Unfortunately this is true. Even well-run outfits with experienced pilots can have a mishap, but your chances of a problem are much lower. Don't hesitate to ask questions before booking a flight. My wife likes to travel to exotic places and sometimes uses very small air operations to get places. I literally call them and talk to the chief pilot to get a feeling for how they are run. So far it's worked out - all the people I've called seemed very professional and were happy to entertain my questions. And thankfully my wife has come back from each of these trips in one piece. 🛩🙏
Luck Has nothing do do with it. He clearly made the wrong decision to keep climbing. Maybe needs a little more MCA instruction? Never turn more than 5-10 degrees bank that close to MCA especially near MGW!! 😐
@@jayallen5177luck has a ridiculous amount to do with it. You don't control who flies you unless you're a millionaire/billionaire.
SO, he had all the ratings. So what if the links in the brain don't connect properly.
I’ve been in many beavers in my life,flying into Heli logging camps on the BC coast. Otters and twin otters too,great planes as long as the guy flying it is good. 😊
I can tell right away they are too heavy. Yeah, 800lbs of mortar. That sounds like an immediate issue to say 'no way' right there. I've read about this a bunch of times over the years.
Clearl;y he was nose high on takeoff and held that bad attitude. Why wasn't he watching his airspeed? The airplane looks like it's struggling to fly just mushing through the air, so obviously not accelerating. No surprise to then see the accelerated stall. Can't believe this wasn't a novice pilot since he was making such a basic mistake.
Sadly aircraft crashes in Alaska are pretty common.
How common? Got any stats to show us that aircraft crashes in Alaska “are pretty common?”
@@sludge8506 so many that the Smithsonian channel had a whole tv series with the TSA all about it.
@@sludge8506 Yep, accident rates in small general aviation aircraft are about 5.8 accidents per 100,000 flight hours. Accident rates in Alaska are about 13.5 accidents per 100,000 flight hours Alaska has about a 2 and a half times greater accident rate.
@@andrewalexander9492 Thank you, Andrew. You have shed light on the issue.
Hey, ham, talking about tv shows proves nothing. 🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦♂️🤦🏻♂️🤦♂️
@@damham5689 Hey, thanks for highlighting that pro-Trump video. Pretty illuminating!! 🙄🙄
@5:14 I think his friend was referring to something else non related, wink wink 😉. And by his smirk, I think he gets it too. LOL
In '60s w/Forrestal afire off Nam, Dad never pilot, but forced to fly B-58 Hustler from Michigan to Nam Base delivering 2-300HP Main Lift motors. COL just completed 2 Crome Domes so tired complete out, taught Dad air-to-air refueling one time, then slept rest of flight & woke to land. SR-71 Blackbird sent by uninformed as only thing to catch it, took photo of COL found sound asleep. Successful delivery & installation saving hundreds of Sailors, but when COL back to Base, informed his call sign now Snow White, written on back of SR-71 photo!!!
Thank you for these. Very useful, concise and well explained.
You're very welcome! Glad you enjoyed it!
He clearly never eased off the elevator during his takeoff. There was zero change with his wake. Lots of drag.
Flying 185 amphibians in s. Louisiana oilfields it looked like he forgot to set his trim forward causing too much back pressure on the controls, it would cause slipping and sluggish controls leading to a stall. Looks like he got this feeling right off the water. He needs my rule #1 Never short yourself Runway and Lift...that is what makes airplanes fly. I always use the most runway available toward the strongest head winds this is just as important as configuring an aircraft properly like weight and balance fuel level, pumping floats, trim, even having to call the arc to enter their space before taking off.
That's why you apply in to wind bank. The Beaver is an amazingly safe and capable aircraft and most of these accidents occur due to incorrect pilot input or total lack of pilot input in situations like the ones shown here.
"You can do without the bush, but you can't do without the beaver..." 😂😂😂😂 Sir, you seem like a genuinly good guy, and I think, a brilliant pilot. 👏
I was trained to "stay in ground effect" untill building up sufficient speed to safely "climb out"!
Isn't this a major point of Training anymore?
I learned about 50 years ago!
Very good video. One more destination for my bucket list. Thank you Jeff.
Thanks! Who's Jeff? 😉
Your channel is awesome because you show us in depth
Sweet. I agree.
Another that made a low slow tailwind turn.. And the idiot stalled it of course..
Never stall… never ever stall… you accelerate into the ground.
Flaperons not only do as described in the video, they increase the chance of a stall when attempting to turn with the flaps down.
Simplified:
The ailerons already down, the one moving down when you apply ailerons for a bank will also significantly increase drag on that side, requiring significant rudder input to compensate.
You now have a high drag configuration, low and slow, trying to climb.
I fly RC models and used to demonstrate turning left while applying full right aileron and full right rudder at low speed using flaperons.
It's a VERY UNSTABLE condition. I eventually did the demonstration too low and too slow and the aircraft suddenly banked 90 degrees (stalled) and cartwheeled down the runway.
We can demonstrate these conditions using models... and when it goes wrong, nobody dies. The aerodynamics work the same. The model usually has much higher power:weight, allowing recoveries the full scale can't perform.
Well, your buddy is right about the bush 🌲 the 🦫, lol
What's tragic is that he had plenty of altitude to play with, and simply leveling off momentarily to pick up speed would have been a breeze, both easily and safely.
Man, the Word "Beaver" Drinking game for this video was a bad Idea. 🤣. Great insight.
@9:17 you can see a puff of smoke coming from the engine
I don't know if that had anything to do with it
but I can't believe it wasn't mentioned
Good eye. I didn't see it either and I agree it's significant!
This guy basically broke every rule there is, and squandered every opportunity to correct the situation. I have some time in the Beaver (the kind that fly, lol) and much like a 182, you can load them up and go BUT you have to respect them too. You have to allow them to do what they do best, and if you expect too much you're going to learn some hard lessons. He had much better runway options just begging to be used, but stupid set in. I was in a non-climb situation many years ago, and it's hard to force yourself to push forward and build speed as opposed to pulling back. That day, my training kicked in and I became a robot for a few moments, but it ended well. As for the last accident, does anyone know if the pilot, his family, and his dogs survived the mishap?
But he didn't have to climb, that's the thing I find puzzling bout this accident. I'm a lake hood local, fly out of there with my own float-plane, so I'm pretty familiar with the layout. From where he lifted off, there is no particular urgency to gain altitude, you still have quite a bit of lake in front of you before the shoreline, and with about a 30-35 degree turn to the left, you have another 3/4 of a mile of lake in front of you to accelerate and climb, or alternately to pull the throttle back and land.
In the loss of control accident with the beaver trying to crash on top of the cameraman, there were no serious injuries (other than to the airplane)
these pilots simply never received quality training. They spent too much time playing Wing Commander at their computers and just got used to "pull stick back = go up"
Unrelated but please comment on this story in the Washington Post; 5,000 pilots suspected of hiding major health issues. Most are still flying.
Washington Post = Intel Mouthpiece
"major health issues" = myocarditis from the Jab
FAA changed the rules to (1) hide this and (2) prevent the collapse of the Airlines already facing a severe pilot shortage
Too many BS hours in many pilots logbook’s.
Best line!! You can live without the bush but can’t live without the beaver. So true.
Trying to clim out to fast and it only takes once.They probably have been extremely close to stalling before and just didn't know it.
Look at the waves on the lake! Dude had a tailwind
yes you're right , " you can do without the bush , but you cant do without the beaver"
7:04 I think you may have misspoken.
Care to elaborate how wind direction is a factor here after becoming airborne?
I think this pilot knew he was heavy and feared a 90 degree turn departing to the south and figured he could cheat a little using the SE waterway.
Also, what do you mean by “broke the AOA”? There is no such term, to my knowledge.
And on the other accident; float planes do not need to be lined up for takeoff. A short “field” technique is to run circles up to speed when there is not enough distance.
If you yank the plane in the air and a headwind component helps you then turning to make it a tailwind is not going to help. Also, when you pulling back hard enough to approach stall then the control surfaces will not be very effective in maneuvering the plane, so a strong crosswind could make the plane turn or you'd essentially be unable to counter the effects of it. You have to reduce the AOA (push forward on the controls) or "break the AOA" which is the terminology we used in the fighter pilot community. You can't keep pulling back and hope things will get better.
@@pilot-debrief Your reply is very surprising given the channel content. The only benefit of a headwind is a shorter takeoff distance and if needed, a steeper net climb. Once airborne, if obstacles are not an issue, wind direction in not relevant. This was a departure stall and loss of control in a turn. A crosswind cannot initiate a roll, (which is needed for a turn), it only causes drift.
The only effect wind would have is to change the radius of the turn. Wind direction and velocity in flight have no effect on aerodynamics, only the aircraft relationship to the ground.
Interesting term. As you know, AOA (angle of attack) is the relationship between relative wind and chord line; you can’t break it. You can exceed the critical angle of attack.
Push forward on the yoke!
I hate it when someone wastes a Beaver - best aircraft ever made, and they're not making any more of them. (For me, pushing forwards when too slow and too low is instinctive, and I've got far fewer hours than that guy. It *can* be learned.)
I was waiting for the splash
5:10 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Taking a shot every time he says beaver was definitely a mistake.
😂
Why do pilots insist on turning on a critical phase of flight? Airspeed, rotate, climb speed, safe altitude, turn on to course. Save the talking after you finish flying. If you are going to cross into an area you should not normally go over or into, get clearance before taking off. Like this, "Lake Hood, Beaver 456 taking off lake, will need straight out climb because I am heavy and slow." If they refuse, wait until the will allow it. If they still refuse, declare an emergency. You can do what you want. Make the call, "my stall horn was going off, I needed to fly straight out and solve the emergency."
Gust of gravity hit them
As the pilot shouted, “That’s it! I am never flying again!,” all of the aircraft’s declared, “Thank you GOD for hearing our prayers!” 😉! I mean, seriously, how many birds is this “pilot” allowed to kill???😔
Ugh. I don't care if I'm flying a 737. you should up with an extra 800lbs, I'm running another W&B. crazy pilots skip fundamentals like that. SO grateful for the instruction I had.
Great vid' and all... and no arguments... BUT someone needs to say it somewhere... in addendum.
JUST because there's "limited space" for your take-off or maneuvering, that DOES NOT MEAN you absolutely have to skimp out on the space you use for said maneuvering or take-off! I know the airport has registered air-space that's not supposed to be invaded... ALL well and good... There's still a LOT of space (especially for a little GA plane trying to take off from the water) between the bank of that lake and the marked and designated "boundaries" of the airport. You DO need to be cognizant of that proximity, but when the airport is about a MINUTE away from the edge of the water, you have AT LEAST a minute in the air before you're "out of bounds" as it were... NO GOOD comes from "rushing it", especially in take-off... EVEN if you encroach on airport air space, I PROMISE you, that EVERYONE INVOLVED would much rather you and your passengers make it to pay the fine and get your "bitching out session" from the ATC or whomever.
In fact, on that "Just in case" basis, it wouldn't hurt anything to take a few minutes pre-flight and LOOK at the traffic pattern over the airport. Who's landing and taking off over there? Which way are they going? How many are there? How HIGH are they? What's YOUR best option just in the remote possibility that you get airborne "technically" but can't just pull up and climb out???
AND NEVER EVER forget to brief on what the hell YOU are going to do if you get too fast to abort take-off but the engine conks out... or what you're going to do to AVOID the temptation of "The Impossible Turn" or "Deadman's Turn"??? ...SO... where might they not get "too pissed" about you firmly putting down an airplane that nobody really wanted there??? (including you)
Getting these ideals together and ORGANIZED IN YOUR HEAD FIRST, will remind us all, that pilots who know what the f*** they're doing ALWAYS have a contingency of some kind for just about everything remotely foreseeable. With the options you figure for yourself, you can have the CONFIDENCE to "just fly off the water" and TAKE YOUR TIME, to perform the rotation STEP-BY-G**-D***-STEP...
AND no... this is NOT to "call anyone out" nor to poke fun at "stupid mistakes"... A smarter man than me once told me, "You damn well BETTER learn from other people's f***-ups, because there's NO WAY IN HELL you're ever going to find the time to make ALL those f***-ups, YOURSELF!" ;o)
This was more like Pilot Debris.
Beaver. Flying since 1947. Arguably the most reliable Bush plane ever built. Takes a true ejit to kill it under pristine conditions... Or... a supremely shitty mechanic.
Great saying! You can do without the bush but you can’t do without the beaver. Lol
What a FI!!! When I get my private pilot license (which I'm NOT pursuing), I will NOT put my family in the passenger seats until I have AT LEAST 500 hours of experience!!! How could someone keep forcing a take-off while not seeing the performance necessary to get into the air??
I don't know, maybe I'm weird, but when I feel the airplane starting to mush, my instinct is to push forward on the yoke. Even a 20-50 foot dip in altitude makes a world of difference in gaining control authority. If you're 100 feet up and feel the airplane start to drop out from under you, push forward on the yoke; do NOT pull back.
I experienced that once when there was a quick wind shift from calm to tailwind right as I cleared 100' AGL. The airport is surrounded by urban build-up, so a stall-mush would have dropped me onto a populated area. As soon as I felt less pressure on my backside, I pushed a little forward on the yoke. In only a couple of seconds, my airspeed increased to where I could continue my climb-out.
NO. Lake Hood IS NOT in Alaska...it is in Anchorage.
Big, no huge, flipping difference.
Got to wonder why? Why so many dumb water pilots do somethings, that they expect Everrhing to flly and go Absoutly right and good. (NOT)... may we should intall JATO rocket assist...
He clearly made the wrong decision to keep climbing. Maybe needs a little more MCA instruction? Never turn more than 5-10 degrees bank that close to MCA especially near MGW!! 17 Degrees to relative wind is about where most aircraft reach CAA "Critical Angle of Attack"😕
Water. Dangerous.
Flying. Dangerous.
Water & Flying. Not something I will ever do.
Nice Beavers! Shame about the pilots. I flew in a Beaver in British Columbia in 1982. Pilot was ex Luftwaffe “I used to bomb your country in the war” he said. T/O and landing on water were brilliant.
Can somebody explain pilot's instinct to pull back on the stick??? You can not climb by pulling up the nose if you don't have the power. Nose down to build speed.
I am not a pilot and have not played one on TV, but I have flown hang gliders. I can never imagine trying to climb merely by point the nose in a more upward position. My brain instantly screams 'stall!' I have watched 100s of youtube videos and the same issue arises.
On crash 2 pilot should have a) NOT been flying family members yet, b) aborted the moment he was drifting left.
One would almost think pilots believe stalling is a myth....
Classic Beaver climbing left turn stall.
I’ve done hundreds of takeoffs just like this. On the step turning downwind stay on the water.
The key is once airborne don’t climb. Accelerate to get the flaps up.
Never turn with takeoff flap below 80 mph.
The Beaver can deep stall with the nose never dropping past the horizon.
9:15 Able to level wings giving pilot impression of regaining control of take-off? But still low-n-slow, nose up, no climb. Room to abandon take-off, nose down, then land ahead?
9:16 Vapour trail? water ballast? (or not from aircraft?)
9 25 Left wing drop. Seems in an attempt to lift left wing right yoke applied - left aileron down, right aileron up. Rudder application not viewable.
OMG....just lower the nose, right rudder, and it would have been fine....just fly down the crosswind waterway and accelerate...or not...could have put it back on the water anytime. Wasted another rare Beaver, needlessly!