Four Case Western Students Killed in 172 Crash

Why are you all bitching about weight? First of all, it was 4 young kids, maybe they didn't weigh much. One article mentions engine failure, another mentions they were attempting to turn back to the airport after engine problems.

Four kids just died and you're all on here arguing with each other over weight and balance BS. Grow up.
 
KKochan said:
Why are you all bitching about weight? First of all, it was 4 young kids, maybe they didn't weigh much. One article mentions engine failure, another mentions they were attempting to turn back to the airport after engine problems.

Four kids just died and you're all on here arguing with each other over weight and balance BS. Grow up.
Click to expand...

No one is arguing about anything. It looks like a discussion to me.
 
4 people doesn't automatically mean they were overweight. And even if they were overweight that doesn't necessarily mean that is the sole cause of the accident.

RIP
 
SeanD said:
No one is arguing about anything. It looks like a discussion to me.
Click to expand...
It may be a sensitive subject. After all, talking about w&b will usually assume the pic never took it into account or didn't do one. Which comes off as assuming the pic was lazy or inexperienced.
 
I flew that aircraft to!
ocdflyboy said:
My old chief pilot from there just told me about it. I have time in that plane as an instructor!
And my wife was in Alumni Relations at Case.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/08/plane_in_willoughby_hills_cras.html

RIP.
Click to expand...
I flew that aircraft too, it's owned by T&G flying club looks like Larry Rohl the owner of the company has got some explaining to do that guy is a big shyster! (ripped a kid off for his wia money and regularly cheated instructors out of their pay) I know they were having severe financial troubles at that club but it looks like it was engine trouble not overweight I thought Brad did a better job with maintenance unless Larry.......... oh never mind let it all come out in the NTSB report.
 
Last edited:
floridabeachbum said:
I flew that aircraft to!

I flew that aircraft too, it's owned by T&G flying club looks like Larry Rohl the owner of the company has got some explaining to do that guy is a big shyster! (ripped a kid off for his wia money and regularly cheated instructors out of their pay) I know they were having severe financial troubles at that club but it looks like it was engine trouble not overweight I thought Brad did a better job with maintenance unless Larry.......... oh never mind let it all come out in the NTSB report.
Click to expand...
The FAA will find everything in the MX records, insurance and financial records.
 
Roger Roger said:
Little premature to jump at weight and balance don't you think?
Click to expand...

I dont think either of us said W&B caused the crash. I was just laying out the obvious numbers and the fact that there is no way I could get 3 adults with me into a 172. On the other hand, to say that W&B couldnt cause something like this would be just as foolish. There could have been any number of things that happened. Nobody knows what their weight was, or fuel, etc...It is just one of the many things that people think through when trying to understand what could have caused it.
 
Fly_Unity said:
Out 172 has 890 lbs useful load. So using your numbers, take out 6 gallons and your good and still have 5 hours of fuel. We do 135 scenic flights all the time with 4 people in it. Its not like you need 5.5 hours of fuel every flight.

We can barely do full fuel and 4 people in a Twin Cessna 340. But for some reason when someone sees 4 people in a 172 they automatically think your overweight.
Click to expand...

No arguments there at all. Nobody knows exactly what they had. I was just using (thinking out loud) what it could have been if everything was gassed up. We all know we can move different things to make it work if need be.
 
Fly_Unity said:
Out 172 has 890 lbs useful load. So using your numbers, take out 6 gallons and your good and still have 5 hours of fuel. We do 135 scenic flights all the time with 4 people in it. Its not like you need 5.5 hours of fuel every flight.

But for some reason when someone sees 4 people in a 172 they automatically think your overweight.
Click to expand...

It really depends what model 172 we are talking about. The one in the article is said to be a 172R. If that's the case, that airplane has very poor payload capability. In the 172R I fly, with 4 people averaging 170 lbs a piece, you're looking at only being able to carry 60 lbs of fuel which is only 10 gallons. That is enough to do about a 30 minute flight. Now granted, our aircraft are equipped with the G1000, so the empty weight is probably a little heavier than 172Rs with the 6 pack set up.
 
Last edited:
GypsyPilot said:
One of the articles I saw said they were on the wrestling team (or at least several were), and showed a couple of pics of some big guys.
Click to expand...

I saw the pics as well and they didnt look like 'lightweight' guys....But as others have said W&B was jsut one of many possible causes.
 
ocdflyboy said:
The FAA will find everything in the MX records, insurance and financial records.
Click to expand...
You're right I just hope they don't find a picture of him in assless chaps and a red ball in his mouth!! I'm sure you guys remember that joke or was it -when he walked in on that female student
 
KKochan said:
Why are you all bitching about weight? First of all, it was 4 young kids, maybe they didn't weigh much. One article mentions engine failure, another mentions they were attempting to turn back to the airport after engine problems.

Four kids just died and you're all on here arguing with each other over weight and balance BS. Grow up.
Click to expand...
Even if it was a weight issue and it wasn't The fact of the matter is that the engine died at the most critical time during takeoff even if he was overweight The poor kid at that altitude flying out of that airport he wouldn't have much time to do anything except Land straight ahead however his lack of experience really showed when he tried to turn back and looks like he might have spun into the ground. It's sad.
 
All 172's must now have the rear seats yanked out and replaced with something cool like the MJU-27A/B countermeasure flare system.

I swear, I REALLY need to work for the FAA and the NTSB at the same time. I have good ideas. :)

Really sorry for the loss of these young students and the pain their families are going thru.
 
I did once load 4 adults (including myself) into a 172. Then proceeded to remove all but about 2:15mins worth of fuel (1.5 flight, 45 mins reserve).
 
gotWXdagain said:
I did once load 4 adults (including myself) into a 172. Then proceeded to remove all but about 2:15mins worth of fuel (1.5 flight, 45 mins reserve).
Click to expand...

I flew a 172 from Hollywood, FL to Key West several years ago with 4 people on board. Plenty of fuel for the trip plus reserve and weight wasn't an issue. Of course nobody brought any baggage either....
 
KKochan said:
Why are you all bitching about weight? First of all, it was 4 young kids, maybe they didn't weigh much. One article mentions engine failure, another mentions they were attempting to turn back to the airport after engine problems.

Four kids just died and you're all on here arguing with each other over weight and balance BS. Grow up.
Click to expand...

Could engine trouble have been a problem? possibly

Could W&B have been a problem? possibly

Any accident is a chain of events that could have been broken at any time with different results. Nobody is arguing it is a simple discussion. If you don't like or choose not to contribute to the discussion, then move along. Plain and simple.
 
The other day I was juuuuuuuust legal with 3 people in a 172, but I have squeezed in 4 people several times and still been legal. I always get a little defensive when pilots tell me you can never take 4 people in a 172. You can if you don't just make blanket statements like that and actually plug in the numbers to see if it works!

But besides, the point, very sad to see 4 young people killed in a crash. Has got to be a horrible feeling having 3 of your buddies up with you and knowing you're going to hit bad. RIP.
 
Bandit_Driver said:
RIP... 4 people in a 172 is just W & B. The numbers work or they don't. They could have an engine problem too..
Click to expand...

This. I've done it in a 160 horse 172P at 82-degrees. Made sure the last guy didn't refill and took fuel 50lbs shy of max t/o weight and was well within margins. Plane performed just fine.
 
ChasenSFO said:
The other day I was juuuuuuuust legal with 3 people in a 172, but I have squeezed in 4 people several times and still been legal. I always get a little defensive when pilots tell me you can never take 4 people in a 172. You can if you don't just make blanket statements like that and actually plug in the numbers to see if it works!

But besides, the point, very sad to see 4 young people killed in a crash. Has got to be a horrible feeling having 3 of your buddies up with you and knowing you're going to hit bad. RIP.
Click to expand...
How many horses?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top