# Small Aircraft Crashes Into New York City High-Rise Building



## v2 (Oct 11, 2006)

NEW YORK — A small aircraft crashed into a high-rise building on Manhattan's Upper East Side Wednesday,

Local news reports quoted New York Fire Department officials as saying two people were confirmed dead. Officials said there is no indication the incident was a result of terrorism.

The crash set off a raging fire that sent a pillar of gray smoke over the city, police said. Witnesses reported seeing a gigantic fireball come out of the building, police said.

Flames could be seen shooting from windows on two upper floors of the 50-story building, near the East River. Burning debris fell from the tower, and a column of gray smoke rose over the city.

"There's huge pieces of debris falling," said one witness who refused to give her full name. "There's so much falling now, I've got to get away."

Fire Department spokeswoman Emily Rahimi said the aircraft struck the 20th floor of the building, located at 524 East 72nd Street.

The Federal Aviation Administration said it was a small aircraft that was involved, but there was very little other information collected so far. A helicopter would be expected in that area of the city; no other aircraft should be around that part of Manhattan, the FAA said.

(FOX News)


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 11, 2006)

I've been watching a live feed on this, no one could make out what it is..


----------



## evangilder (Oct 11, 2006)

The news stations are in a feeding frenzy on this one. Some say it was a helicopter, others say fixed wing. I have received word that NORAD has activiated some CAP flights over major cities. This is probably a precautionary measure at this time.


----------



## evangilder (Oct 11, 2006)

I just got wind of this info. It was a single engine, fixed wing aircraft that departed from Teterboro Airport and was flying north along the East River corridor. The aircraft suddenly banked sharply 90 degrees and dropped quickly in altitude. It levelled off before impacting the building. Word is that the JTTF is treating this as a deliberate act, and not an accident. The investigation continues. 

I am hoping that the aircraft and pilot info becomes available soon. Something smells kind of fishy...


----------



## evangilder (Oct 11, 2006)

Damn phone is ringing off the hook....Looks like it may be a Cirrus SR20 owned by NY Yankees pitcher Corey Lidle.

Unconfirmed reports that his passport was found near the building.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 11, 2006)

We just looked up his info - private pilot, no instrument rating. The weather in the area? Between 1 1/2 to 2 miles visibility, between 1000 - 1500 foot ceiling, haze and drizzle, definitely not VFR. Again, Mr. Lide does (did) not have an instrument rating.


----------



## lesofprimus (Oct 11, 2006)

Guess he was upset that the Yankees got eliminated from the Playoffs....


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 11, 2006)

Yep - you should see some of the stuff that was posted about him on Yahoo...


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 11, 2006)

I guess the SR20 parachutes don't work when your run 'em into buildings.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 11, 2006)

Matt308 said:


> I guess the SR20 parachutes don't work when your run 'em into buildings.


Yep!!!

I hate to say it but he was an idiot....


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

Didn't you guys get the memo - if you're famous you don't need an instrument rating. Seriously - people vastly underestimate the importance of being able to fly in IMC. Any billy-bob can tote his cessna in vmc.


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 12, 2006)

I'll go further and state most light general aircraft pilots scare the hell out of me . In Niagara we have a published race track pattern for viewing the Falls with altitudes determined by type of aircraft . I would not be surprised to find a Lycoming engine in my yard one day from the result of a mid air the general aviation aircraft are at all altitudes and flying the race track in any direction. The fact we've only had one mid air between two helos really shocks me . While contolling I've witnessed people flying with road maps for navigation , fuel tanks from outboard motors in the cockpit to extend range . Myself when I flew I ran into some weather decided on a 180 and and ended up doing a 360  it was a real learning experiance but how many of those types of thrills can you have before you find yourself in the middle of a smoking hole in the ground


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

Yep - and 3 miles always don't mean you could see the granite cloud in front of you...


----------



## Vassili Zaitzev (Oct 12, 2006)

Heard from my golfing instructor, hard to believe the rumor he flew into the tower deliberately but hey, the truth will take awhile to be unearthed.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

It seems he was turing around, he was being tracked on radar and was in a VFR corridor. As posted, the weather was horrible, this guy shouldn't even been thinking of flying. I think he turned around becuase he was worried about pentrating LaGuardia's airspace or he was encountering reduced visibility, in any case 1000' above the east river in under 2 mile visibility is not a place to do a 180 degree turn...


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

FLYBOYJ said:


> It seems he was turing around, he was being tracked on radar and was in a VFR corridor. As posted, the weather was horrible, this guy shouldn't even been thinking of flying. I think he turned around becuase he was worried about pentrating LaGuardia's airspace or he was encountering reduced visibility, in any case 1000' above the east river in under 2 mile visibility is not a place to do a 180 degree turn...



But he apparrantly was not concerned about max elevation figures??? Who needs obstacle clearance anyway


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

mkloby said:


> But he apparrantly was not concerned about max elevation figures??? Who needs obstacle clearance anyway



Yep! I bet he forgot about that from his student pilot days. I'm sorry, but there's a lot of people morning him and saying what a tragedy this is, flat out the guy was an idiot and the thing we should all be thankful for is more people weren't killed. This wasn't a matter of a simple mistake or human error, this was a blatant FAR violation, the accident chain started when he decided to go and started his engine....


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

So my father was reading an article and said that the weather was legal. Report said he took off 1421 local (1821Z) was in the air for 20m. The metar says he was legal - but with the way the conditions changed so rapidly, doesn't seem like it was a legit 7sm. Everyone knows that sometimes metars are just plain off.

I pulled up all the metars from yesterday - and showed the visibility near LGA diminishing from 9 down to below 2sm in the matter of an hour and a half. Weather pretty similar near TEB, but teterboro started getting socked in about 30 mins earlier. I couldn't find yesterdays tafs, but I would think that there was a hell of a tempo line or a becoming line for the weather that was supposed to move in. Which would mean that they knowingly flew into IMC.

So - was the instructor instrument rated? Any way you slice it - piss poor preflight planning, doesn't seem like they even checked the wx, and were flying in an area below MEF...

Everyone in aviation has done stupid things at one point or another - but this is gross incompetence.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

Yep - just found out he was with his instructor, a low time instructor. My god, double stupid! 

Check the METAR for LaGuardia - I showed they were 1 1/2 miles 1000.' This wasn't far from where they crashed. I pulled up a sectional for the area and they had to be under ATC for the area they were at along the East River. Here a great site to get on line moving sectionals...

SkyVector.com - Aeronautical Charts - Flight Planning

I agree 100% with you - "Gross Incompetence."


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

KLGA 112038Z 08011KT 1 3/4SM RA BKN016 OVC022 17/14 A2985 RMK AO2 TWR VIS 2 1/2 P0006
KLGA 111951Z 10011KT 8SM -RA OVC018 18/13 A2987 RMK AO2 RAB46 SLP114 P0000 T01830133
KLGA 111851Z 10013KT 9SM OVC018 18/13 A2988 RMK AO2 SLP118 T01830128
KLGA 111751Z 10011KT 9SM OVC018 18/13 A2991 RMK AO2 SLP128 T01830133 10183 20161 58019

Report said T/O time of 1421L (1821Z) - so the wx i'm seeing OVC018/9SM
It didn't drop below 3sm till 2038Z, which is 1638 local.

Either way - you have a responsibility to check wx - clearly it was heading south. I mean God - look at the falling altimeter... that should get the hamster running by itself. And if you're weather handicapped - check the weather channel even they'd give you wx in simple baseball player terms to tell you that you should not be flying vfr.

I really wanted to see what the TAF said - because factoring in your +/- 1 hour, I'm sure the weather depicted on that line would be below vFR mins.

Flying is dangerous, and it's even more dangerous when you're stupid. Celebrities are apparently trying their best to drive home this fact.


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

Oh and my most sincere thanks for that online sectional. I never knew about that site. Great stuff!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

mkloby said:


> Oh and my most sincere thanks for that online sectional. I never knew about that site. Great stuff!


No sweat, enjoy...

Look at the airspace around NYC - your METARS showed broken and overcast, 1,600 and 1,800 feet - look what the chart shows, towers 1515!







It looks like they were real close to LaGuardia. They either got chased away or ran into a wll of soup and tried to turn around. In any case the East River isn't the place to do a 180 degree turn at 1000' (the news said they were at 600' when they hit the building)


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 12, 2006)

Cant wait to get the full story on this...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

Yep - the plot thickens!


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 12, 2006)

that VFR route is below the height of most of the obstructions and from what I've heard is not monitered by ATC it is a seen and be seen area . It doesn't look like a good spot for a 180 but a point I'd like to make is that pilots sometimes stretch the truth a bit back in the 80's a large US carrier gave the pilots a bonus for fuel savings so the pilots would say they had the aerodrome visually when in our minds and other traffic it was not and they would proceed with a visual approach so they would not have to do the full IMC approach but abreviated the turn on to final to pick up the localizer at 3 or 4 miles hence saving fuel.


----------



## the lancaster kicks ass (Oct 12, 2006)

how much damage was done to the building? any pictures?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

pbfoot said:


> that VFR route is below the height of most of the obstructions and from what I've heard is not monitered by ATC it is a seen and be seen area . It doesn't look like a good spot for a 180


I lived in that area and it is very congested fron the surface to 1500 feet. 


pbfoot said:


> but a point I'd like to make is that pilots sometimes stretch the truth a bit back in the 80's a large US carrier gave the pilots a bonus for fuel savings so the pilots would say they had the aerodrome visually when in our minds and other traffic it was not and they would proceed with a visual approach so they would not have to do the full IMC approach but abreviated the turn on to final to pick up the localizer at 3 or 4 miles hence saving fuel.


Very True!



the lancaster kicks *** said:


> how much damage was done to the building? any pictures?



N.Y. plane crash kills Yankee pitcher on Yahoo! News Photos


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

So - anyone else wondering why the instructor let this all happen? I'm guessing he was inst rated. He shoulda known what was going down. How about talking to atc and getting and IFR clearance and getting under their positive control. It seems many when they hit trouble do not want to ask atc for assistance. Obviously you must maintain flight free of clouds, if you can't your not VFR. Maybe there was considerable head down time while they were trying to figure out what the hell to do. how else do you hit a building.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

mkloby said:


> So - anyone else wondering why the instructor let this all happen? I'm guessing he was inst rated. He shoulda known what was going down.


I looked him up on line. Instrument, multi-engine, etc., etc.


mkloby said:


> How about talking to atc and getting and IFR clearance and getting under their positive control. It seems many when they hit trouble do not want to ask atc for assistance.


Yep - I've done it before, it's a no-brain-er. Almost like someone who refuses to ask for directions when they are lost.



mkloby said:


> Obviously you must maintain flight free of clouds, if you can't your not VFR. Maybe there was considerable head down time while they were trying to figure out what the hell to do. how else do you hit a building.


The SR20/22 has all kinds of gadgets and neat equipment and sometimes there is too much time screwing around with these things instead of flying the aircraft. On the other hand not fully knowing how to operate them could be just a deadly. I went to a CFI seminar last weekend and this exact subject was discussed.

His instructor was with him but unless he was giving him instrument instruction (that didn't seem likely) Lidle was still PIC. At the same time his instructor should of realized the risk of what they were doing (and tried to mitigate it) way before they decided to fly up the East River....


----------



## mkloby (Oct 12, 2006)

Just to let everybody know - passed my Primary instrument check ride. Have my last flight in the T-34C tonight. Kinda sad...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 12, 2006)

mkloby said:


> Just to let everybody know - passed my Primary instrument check ride. Have my last flight in the T-34C tonight. Kinda sad...


VERY VERY COOL!!!!


----------



## Matt308 (Oct 12, 2006)

here ya go Lanc


----------



## pbfoot (Oct 12, 2006)

mkloby said:


> Just to let everybody know - passed my Primary instrument check ride. Have my last flight in the T-34C tonight. Kinda sad...


congrats thats a tough course I'm going to assume probably one of the hardest


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Oct 13, 2006)

Congrats man!


----------



## Dazed (Oct 14, 2006)

Congrats!


----------



## evangilder (Oct 14, 2006)

Good job, Marine.


----------



## Propwash (Oct 15, 2006)

Way to go!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 15, 2006)

BTW - I read on Friday, the FAA closed the VFR corridor along the East River. They only allow helicopters and a small seaplane operator to go in there without calling ATC.


----------



## evangilder (Oct 17, 2006)

From what I have heard, that coridor had a lot of helos in there anyway. Looks pretty narrow and not a place for a novice. I heard on the radio that there were experienced pilots that would fly there.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 18, 2006)

Yep - correct! Not a place for a novice pilot or anyone not familiar with the area. Flying there on a day with falling visibility was just plain stupid.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Oct 23, 2006)

Here's some more!!!!

Mayor Daley - A GENUINE IDIOT 

He's just as arrogant and ignorant as his father. As a result of the the light plane crash in NYC he is once again politicking General Aviation, terrorism and what he did to Meigs Field. Here is a letter to him from Phil Boyer, President of the Aircraft Owners and Pilot's Association...

Enough is enough

BY PHIL BOYER

Mayor Daley's latest rants have sent me over the edge. He used the accident in New York to once again demand a no-fly zone over downtown Chicago for general aviation aircraft.

It was expected, of course. He has an irrational hatred for piston-engine aircraft, as evidenced by his illogical tirade this week. "They should not jeopardize, through intentionally or by accident, a single- or two-engine plane flying over our city [sic]," the Meigs Field destroyer exploded at a press conference. (I don't think he was including Boeing 737s, 757s, and 767s in his list of twin-engine aircraft.) "Remember: a single- or two-engine plane can kill as many people as possible if they want to."

And if it were just Daley, I'd ignore his ravings, just as the folks in the federal government in charge of security and airspace do.

But it's not just him. Other politicians (with the spectacular and notable exception of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg) and self-appointed "experts" are jumping on the tragic accident — repeat, accident — in New York to sound off again about the "danger" of light aircraft, and how they must be regulated, restricted, banned.

OK, for all of those ranting about "threats" from GA aircraft, we'll believe that you're really serious about controlling "threats" when you call for:
Banning all vans within cities. A small panel van was used in the first World Trade Center attack. The bomb, which weighed 1,500 pounds, killed six and injured 1,042.
Banning all box trucks from cities. Timothy McVeigh's rented Ryder truck carried a 5,000-pound bomb that killed 168 in Oklahoma City.
Banning all semi-trailer trucks. They can carry bombs weighing more than 50,000 pounds.
Banning newspapers on subways. That's how the terrorists hid packages of sarin nerve gas in the Tokyo subway system. They killed 12.
Banning backpacks on all buses and subways. That's how the terrorists got the bombs into the London subway system. They killed 52.
Banning all cell phones on trains. That's how they detonated the bombs in backpacks placed on commuter trains in Madrid. They killed 191.
Banning all small pleasure boats on public waterways. That's how terrorists attacked the USS Cole, killing 17.
Banning all heavy or bulky clothing in all public places. That's how suicide bombers hide their murderous charges. Thousands killed.

*Number of people killed by a terrorist attack using a GA aircraft? Zero.

Number of people injured by a terrorist attack using a GA aircraft? Zero.

Property damage from a terrorist attack using a GA aircraft? None.*

So Mr. Mayor (and Mr. Governor, Ms. Senator, Mr. Congressman, and Mr. "Expert"), if you're truly serious about "protecting" the public, advocate all of the bans I've listed above. Using the "logic" you apply to general aviation aircraft, you're forced to conclude that newspapers, winter coats, cell phones, backpacks, trucks, and boats all pose much greater risks to the public.

So be consistent in your logic. If you are dead set on restricting a personal transportation system that carries more passengers than any single airline, reaches more American cities than all the airlines combined, provides employment for 1.3 million American citizens and $160 billion in business "to protect the public," then restrict or control every other transportation system that the terrorists have demonstrated they can use to kill.

If you're not willing to be consistent, then we might think that you're pandering to uninformed public fears, posturing from the soapbox of demagoguery, screaming security for your own political ends.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Nov 10, 2006)

What the NTSB Came up with...

NTSB CITES CROSSWIND AS FACTOR IN LIDLE ACCIDENT
The NTSB says that a 13-knot easterly crosswind may have been a factor in the accident that killed Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle and his flight instructor, Tyler Stanger. According to the NTSB, Lidle's Cirrus SR20 was flying over the east side of Roosevelt Island before starting a 180-degree turn. From that position, *there was only 1,700 feet of room to complete the turn.* However, the easterly crosswind would have caused the aircraft to drift about 400 feet, leaving only 1,300 feet to complete the turn. The board computed that with an airspeed of 97 knots, the pilot would have needed a 53-degree bank angle and pulled 1.7 Gs in order to complete the turn without hitting the building. If the bank angle at the beginning of the turn were less steep, an increasingly aggressive bank would have been needed, and that would have put the aircraft close to a stall. The AOPA Air Safety Foundation notes that some 26 percent of fatal accidents occur during maneuvering flight. 

This is pilot 101 - not adjusting for the winds in turns...


----------



## mkloby (Nov 10, 2006)

Too low for a split-S, I'm guessing the A/C cannot perform an immelman - and his A/S was too slow anyway I'm sure. Again - don't know what his stall speeds were - and this is one of the things I dislike about these investigations... but if you lower your A/S, and keep the same AOB, then your radius of turn will become tighter - which the board no doubt knows - but maybe they keep it on the simple side for the reports.

I'm still stunned about the fact that an instructor was there...


----------

