Is there an abnormal condition that could have caused this fatal accident involving a stall?

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












In 2009, a Grob 103 glider stalled and crashed at Richmond Field, Michigan, killing the passenger but not the pilot.



The accident occurred after a failed winch launch; during the winch launch, the tow cable broke while the glider was about 400 feet AGL. The pilot correctly decided to turn around and return to the airport.



Here's what happened next, according to a statement the pilot later gave: "I could feel in the controls that something was not right and the glider was not responding in the manner that I am accustomed. There were none of the signs of a stall and the glider did not behave like it has any time that I have practiced stalls. Before I could determine the cause or take any action, the nose abruptly dropped and we dove toward the intended runway."



The NTSB report about the accident states that the probable cause of the accident was simply the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed, resulting in a stall. Judging by this, the NTSB didn't seem to put much stock in the pilot's report that "something was not right".



Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?










share|improve this question

























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    In 2009, a Grob 103 glider stalled and crashed at Richmond Field, Michigan, killing the passenger but not the pilot.



    The accident occurred after a failed winch launch; during the winch launch, the tow cable broke while the glider was about 400 feet AGL. The pilot correctly decided to turn around and return to the airport.



    Here's what happened next, according to a statement the pilot later gave: "I could feel in the controls that something was not right and the glider was not responding in the manner that I am accustomed. There were none of the signs of a stall and the glider did not behave like it has any time that I have practiced stalls. Before I could determine the cause or take any action, the nose abruptly dropped and we dove toward the intended runway."



    The NTSB report about the accident states that the probable cause of the accident was simply the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed, resulting in a stall. Judging by this, the NTSB didn't seem to put much stock in the pilot's report that "something was not right".



    Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?










    share|improve this question























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      In 2009, a Grob 103 glider stalled and crashed at Richmond Field, Michigan, killing the passenger but not the pilot.



      The accident occurred after a failed winch launch; during the winch launch, the tow cable broke while the glider was about 400 feet AGL. The pilot correctly decided to turn around and return to the airport.



      Here's what happened next, according to a statement the pilot later gave: "I could feel in the controls that something was not right and the glider was not responding in the manner that I am accustomed. There were none of the signs of a stall and the glider did not behave like it has any time that I have practiced stalls. Before I could determine the cause or take any action, the nose abruptly dropped and we dove toward the intended runway."



      The NTSB report about the accident states that the probable cause of the accident was simply the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed, resulting in a stall. Judging by this, the NTSB didn't seem to put much stock in the pilot's report that "something was not right".



      Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?










      share|improve this question













      In 2009, a Grob 103 glider stalled and crashed at Richmond Field, Michigan, killing the passenger but not the pilot.



      The accident occurred after a failed winch launch; during the winch launch, the tow cable broke while the glider was about 400 feet AGL. The pilot correctly decided to turn around and return to the airport.



      Here's what happened next, according to a statement the pilot later gave: "I could feel in the controls that something was not right and the glider was not responding in the manner that I am accustomed. There were none of the signs of a stall and the glider did not behave like it has any time that I have practiced stalls. Before I could determine the cause or take any action, the nose abruptly dropped and we dove toward the intended runway."



      The NTSB report about the accident states that the probable cause of the accident was simply the pilot's failure to maintain adequate airspeed, resulting in a stall. Judging by this, the NTSB didn't seem to put much stock in the pilot's report that "something was not right".



      Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?







      accidents glider stall sailplane






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 2 hours ago









      Tanner Swett

      767516




      767516




















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          4
          down vote













          Possibly a Center of Gravity beyond the aft limit could do it, but with 2 adults on board I don't think that's likely unless the person up front was really small and the PIC failed to load ballast to bring the front seat weight up to the minimum. The NTSB report doesn't say anything about loading so that seems to be a non-issue and there were no other anomalies with the airplane that they could find. Possibly really bad bug contamination on the leading edges could also affect the stall behaviour and maybe that could've been a factor the investigator overlooked. Pretty unusual to see gliders with bugs allowed to accumulate that badly, however.



          One of the problems with winch launches is when a cable breaks at 400 ft like that, you are in the worst possible place to be, directly over the middle of the runway. There is no way to get aligned with a runway to land without a fair bit of maneuvering and turning, and you're high enough that landing more directly toward an off-airport field is out of the question, since 400 feet is a lot of altitude to play with in a 35:1 glider, so psychologically the tendency is to be hell bent on landing on the grass directly below you one way or another. With that kind of unpleasant surprise with the stress level dialed up, it's likely the pilot simply did not perceive the pre-stall behaviour while concentrating on getting lined up.



          In gliders the pre-stall cues can be fairly subtle by power plane standards, obvious enough during deliberate practice but easy to miss when mentally loaded up with a life and death do-it-now task. So if I was going to bet a large sum of money on a likely cause, I'd go with the pilot stalling and spinning an otherwise normal glider from failure to maintain flying speed while maneuvering, regardless of what his recollection is.






          share|improve this answer



























            up vote
            2
            down vote













            Your question:




            Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?




            A couple of thoughts:



            1. In a 60 degree level bank turn, stall speed increases by about 40%.


            2. See below for information regarding indications of an approaching stall in the G103. (from the G 103 C Twin III Acro manual)


            G103 Flight Manual



            enter image description here



            Here is a copy of the manual for the Grob G103 Twin III Acro: G103 manual



            Here is a copy of the NTSB report I believe covers this accident: Grob 103 Accident - NTSB Identification: CEN09LA353






            share|improve this answer




















              Your Answer




              StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
              return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
              StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
              StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
              );
              );
              , "mathjax-editing");

              StackExchange.ready(function()
              var channelOptions =
              tags: "".split(" "),
              id: "528"
              ;
              initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

              StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
              // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
              if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
              StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
              createEditor();
              );

              else
              createEditor();

              );

              function createEditor()
              StackExchange.prepareEditor(
              heartbeatType: 'answer',
              convertImagesToLinks: false,
              noModals: false,
              showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
              reputationToPostImages: null,
              bindNavPrevention: true,
              postfix: "",
              noCode: true, onDemand: true,
              discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
              ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
              );



              );













               

              draft saved


              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function ()
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55910%2fis-there-an-abnormal-condition-that-could-have-caused-this-fatal-accident-involv%23new-answer', 'question_page');

              );

              Post as a guest






























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes








              up vote
              4
              down vote













              Possibly a Center of Gravity beyond the aft limit could do it, but with 2 adults on board I don't think that's likely unless the person up front was really small and the PIC failed to load ballast to bring the front seat weight up to the minimum. The NTSB report doesn't say anything about loading so that seems to be a non-issue and there were no other anomalies with the airplane that they could find. Possibly really bad bug contamination on the leading edges could also affect the stall behaviour and maybe that could've been a factor the investigator overlooked. Pretty unusual to see gliders with bugs allowed to accumulate that badly, however.



              One of the problems with winch launches is when a cable breaks at 400 ft like that, you are in the worst possible place to be, directly over the middle of the runway. There is no way to get aligned with a runway to land without a fair bit of maneuvering and turning, and you're high enough that landing more directly toward an off-airport field is out of the question, since 400 feet is a lot of altitude to play with in a 35:1 glider, so psychologically the tendency is to be hell bent on landing on the grass directly below you one way or another. With that kind of unpleasant surprise with the stress level dialed up, it's likely the pilot simply did not perceive the pre-stall behaviour while concentrating on getting lined up.



              In gliders the pre-stall cues can be fairly subtle by power plane standards, obvious enough during deliberate practice but easy to miss when mentally loaded up with a life and death do-it-now task. So if I was going to bet a large sum of money on a likely cause, I'd go with the pilot stalling and spinning an otherwise normal glider from failure to maintain flying speed while maneuvering, regardless of what his recollection is.






              share|improve this answer
























                up vote
                4
                down vote













                Possibly a Center of Gravity beyond the aft limit could do it, but with 2 adults on board I don't think that's likely unless the person up front was really small and the PIC failed to load ballast to bring the front seat weight up to the minimum. The NTSB report doesn't say anything about loading so that seems to be a non-issue and there were no other anomalies with the airplane that they could find. Possibly really bad bug contamination on the leading edges could also affect the stall behaviour and maybe that could've been a factor the investigator overlooked. Pretty unusual to see gliders with bugs allowed to accumulate that badly, however.



                One of the problems with winch launches is when a cable breaks at 400 ft like that, you are in the worst possible place to be, directly over the middle of the runway. There is no way to get aligned with a runway to land without a fair bit of maneuvering and turning, and you're high enough that landing more directly toward an off-airport field is out of the question, since 400 feet is a lot of altitude to play with in a 35:1 glider, so psychologically the tendency is to be hell bent on landing on the grass directly below you one way or another. With that kind of unpleasant surprise with the stress level dialed up, it's likely the pilot simply did not perceive the pre-stall behaviour while concentrating on getting lined up.



                In gliders the pre-stall cues can be fairly subtle by power plane standards, obvious enough during deliberate practice but easy to miss when mentally loaded up with a life and death do-it-now task. So if I was going to bet a large sum of money on a likely cause, I'd go with the pilot stalling and spinning an otherwise normal glider from failure to maintain flying speed while maneuvering, regardless of what his recollection is.






                share|improve this answer






















                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote










                  up vote
                  4
                  down vote









                  Possibly a Center of Gravity beyond the aft limit could do it, but with 2 adults on board I don't think that's likely unless the person up front was really small and the PIC failed to load ballast to bring the front seat weight up to the minimum. The NTSB report doesn't say anything about loading so that seems to be a non-issue and there were no other anomalies with the airplane that they could find. Possibly really bad bug contamination on the leading edges could also affect the stall behaviour and maybe that could've been a factor the investigator overlooked. Pretty unusual to see gliders with bugs allowed to accumulate that badly, however.



                  One of the problems with winch launches is when a cable breaks at 400 ft like that, you are in the worst possible place to be, directly over the middle of the runway. There is no way to get aligned with a runway to land without a fair bit of maneuvering and turning, and you're high enough that landing more directly toward an off-airport field is out of the question, since 400 feet is a lot of altitude to play with in a 35:1 glider, so psychologically the tendency is to be hell bent on landing on the grass directly below you one way or another. With that kind of unpleasant surprise with the stress level dialed up, it's likely the pilot simply did not perceive the pre-stall behaviour while concentrating on getting lined up.



                  In gliders the pre-stall cues can be fairly subtle by power plane standards, obvious enough during deliberate practice but easy to miss when mentally loaded up with a life and death do-it-now task. So if I was going to bet a large sum of money on a likely cause, I'd go with the pilot stalling and spinning an otherwise normal glider from failure to maintain flying speed while maneuvering, regardless of what his recollection is.






                  share|improve this answer












                  Possibly a Center of Gravity beyond the aft limit could do it, but with 2 adults on board I don't think that's likely unless the person up front was really small and the PIC failed to load ballast to bring the front seat weight up to the minimum. The NTSB report doesn't say anything about loading so that seems to be a non-issue and there were no other anomalies with the airplane that they could find. Possibly really bad bug contamination on the leading edges could also affect the stall behaviour and maybe that could've been a factor the investigator overlooked. Pretty unusual to see gliders with bugs allowed to accumulate that badly, however.



                  One of the problems with winch launches is when a cable breaks at 400 ft like that, you are in the worst possible place to be, directly over the middle of the runway. There is no way to get aligned with a runway to land without a fair bit of maneuvering and turning, and you're high enough that landing more directly toward an off-airport field is out of the question, since 400 feet is a lot of altitude to play with in a 35:1 glider, so psychologically the tendency is to be hell bent on landing on the grass directly below you one way or another. With that kind of unpleasant surprise with the stress level dialed up, it's likely the pilot simply did not perceive the pre-stall behaviour while concentrating on getting lined up.



                  In gliders the pre-stall cues can be fairly subtle by power plane standards, obvious enough during deliberate practice but easy to miss when mentally loaded up with a life and death do-it-now task. So if I was going to bet a large sum of money on a likely cause, I'd go with the pilot stalling and spinning an otherwise normal glider from failure to maintain flying speed while maneuvering, regardless of what his recollection is.







                  share|improve this answer












                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer










                  answered 1 hour ago









                  John K

                  9,0491028




                  9,0491028




















                      up vote
                      2
                      down vote













                      Your question:




                      Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?




                      A couple of thoughts:



                      1. In a 60 degree level bank turn, stall speed increases by about 40%.


                      2. See below for information regarding indications of an approaching stall in the G103. (from the G 103 C Twin III Acro manual)


                      G103 Flight Manual



                      enter image description here



                      Here is a copy of the manual for the Grob G103 Twin III Acro: G103 manual



                      Here is a copy of the NTSB report I believe covers this accident: Grob 103 Accident - NTSB Identification: CEN09LA353






                      share|improve this answer
























                        up vote
                        2
                        down vote













                        Your question:




                        Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?




                        A couple of thoughts:



                        1. In a 60 degree level bank turn, stall speed increases by about 40%.


                        2. See below for information regarding indications of an approaching stall in the G103. (from the G 103 C Twin III Acro manual)


                        G103 Flight Manual



                        enter image description here



                        Here is a copy of the manual for the Grob G103 Twin III Acro: G103 manual



                        Here is a copy of the NTSB report I believe covers this accident: Grob 103 Accident - NTSB Identification: CEN09LA353






                        share|improve this answer






















                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote










                          up vote
                          2
                          down vote









                          Your question:




                          Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?




                          A couple of thoughts:



                          1. In a 60 degree level bank turn, stall speed increases by about 40%.


                          2. See below for information regarding indications of an approaching stall in the G103. (from the G 103 C Twin III Acro manual)


                          G103 Flight Manual



                          enter image description here



                          Here is a copy of the manual for the Grob G103 Twin III Acro: G103 manual



                          Here is a copy of the NTSB report I believe covers this accident: Grob 103 Accident - NTSB Identification: CEN09LA353






                          share|improve this answer












                          Your question:




                          Suppose that we take the pilot at their word, however. Is there any type of abnormal condition that might have caused a "feeling in the controls that something is not right", and which could cause the nose to drop with "none of the signs of a stall" occurring beforehand?




                          A couple of thoughts:



                          1. In a 60 degree level bank turn, stall speed increases by about 40%.


                          2. See below for information regarding indications of an approaching stall in the G103. (from the G 103 C Twin III Acro manual)


                          G103 Flight Manual



                          enter image description here



                          Here is a copy of the manual for the Grob G103 Twin III Acro: G103 manual



                          Here is a copy of the NTSB report I believe covers this accident: Grob 103 Accident - NTSB Identification: CEN09LA353







                          share|improve this answer












                          share|improve this answer



                          share|improve this answer










                          answered 1 hour ago









                          757toga

                          4,9421029




                          4,9421029



























                               

                              draft saved


                              draft discarded















































                               


                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function ()
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2faviation.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f55910%2fis-there-an-abnormal-condition-that-could-have-caused-this-fatal-accident-involv%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                              );

                              Post as a guest













































































                              Comments

                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Long meetings (6-7 hours a day): Being “babysat” by supervisor

                              Is the Concept of Multiple Fantasy Races Scientifically Flawed? [closed]

                              Confectionery