Skip to comments.
Four killed in skydiving plane crash (Bad prang)
CNN ^
| 061503
| CNN
Posted on 06/15/2003 6:50:07 PM PDT by Archangelsk
Edited on 04/29/2004 2:02:41 AM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
WASHINGTON (CNN) --Four people were killed when a small plane crashed on takeoff from Greensburg Jeannette Regional Airport in Greensburg, Pennsylvania, Sunday afternoon, authorities said.
The plane, a Cessna 205, took off at 1:15 p.m. for a skydiving operation, said Arlene Salac, a spokeswoman for the Federal Aviation Administration's Eastern Region.
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: badprang; cessna205; fsdo; gonogodecision; jumpers
Nuts. Another GA prang.
To: Willie Green; xsmommy; mountaineer
Yunzers R.I.P.
2
posted on
06/15/2003 6:57:59 PM PDT
by
martin_fierro
(A v v n c v l v s M a x i m v s)
To: Archangelsk
Blue Skies, black death.
3
posted on
06/15/2003 7:06:46 PM PDT
by
pops88
To: Archangelsk; martin_fierro
Sounds like an old plane
Introduced to the Cessna lineup in 1962, the 205 was powered by the same IO-470 engine as the 210B and featured an additional small cargo door on the left side of the fuselage. It later gained it's 6th seat.
The 205 lasted in production until 1964 when it was replaced by the more powerful 206,
Source: The Cessna 205, 206 & 207
4
posted on
06/15/2003 7:10:15 PM PDT
by
Willie Green
(Go Pat Go!!!)
To: Archangelsk
It sounds like he ran out of runway before he became an airplane.
Even if it's your 4th or 5th hop of the day, you NEVER skip your check list.
5
posted on
06/15/2003 7:17:29 PM PDT
by
SunTzuWu
To: Willie Green
So what? Planes are not cars. They can last forever, if you spend enough on upkeep.
Nik
6
posted on
06/15/2003 8:35:11 PM PDT
by
Nik Naym
To: SunTzuWu
\
overload/load placement; I assume the engine was making power because he continued his roll.
To: SunTzuWu
I checked the weather for the greater Pittsburgh area, apparently it was warm (about 80 F) and Greensburg-Jennette (5G8), if I remember correctly, has a field elevation of 1188 and a runway length of 2600 feet. Combine those conditions with 5 crew and pax and you may have an overweight airplane for the field length.
8
posted on
06/15/2003 8:41:37 PM PDT
by
Archangelsk
(Me, You, 6, 4, 2....what a crock.)
To: Archangelsk
Also, I think the recommended procedure for a short-runway takeoff for the 205 is no flaps so they wouldn't even have the additional lift of extending the surface area.
9
posted on
06/15/2003 8:46:10 PM PDT
by
Archangelsk
(Me, You, 6, 4, 2....what a crock.)
To: Archangelsk
short-field vice short-runway. Sorry, I'm tired.
10
posted on
06/15/2003 9:02:32 PM PDT
by
Archangelsk
(Me, You, 6, 4, 2....what a crock.)
To: Archangelsk
Bounced without a jump.
To: Archangelsk
They should of been wearing their parachutes!?! Oh, that's right, they were.
12
posted on
06/15/2003 9:11:12 PM PDT
by
Porterville
(I support US total global, world domination; how's that for sensitive??)
To: Porterville
Statistics show more skydiver are killed in plane crashes than diving out. wild, huh?
To: eccentric
I don't trust those little planes.
14
posted on
06/15/2003 10:06:36 PM PDT
by
Porterville
(I support US total global, world domination; how's that for sensitive??)
To: eccentric
Statistics show more skydiver are killed in plane crashes than diving out. wild, huh? Kind of like the most dangerous period when flying commercially being the drive to the airport.
To: Porterville
I don't trust those little planes. Those little planes do just fine. Most accidents are caused by the person at the controls.
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson