Plane Crashes Into Crowd at Nevada Air Race, Injuring More Than 75

Fox ^

[nuconvert]

DEVELOPING: RENO, Nev. -- An airplane crashed Friday into a crowd attending an air race here, injuring dozens in what one event official described as a "mass-casualty situation."

A medical official later said more than 75 people had been injured, including 25 critically. There was no official word on deaths, though one report put the toll as high as 12 and the crash near the grandstands left a horrific scene of bodies and wreckage.

[hattend]

These aircraft generate a considerable wake vortex at 500 mph pulling G’s. I have seen upsets in all the classes raced at Reno. I witnessed the whole incident from the start at the #8 pylon to impact. Although pictures show a missing elevator trim tab the beginning of the incident looked to be classic wake upset.

Did that cause the elevator tab to fail? Beats me the NTSB had 3 people at the venue and I’m sure they saw the whole thing. Another NTSB person is coming in from DC

It’ll be a while before most of the story comes out

[tomkat]

Accepted, and thank you .. have a good weekend.

[Northern Yankee]

Just damn!

A B-25 came roaring over our house at tree top level today. Doesn't happen often, but when it does its a thrill for this veteran.

[Northern Yankee]

Prayers to all those who perished or injured.

[nuconvert]

Update: Number dead is now 9 (as per CNN)

[SkyDancer]

All over the news down here - wow!

[dupree]

Just a few additional thoughts: How is the comparison “ignorant”? In both cases the event organizers KNOWINGLY put people’s lives in the face of injury or death without any thoughts regarding safety-—all for financial profit. Both are responsible for the deaths and injuries of the victims. The airshow organizers, like the nightclub owners, will be sued for damages and might also face criminal charges.

“These airshows are highly regulated and professionally run.”

Tell that to the 9 dead and many that were ctitically injured and see if they agree.

[dupree]

Well, I would rather curl up in my bed than curl up in a casket.

[3boysdad]

Are you a fag? Did you vote for Barry Hussein Soetoro Obama? Get the hell out of my country.

[dupree]

I bet at least 9 of the people that chose to attend this “entertainment” probably won’t choose to attend the next one. Nor will the man that lost his eye or the man with 100 fractures in his face or......

[dupree]

Actually,if it matters, I’m a married mom that voted for Sarah Palin with a knowledge of right and wrong and an appreciation for COMMON SENSE, which tells me that allowing people to sit directly under outdated airplanes with ancient engines that are flown by 74-YEAR-OLD daredevils at 400 mph is probably not a good idea. I didn’t know that this was such a threatening idea.

[driftdiver]

“Tell that to the 9 dead and many that were ctitically injured and see if they agree.”

I’d wager the majority of those people knew the risks far better than you or I.

Life is full of risks. You can hide from them behind a keyboard or you can go out and actually live your life.

[driftdiver]

What you’re doing is incredibly crass, bringing an argument into this thread.

Are you a member of Westboro?

[caww]

The obvious is quite obvious...however those who are alive and well certainly love the entertainment and will indeed likely go again. Race cars too have accidents...I don’t see crowds thining for the many accidents which occur there.

[hattend]

You know nothing of the event, how it is run, the planes, the pilots or the fans.

[hattend]

Thanks Roccus

We were close. You can see us in some of the still photos.

When I get home so I am using a computer instead of a phone I may point us out

Prayers up for those injured and dead.

[Yosemitest]

I've got over 30 years of air traffic control experience, and I'm telling you that it's happened before,
and at the speeds they're racing, and their modified contitions, it's VERY possible.

[CFIIIMEIATP737]

I appreciate your more than thirty years of air traffic control experience. As for my credentials, pleased look at my screen name. It stands for Certificated Flight Instructor, Instrument Instructor, Multiengine Instructor and the 737 is the first of the many type ratings I hold in a variety of jet aircraft. Not included is my masters degree in aeronautical science, my fifteen years as a professor of aeronautical science and over eleven thousand hours of pilot in command and over five thousand hours of instruction given.

You say that this has happened before. Could you please cite an NTSB finding to support your claim?

[Yosemitest]

Read this (Tommy Rose Pre-Crash Photo: Source?) and if you want the photo of the pre-crash evidence of that 2002 wake turbulence crash, you can request it yourself.

From another source about Tommy Rose's crash.

The aircraft is believed to have entered the wake turbulence of another racer, began porpoising, had the tail detach, then crashed into the ground.
Tommy was pronounced dead at the scene at 14:45 (GMT)

Have you seen this photo?

Tom Rose is a commercial pilot in Mississippi whose father died racing in the same Reno event in 2002 in what appeared to be similar circumstances, although he crashed far from the crowd.

His father, 62-year-old Tommy Rose, was flying an experimental sport plane about 200 feet off the ground when a stabilizer broke off the tail, his son said Saturday. At that altitude, he had nowhere to go but down.

He said in his dad's case, like many crashes at the air show, he had just pushed his plane beyond its limits in an effort to win, and it broke apart.

"But you want to push your plane to its limits because you want to be competitive. That's what you're there for," he said.

Still, Rose said, he'd like to see the races continue.

"My dad passed doing what he loved, and I think so many of those guys who fly out there would say the same thing," he added. "They'd rather go this way than in a nursing home."

[Yosemitest]

Since you're a CFI, you know that a Mustang P-51 is a CAT III aircraft for wake turbulence. Source is almost at the bottom, after ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP. (USA)
I don't know what type aircraft were ahead of him, but I assume the similar type aircraft with similar type speeds.
You also know the definition of:

WAKE TURBULENCE- Phenomena resulting from the passage of an aircraft through the atmosphere. The term includes vortices, thrust stream turbulence, jet blast, jet wash, propeller wash, and rotor wash both on the ground and in the air.

You know that a touch and go/low approach (what is closest to the air racing low to the ground) over the same runway requires, When either is a Category III aircraft- 6,000 feet and that's at a normal landing speed.
These racing aircraft were NOT a landing speed.
You're familiar with the AIM, chapter 7, but just in case you want to review it, click here.
But let's review anyway.

... The strength of the vortex is governed by the weight, speed, and shape of the wing of the generating aircraft. The vortex characteristics of any given aircraft can also be changed by extension of flaps or other wing configuring devices as well as by change in speed. However, as the basic factor is weight, the vortex strength increases proportionately. Peak vortex tangential speeds exceeding 300 feet per second have been recorded. ...

1. In rare instances a wake encounter could cause inflight structural damage of catastrophic proportions. However, the usual hazard is associated with induced rolling moments which can exceed the roll-control authority of the encountering aircraft. In flight experiments, aircraft have been intentionally flown directly up trailing vortex cores of larger aircraft. It was shown that the capability of an aircraft to counteract the roll imposed by the wake vortex primarily depends on the wingspan and counter-control responsiveness of the encountering aircraft.

2. Counter control is usually effective and induced roll minimal in cases where the wingspan and ailerons of the encountering aircraft extend beyond the rotational flow field of the vortex. It is more difficult for aircraft with short wingspan (relative to the generating aircraft) to counter the imposed roll induced by vortex flow. Pilots of short span aircraft, even of the high performance type, must be especially alert to vortex encounters.
(See FIG 7-3-2.)

Something else that you probably are aware of is wind's effects on wake turbulence.
But just remember

A crosswind will decrease the lateral movement of the upwind vortex and increase the movement of the downwind vortex. Thus a light wind with a cross runway component of 1 to 5 knots could result in the upwind vortex remaining in the touchdown zone for a period of time and hasten the drift of the downwind vortex toward another runway. (See FIG 7-3-6.) Similarly, a tailwind condition can move the vortices of the preceding aircraft forward into the touchdown zone. THE LIGHT QUARTERING TAILWIND REQUIRES MAXIMUM CAUTION. ... (See FIG 7-3-7.)





Look, I'm not trying to get into an ego contest here.
I have several college degrees also. And I know that this is going to be a legal nightmare.
But when it's all said and done, it's going to be "pilot error".
The pilot went under someone's wake, when he should have went slightly above that lead aircraft's flight path.
Never, but never, cross under and inside a high performance aircraft's track.

I'm trying to save lives, here.
Don't get caught up in the "large, heavy" mentality for wake turbulence.
Don't forget about aircraft category classes (CAT I, CAT II, and CAT III).
Also, helicopters can produce some very dangerous wake turbulence, even though they are physically small.
Never, never, NEVER, forget about high performance aircraft. That error will kill you, and your passengers.
Have a good night.
P.S. I knew Tommy Rose.