C-45 Down in Colorado

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Thu Jul 19, 2007 9:21 pm

Also, I think I've located the location of the accident.

Google Maps

Based on the video I saw on CBS4's website, it looks like the aircraft was flying westbound and the initial impact was on the east (right) side of the N/S-running County Line Road. If this is the case, I'm glad they were able to avoid the house just short of that point. This location is about 6 1/2 miles due north of the Erie Tri-County airport.

Warbirdnerd · **Joined:** Fri Apr 30, 2004 7:34 pm **Posts:** 2938

The Latest:

Code:

Last Edited: Thursday, 19 Jul 2007, 7:16 PM EDT  
Created: Thursday, 19 Jul 2007, 7:16 PM EDT  
 
A vintage airplane crashed and burned in Boulder County, Colo. Both people on board survived the crash. By The Associated Press

LONGMONT, Colo. -- A vintage military transport plane crashed (video: MyFoxColorado) and caught fire Thursday, injuring both people aboard, authorities said. 

Neither the pilot nor co-pilot appeared to have life-threatening injuries, Weld County sheriff's spokeswoman Margie Martinez said.

Witnesses said the twin-engine Beech C-45H appeared to be having engine trouble and may have been trying to make an emergency landing when it clipped some trees and hit the ground southeast of Longmont, Martinez said.

It slid about 100 yards across a county road and toppled a power pole before stopping.

Martinez identified the pilot as Stanley Peterson, 64, of Boulder, and the co-pilot as David Gianakos, 52, of Littleton. They were taken to Longmont United Hospital.

She said Peterson was serving as a flight instructor for Gianakos.

A Federal Aviation Administration database said the plane was built in 1951 and was owned by the Commemorative Air Force's American Airpower Flying Museum in Midland, Texas.

It was not immediately known where the plane took off or was headed.

The Commemorative Air Force preserves World War II-era aircraft. Museum spokeswoman Kay Crites said the group's safety director, Bob Stenevik, was on his way to Colorado

EDowning · **Posted:** Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:35 pm

CAPFlyer wrote:

Quote:

BTW - before you start going off about how we don't know what happened, I said that in my first post. It's not what happened, but that it happened that is an issue for me. I have a problem with any organization that that would accept 2 hull losses from the same group/unit/person/whatever in as short a time as this.

I guess using this logic I would have to have had the warbird organiziation that I used to fly for stand down as well. Even with their excellent safety program, they never had a year where they didn't have to "accept" 2 or more total hull losses. Of course they didn't have a catchy name like THE COMMEMORATIVE AIR FORCE, the just went by THE U.S. ARMY.

Roger Cain · **Posted:** Thu Jul 19, 2007 10:55 pm

JohnH wrote:

I wonder if this was the same one that was at the Tracy Air Show in 93?

John

John,

While it looks similar, that was a Lockheed C-40A (N93R at that time) that you saw at Tracy. That show had all the makings of a great show to be, that never happened again.

Bluedharma · **Posted:** Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:25 pm

Here is (Fox News Report...Video) that was on the local news.
(removed... for direct links)

New links directly from FOX 31.
http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=3825741&version=1&locale=EN-US

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=3820924&version=1&locale=EN-US

http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=3821833&version=1&locale=EN-US

Best Regards

Dave Fish · **Posted:** Thu Jul 19, 2007 11:42 pm

vg-photo wrote:

Can we get this week over with already?! Sheesh, it's been a tough one for warbirds.

You're right Eric, a tough, bad week...I believe John's service is tomorrow (Friday)...some closure for his family and Camarillo. Hope all is true about these guys getting out OK...we don't need more services.

Dave Fish · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:06 am

sdennison wrote:

CAPFlyer wrote:

I'm starting to think that the Colorado wing needs to have a serious discussion about whether they're a good idea to remain in existance and HQ needs to take a long look before allowing them to have another aircraft. It's a bit soon to determine why it crashed, but it is still the second aircraft the wing has totalled and more importantly, the only two aircraft the wing has ever been assigned both crashed within a year of assignment.

I'm sorry, but it's things like that that give the CAF a black eye, something we really don't need right now.

Sorry Dude, but I think that is a CAF issue that should be dealt with in their own house and not on this forum. Whole lot of facts missing before we try to debate a topic like this here.

CAPFlyer has already commented on his early postings...and I am only a 3-year CAF member, and not a pilot, but I agree any posting about any conceived CAF "problems" does not belong on WIX...they belong internal to CAF to be resolved.

We, the warbird group (not the CAF), lost one life at Camarillo...it appears that no loss of life was suffered here, so I say God-Speed to them and am thankful that Camarillo's loss was not repeated.

Taylor Stevenson · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:29 am

We should be concerned with the safety and recuperation of the pilots and not point fingers at a wing of an organization that has preserved and maintained 150 of YOUR aircraft for the past 50 years.. Name an organization that has done the same? Just my loyal 2 cents…

Chad Veich · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 1:25 pm

The co-pilot is an acquaintance of mine and an email from his wife indicates that both he and the pilot are doing OK. I don't know any more about the accident but let's just be glad that nobody lost any loved ones.

Chad Veich

Shay · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:03 pm

The Bottom Line:

Chad Veich wrote:

The co-pilot is an acquaintance of mine and an email from his wife indicates that both he and the pilot are doing OK. I don't know any more about the accident but let's just be glad that nobody lost any loved ones.

Chad Veich

Shay
____________
Semper Fortis

Larry Kraus · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 2:38 pm

Its definitely good news that the crew seems to be relatively okay.I flew around 7500 hours in various models of the Beech 18 hauling freight between 1972 and 1995.Even empty,the airplane can be a handful on one engine.I've flown a fair amount of hours in Colorado in Beeches and the elevation and density altitude during the summer months can add to performance problems,even with both engines operating normally.I don't think that it is wise or fair to jump to the conclusion that the pilots or maintenance people did anything wrong that contributed to this accident.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 3:58 pm

I don't know what to say at this point. I try to apologize for not clearly getting across the concerns I had about this accident and all I get is another half-dozen plus replies about the original post that did not read the further posts.

I spent time last night at work re-reading the posts and trying to determine how to say what I wanted to say. Effective communications (i.e. writing what I mean) is not a strong suit of mine. I try, but I am still working on it (obviously as I have now stuck foot and leg down throat twice here on this forum). I hope that I can clarify an item from my first post (now removed because of the continued frustration it's causing me). I did not mean to convey that I thought the Colorado Wing (actually Mile High Wing as I've been corrected) should have its charter removed. That is not what I want, only that there be an honest discussion about how the wing and the CAF as a whole move forward after this very unfortunate rash of accidents in the last several years, two of which happen to involve the Mile High Wing. Age of the aircraft has nothing to do with my concern, only that too much stuff and too many people have been bent and broken recently not only in the CAF but at my work, and around the aviation community and it's getting worrisome.

Dave Fish · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:32 pm

CAPFlyer wrote:

I don't know what to say at this point. I try to apologize for not clearly getting across the concerns I had about this accident and all I get is another half-dozen plus replies about the original post that did not read the further posts.

Hey CAPFlyer, I was one of those who took a shot at you after you apologized...Now it's my turn to apologize to you. I think you have great concern about the CAF and this Wing and some of us (including me) maybe just did not understand nor appreciate your concerns.

Dave

Larry Kraus · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:49 pm

CAPFlyer,I hadn't intended to attack you or your post.I was just trying to add another perspective from experience in the aircraft type and location.I'm sure that you never intended for your view to be taken in the spirit that some people seem to have assumed.Everybody is spring-loaded in the overly sensitive position until the facts and figures concerning an accident are in,especially concerning the crew.

CAPFlyer · **Posted:** Fri Jul 20, 2007 7:50 pm

Dave, thanks for that. I am mostly at fault here because I was unable to convey my thoughts accurately and I did write "continued existance" instead of "future existance" which I think would have made more sense. I understand people being upset at what was said initially because what I was trying to say and what I said were two different things and even I found my earlier statements to be definitely inappropriate because of my inability to articulate them correctly. Had I done so, the issue would have been avoided altogether and we could have a decent conversation on the safe recovery of those involved and learn new information as it becomes available similar to what happened with the ODS Tracker thread.

Warbird Information Exchange

C-45 Down in Colorado

Who is online