Jack Roush Crashes Plane in WI

[Don]

Not being in aviation, is there a reason Jack and his passenger were not interviewed for the Preliminary NTSB Report, or is it SOP to not include the participants comments on the incident until the final report, legal or otherwise ?

Appears the passenger was not injured, or there's no report of injuries, and Jack was available as he participated in all the NASCAR Race Team conference calls except one while in the hospital, as reported by his Race Team in interviews.

[IndyCobra]

Not speculating on the cause here, but of all the pilot's posting on this topic, how many have actually landed at Airventure, in particular, the 18 approach?

Having landed at Airventure more than a dozen times, it gives you a different perspective. All I've said is that the 18 approach requires a very close in tight left turn to final south of the 09/27 runway boundary. It would be a tough turn to make in a business jet if you are not used to maneuvering close to the ground.

[Excaliber]

No problem here Jerry, a good discussion all around.

[Jerry Clayton]

Paul

In my opinion, speculation has been miniumized by the debris field evidence

[jmimac351]

[jmimac351]

[jmimac351]

[Paul F]

Well, there it is. The pictures tell the story. This is clearly a new pattern used at OSH where pilots combine landing with parking. Notice the cones indicating where his parking space was assigned.

Ok pilots, are the flaps out as far as they should be? they look a bit shallow to me who knows nothing.

Are the ailerons or rudder settings indicating any maneuver or are we looking at a stall?

[Tommy]

The most telling photo to me is this one.



About the only scenario I can imagine that would result in a jet having this much bank so close to the ground and away from the paved runway is a stall. (For the non-aviators, a stall is when the airflow over a wing is disrupted. Stalls commonly occur when the angle the wing makes with the oncoming air gets too steep for the speed it is traveling.) When one wing stalls before the other, it will drop and cause an abrupt roll and subsequent change in direction. The solution for a stall is to add power, lower the pitch of the airplane to decrease the angle of attack of the oncoming air, and level the wings. Typically that results in a momentary loss of altitude. Unfortunately, that solution doesn't work when you are as low as was that airplane.

[Excaliber]

There was chatter about a crowded field and airspace, which may have limited some options.

[Don]

Question asked earlier, any thoughts ?

" Not being in aviation, is there a reason Jack and his passenger were not interviewed for the Preliminary NTSB Report, or is it SOP to not include the participants comments on the incident until the final report, legal or otherwise ?

Appears the passenger was not injured, or there's no report of injuries, and Jack was available as he participated in all the NASCAR Race Team conference calls except one while in the hospital, as reported by his Race Team in interviews. "
__________________

[bran3b]

The picture with the right wing about to touch the ground appears to show the rudder also to the right. Then in the last image in Excaliber's post, while the plane is still moving, the rudder still appears to be to the right, it is not until the plane comes to rest that the rudder then shifts to the left.

So my question is, could this indicate that he was trying to avoid something by turning the plane which then caused the stall? It looks to me like he is turning away from the intended runway.

[Excaliber]

I bet that guy in the single engine prop has a pucker factor equal to that of Roush at this moment in time!

[Jerry Clayton]

Not much flaps for landing---but maybe he was retracting them for parking

[snakebittexan]

If we limited the post on this thread to those "that do" we would far fewer responses wouldn't we?

[BT SNAKE]

The small plane landing is on 18L which is a long taxi way they deem 18L for this event. The small plane landed just after the jet hit the ground and he is at least 500ft from 18R. The 18R runway is 150ft wide and 8,000ft long.
Sorry, my error. The jet was landing south and is now facing north after the crash. The small plane is taxing North. No way could it have been ahead of the jet in the air. If you look you can see the jet missed the intended runway by a large margin.

Hersh

[Excaliber]

Considering the speed and the "bounce" potential 500 ft is way close.

As I understand it, a private jet, when landing, comes in relatively slow, making it a difficult plane to land just from that perspective.

Some numbers I came across for this Beechcraft. Typical landing speed looks like a 100 knots. Stall speed, lowest, is 93 knots. Man, sounds like your right on the edge.

[Tommy]

Originally Posted by bran3b

The picture with the right wing about to touch the ground appears to show the rudder also to the right. Then in the last image in Excaliber's post, while the plane is still moving, the rudder still appears to be to the right, it is not until the plane comes to rest that the rudder then shifts to the left.

So my question is, could this indicate that he was trying to avoid something by turning the plane which then caused the stall? It looks to me like he is turning away from the intended runway.

I do not know if he was trying to turn on purpose, but as an airplane increases its bank, it requires ever more lift (i.e., upward aerodynamic force) to keep it from descending. If I were low and slow when I realized I needed to maneuver to avoid a conflict, my turns would be as gentle as possible. Let me add that the only conflicts I can imagine that would necessitate such low altitude maneuvering would be a vehicle unexpectedly pulling out on the runway or birds or another airplane unexpectedly flying into my path. If I were maneuvering to avoid a conflict with a known airplane (e.g., the airplane landing ahead of me), I would have made the decision and started the go-around maneuver much earlier when it was safer to do so.

[tcrist]

Originally Posted by snakebittexan

If we limited the post on this thread to those "that do" we would far fewer responses wouldn't we?

Just because you don't do, don't mean you don't understand. Sure I am not an expert but just because I do not fly don't mean I do not know anything about it.

Not that you are talking about me or just me, it is just a phrase.

[Tom Niebrand]

Originally Posted by jmimac351

I used to fly a corp jet as sic and pic. These planes used to require a co-pilot. In these pictures of Jack exiting the plane, you can kind of see inside the cockpit. I see no one in the cockpit, I see no one in the door way, except Jack. You better start looking for that co-pilot, he may need some help, or was the secretary a co-pilot? Now Jack, you would not fly that plane by yourself would you?????