Frank Lewis Photography wrote:
The Ryan is not an easy airplane to fly. Like Click said, Good thing Ford didn't stall the airplane.
When a Ryan stalls and spins it's Stall, Spin one turn, three turns, your dead.

EDIT: Some movie he did with Ann Heche some years back, he used his deHavilland Beaver as part of the storyline.

Or even in the development of the spin. As soon as the plane flips over the dead wing it's pointed straight into the ground for a more serious head-on collision. Lots of accidents happen during take off and landing where there is not enough time and altitude to recover. Trying to "turn back" vs. landing straight forward and taking what's coming to you is an important decision. Trying to make it back to the runway with a nose up attitude and the stall alarms going off is not a good choice.

On a normal afternoon with prevailing wind coming in from the ocean, the golf course is right off the departure end of the runway. I have not read yet if his engine failure was on take off or landing, or if he was trying to fly back to the airport downwind.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Santa … 0593ddd9b4

I thought his movie set somewhere around Tahiti was a good one. Six Days, Seven Nights. Romantic comedy adventure. Thanks for the reminder. I'll watch it again tonight on Netflix.

Caradoc wrote:
At least the golf course was a good choice for crashing.

Wide open spaces, little risk to hurt other people, plenty of doctors nearby...

You made me laugh. "Forrrrrre! ......"

Click Hamilton wrote:
The rest of the plane looks like it can be repaired.

I hope you are right.  There are too few left as it is.

Click Hamilton wrote:
On a normal afternoon with prevailing wind coming in from the ocean, the golf course is right off the departure end of the runway. I have not read yet if his engine failure was on take off or landing, or if he was trying to fly back to the airport downwind.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Santa … 0593ddd9b4

CORRECTION: There are at least 7 golf courses near that airport.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0239082 … a=!3m1!1e3

EDIT UPDATE: news is reporting now that it was after take off and that it was the first golf course right at the end of the runway. He was cleared by the tower to land downwind and he landed short. From an eyewitness video his rate of descent without power looked normal.

Caradoc was right! ... it was doctors playing golf who got to him first. A spinal surgeon, no less, who gave a nice, crisp statement to the press.

Click Hamilton wrote:

CORRECTION: There are at least 7 golf courses near that airport.
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.0239082 … a=!3m1!1e3

EDIT UPDATE: news is reporting now that it was after take off and that it was the first golf course right at the end of the runway. He was cleared to land downwind.

Caradoc was right! ... it was doctors playing golf who got to him first. A spinal surgeon, no less.

His engine failed.  He was lucky that he landed near the doctors.

Frank Lewis Photography wrote:
The Ryan is not an easy airplane to fly. Like Click said, Good thing Ford didn't stall the airplane.
When a Ryan stalls and spins it's Stall, Spin one turn, three turns, your dead.

EDIT: Some movie he did with Ann Heche some years back, he used his deHavilland Beaver as part of the storyline.

Ann Heche's character told him, "I've flown with you twice, you crashed half the time."  LOL

Click Hamilton wrote:
It will be useful to know what caused the crash landing rather than a soft landing on the golf course. Maybe hitting trees on the approach was the problem. In the photos, I don't see the landing gear. Prop strikes require a full engine overhaul. The rest of the plane looks like it can be repaired. I wonder if Harrison Ford does this kind of restoration work himself as part of his hobby?

The report I heard yesterday was the gear stuck in the soft ground.

Click Hamilton wrote:
Caradoc was right! ... it was doctors playing golf who got to him first. A spinal surgeon, no less, who gave a nice, crisp statement to the press.

I didn't make that joke out of thin air. A lot of pilots think golf courses are ideal places for "unplanned landings." And I already knew that two of the people who got there first were doctors playing golf.

ernst tischler wrote:
The report I heard yesterday was the gear stuck in the soft ground.

We had 3-4 pretty solid days of rain last weekend, which is luxurious by by Southern CA standards. We are back into the high 70's, low 80's today, but the ground is still moist. It rarely gets soggy around here.

Another thing to consider: if the landing gear stick, a plane will often nose over, especially on an old tailgragger. Taildraggers are subject to ground loops too, because the center of gravity is usually behind the main landing gear. By the dents and the way the engine mounts broke off, it looks like it was pretty much a smooth and straight belly landing for the most part. I'm still waiting to hear where the landing gear ended up -- under the plane or somewhere behind him in the landing path.

This is what the landing gear look like:


... and a nice synopsis of this plane from the AOPA:
http://www.aopa.org/News-and-Video/All- … retty-Face

"Landing the PT-22 is unexpectedly easy. The trunion (knee-action) landing gear incorporates long-stroke Aerol (air-oil) oleo struts that soak up any tendency to bounce. It is difficult to make a hard landing in the Recruit. It simply squishes onto the ground during either three-point or wheel landings.

Do not, however, allow this to lead to overconfidence and complacency. The PT-22 is one of those airplanes that helped give taildraggers a bad reputation. Although the touchdown is easy, hang on. This is when the fun begins. Inattentiveness, or overcontrol of the rudder, during the ground roll can lead to a wicked ground loop, especially if you are flying alone and the CG is aft. If your feet are not busily and adroitly dancing on the pedals, then you’re probably doing it wrong. PT-22s have steerable, full-swiveling tailwheels.

---

When I think of the moment his engine quit, I keep hearing the Indiana Jones theme song kick in.


---

EDIT: Here it is, collapsed under the plane:



Other photos show part of the struts or mounting brackets on the other side.

Caradoc wrote:
At least the golf course was a good choice for crashing.

Don't they call that a "birdie" in golf???

Click Hamilton wrote:
We had 3-4 pretty solid days of rain last weekend, which is luxurious by by Southern CA standards. We are back into the high 70's, low 80's today, but the ground is still moist. It rarely gets soggy around here.

Another thing to consider: if the landing gear stick, a plane will often nose over, especially on an old tailgragger. Taildraggers are subject to ground loops too, because the center of gravity is usually behind the main landing gear. By the dents and the way the engine mounts broke off, it looks like it was pretty much a smooth and straight belly landing for the most part. I'm still waiting to hear where the landing gear ended up -- under the plane or somewhere behind him in the landing path.

<snip>



Other photos show part of the struts or mounting brackets on the other side.

Perhaps the gear didn't "stick" in the soft ground, but rather trenched along until they collapsed.  Look at the furrow behind the plane in the photo.  Also, looking at the damage to the front of the plane, it could have nosed down briefly, but not far enough to flip over before the gear collapsed.

ernst tischler wrote:
Perhaps the gear didn't "stick" in the soft ground, but rather trenched along until they collapsed.  Look at the furrow behind the plane in the photo.  Also, looking at the damage to the front of the plane, it could have nosed down briefly, but not far enough to flip over before the gear collapsed.

Yes, I agree. It could be lots of things. When the final reports come out from the NTSB investigation it could be other things too, including why the engine quit.

I'm glad to hear that Harrison Ford is OK. I have always liked him as an actor. I have no clue what he is like in his personal life, but he seems to be pretty adventurous and active in many things. For 72, he seems to pack a full schedule.

When he crash landed his helicopter in a riverbed near Lake Piru, he was practicing engine power loss, auto-rotation and restarting of the engine. This is important practice for a helicopter pilot. They got too low and the ground came first, before recovery of engine power. The helicopter was badly damaged. Harrison and his instructor walked away unhurt. My favorite answer he gave after that incident was "I broke it."

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
The plane was made in San Diego.

Ryan Aeronautical, Lindbergh Field, San Diego



The Ryan PT-22:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_PT-22_Recruit

DOUGLASFOTOS wrote:
This is Harrison Ford's Third Crash...Two Planes and one Helicopter...OR...Hard Landing.

gravity doesn't like him, maybe the the universe is saying he should take up golf

GK photo wrote:
i'm not a pilot (i actually hate fucking flying), but i have always wondered what benefit it would be to piloting those old birds from the back seat of them. from the looks of this crash, he is probably alive due to him having been in the rear seat. i would assume the potential for life threatening trauma would have been far greater for someone in the front seat.

Weight and balance. Center of gravity. These things are important and have to be calculated. Each plane is different and it also depends on if you have passengers/cargo or not. There are usually flight controls from two seats.

I learned to fly and had my first solo flight in a Piper J3 Cub. That's another tandem seating arrangement that's normally flown from the back seat. I've never flown from the front seat in that plane.

When the plane has two seats abreast, the pilot-in-command usually flies from the left seat.

My Cessna held 4 people and both sets of controls were in the front. Can't fly that one for very long from the back seat

Click Hamilton wrote:
I learned to fly and had my first solo flight in a Piper J3 Cub. That's another tandem arrangement that's normally flown from the back seat. I've never flown from the front seat in that plane.

My Cessna held 4 people and both sets of controls were in the front. Can't fly that one for very long from the back seat

pardon the ignorance, but wouldn't your sight (as a pilot) be better from the front seat? i would assume that most of the take offs and landings (from the rear seat) would be pretty much blind, other than your peripheral vision. hell, even in flight, how can someone from the rear seat get a real good view of what's happening in front of the plane?

from what i see, these planes fly basically parallel to the ground, but the back seats seem to be lower than that plane (geometric, not aeronautic).

GK photo wrote:
pardon the ignorance, but wouldn't your sight (as a pilot) be better from the front seat? i would assume that most of the take offs and landings (from the rear seat) would be pretty much blind, other than your peripheral vision. hell, even in flight, how can someone from the rear seat get a real good view of what's happening in front of the plane?

from what i see, these planes fly basically parallel to the ground, but the back seats seem to be lower than that plane (geometric, not aeronautic).

I never thought about that much. A pilot should be looking in all directions, including above and below. To see past the cowl on a tail-dragger the pilot should taxi with drunken-looking S-turns so he can look ahead from looking side to side. Without that, he could run into something. A tail-dragger with a big engine is worse. Can't see anything straight ahead.

Before entering the runway, for example, it's a good idea to lock one wheel brake and do a 360 on the ground for an excellent view of the airspace around the airport in all directions. If it's clear, then announce on the radio, pull out and full throttle.

In level flight the plane visibility is relative to level flight. You can see the ground from the left or right, but not down through the front of the airplane. In a nose-down descent the visibility of the ground is better if you want to look at it straight ahead. In a climb, the pilot can only see what he can see at that angle pointing upwards in the direction he's flying, not "straight ahead" .. meaning relative to the ground.  The views and blind spots change with the planes attitude to the relative wind.

In a plane with tricycle landing gear, the body of the plane is already in a more level configuration when on the ground.

Yes, there are significant blind spots, but it depends on what the pilot should be looking at. Wings are big blind spots too. The pilot can raise and dip wings to check out airspace around him or to get a better view of the ground, if that's important. It seems natural to do this for a look before making sharp left or right turns. The movement is subtle and maybe the passenger doesn't notice.

Before a pilot does a maneuver that's an abrupt departure from straight and level (stall, dive, acrobatics, other sharp changes) the pilot should do a 90 degree turn one direction, then 180 back the other, or make a 360 steep turn to make sure the area is clear. By doing this the pilot can see clearly in all directions and make sure there are no other aircraft in his area.

In a car, it's about looking left or right, straight ahead and for cops in the rear view mirror. In a plane you also have to look above and below.

Coming in for a landing, for example, power is reduced or cut and the nose comes up to bleed off the energy and slow the plane down for a gentle descent (sink, not dive) to the runway. There is a huge blind spot trying to look through the engine if it's in front of you, or over the nose. There are lots of other reference points all around, including the left and right edges of the runway. Perspectives. Trapezoidal shapes. Looking down is different from looking across. This is part of what telIs a pilot where he is. That perspective is different from the pilots seat of different aircraft. Maybe that feeling is part of the thrill of flying. 

I've never seen my wheels touch the ground either. That view is not available to me through the floorboards. You just learn to know when the wheels are going to touch. You feel for it.

There's an old expression: "flying by the seat of your pants" ... you can feel a lot of things through your butt, LOL, like where the ground is. 

Planes in a pattern can descend upon one another on the final approach if they don't see each other. Different planes have different landing speeds and rates of descent. There are blind spots from both positions. Especially at an airport without a control tower, It's good practice to announce your position in the pattern and when entering the different segments of the landing pattern (left pattern, right pattern, entering downwind from the 45, downwind, turning left or right base, straight in, turning final, etc.) This gives other pilots more of a chance to see each other.
.
To answer your question, I think looking around the head of a passenger sitting in the front seat is a very minor consideration relative to all the other things a pilot should be looking at, or being aware of indirectly. The passengers head might block the view of part of the instrument panel, but that's about all. A pilot can see a lot from unobstructed side views.

NothingIsRealButTheGirl wrote:
Not critically injured, as was previously reported, but seriously injured

http://boingboing.net/2015/03/05/harris … crash.html

Looks like he is going to be okay.