rickair7777

Pilot survived with minor injuries. May need more training on stall avoidance in the pattern.


https://www.newsnationnow.com/us-new...ilot-survives/

Excargodog

Eventually nobody is going to insure GA aircraft if this keeps up…

JohnBurke

Makes for a short-field approach and landing, but the tie-down fees are through the roof.

TiredSoul

St Jude, one of the patron Saints of impossible causes and student pilots.
Reminds me of the dude that tried a touch and go and ended up in the side of a hangar.

Like a horse to the stable

QRH Bingo

Look at the flaps; one side up, one side down. Guesses on pre or post impact?

TiredSoul

Interesting point.
I don’t remember enough from my 172 days to know if it’s a single flap motor with cable and pulley. I’ve had the cable snap on a C150 and asymmetric flap with only one coming up.
Had to fly home with full flap.
If this was asymmetric flap in the traffic pattern then it could have been interesting for a student pilot.

CBrF3

It doesn't look like a vertical impact to me. Based on the damage to the building at the edge of the roof and away from the plane, it looks like it almost cart-wheeled into that nose down position.

JohnBurke

The left flap is down, right up, which would have resulted in a right roll, if inducing a loss of directional control issue, but the left wing is bent up, indicating a left rolling motion on impact. Further, the windscreen is laying in front of, or above the aircraft, between the photographer and the airplane. That's secured at the top and bottom and takes a fair amount of force to remove, but a vertical impact, lawn-darting into the hangar, would force the windscreen inward, into the cockpit or crush it in place, and induce oil-canning or accordioning of the fuselage. A strike against the underside of the aircraft with the left wing absorbing the impact and the aircraft rolling left, might allow separation of the windscreen like that. The right cockpit door is open, indicating possible egress that way, vs. removal of the windscreen.

The 172 uses an electric motor actuator in the right wing for the right flap. Prior to 1965, 172's used a manual system. The manual system used a lever on the cockpit floor between the front seats, and the lever actuated cables going to both flaps. The Electric system replaced the manual in 1965, by using an electric motor for the right flap only, with a follow-up cable mechanism that moved the left flap. The mechanism uses two cables under tension from the right wing drive pulley. The flap pushrod and dive pulley's are the same on each side, right and left, but the right side is positioned electrically, while the cables from the right side attach to the left. If either of those cables fails, then the pulley will not have tension in that direction of movement.

In a nutshell, there is an extend, and a retract cable. If the extend cable fails, and the flaps are already retracted, then the flaps will remain retracted, and will be held in that position. An attempt to extend the flaps will not extend the left flap, but will remove the cable tension retaining it in the retracted position, and the flap will be free to flop or move unrestrained, except by cable binding that might occur, depending on the nature of or way in which the flap cable/mechanism failed. If instead the retract cable fails, and the flaps are extended, the left flap will stay extended, but will not retract when the right flap is retracted. In this case, if the flaps are retracted, the, the left flap will flop; it may stay retracted or it may be moveable, between the retracted and extended position. However, because the cable tension system relies on tension on both cables, failure of one cable can lead to failure of the other and binding of both cables, as well as the cable coming off the pulley to bind one or both flaps.

An extended flap does not indicate that the flaps had an asymmetric condition in flight, but only a loss of cable tension. between the left and right flaps; very possible at impact with either a failure of one or both cables, or one or both cables being forced out of position; given the damage to the left wing (severed, or spar bending/breaking) inboard of the flap area, the possibility of damage to or repositioning of the flap actuation mechanism (pulley, cable, etc) on the left side is very high; the asymmetric flap position as a result of the impact damage is very plausible. Given that the rolling motion of full flap asymmetry (right) would be opposite to that which caused the wing failure (left), the asymmetrical flap deployment is almost certainly the result of impact damage, not an inflight failure. That does not mean that both did not occur, or that the flap did not incur a failure prior to impact, but only that the damage as seen corresponds to the other elements of the impact.

As a side note, attempting a takeoff with a failed flap cable in a 150 or 172 would be very dangerous. The extend mechanism for the side might be intact, but there is no guarantee that the extended left flap would stay extended; it may very well have been held in place simply by a cable off it's track and bound against a pulley. Put the air load in flight on that, and it could fail at any time. A failed flap mechanism, up or down, should ground the airplane until the repair can be made. Imagine the effect of conducting that takeoff with full flaps and a subsequent engine failure while flying with full flaps.

An individual once had a flap problem in which the flap wouldn't retract on his light twin . He told me he'd fly to a nearby airfield where a repair station was located. He'd use full flaps. I asked what he had in mind if an engine failed, and he said it was a short flight, so minimal risk. A short flight that was all takeoff and landing, so biggest risk for the entire flight. I spent a few minutes examining the airplane, and found an electrical short; his flaps could have moved uncommanded at any time. I repaired the wire and off he went.

Getting afield, but aircraft talk to us; what seems like a little thing may be a precursor to or the only insight into, a bigger thing. I understand the impetus to simply extend the other flap to match and going, but the mechanical reality is that it could end very badly, because the cable-actuated flap isn't actually secure, even with the extend-cable still intact. There is nothing keeping it in place, or even assuring that it's actually still on the pulley; it may have jumped and may merely be trapped or kinked in place, giving the illusion that it is solid and stable. It could let go any time, depending on the progress of the cable failure. Further, even if it hasn't jumped the track yet, it could do so, enroute. If the flaps extend to an intermediate position, this is especially dangerous. With a flight control issue of that nature, it's definitely best to ground the airplane and wait until it's airworthy again.

I've had a cable failure in the older, manual flap system in which I applied landing flaps and with a bang, they retracted on their own. I question whether the airplane would be controllable with a full asymmetric deployment.