PSA Jet crash, 1978

[chrisinhouston]

Prior to Sept. 11, this was a one of the most dramatic pre crash photos, taken just by chance. It is the PSA jet crash of 1978. The photographer had to fight for the rights to the image, as he was employed by the city of San Diego when he snapped it and they claimed ownership. He eventually won in court. It made the cover of Time.

[Nothing But Net]

Nothing But Net here, another Houston (TX) Cellar Dweller.

Going to be meeting face to face with sycamore next week, by odd chance, but it's always good to see a homeboy on the boards.

Welcome!

NBN

[tw]

Originally posted by chrisinhouston
...one of the most dramatic pre crash photos, taken just by chance. It is the PSA jet crash of 1978.

Looking close at the fire - it is not in the engines. Apparently a fuel tank is burning. But what caused it? The engines are in the back on what I believe is a DC-9.

[sapienza]

That crash was caused by a collision the plane had with a much smaller plane that had violated its airspace.

If you want to hear the cockpit voice recorder of the crash in MP3, go here:
http://www.worldwidemart.com/sapienz...ssna%20172.mp3

(one of my silly little habits is to collect and MP3 CVR recordings ...)

More links of interest:
http://aviation-safety.net/cvr/cvr_ps182.htm
http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-psa182.shtml

... yeah, I know, I find air disasters a little TOO interesting...

sapienza

[tw]

Originally posted by sapienza
... yeah, I know, I find air disasters a little TOO interesting...

Those who come to gape are the ones who should apologize. They watch Lisa Thomas Laurie and Jim Gardner, or buy the Daily/Local or Mercury for the daily car crashes on the front page. The difference is that this picture now includes details from which responsible people learn. That is what news is all about - learning.

Pilots lost track of a Cessna and did not report same to control tower. Control tower knew of impending collision but ignored it since too many alarms were normal. Humans failing to do their job by 'ignoring the details' is the summary. Now we must ask who was in charge of control tower operations because 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. The whole logical process of how failures happen is why this picture and story are so important.

As I note so many times previously, Channel 6 Action News never reports news. They report hype. They would flood the screens with the topmost picture, but never report nine reasons why the crash occured nor demonstrate how human failure causes catastrophy.

Excellent hyperlinks now make the picture appropriate. Quality poster who demonstrates how Lisa Thomas Laurie, et al should be doing her job.

[aofl]

Originally posted by sapienza
That crash was caused by a collision the plane had with a much smaller plane that had violated its airspace.

If you want to hear the cockpit voice recorder of the crash in MP3, go here:
http://www.worldwidemart.com/sapienz...ssna%20172.mp3

(one of my silly little habits is to collect and MP3 CVR recordings ...)

More links of interest:
http://aviation-safety.net/cvr/cvr_ps182.htm
http://www.airdisaster.com/special/special-psa182.shtml

... yeah, I know, I find air disasters a little TOO interesting...

sapienza

I can't fault you. I've been a fan of airdisaster.com for a while now. There are many disturbing images. I recommend this site to everyone I talk to who mentions air disasters. They used to have movies of air disasters, but no longer.

[Joe]

A small plane intruded into the class B airspace around the airport, I believe, and they had a midair collision.

The jet looks to be close to or exceeding ninety degrees of bank. Also their speed must have been pretty slow so near an airport. I think they stalled and fell out of the sky. The plane is nose-down, so the pilot is probably trying to regain some airspeed and save it, but he's way too low.

The big jet landed right into the middle of suburbia and blew away a whole block of middle-income homes. I mean nothing left.

This accident is where as a kid I learned the word "Cessna".

[MaggieL]

<i>This accident is where as a kid I learned the word "Cessna".</i><p>
Interesting, considering the other aircraft involved was a Piper.

Originally posted by MaggieL
<i>This accident is where as a kid I learned the word "Cessna".</i><p>
Interesting, considering the other aircraft involved was a Piper.

Interesting, considering the other aircraft involved WAS A CESSNA 172M.

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood, but please check your facts before you post smarmy comments designed to make other people look stupid.

Go do a google search for "psa 182 piper"... all results that come up say that it was a Cessna, as does the original article on airdisaster.com, as does everything else I've ever heard.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by dhamsaic

Interesting, considering the other aircraft involved WAS A CESSNA 172M.

Maybe I'm just in a bad mood, but please check your facts before you post smarmy comments designed to make other people look stupid.

I stand corrected. Sapienza's comment about an airspace violation, and Joe's mention of Class B airspace threw me off.

The Piper I was thinking of I was in the Mexicana DC-9 collision with a Piper Archer in 1986 over Cerritos near LAX...it really stuck in my mind because that *was* a TCA violation (although not a profound one) and I was in VFR flight training in Cessnas near the edge of KPHL TCA at the time. Of course the LAX TCA wasn't *technically* "Class B airspace" then, as ICAO-compliant nomenclature wasn't adapted until much later. But TCA is the moral equivalant. There were pre-impact photos and significan on-the-ground casualties of that crash, too.

The PSA/Skyhawk merger was quite a bit before that, when I was just starting out on BBSs. In that case, *both* aircraft were on ATC clearances and in radar contact. I believe San Diego was not within an ARSA (since it's not now Class C) but possiblyTRSA or even ATA airspace at the time...certainly not a TCA, which was the then-current equivalant of Class B.. Regardless, no airspace violation was involved since both were on vectors at the time.

The idea of flying in Southern CA airspace is intimidating to us East Coast pilots. Myself, I'd prefer *not* to collect any CVRs...the situations that lead to keeping one can ruin your whole day.

And, yes, you are in a bad mood....but judging by your sig it's not an an unusual condition. :-)

The three most frequently heard statements on CVRs *not* involved in accidents:

"Oh, shit"
"Was that for us?" and
"What did he say?"

[jaguar]

*stunned*
Any chance of having that translated into normal-person speak? =)

[MaggieL]

Normal people don't talk about airspace at that level of detail, it's like the apocryphal story about eskimos having a plethora of different words for "snow". For normal people, I suppose it would have to read: "Maggie mixed up two similar midairs that were a decade apart in time".

Does Cellar content need subtitles for normal people now? Didn't used to. :-)

[juju]

Sapienza, is there anywhere else I might find that mp3 of the cockpit voice recorder? The link you posted only pulls up a "can't find this page" deal.

[jaguar]

I picked up that much, it went jargon from then on. Dosen't usually but i suffer from a curiousity complex.

[MaggieL]

Originally posted by jaguar
I picked up that much, it went jargon from then on. Dosen't usually but i suffer from a curiousity complex.

OK...if you're actually curious rather than bored, here's a semidejargonizer.

The 3D airspace in the US is sliced up into pieces. The various flavors have different rules for which aircraft can enter them under which flight rules (instrument vs. visual), what weather conditions in terms of visibility and separation from clouds they must observe and what kind of permission they need first. The first major division is between controlled and uncontrolled airspace.As radar coverage gets better and better, there's less and less uncontrolled airspace; it's now found mostly in blobs close to the ground (700 to 1200 feet above ground level or AGL) in between controlled airspace that touches the surface under airways or at airports...even some airports that don't have control towers but have a minimum density of operations under instrument rules...Wings Field in Ambler being an example.

The blobs of *controlled* airspace that are near to or tounch the surface used to have a system of semiconfusing acronymic na
mes: terminal control area (TCA). airport radar service area (ARSA), terminal radar service area (TRSA), airport traffic area (ATA) and control zones (CZ). In 1993, this system was reorganized, and the new airspace classes were given letter names to align them better with international practice as standardized by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO). At that time, TCAs became Class B, ARSAs became Class C, TRSAs didn't do anything, ATAs became Class D, CZs and all other controlled airspace below 18,000' above mean sea level (MSL) or above Flight Level 600 (60,000' MSL) became Class E, and the "Continental Control Area (CCA)" where most airliners cruise (between 18,000' and 60,000' MSL) was renamed Class A.

So, all the classes of "alphabet airspace" other than G are considered "controlled" to some degree, and *all* aircraft operating under instrument flight rules (IFR) within controlled airspace will be in radio (and usually, but not always radar) contact with an air traffic controller (ATC) whose job it is to make sure all IFR aircraft maintain a minimum separation from each other. The ATC will also, to the extent practical, ensure separation between IFR flights and those operating under visual flight rules (VFR), who he may (Classes B, C or D) or may not (Class E and G) be able to reach via radio. (No VFR operations are permitted in Class A airspace)

OK...what jargon is left? KPHL= Philly International Airport. LAX=Los Angeles International. CVR=Cockpit Voice Recorder, one of two flavors of "black box", the other being Flight Data Recorder or FDR..

I've had too much coffee this morning...