Harrison Ford?s plane crashes at golf course near SMO | Santa Monica Daily Press "Engine failure, immediate return" at 21:20: http://archive-server.liveatc.net/ksmo/KSMO-Twr-Mar-05-2015-2200Z.mp3
Warbird Alley: Ryan PT-20/21/22 Recruit Seems to me I recall Mr Parks or someone here telling us that these can be a handful to fly, something about the stall pattern or perhaps when in a turn? May have nothing at all to do with what happened today, but just tickled the memory a bit. pilot report on Ryan PT-22 The Stearnian was a tank of a biplane. It was big and re-defined the term "robust." The absolute sole of docility, it could keep your feet busy on the runway, yet allow you to expand your mind in the air. In essence, the N3N and the Fairchild PT-19/23/26 could be described the same way. This could not be said about the Ryan PT-22 Recruit. Streamlined and dainty by comparison, the PT-22 could teach its students things the Stearman never heard of. Supposedly its four degree, 10 minute swept back wing was designed specifically to give unstable stall characteristics, such as those the students would encounter in the airplanes they would soon graduate to. This could be an old wives tale since it would seem more logical that this sweepback was introduced to correct a center of gravity problem. It was also the most heavily wing loaded of the trainers, which meant ignoring the air speed on a botched approach could, and did, result in a disproportionate number of bent airplanes. There are many who agree that the PT-22 bears much more relationship to the AT-6 Texan then its primary trainer brethren. Today, the PT-22 lives on in a love-it-or-leave-it environment. It's impossible to discuss the little air-plane without stall-spin horror stories running rampant. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Plane does not look that bad, these are kind of cool. Why did the media reader have to say, I heard it on the streaming radio during news break, "The 70 year old bla bla bla?" If he were younger, would they state his age? Just makes you wonder if they are trying to say 70 is just too old to fly. Image Unavailable, Please Login
My flight instructor was hurt very badly in a PT-22 in the mid 1960s.. I sat in his wrecked plane as a Boy Scout and two kids in my troop said I was too stupid to fly. I quit the scouts and my parents said I could take flying lessons if I paid for them myself. The rest is history - multi-engine airplane and helo instrument rated five years later. The PT-22 has a special place in my heart. I hope Harrison Ford recovers soon. He's been a great advocate for GA. Sent via itty bitty electrons
I don't know how Ford could be seriously injured since the rear cockpit is virtually in tact. I noticed some wrinkled skin aft of the cockpit so it did hit fairly hard but not to damage the rear pit. The are a tough little airplane but come down like streamlined brick with no power. I have flown them several times and I did not like the Kinner or the way the airplane felt. I have known of too many engine failures with this model Kinner, several close friends, and I do not trust it. One incident was the entire loss of the number one jug. It is a good trainer for those moving up to a BT-13 or T-6 because it has some characteristics present in the larger airplanes. The PT-22 doesn't tolerate complacence or incompetence and it can bite with a vengeance.
I'm guessing his shoulder straps weren't tight enough, and he hit his head on the panel. Otherwise, it looks like he did a pretty nice job-- especially considering Bob's comments about how well it glides, and it's stall/spin behavior.
I was wondering about that, too but I'm betting that he just got pretty well shaken up. With the collapsed nose, gear wiped out, gouges in the turf, and bashed up wings it appears that he hit at a steep angle and with plenty of speed. But under control. i remember describing snap rolls in a Stearman to a fellow pilot who flew a PT-22 and he said, " That isn't a snap roll, you don't fly through a snap roll!" Well later on we demonstrated one in a Stearman and he said, " Man! That's not what my Ryan does. When it snaps, it snaps!" And they do, sometimes when you least expect it.
I'll bet that the Millennium Falcon wouldn't glide any better! Anyone want to hazard a guess as to whether that airplane is repairable?
Transporting Harrison Ford from the scene of today's accident. He was flying Solo. Image Unavailable, Please Login
Anything is repairable. Fox News is reporting moderate condition. Possible he has a broken leg. But the latter is news speculation.
Looks to be fortunate he didn't ground loop or flip over. That tail looks like it may crumple like a tin can. And good thing he didn't take out any golfers! Look at that deflection of the left aileron. Broken, or do they really move that much? If so they must have one hell of a max roll rate!
I suspect it will be pretty easily repairable. Both pilot and airplane will probably be flying by late summer.
I've been very fortunate in avoiding accidents, but I know from aerobatics that it's hard to get the should straps tight enough, even if you think they're really uncomfortable. For just flying around, they're probably never tight enough. The semi-serious aerobatic guys now have seatbelts that ratchet down to get them tight enough.
The short impact marks to me show a steep angle with no flare to affect a landing. The heavy damage to the nose and wing leading edges indicates a hard and steep impact, not a "tripping" damage. Looks like the left wing was low and the left gear was ripped off. Major rebuild; two new wings, new landing gear, new front end, new engine , new prop, and rebuild aft fuselage. Heck, they can buff that out in the morning.
You cannot get your own harness tight enough. The ratchet makes sense. In race cars you have to have an assistant tighten them for you. At Bonneville our crew chief is the last to talk to the driver and he tightens them so tight the driver can't fart then closes the lid and waves him off. It's the only way they do any good.
That isn't what I took away from that. What came to mind for me is it's was a pretty good crunch for a 70 year old body to take and being able to get out as well as he did for a guy his age was a good show. I am a number of years younger and I know I don't bounce as good as I used to.
That was my point with the glide question. I knew Stearmans had a best glide speed approaching redline, just wasn't sure about the PT-22's. So at low level, climbing out you would have to get the nose over fast and hope there was a good landing spot straight ahead. Looks like HF did well.
If you look at a larger shot of the area, he was right across the street from the runway, pointed at it. The thing I really respect is that he didn't try to stretch the glide and stall/spin-- lots of guys would have done that, in that situation.
I had that drilled into my head when I was learning to fly; straight ahead and keep the airplane flying and in control. Then there are those who have a lot of hours and think that they can make a return to the field after engine failure because they "have experience." I know of two local fatalities because of this attitude. I witnessed one long ago and it's uncanny to sense what's going to happen when you're watching it unfold. I hope that people aren't thinking that I'm some kind of hot shot ace expert. I'm not! I did most of my flying some 68 years ago with another stretch 40 to 50 years ago. Early on I had access to a lot airplanes because I worked at an airport after the war. Then I made friends with a lot of airplane owners along the way and I had the opportunity to fly (briefly) a great variety of airplanes. I don't have piles of hours and ratings like some of you so I can't expound on the deep knowledge that I don't have. So, my statements are based on what I tasted here and there and only how I felt about the stuff that I flew. I was perhaps an adequate pilot, but not great or gifted. I had a great time while I was active and I met some great people!
