re: Plane crash in Lafayette

quote:

---

What? Let me get this straight? You're telling me the pilot (Ian) flew another Piper Cheyenne that crashed in 2010?

Would you care to clarify that please? Surely I'm missing something here.

---

You’re an idiot

quote:

---

I have a family member who worked for GDS. Ian flew him around in the same aircraft that crashed back in 2010

---

This is where it gets murky. But whatever. This is a stupid argument

quote:

---

This is where it gets murky.

---

I don’t see it at all. It’s crystal clear what is being said.

No comma is needed. Just a quick refresher on reading comprehension.

quote:

---

Cowboyfan89

---

This is a thread about a plane crash. With that comes responses to how and why as well as about the victims. So frick off with your crap.

quote:

---

If the flightaware data is to be believed they got to +1000’ and 200MPH. One engine can’t maintain enough speed to stay level at that altitude?

---

Yes. Most turboprop twins can maintain and climb slowly with one engine inoperative, IF proper piloting techniques are followed.

When a twin engine aircraft loses an engine, it induces several negative aerodynamic factors, mostly drag, yaw and roll into the dead engine. The airplane yaws and rolls into the dead engine because of the loss of power, drag created by the windmilling prop, and the opposite motor creating max power. If the pilot doesn’t immediately use sufficient rudder and aileron to maintain control, the airplane will literally roll inverted.

Most if not all turboprops automatically “feather” the props of the dead engine (the props change pitch to lessen the drag created by the props), but the operating engine produces a lot of thrust which creates a huge yawing action, which increases lift on the wing with the operating engine making it roll also.

It’s difficult enough to recognize and react accordingly to an engine failure in visual meteorological conditions where your peripheral vision of the horizon and ground can help you maintain control, and it’s extremely difficult to do in purely instrument meteorological conditions if you’re not properly trained and prepared for it.

It does, but it's instinctive. In the situation that happened it would have helped to have a co-pilot. Something happened that took the pilot out of his element and he needed some help in the right seat. If it was engine related is one thing, but I think there was another issue. Possibly electronic or flight control compromised.

quote:

---

It’s difficult enough to recognize and react accordingly to an engine failure in visual meteorological conditions where your peripheral vision of the horizon and ground can help you maintain control, and it’s extremely difficult to do in purely instrument meteorological conditions if you’re not properly trained and prepared for it.

---

Ian Biggs was head of GDS corporate aviation and an experienced pilot. I have to believe he was instrument certified and fully capable to fly that airplane. One of the witnesses reported the airplane was shaking violently (or making a shaking noise) when it crossed above her. Would that be an indication of a damaged engine(s)?

I'm thinking Biggs encountered some catastrophic engine failure at 900 ft. Everything seemed normal until that altitude. No Mayday to the Control Tower requesting emergency clearance to land...no communications whatsoever. Obviously Biggs was struggling to glide his damaged airplane to a safe landing somewhere.....anywhere.

quote:

---

The FAA does not have a good track record preventing airplanes from falling out of the sky.

---