CFI survives wing separation PA28-161

I suspect the factored TIS stated was a complete fabrication... 15,000 hour airframe owned by at least two flight schools (it has a previous incident from 20 years ago).

May or may not mean anything, but it's fishy.
 
Maybe, but reading the report they’ve already looked at the wing stubs and if I’m reading it right all failed in overload. The AD is still a very real thing, but it appears these folks just yeeted the wings right off in almost literally a “hey y’all watch this” moment.
 
Which airplanes wing is less dubious and why:

1) A 1975 Bellanca Viking.
2) A 1975 Piper Arrow.

Assume the airplanes have 15,000 hours and have been used extensively for training. Both airplanes have been stored indoors exclusively. Both airplanes are located in St. Louis, MO for their lifetimes. Both airplanes are in compliance with all AD's/maintenance directives/inspections.
 
WacoFan said:
Which airplanes wing is less dubious and why:

1) A 1975 Bellanca Viking.
2) A 1975 Piper Arrow.

Assume the airplanes have 15,000 hours and have been used extensively for training. Both airplanes have been stored indoors exclusively. Both airplanes are located in St. Louis, MO for their lifetimes. Both airplanes are in compliance with all AD's/maintenance directives/inspections.
Click to expand...

Wood will always require more scrutiny than aluminum. But well maintained is well maintained.
 
trafficinsight said:
Wood will always require more scrutiny than aluminum. But well maintained is well maintained.
Click to expand...
My (uneducated) guess is that wood may show visual indications of overstress, fractures, etc., while aluminum could fatigue severely without showing it visually(?).
 
Roger Roger said:
Maybe, but reading the report they’ve already looked at the wing stubs and if I’m reading it right all failed in overload. The AD is still a very real thing, but it appears these folks just yeeted the wings right off in almost literally a “hey y’all watch this” moment.
Click to expand...
I'm seeing the same.

"...all fracture surfaces displayed features that were consistent with overstress separation. There were no indications of fatigue fractures observed."
 
mightynimbus said:
From the report it seems the inspections were current and passed ?
Maybe the incident has nothing to do with spar issues or inspections.
Click to expand...
Appears you are correct per the initial examination. I’m surprised they published that part this early. I suppose the existing spar issues made it priority to get out the info that this provably WASNT fatigue related
 
trafficinsight said:
True, but wood has issues with degradation over time which requires close monitoring.
Click to expand...
I was leaning towards Steve's answer but I also would ask - does the aluminum give a false sense of security? You stated in your first post "wood always warrants extra scrutiny" and nobody would argue - but is it correct? Meaning, the scrutiny on wood certainly is, but is a disparity between wood and aluminum warranted? Shouldn't aluminum be given equal scrutiny? I always kind of thought that over a long term woods elastic qualities being better than metal serve it better. But again, just a hunch.

Saw a $13k 1959 Mooney M20A with wood wings - nice looking airplane in annual with 700SMOH and a gear up on turf in the 60's some time. If I got sophisticated enough I search for Mooney/Bellanca wing separations but I need to learn the technologies. Because I know Amish women with more computer skill.
 
My school after switching from Piper to Cessna: “these things are junk, it’s so easy to wrinkle the firewall.” My first job after college working at the factory where the high wing Cessnas were built opened my eyes as to what it really takes to break an airplane. And yet stupid human tricks prevail.
 
The left seat instructor responded that given he was already an instructor, there were no new maneuvers, but added, “I can show you an EASA [European Union Aviation Safety Agency (EASA)] maneuver.” He described that the maneuver involved a power-off aerodynamic stall and recovery without the use of engine power. The left seat instructor took the flight controls and initiated the demonstration; he pitched up and entered a full aerodynamic stall, with power at idle. After the airplane stalled, he recalled pitching to “Vg” (glide airspeed, 73 knots) to recover from the stall. During the recovery, with power at idle, he stated, “the right wing came off” and there was an “abrupt banking tendency” to the right.

He recalled that he retracted the flaps, and added rudder and aileron application, but his “eyes were getting blurry,” he was starting to see “white,” and the airplane was “losing altitude like crazy.” He also noticed that a lot of wind was entering the cockpit. Subsequently, his next memory was awaking in the hospital. He did not recall observing any other components depart the airplane.
Click to expand...
Yeesh.
 
WacoFan said:
I just wonder if sometimes wood wings are unfairly maligned - particularly when the only in-flight separations I've seen in a LONG time have been metal winged airplanes.
Click to expand...

The ratio is like 99 to 1 these days....

They're fairly maligned, and often replaced with aluminum, but the ones that are out there are generally well kept, and when they aren't bad things sometimes happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top