This website uses cookies. By using and further navigating this website, you accept this.
Dismiss
Did you know that FlightAware flight tracking is supported by advertising?
You can help us keep FlightAware free by allowing ads from FlightAware.com. We work hard to keep our advertising relevant and unobtrusive to create a great experience. It's quick and easy to whitelist ads on FlightAware or please consider our premium accounts.
Dismiss
Back to Squawk list
  • 25

Plane crashes into Md suburban house

Submitted
GAITHERSBURG, Md. (AP) -- A plane has crashed into a house in Maryland's Montgomery County. Montgomery County Fire and Rescue could not immediately say whether there was anyone in the Gaithersburg house at the time of the Monday crash or how many people were injured or killed. They say the house is on fire. The crash happened less than 1 mile from the Montgomery County Airpark. (hosted.ap.org) More...

Sort type: [Top] [Newest]


TRPD304
TRPD304 9
Sad event. My wife went to school with the mother in the house. I can't even begin to imagine what the surviving husband and son have to go through and so close to Christmas. Godspeed to all those involved.
skeehner
Sean Keehner 6
No matter what the outcome of the NTSB investigation, no pilot goes up to fly with the intent of crashing & not walking away from the flight. Aircraft crashes are few in comparison to the number of flights, but it still does not help those who have to live with the results. Heart felt prayers go out to all the families both on the ground & in the plane. Such a tragedy around a time when we are in a time when we need to be thankful for all of those around us.
Avi8tor2
Avi8tor2 9
I fly both the Phenom 100 and 300. In my and many of my peer's personal opinions, the 100 is somewhat under powered and too many times I have seen it overloaded by over zealous aircraft owners that have the taste for a Challenger 300 but with the budget of a Phenom 100. These aircraft are not particularly difficult to fly however, but as a couple of the recent Jet Suite Phenom 100 accidents have proven, they are definitely not forgiving when landing on a contaminated runway or with a tailwind. The electronic braking does it "own thinking" when it comes to trying to stop the darn thing so for awhile, at least, you (the pilot) are along for the ride on landing. I sure hope this aircraft wasn't overloaded. I'm shocked to hear about it crashing so close to the airport with all of these witnesses (not very accurate of course) saying they heard what sounded like the engines were "sputtering".....yeah, okay a Jet Engine "sputtering", maybe more like compressor stalls, but with such a bulletproof engine, I will really be anxious to hear what the NTSB will have to say about this particular accident. May the Lord be with those dearly departed.......
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
It's refreshing to hear someone who has some first hand knowledge in type if not the actual model. Thanks for a better feel for the incident. There is little doubt that the pic stalled the airplane now it's up to NTSB to find out why and how. I find it hard to believe the investigator saw the data from the FDR but hadn't heard the data from the CVR which quite possibly has the answers we all seek. He likes to land at low speed, but I don't know what the over the fence speed should have been for the 500. Maybe you can tell us how low 88 kts might have been
preacher1
preacher1 2
Boss, I'll go back and look but I thought he both FDR and CVR to work off of. Vref is 90kt so I don't think 88kt was all that slow, but that is just me.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I may have misread the article. I made a mistake once before.:-), I thought it said he hadn't istened to the CVR yet. I thought it a little unusual he would have looked at one and not the other.

Merry Christmas my friend, if I don't get a chance to talk to you between now and then.
preacher1
preacher1 1
http://youtu.be/vi6oFL0Is68. I think this is from his briefing on Tuesday afternoon.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Thanks. There is no doubt he had examined both recorders. The difference between 88 and 90 kts. explains nothing. Two "bad" landings at the same airport gives suspect to something uniquely environmental but it may be weather related. I've never used Gaithersburg. Anything I come up with would be pure speculation
preacher1
preacher1 1
Yeah, me too. The TBM crash was on another runway. It also notes in that briefing that there was a pax in the right seat but very little conversation and that the plane was certified for 1 man operation. I'm like you, 2 kts on the approach don't mean anything. Ain't no telling. Hopefully we'll find out down the road. I'm just guessing but I am betting mechanical of some type from which he could not recover. You might jump into Google and call that plane up. It has a few odd quirks not normally found on the street.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
I tried to Google some things up yesterday but got interrupted. Maybe I'll have some clear time tonight. As I recall they all had a quirk or two. The old ones because the technology was emerging and the newer ones because they over used the technology. :-)
preacher1
preacher1 0
Yeah, I think most of it was ground stuff like the brakes and all but a year or 2 back they had an FAA mandate to put that stick pusher in. I don't know what caused that though. Don't remember.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
Never paid much attention to any of their stuff. Too many airplanes too little time.
preacher1
preacher1 1
Merry Christmas to ya'll up there. Stay war. LOL
iflypvt01
Preacher1,
Merry Christmaa! Got caught in NATS mess UK!
Thx for always keeping everyone @ 1200 on the nose!
preacher1
preacher1 1
Merry Christmas to ya. LOL
bernuli
first last 0
Witness reports often times have a lot of imagination involved, perhaps due to not fully understanding what was going on. Sputtering could easily be someones interpretation of a compressor stall.

The phenom's smart brakes don't seem to have been involved in this horrible crash.

With only 3 people onboard. don't see how they could be overloaded. Unless there was some inflight refueling. Even then, my guess is the 100 can do 3 people with full fuel.
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 8
The Doctor who was at the controls crashed a Socata TBM just four years ago at the same airport. He had no business getting back behind the controls of an aircraft and now a poor young mother and her two little boys are dead as a result.

http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/investigations/russ-ptacek/2014/12/08/gaithersburg-crash-rosenberg/20116417/

[This poster has been suspended.]

preacher1
preacher1 9
He obviously was not at the controls, but if you would have looked at his profile, you would have seen that he carries a commercial rating, which more than qualifies him to bring up documented happenings from the past. The part about the mother and children is his opinion as is his statement about getting back behind the controls.
isardriver
isardriver 4
right on
linbb
linbb 2
Don't have a commercial rating just private. Read the accident report on the TBM crash and his statement about it sounds like he was a little behind the AC on that one. It went in due to not enough power being applied. At this time who knows why it got slow and was on the edge of a stall. Might have been doing all he could to keep it in the air and just came up short no matter what he did.
preacher1
preacher1 6
As I tell everybody, you haven't got " JUST A PRIVATE". Should you choose, a private is just the first step to an ATP. You have no idea just how many people would trade places with you, but you have worked and studied and put forth that effort. So many talk and never carry out. Hang in there bub.
BaronG58
BaronG58 6
linbb..Next time your a couple thousand feet up, look down at the roads and highways....those people have "JUST A DRIVERS LICENSE". Earning your private ticket is a big deal and great accomplishment.
wingbolt
wingbolt 17
The Esq title explains your lack of useful knowledge and qualifies you as a good candidate as a politician. Washington would welcome your babble with open arms.
linbb
linbb 4
Go to his response page and it reads the same about everything as he seem to know all about all also.
wingbolt
wingbolt 8
To let him know, I do have several type ratings which means I have to attend recurrent training. I am sure he is the guy that is in class that cant keep his pie hole shut...normally one every class.
Bernie20910
Bernie Behling 18
Perhaps, Mr. Hartmann, if you so enjoy riding high horses, an equestrian forum would better suit you? They at least would have pertinent suggestions as to what you can do with your horseshit.
joelwiley
joel wiley 8
And are you typed in that aircraft? The problem with filtering out the hoi polloi from this forum, is that it IS a public forum. Perhaps you should create your own forum for high-flying attorneys, and control the membership yourself. Have you anything to add on the topic beyond de mortuis nihil nisi bonum?
mikepilot
Mike Layton 2
Very sad...i sued to fly in and out of there back in the 70s.....
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 2
The plane is reported to be a Embraer EMB-500/Phenom 100 with at least three people on board.
cm5299
Chuck Me 2
Seems to also own N791PS
KevinBrown
Kevin Brown 2
Earlier crash

http://aviation-safety.net/wikibase/wiki.php?id=73272
preacher1
preacher1 2
According to the ATC comm, there were other pilot reports of excessive birds in the area. Whatever it was, it was fast and ugly.
bbabis
Bill Babis 2
Way too much is still unknown. Everything seamed normal at 3 mile final radio call. This is a total guess on my part as I am unfamiliar with the Phenom and its flight characteristics. What this looks like is a classic tailplane stall. Looking at the weather, undoubtedly there was a decent through ice. The wings may be clear but if the tail has any ice, the aircraft can appear to be flying very normal but a sudden loss of control can happen as landing flaps are selected. Unless you take precautions, recovery is very unlikely. May all involved rest in peace and the rest of us be ever vigilant.
preacher1
preacher1 3
I missed the descent thru ice possibility. I though it strange that bird warning were mentioned. As I said earlier, whatever it was was fast and ugly.
bbabis
Bill Babis 5
Fast and ugly is a great description. You know as well as any of us, unless you are prepared for the possibility, you don't get to the F part of WTF.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Flying is wonderful but can be the most deadly of anything I have ever seen. It seems so secure but Mr. Murphy can walk in and tear things up very quick, and if you are not on your game, you'll wind up like these folks. They said on the news this morning that Doc had been flying for 4 decades. Chances are the flight had been routine until that moment, then something happened fast.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 2
http://youtu.be/vi6oFL0Is68
cm5299
Chuck Me 1
Thanks for this. I did not know they posted these on youtube. I prefer going "to the source" like this as opposed to reading someone's interpretation of these things.

Thanks again.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 2
Todays NTSB Press conf CVR & FDR INFO.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 2
CVR says from about 20 sec to the end the stall warn was on and FDR says air speed was slow.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Saw that. Airspeed at 88kt. Engines did respond to increase and gear was down. Sounds like he got behind somehow. Not sure on Vref but I figure it is above 88kt.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 1
If you look at a Satellite view of the crash site their was some tall power lines just before the crash site in the approach.Maybe he was low seen the power lines and just pulled the nose up to level off lost speed then stalled?? Just a guess but the lines look tall and close to the crash site.

Seen it was about the same thing in the TBM crash he had in 2010 too. But he was an ATP CFI/MEI so who knows. RIP
preacher1
preacher1 2
All the ratings in the world don't stop complacency or Mr. Murphy from coming through the cockpit door.
iflypvt01
Preacher 1
Those words are my Dads "Tami, complacency has no room in the cockpit"
It's always proven fact..... Sad at the holidays, rip to all...
DSchultz101
It seems like the plane was on a stabilized approach since he was 500 AGL 32 seconds before impact. (1000ft/min) somehow he got the plane behind the power curve and stalled at 88kts. I think Vref for this plane is around 90kts. Might have been heavy with CG in an unfavorable position which would make it difficult to recover from a stall.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 1
I cant see the CG getting him with just 3 on the plane and maybe at most 1/2 full on fuel. Who knows.Little jets like that are not very forgiving.
preacher1
preacher1 2
In about 10 minutes there will be an NTSB prelim. Maybe that will shed some light.
preacher1
preacher1 3
Just heard a tad on the National News about low flying planes a problem. This will undoubtedly bring on the argument of who was there 1st, the houses or the airport.
joemccary4795
Joe McCary 1
I live in the area. The Airpark predates the houses.
mhlansdell00
Mark Lansdell 1
That's never stopped the residents before. Quarries have been shut down, highways have had to add noise barriers, several airports have had to discontinue ops. No matter what the legal costs alone are staggering. "America is a wonderful place. Anyone can sue anybody for anything" a quote from a business owner mechanic when subpoenaed to testify as a witness.
boppe
larry boppe 1
I read an account that said he was following a C172 for landing. In that case he may have slowed excessively to maintain spacing. Final approach speed for a 172 is likely 65 to 70.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I did not see that but NTSB confirmed 88kt, which is not slow enough to bring on a stall. I don't think he was slowing through that. May have been, idk.
SanjivB
Sanjiv Bhusry 1
Kevin - you're correct. Last time too he stalled on approach, fortunately that time no one was injured.
mx747
mx747 1
After all is said and done, there will be a hell of a lot more said than done!
Shredr
Shredr 1
I'm really surprised that no one has even mentioned icing as the cause. I'd be willing to put money o it. Either a malfunction of the wing/tail deicing system or pilot error in not turning it on (i.e., looking out the window to know the wings were iced up). I live in the area and it was a very cloudy, rainy/snowy/freezing rain type of day. Temperatures aloft were conducive to icing. He had descended through the clouds. This is almost a textbook repeat of the United Q400 crash in Buffalo and the crash of a PC-12 in Pennsylvania several years ago. I'm not sure what it is, but it's something with T-tailed airplanes. If you're iced up, as soon as you put the flaps and gear down and autopilot off all goes haywire. Seems like this guy almost saved it, but couldn't get back to straight and level fast enough (i.e., he was already too low) after the stall and spin. And, the reason why there was no ice on the plane when the authorities got there is because it all fell off when the plane nosed into the ground. And, by the time they got there, the fire would have melted it.
thegoodguy
thegoodguy 1
Don't think ice was it. Check out the NTSB press con.

Had it been ice it would have stalled way above the 90 KT stall speed.
Locket3
Tom Lull 1
Because of the stall characteristics of the aircraft, FAA requires a "stick Pusher" to automatically lower the nose in a stall condition. The natural reaction, that close to the ground, would be to keep it up. Apparently, this fight lasted some 20 seconds. The crash site indicates very little forward velocity at impact.
Checking the airport, there is a turnoff about 1900' from the approach end. Do you think he was trying to be slow enough at landing to make that turnoff?
preacher1
preacher1 1
I don't really know about the turnoff but 1900' ain't much for that AC, even if he kissed the marks. 88kt against a Vref of 90 is not really behind, I wouldn't think. Later into the NTSB thing it talks of a trim problem. Maybe something developed there and bit him in the butt. It said the engines responded to speed increase from throttles. I guess we'll have to wait and see for sure.
Steamjet
Steamjet 0
Sad event for sure. Even sadder is the fact that the FAA didn't strip him of his licenses after his first stall and crash.
Now we see the results.

Some folks just aren't cut out to be Pilots.

This fellow, according to the CVR, "rode" the stall warning for TWENTY seconds and (apparently) overrode the stick-pusher, both NO-NO's.

Some people learn by experience and some don't.
preacher1
preacher1 1
I posted the link to the first NTSB conference below. According to them per the FDR, the stick pusher did not engage. He was applying power and apparently had some trim issues at that same time that he was also dealing with so he wasn't ignoring the stall warning, but It didn't sound like a normal wing stall. what happened is what they'll have to find out. We can all talk after the fact but the RESULTS on the other crash were what happened then. This is what happened now and other than bad luck/coincidence, there is nothing to suggest a link between the 2.
linbb
linbb -7
Hope that ever who wrote the headline takes more time to spell check it as never heard of one of them things.
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 16
Pot, meet kettle.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 3
Whaaaaaaaaat???
TorstenHoff
Torsten Hoff 3
In his defense, he was responding to a duplicate squawk with a title containing a typo. That squawk has since been merged with this one.
linbb
linbb 2
Thanks he didn't get it as don't quite understand his dash between the two words either.
THRUSTT
THRUSTT 3
I was only commenting on his own lack of proof-reading...
linbb
linbb 1
Was meant to be that way guy.
joelwiley
joel wiley 2
Where's that sarcasm font when you need it?
tyketto
this one was rather shocking. Apparently, the media got hold of the LiveATC clip and aired it before it could be checked. What makes it worse is that the mic from the radio was still hot during and after the crash, so you could hear the screaming. ATC was rather shaken...

The clip and the archive of it has since been deleted from LiveATC.
WeatherWise
WeatherWise 4
I believe you're thinking of the Frederick, MD (KFDK) mid air on October 23. That had the screaming on it, not this crash.
adambear8
adambear8 2
Was this on the KGAI CTAF as I listened to the thing and I did not hear any screaming from that pilot just a holy **** from one of the other pilots on the FREQ. BTW I fly out of this airport as it is my flight school and I can attest that that area does have a lot of traffic flying over it at a low altitude.
MH370
MH370 -4
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Developing story: Embraer EMB-500 Phenom 100 crashed in a residential area at Gaitersburg, Maryland

An Embraer EMB-500 Phenom 100 corporate jet was destroyed when it crashed in a residential area at Gaitersburg, Maryland. At least three people are said to have been killed.
The airplane was on approach to runway 14 at the Montgomery County Airport, MD (GAI) when it impacted a house in the 19000 block of Drop Forge Lane.

http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20141208-0
ltcjra
ltcjra -4
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

Phenom 100 jet crashes into Maryland house, at least 3 dead

The three people killed were in an Embraer EMB-500/Phenom 100 twin-engine jet that was on approach to nearby Montgomery County Airpark.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/12/08/plane-crash-house/20090509/
yoteun
yoteun -6
(Duplicate Squawk Submitted)

At Least 3 Dead After Plane Crashes Into Md. Home

At least three people were killed when their plane crashed into a home in Gaithersburg, Maryland, and three residents of the home are unaccounted for, Montgomery County Fire Department spokesman Pete Piringer said.

The small jet crashed before 10:45 a.m. Monday in the 19000 block of Drop Forge Lane, near Snouffer School Road, killing all three aboard, according to Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Chief Steve Lohr.

A husband and wife and their three children -- ages 5 and 2 and a newborn -- live at the home, News4's Chris Gordon reported. The husband is accounted for at the scene, and the 5-year-old is in school.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/national-international/Plane-Crash-Reported-in-Montgomery-County-285090681.html?_osource=SocialFlowTwt_LABrand
bighoss81
bighoss81 0
(Duplicate Comment Submitted)
Locket3
Tom Lull -1
Because of stall characteristics, this aircraft is required to have a "stick pusher" installed. This automatically lowers the nose to assist in stall recovery. Close to the ground, the natural reaction would be to keep the nose up. It appears this fight went on for about 20 seconds. Aerial shots to the site indicate very little forward velocity at impact.
The runway has a turnoff about 1900' from the approach end. Do you think that might have been what the pilot had in mind and was attempting to minimize airspeed at touchdown?
preacher1
preacher1 1
Flaps and all were configured for landing and gear was down. There were some trim issues developed in the middle of all this. I'm thinking something happened toward the tail. In the briefing, they indicated stick pusher had not engaged.
Locket3
Tom Lull 1
Sorry, didn't think my first attempt took - into the penalty pattern.

Login

Don't have an account? Register now (free) for customized features, flight alerts, and more!