Deadly Plane Collision In Ohio

Guest Discussion
1

Deadly Plane Collision In Ohio

RAVENNA, Ohio, Oct. 14, 2005

Wreckage of one of two small aircraft which collided Friday, Oct. 14, 2005 near a housing development near Ravenna, Ohio. (AP /Akron Beacon Journal)

Quote
“The debris was floating in the sky, wings flipping and the planes were both spiraling out of control.”

Donald Litsinger, who raises livestock near the crash site and heard the explosion

(AP) Two small airplanes collided Friday over northeast Ohio and crashed in a field, killing four men, the State Highway Patrol said.

The origins and destinations of the flights weren’t immediately known, but all the victims were from Ohio, Patrol Capt. Jim Holt said.

One plane came to rest upside-down in a field in this mostly rural community 15 miles east of Akron.

The other crashed about a quarter-mile away near a housing development. The tail was broken off and one of the wings was nearly separated from the plane.

“The debris was floating in the sky, wings flipping and the planes were both spiraling out of control,” said Donald Litsinger, who raises livestock near the crash site and heard the explosion.

Christopher J. Erdovegi, 19, of Lakewood, and Alan L. Lyons, 38, of Shreve, died in a Cessna that crashed in the field. John P. Plavcan, 55, and Mark P. Schaden, 36, of Middlefield, died in the other plane, a Lancair, Holt said.

The Lancair was registered to Plavcan of Newbury, about 25 miles east of Cleveland, according to the Federal Aviation Administration Web site.

No one on the ground was injured.

The FAA said investigators from the agency and the National Transportation Safety Board were sent to investigate the cause of the crash.

Chute would have been handy…

Gaynor

2

while mildly interesting to post - (i have no idea what this crash in particular has to do with Cirrus) i think it is inappropriate for you to surmise that a chute would have made the difference. the CAPS is a wonderful safety device but it is not the holy grail of aviation safety. you might have posted " wish they had TCAS" and hoped that helped as well. i would hope you would think before you post what i think was a tasteless glib remark.

3

It doesnt have anything to do with Cirrus thats why its on the off topic forum, and I also believe that CAPS couldve helped them out big time. As you said, The Chute is not the Holy Grail but neither is TCAS.

4

Stuart:

It is posted here because it is off-topic. That is the appropriate place for it. Additionally, I do bet they wish they had a chute. It may not have helped, but when all other options fail you can’t help but hope for another one.

5

In reply to:

i think it is inappropriate for you to surmise that a chute would have made the difference…

The text of the report supports my supposition.

In reply to:

the CAPS is a wonderful safety device but it is not the holy grail of aviation safety. .

I didn’t say or imply that.

In reply to:

i would hope you would think before you post what i think was a tasteless glib remark.

OK. I’ll allow that some could find the remark tastless and glib. Let me rephrase it:
People who fly with parachutes are more likely to survive a mid air collision.
The remark also reflects my attitude towards people who take unnecessary risk. For example,I do not sympathize with accident pilots who have not sumped their fuel. In addition, the industry has been slow to adopt parachutes due to (in my opinion) macho pilot attitudes. If the tragedy of a mid-air with 4 deaths has any redeeming value it may be that it causes others to rethink their anti-parachute bias.
All those thoughts were condensed into the remark that you found objectionable.

Gaynor

6

In reply to:

… i think it is inappropriate for you to surmise that a chute would have made the difference…

I had the same initial reaction.
There are just too many ways to envision a midair that would leave the pilot incapacitated/unconscious/dead almost instantaneously. In those cases the chute is just so much “dead” weight.
That said, the chute may have been “handy”.

I think it was the word “handy” that came off as a bit glib - hard to tell tone/intent in a written post.

7

In reply to:

while mildly interesting to post - … i would hope you would think before you post what i think was a tasteless glib remark.

Again with people being offended…

Thanks Gaynor, you’re right… a parachute might have come in handy.

And thanks for taking the time to share. Keps us all informed that bad things can happen to nice people and we should always be viginalnt.

Reminds me to post in the memeber’s section about yesterday’s flight in Osama’s non-Skywatch SR22… two close mid-air calls.

8

Just another reason I bought the Cirrus. Maybe the CAPS is not the holy grail but it is one heck of an insurance policy!!!

9

"People who fly with parachutes are more likely to survive a mid air collision. "

this “fact” is based on what exactly? is there any supporting evidence?

10

In reply to:

"People who fly with parachutes are more likely to survive a mid air collision. "
this “fact” is based on what exactly? is there any supporting evidence?

The “fact” is that if you can pull the CAPS after a mid air collision you will probably survive. There was a mid air collision about four years ago near Waukegan, IL. One of the pilots was a well known local radio personality. He had an SR20 on order. He was still talking on the radio as he went down right into the roof of a hospital. I have often thought that the thought of an SR20 with a chute must have flashed through his mind on the way down.
Why do you question the value of a chute in a mid air collision when it seems to be obvious? If you are capable of pulling the chute and it is undamaged you and your passengers can survive.

11

In reply to:

"People who fly with parachutes are more likely to survive a mid air collision. "
this “fact” is based on what exactly? is there any supporting evidence?

Dunno about facts, since I don’t know of any mid-air collisions involving a Cirrus. (Keep up the vigilance, eh?!)

However, assuming that in your mid-air collision, you are alive before impacting the ground, then “logic” would indicate that in a Cirrus, the pilot and any passengers have one additional option to survive. When not in a Cirrus they don’t. (At least not without installing an after-market BRS option)

Cheers
Rick

12

About as bad an accident as you can get! I second the parachute–due to the relatively new status of the plane/chute we are in essence building the statistics—I am not a gambler, but I sure as heck will take ANY reasonable tool that may help save my life and family/friends and a chute is definitely one of the new ones!!

Ironically, Alan’s idea for the chute came from his in flight collision! While some may debate it’s usefulness, I would just as soon debate while I have one in my plane! [:)]

13

I have stayed out of this thread until now.

While I don’t know of any chute pulls after a midair it is certainly possible. Certainly the original chute pull in Texas with an aileron that had departed the aircraft is somewhat instructive. This was a significant portion of the airframe that was no longer present on the aircraft that preceded the chute pull.

Also not mentioned so far is the fact that Allen Klapmeyer survived a midair collision (I am not sure what type of aircraft). This was a major factor in the decision to equip all Cirrus with a chute.

14

In reply to:

However, assuming that in your mid-air collision, you are alive before impacting the ground,

Okay, it’s getting pretty far off topic now, but I wonder how many mid-airs are both survivable AND damage the aircraft substantially.

In other words, if the mid air is more of a glancing blow with little damage to the aircraft, then it’s still flyable. This would account for pretty much all survivors of midairs (like Alan K).

If the mid air is pretty severe, I would really doubt whether the pilot & passengers are alive and/or conscious. Can you imagine the impact from a head-on collision with two planes each traveling 180 knots? Even if it was a 90 degree impact angle, just the momentum from one plane at 180 knots would be very significant.

I’m guessing (and it’s certainly just a guess!) that only a small percentage of midairs would cause enough damage to make the plane uncontrollable but yet not impact the pilot enough that he or she could still pull the chute.

15

In reply to:

Again with people being offended…
Thanks Gaynor, you’re right… a parachute might have come in handy.
And thanks for taking the time to share. Keps us all informed that bad things can happen to nice people and we should always be viginalnt.
Reminds me to post in the memeber’s section about yesterday’s flight in Osama’s non-Skywatch SR22… two close mid-air calls.

Thanks to you and the others who placed supportive posts.
Gaynor

16

Gaynor,

The images of the crashed airplanes (go to http://msnbc.msn.com/id/9699088/ and click on “Slideshow”) do indeed support the hypothesis that CAPS could have led to a less tragic outcome for this accident.

The key observation to make from the photos is that the fuselages of both aircraft were largely intact after the collision. Hence an onboard CAPS system would be likely to have survived the collision. If we assume that the occupants were conscious after the collision, they could have been able to pull the CAPS handle… and our discussion of the impact might have been a much happier one.

— Roger

17

I viewed the slideshow, and saw nothing to suggest a CAPS system would have done any good. The only aircraft shown is a Cessna, and it has both wings entirely ripped off. It also appears the top of the cabin portion of the fuselage is gone, which could be attributable to the wing or wing spar tearing off. In any event, I think a CAPS on a high wing airplane requires the risers to go over the top of the wing. If the ceiling of the fuselage is gone, then any handle mounted in the ceiling would be gone, as well.

18

My feelings are that CAPS is a good thing but I wonder what the consequences are. Are Cirrus pilots putting themselves into situations where CAPS would be their only out? I just worry about putting too many eggs in that basket. In this case Gaylord’s post could have read “wish they had skywatch” and we could draw similar conclusions. technology is great and i am a huge advocate - i just hope that we as GA make appropriate decisions based on it.

19

In reply to:

I viewed the slideshow, and saw nothing to suggest a CAPS system would have done any good.

Perhaps it would have done no good, but would it’s availability done any harm? The outcome couldn’t have been worse.

20

Perhaps we can agree that it’s a good thing to know how to text message?

— Roger