CAF P-39 landing incident at Tyler, TX

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 5:49 pm

Was there an engine problem that caused it to be short of the runway? I can't think of much else?

Pogo · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 6:37 pm

I thought all Aussies were already honorary Texans as a default thing.

warbird1 · **Joined:** Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm **Posts:** 2760

Bill Greenwood wrote:

Was there an engine problem that caused it to be short of the runway? I can't think of much else?

Bill, there are lots of things that could cause an aircraft to land short of a runway. Some of them are:

1) Weather - wind shear, micro-burst, bad visibility, intermittent IMC, etc.

2) Pilot error - wrong approach speed, wrong flap setting, incorrect power setting, visual illusions, high sink rate, pilot distraction with something else, incorrect configuration, etc.

3) Wake turbulence

4) Collision avoidance maneuver with another aircraft or terrain avoidance

5) Mechanical problem - control problem with primary or secondary flight controls, engine/prop malfunction, etc.

6) ATC induced but pilot caused - i.e. ATC asking for unrealistic speeds/aircraft separation criteria.

I'm sure there are many more that I am forgetting. It's obvious from what has been said so far, that the CAF won't and should NOT comment on what caused this. Any idle speculation on the cause from any representative of the CAF could have legal consequences since an aircraft was damaged. In addition, the pilot's flying career with the CAF and/or his license could be at stake as well - dependent upon the outcome of the investigation.

JMO, of course!

Chunks · **Joined:** Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:02 am **Posts:** 361

This photo is directly from the CAF communication. I read the email and the document numerous times and have seen nothing to indicate that it should not be shared. The credit for the photo goes to the CAF for lack of specific info.

Chunks

Warbird Kid · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:26 pm

Sad to see her like this.

Good to know it didnt become more serious and we didnt loose plane and pilot.

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:28 pm

Warbird1, I assume that the flight was in good weather, not likely to be IMC or microburtst. And not too much terrain to avoid at Tyler.
Other traffic or ATC, maybe, a factor.
An engine problem seems more likely.
I don't agree much with the idea others have expressed that hiding the cause, if something defininite is known now, is good strategy. False info is not good,but real info is.
The NTSB report will likely cover this, and won't be pr. based.
Others like myself might learn something from this incident, that is part of the reason to report it.

Ray Clausen · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 7:44 pm

That photo is one of the better ones and is from the formal report. There were no mechanical issues that I've heard about. The plane was sounding great as she taxied past me after the landing (I was in the Rose and only looked up after the P-39 passed us. It was more than an hour before we knew anything happened.) and we're preparing to make the repairs necessary to ferry her home. The NTSB/FAA declared this an incident today, for what that's worth. The weather was good and it seems to be a case of pilot error. The important thing is that we got him back safely and nobody was hurt. We can fix the plane.

I'll post more detailed photos of the damage when I can take them and will get shots during the flight back, as we will certainly have a chase plane observing. We are still determining when that will happen.

Thanks!

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:00 pm

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:01 pm

warbird1 · **Joined:** Fri Sep 21, 2007 6:25 pm **Posts:** 2760

Bill Greenwood wrote:

Warbird1, I assume that the flight was in good weather, not likely to be IMC or microburtst. And not too much terrain to avoid at Tyler.
Other traffic or ATC, maybe, a factor.
An engine problem seems more likely.
I don't agree much with the idea others have expressed that hiding the cause, if something defininite is known now, is good strategy. False info is not good,but real info is.
The NTSB report will likely cover this, and won't be pr. based.
Others like myself might learn something from this incident, that is part of the reason to report it.

I had a long reply to this, but I just erased it since this was classified as an incident and not an accident. It's a moot point now.

"As you were!"

Bill Greenwood · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:02 pm

There are some nice folks at CAF San Marcos. I enjoyed flying there, except for the 98* heat on e time. I'm glad that no one was hurt and the plane damage is not too bad. It must have been pretty smooth where it touched down. Were there some trees or bushes that the wing hit?

Chunks · **Joined:** Fri Jun 15, 2007 10:02 am **Posts:** 361

deleted

Chunks

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:28 pm

Bill Greenwood wrote:

There are some nice folks at CAF San Marcos. I enjoyed flying there, except for the 98* heat on e time. I'm glad that no one was hurt and the plane damage is not too bad. It must have been pretty smooth where it touched down. Were there some trees or bushes that the wing hit?

Per the original post, the wing impacted approach light structure(s).

JDK · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 8:44 pm

Pogo wrote:

I thought all Aussies were already honorary Texans as a default thing.

Well I never. :partyman:

I suppoze Texas is kinda average size for an Australian State, and we have a big star on our flag, but we don't let it get lonely, we've crossed it up.

Meanwhile, back in reality...

Obergrafeter · **Posted:** Wed Jul 07, 2010 10:43 pm

Glad those light posts were breakaways otherwise the damage could have been much worse.

Warbird Information Exchange

CAF P-39 landing incident at Tyler, TX

Who is online