Lancaster Mid-Air collision during Young Eagles Day

[Eclipse]

LANCASTER, NY - A 78-year-old pilot and his 14-year-old male passenger both died when their plane collided mid-air with another small airplane not far from the Buffalo-Lancaster Regional Airport Saturday morning.

The plane crashed a little before 10:30 a.m. in a wooded area just west of Town Line Road in the Town of Lancaster. The deceased are Anthony Mercurio, 78, and James Metz, 14.

Not far away, the second plane made a harrowing emergency landing in a field on Kieffer Road in the Town of Alden. That pilot -- Kevin D'Angelo, 59 -- and a nine-year-old girl who was flying with him were able to walk away from their plane with minor injuries. (Her name will not be released.)

http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/local/lancaster/2014/09/27/breaking-two-plane-crash-on-alden-lancaster-border/16332859/



2 fatalities, 78 year old Pilot and 14-year old passenger.

[nomiddlemas]

That is to bad.  I was once part of EAA until I heard about CAP.  RIP to all those who did not make it down safely. 

[Eclipse]

http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/2014/09/29/lancaster-plane-crash-victims/16409763/

This is the Sea-Ray which survived the collision.

[nomiddlemas]

Wow how did they land it with no wings? Im guessing they were taken off before the picture?

[a2capt]

Trailerable aircraft, the wings come off quickly.

[Al Sayre]

 When I read the title of this thread I had visions of a Lancaster bomber with a plane load of kids... Sad for all involved.

[PHall]

When I read the title of this thread I thought you were talking about the RAF BBMF Lancaster.
A bit more clarity please...

[a2capt]

That's what the headlines say.

[Eclipse]

Many things ran through my mind when I saw this, not the least of which was the statistical probability
this could involve CAP members.

That a Lancaster Bomber might be involved in an EAA Young Eagles day literally never crossed my mind.

[NIN]

Trailerable aircraft, the wings come off quickly.

Something tells me the trailerability of the aircraft was only a small factor in the wings not being present in that photograph.

[JacobAnn]

So sad.  My son who is a Life Member of EAA regularly flies Young Eagles.  It is one of the things he loves most about flying.

[LSThiker]

A reminder of the possible dangers. We could easily have an accident during an O-flight, transport, IACE, or military flight.

[Eclipse]

^ And something to bear in mind when discussing safety procedures and being in a hurry.

[NIN]

A reminder of the possible dangers. We could easily have an accident during an O-flight, transport, IACE, or military flight.

People shuck and jive about flight manifests sometimes, but they're a real live no kidding document that operations folks need to pay attention to.  I have been standing there when the statement "I need the manifest for the aircraft laying burning in the field over there" was uttered. It was a real, live no kidding moment.

We (the CAP we) can certainly encounter this kind of problem which just highlights the need for planning, solid briefings, common procedures, heads on a swivel, cockpit sterility, etc. 

I've run wing-level fly days that were easily as busy as most EAA Young Eagle events, and we had nary a problem.  But our pilots briefed their sorties together, and flew as briefed.  Deconfliction was part of the brief.

[Panzerbjorn]

I have no words.  That poor poor family.  My deepest condolences to that family.  My deepest relief to the families of the survivors. 

I also truly hope that the EAA doesn't overreact and regulate the Young Eagles program into non-existence over the incident.

[a2capt]

I think you mean the FAA in that one. As for the wings, if that thing had lost wings in the air, it would have not "landed", but more cratered. Witnesses said they saw it flying low, fast and it went over the tree line and disappeared. A glimpse of a photo showed a mostly intact aircraft on the ground beyond the vegetation.

Based on the bits shown on the ground, I'd have to figure it suffered some kind of chopping by the prop from behind, and if the 172 broke a prop because of it, that would have sent that thing shaking apart at the front, with basically pattern altitude .. you're not going to get much time to deal with it. 

I can't see that flying boat becoming a lifting body...

The NTSB will tell us what they think.

[Eclipse]

That's uncontrolled airspace, right?

I always find it amazing how quickly aircraft converge in "empty" air.  One second there's nothing there,
the next you're changing your shorts.

It also freaks me out on the rare occasion that we land without a tower - you get used to that in an urban area.

The preliminary report still says "unknown circumstances".

[JeffDG]

That's uncontrolled airspace, right?

Looking at the chart, Lancaster Regional (KBQR) is just outside Buffalo's Class C surface area (actually they made a little cutout for them).  Looks like the shelf for the Class C starts about 1,500' AGL (2,200 MSL), but it's Class E starting at 800' AGL in that area. 

So, surface to 800' is Class G (uncontrolled), rest is various levels of controlled airspace.

[a2capt]

When my aircraft was at a controlled airport, the percentage of operations with/out control were biased towards the controlled side, but if I left the home field out of the equation the percentage was probably 10% controlled.

[JeffDG]

When my aircraft was at a controlled airport, the percentage of operations with/out control were biased towards the controlled side, but if I left the home field out of the equation the percentage was probably 10% controlled.

Most folks forget that Class D fields don't have radar control, they rely on pilot position reports and the Mark 1 eyeball of the controller...

[Eclipse]

ORD is the big boy on the block around here, so most of the airfields I ever use are within or influenced by the Class B.

On unit visits I occasionally get into an uncontrolled local municipal airport, but the planes I use regularly are
all hangared at larger controlled fields.

It is cool, though, to do that radio activation of landing lights on the rural fields.

[Panzerbjorn]

When my aircraft was at a controlled airport, the percentage of operations with/out control were biased towards the controlled side, but if I left the home field out of the equation the percentage was probably 10% controlled.

Most folks forget that Class D fields don't have radar control, they rely on pilot position reports and the Mark 1 eyeball of the controller...

Not ALWAYS true.  There are Class D airports that have radar.  Class D airports with a TRSA most certainly have radar.  Several Class D airports in the Chicago area, such as KDPA, KARR, and KPWK have radar, for example.

[NIN]

That's uncontrolled airspace, right?

I always find it amazing how quickly aircraft converge in "empty" air.  One second there's nothing there,
the next you're changing your shorts.

The pattern, especially the base-to-final area, becomes a really bad place because everybody is headed to one patch of ground in approximately the same glide slope, meaning you're all going to be occupying one "lane" at certain distances from the runway (ie. if you take a long downwind and are rolling in on a two mile final, you're at more or less the same altitude as they guy who is on a 2 mile straight in...).  It gets wicked crowded if your SA is low or people aren't talking.

There was a college aviation program at a nearby airport that was right-traffic (due to terrain terrain & layout) when of course most of the rest of the world is left-traffic.  It wasn't a big deal because it was towered, but the bigger problem was when the students would solo and then start flying elsewhere solo for practice.  One of the other multi-runway non-towered airports about 20 miles away was a popular destination. There were many close calls, and at least one actual accident where a student pilot entered final from right-traffic while there was left-traffic and they collided.

[Panzerbjorn]

Many things ran through my mind when I saw this, not the least of which was the statistical probability
this could involve CAP members.

Yes, it could happen.  But I certainly hope that it would be understood that the risk is minimal and easily mitigated.  My own personal fear is that like any item reported on the news, people will think the sky is falling and regulate activities like this into non-existence.

[Panzerbjorn]

That's uncontrolled airspace, right?

I always find it amazing how quickly aircraft converge in "empty" air.  One second there's nothing there,
the next you're changing your shorts.

It also freaks me out on the rare occasion that we land without a tower - you get used to that in an urban area.

The preliminary report still says "unknown circumstances".

We have an airport near us, Triangle North Regional KLHZ, that we conduct our glider and powered o-flights at twice a month.  It can get really busy there with gliders, our aircraft, skydivers, and other regular traffic converging on one spot AND have a right-hand traffic pattern when one runway is active and a left-hand traffic pattern when the opposite runway is active.  As long as you pay attention, talk and listen on the radio, and maintain situational awareness, it's perfectly safe.  I personally enforce a sterile cockpit environment when we're flying into that airport for that reason.  There are always risks, but you do everything possible to mitigate them.

Non-towered airports are actually more ideal for o-riders than towered airports simply to save time and gas getting in and out of the airport, especially when you're trying to get 30 or 40 cadets flown in a day.  It may not necessarily be an issue at the less busy towered airports, but at Class C towered airports, it become impractical.  But theres nothing to freak out about at non-towered airports.  There are rules you follow to get into that airport, and the pilot is responsible for knowing all the applicable rules (pattern altitude, left-hand or right-hand pattern, etc.) for that airport.  It's just part of the game.

I'll be looking forward to seeing that NTSB report and the Lessons Learned that follow it.