Midair Crash
 

just saw the news clip of a Hawker 800XP hitting the wing of a glider out in Carson City... jet was apparently at 16,000 doing 450 KIAS when it struck the wing of the glider that was climbing. Obviously no transponder hit on the glider.

all survived, but with wet pants in the front. the glider pilot had a parachute and the female pilot of the hawker went gear up.. pics are on Airliners.net forum.. NetJets bird

direct link to images? that forum was huge :(

Picture:

http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/mi...rt&cachetime=0

Geez, right up by the cockpit too....I bet it scared the hell out of the crew having something hit that close to the cockpit.

Just out of curiosity, why would the jet need to land gear up? Was it concern about changing the configuration without knowing what it would do to aerodynamics?

The nose gear doors come up pretty far on the nose. The collision may have messed something up with them or the hydraulic system I would imagine.

i fly the XP now and the nose gear does in fact come up that far... the other thing, with an impact like that, you can not assure yourself that the girl didnt fall apart. if you lower the gear, it may just fall right out of the airplane, but still indicate a "down and locked" position.. never had the situation happen, so dont know the procedure for sure

UConn QB, did I ever tell you how gay you are? Really.

uconn, would you be so kind as to explain how the gear and gear indication system on the hawker operate? Just outta curiosity.

first things first: love2fly, you have some serious issues and if you care to address them in person, im all for it.. it would be a bad decision for you and over really quick

secondly, in regards to the hawker... like most retractables, the gear is hydraulically actuated and a crash like this has the potential to screw up that system. secondly, the dual nosewheel's steering system is also on the hydraulic system. judging by the force of the crash, there is a high probability of damage to that system. my guess is that it is not smart to land an airplane with no steering

for further inquiries, go to flightsafety.com, sign yourself up for a course, and you can ask your instructor.. my suggestion is to ask Kevin at FSI in Wilmington, DE

also, just because someone says the fly an airplane, does not make them a 100% expert.. i am not type rated in the XP, but i have been able to get some sim time.. not to mention that i am not in the actual airplane considering i am only getting ground school and sim time at FSI.. talk to me in a few weeks

Dude,

This is why I hate webboard "experts". Uconn, you might have more info about the Hawker than I do, but don't pass yourself off as being in the know (by saying "I fly the XP now") if you haven't even finished ground school.

It does nothing but hurt your credibility for the future. You free to tell us that you've discussed it in training. Or with other Hawker pilots. But don't pass yourself off as somthing you aren't. That's lame.

understood.. i correct my mistake

Fair deal. Sorry if my initial rant was a bit harsh. I guess that all of the CRJ "experts" that have surfaced this week have been driving me up the wall a bit.

Can you say Gay?

Yes, and I can also say goodbye...please find another forum to troll.

UConnQB14's decision to misrepresent himself is self-correcting, and as pointed out kills his current and future credibility. Instead of calling him on the issue of claiming to be something he's not, you elect to lob personal attacks. After reading some of your other posts, you really don't bring anything to the table.

I can't think of a single aircraft that does 450 KIAS at 16,000...

[QUOTE=...judging by the force of the crash, there is a high probability of damage to that system..."[/QUOTE]

Wow, please advise actual forces measured: from either accelerometers, accident report, or from your sources (probably Kevin). Then - and only then - can we assess probability of system decay.

neither can i, im just quoting the news report..

I can name about a dozen. They all start with the letter F. F-16, F-18, etc.

450 TAS would be a lot closer, but maybe still a little off. I know of some Hawkers haveing an VMO of 385kts. At 16000, that would not quite come out to 450, but could be pretty close. 16000 / 1000, x 5 = 80 + 385 = 465

probably off some without exact weather info, but maybe a slightly better idea. Just my 2cents.:)

Any glider pilots want to weigh-in here? Had near mid-airs with two here in the UK just a few weeks ago. Right in the radar pattern of a well known military airfield. I know the unpowered aircraft has the right-of-way and all, but really, these guys need to seriously think about where they are operating. Low time, recreational pilots in non-squaking aircraft have no business near high density turbojet operations IMHO.

The glider patches in my area display a colossal level of arrogance regarding their right of way...I guess they don't realize that those little glider symbols only appear on VFR, not IFR charts. At least they could get a transponder; those things are REALLY hard to see with just the 'ol eyeball...I saw one once while descending through 17,000 into socal IN AN AIRLINER, no TCAS, no nothing! :eek:

Agree with rickair. Those guys are almost impossible to see unless/until they lift up a wing. The other day when we had our close encounters, there was talk in our jet of filing paperwork against those guys. I had to remind my guys that this could only be harmful to our careers since we were technically the ones in the wrong. ICAO/FAR regs shouldn't be used in place of good situational awareness and judgement. Frustrating. I don't want to sound like I'm trying to discourage grassroots/general aviation here. Far from it. However, that doesn't mean that everyone who shares the sky shouldn't have a high level of SA.

Some of those glider pilots can be a bit...daring. Flying KC-10s out of March AFB, we'd have gliders out of Hemet making a bee-line for us as we entered the pattern. Their goal; to use our thermals to gain more altitude. Just a tad un-nerving to see one of these guys not moving in the windscreen until the last minute!

you'll be lucky if the glider pilots are carrying radios, much less a transponder. Issue on the TX would be finding an adequate source to power the stupid thing...guess a mighty air driven generator would work, lol.

Not to be a deusch Uconn, but I couldn't agree more...

A part owner of the Arizona Diamondbacks was in the Hawker. I saw the article in the Arizona Republic. Here's a link to the article. It sounds even more harrowing than the photo suggests:

http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news...crash0831.html

As far as hitting gliders, I flew F-16's in Germany in 90-91. Gliders at that time were much more prevelant there than anywhere else I've seen. I used to call them barrage-gliders and had many "near-hits" (as there's no such thing as a near-miss eh?). In the summer of 90 we had one of our jets hit a glider and kill the glider pilot. The F-16 sustained severe damages but the engine ran long enough to get the jet on the ground. Back then we typically cruised all over Germany at 420-480KCAS so you didn't get much warning. As you probably already know, gliders are virtually invisible to radar.

The radar thing might be an easy fix...line the inside of on side of the cockpit or fuselage with aluminum foil...this would only work at a certain range of target angles, but gliders turn a lot, so presumeably ATC would get the picture. Or purchase an off-the-shelf radar beacon and carry it in the glider, if there's room. That would work at any target angle.

Here's some good photos:

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l6...cf0034vm0s.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l6...ion/bildes.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l6...ion/14nx6s.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l6...ion/11dy6s.jpg

http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l6...tion/5oy9s.jpg

...dead stick landing? ;)

OK OK...bad joke...

Not that simple.

Increasing the radar cross section isn't going to help radars that work on doppler principles detect slow moving and constantly turning gliders.

I don't know of any off the shelf radar beacon that works with a large number of different radars.

Well, I was going to respond to the piece on gliders and right aways (being an active glider pilot), but....


I just saw the picture of the cockpit of the Hawker. And DAMN, that must have scared the crap out of the captain!!!!!

The captain of that plane did her job very well. I hope she got a fat tip from her well-healed passengers for bringing that baby and her passengers home safely. I'd hire her.

ryane,

Interested to hear from the glider perspective. What's the attitude like in that community? Is it "we have the right of way, and the right to fly wherever we choose", or is there some training/planning involved regarding where you guys fly? Don't want to make any assumptions here but some glider pilots seem pretty brazen in their choice of flying areas.

Since the glider "got hit" -whose insurance pays?:confused:

I don't think we as glider pilots really push the right of way thing. I know that if I am flying, and I see another aircraft, I watch and avoid it like any other powered pilot would. I think we are more conscience of the right of way when coming into land. It is more of a big deal when we are within 1,000ft of the ground.

I know I have personally turned out of a thermal to avoid powered traffic. To be honest, I don't care who has the right away, as long as we don't collide! I think the best way is for powered pilots to try and give glider pilots their space, especially when landing. I have gone around a few times in a powered aircraft just because I was close pretty close to a landing glider, and I wanted to give them their space.

As for where we fly, we are very conscience of powered traffic where I fly (Boulder, 1V5). I know that I never hang around the north side of the field below 1700ft AGL. I also know where the towplane descent area is, and try to avoid low altitude thermalling around there (even though that is sometimes the best air around). We stay away from the traffic pattern. We stay below 18,000ft unless we are talking to Denver center.

I've said it long before this accident, Gliders should be required to have a transponder.

Flying the star into ABQ from the southeast almost hit a glider in a 727 doing 350 kias. It was lucky it was circling away from our path as we passed.

The kicker is it was right on the arrival at 19,500. We were heads down, looked up, and there it went. Happened very fast. I didn't know it was physically possible to urinate my pants that fast.

Told ABQ center, and he said he did not have a target...not even a primary.