E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSOnline viewers have been captivated by dramatic video recently posted to YouTube showing how close a group of men came to death after their small plane crashed in the remote wilderness of Idaho back in June. Â WNBC's Tom Llamas reports.
The four survivors of a plane crash in central Idaho can prove just how close they came to death on June 30, with a seven-minute video documenting their harrowing experience, including the bloody aftermath.
The video, which has gone viral online, was captured by two cameras, and posted weeks after the ordeal so the men's friends and family could see what happened.
One passenger, Nathan Williams, 38, told The Associated Press on Thursday that he and his friends are "just four guys who are lucky to be alive."
The dramatic footage shows the plane taking off from a dirt runway in the Bear Valley area, where the men had spent the day hiking in the wilderness. Williams said they were headed to McCall for dinner.
About 2 minutes and 40 seconds into the video, the plane begins to lower and then crashes into trees. As the shot becomes blocked by the wreckage, a man is heard asking, "Everybody OK?"
"Within five seconds we're on the ground, upside down, hanging from our seat belts," passenger Tol Gropp, the pilot's son, said.
He and another passenger, Alec Arhets, escaped with cuts and bruises. Williams suffered a concussion, while the pilot, Les Gropp, 70, had a broken jaw, broken ribs and a fractured cheekbone.
NBC News
One passenger, Nathan Williams, 38, said he and his friends are "just four guys who are lucky to be alive."
He is expected to make a full recovery.
"You certainly feel like we were watched over that day," Tal Gropp said, adding that his father is credited with grounding the plane without loss of life.
Several minutes later, one of the men is shown retrieving the camera, which films the pilot lying on the ground with his head resting on a log and his face and arm covered in blood. His eye appears blackened and the wreckage of the Stinson 108-3 is in the background.
The men suspect the plane had a difficult time gaining altitude because of warming temperatures. They think it may have hit an air pocket that made it rapidly lose altitude, pushing it down into the trees.
"The first time you see it it's kind of surreal because it's full speed, you know, it's seven seconds, it's not very much time," Tal Gropp said. "Probably watched it a couple of hundred times."
As of Friday morning, the video of the plane crash had more than 370,000 views and had been played more than 1.3 million times on the website LiveLeak, where it was shared two day ago. [Editor's note: The video contains graphic images some viewers might find disturbing.]
Williams told the AP he understands why people are intrigued, while Tal Gropp muses: "It's surreal that I was actually one of the people in the plane."
The Associated Press contributed to this report.
More content from NBCNews.com:
- Calif. alleges veterans charity engaged in fraud, self-dealing
- Psychologist: No guarantee Loughner would stay competent
- Mother: Son's California mansion death no accident
- Video: Near-death plane crash caught on video
- Officer helps free moose tangled in swing set
Follow US News from NBCNews.com on Twitter and Facebook
Leave a Comment:
Wow.
Looks like the plane got airborne in ground effect, but had trouble gaining altitude. My first thought is that it was overloaded.
The Stinson 108-3 has an empty weight of 1,300 pounds, a gross weight of 2,400 pounds, and carries 50 gallons of fuel. So they had 1,100 pounds to play with, minus 300 pounds of fuel if they had full tanks; 800 pounds left for the pilot, passengers, and baggage. The passengers didn't look that hefty, so I'm guessing they weren't over-gross.
But it looked like high country, and it might have been a bit warm. Density altitude may have been rather high, so they aircraft might have been too heavy for the conditions. This is armchair post-crash analysis, of course. I'd be interested in reading the NTSB report when it comes out.
I'd have to bet they were overloaded for the conditions. Its better to side on the err of caution and be underweight than tempt fate. How many VFR pilots have looked up to the sky and said to themselves, "I have to get to my destination (because someone is waiting for me) and is just a little cloud forming, I can fly around it if need be"? The pilot paid the price with a broke jaw and ribs and the possible death of everyone. He was good enough to get them on the ground though.
K>S>C>: I read a WaPo article that mentioned warm weather. Still sitting in my armchair, it does sound like they were overloaded for the conditions. High density altitude reduced the performance, and the terrain was rising. Add to that, possible mountain wind conditions. One of the helicopters I'd flown, a Robinson R22 Beta, crashed when a guy came in too shallow for a ridge landing on a hot day. Performance was reduced in the Southern California heat, and ridges and hills have downdrafts on the lee side. The guy couldn't climb out of it. (He was OK. Helicopter was destroyed.)
Oh, K>S>C>...
I'm reminded of an old FAA safety poster from back in the '70s when I was a kid. It was a cartoon of a pilot flying toward a mountain with angry anthropomorphic storm clouds covering them. The caption was:
Get-there-itis
May someday bite us!
I get the impression they were taking off upslope in thin air on a hot day at near max gross weight.
Perfect recipe for what happened next.
.
Clearly overloaded for the performance of that aircraft given the density altitude, and that pilot did nothing heroic other than mush into the trees. They would have been better off camping out and leaving early the next morning in cooler temperatures.
Overloaded or not, regardless of the temperature, the upslope or storm clouds...
I'm certain that their families are extremely thankful that everyone survived that crash and they have the opportunity to live another day!
Exactly what I thought. Pilot error but at least they survived.
I should have used that guy to film my daughter's wedding party.
They used up eight of their nine lives in that crash...
Oliver - Agreed - you said what I said before I got a chance. Poor decision making on the pilot's part. Luckily no one got killed because of it.
"They think it may have hit an air pocket that made it rapidly loose altitude, pushing it down into the trees."
Ah, I see the "professionals" aren't immune to mangling the language. Welcome to the DeVry School of Broadcast Journalism.
Air pocket? Not really.
"Lose", not "loose"....
DBARAK just the fact you used the term 'air pocket' shows your ignorance.................
The ARTICLE used the term "air pocket", so no, I'm not buying this.
Downdrafts stagnate vertically and change to horizontal winds at low altitudes. At their altitude above ground, pre-crash, the likelihood of a descending column of air is pretty minimal. And even when a column of air is moving vertically at low altitude, an aircraft passes through the column in a few seconds. The crude view of the terrain ahead suggests flight into rising terrain and a decision a few minutes prior to turn back would have been warranted. Flying at low altitude above hostile terrain without a climb performance margin is not advisable.
That said, I am glad they survived in decent shape to tell their story and give the rest of us a lesson without the necessity of undergoing the experience.
NBC: Please proofread the following (terribly embarrassing) sentence excerpted from the article above: "They think it may have hit an air pocket that made it rapidly loose altitude, pushing it down into the trees."
Try not to be so loose with usage.
Same error on the WaPo article I read. That article says it's from Associated Press.
That's even worse. The error made it through that many more levels of proofreading, those at NBC and those at AP.
This crash is a good example of the statement made by Captain A. G. Lamplugh, British Aviation Insurance Group, London, in the early-1930s:
For some reason, I cannot believe this crash wasn't staged. I have been a pilot for 35 years and would know how much weight would be safe to take off with, and the film of the crash was a little too controlled. When you lose power or lift, you look first for a clearing, and if none are available you look for two trees to mushroom between allowing the wings to shear off and the plane to enter a controlled crash belly first. But with the elevation, temperature and weight of the passengers, it doesn't seem that the pilot was thinking like a pilot.
For some reason, I cannot believe you're serious. I know some people are stupidly careless, but do you really think someone's going to risk their life and destroy an airplane just to get the video on YouTube?
Could it be that the pilot wasn't a good pilot? Could it be he didn't have enough directional control to steer between two trees?
Nah, no one is going to destroy a $40,000 (more or less) airplane and risk his life and the lives of his passengers for a stunt. (Unless it's for a movie or something; but you know what I mean.)
If terrain is rising faster than you are, the obvious thing to do would be to turn away from it. But since (it looks like) they barely made it off of the ground, they may not have been able to turn because they needed all of their lift to maintain altitude. More likely, the pilot was surprised. Rather than abort the take-off, he continued and hoped he'd get enough altitude to salvage the situation. Poor planning, poor decision-making, poor execution; not a stunt.
Hey, I used to hunt Elk up in that area. Good thing they went down as soon as they did because they were heading into the middle of nowhere fast.
GOIN in Hot!
"They think it may have hit an air pocket that made it rapidly loose altitude, pushing it down into the trees."
Why can't anyone spell the word LOSE these days?
product of a loose mind
Must of been flatlanders. Anybody with mountain flying experience knows not to max out the gross at higher elevations and warm afternoon conditions. I am glad they all survived.
Oliver hit the nail on the head, the pilot ignored the rising "Density Altitude" that was associated with the higher altititude they were operating out of and the increasing temp. A very common cause of accidents out west where many small airfields/airports are in higher terrain (mountains). This accident could had been avoided by waiting until later in the day to depart.
I'm not a pilot, but I have flown many times in these type of aircraft. Professional pilot viewpoint aside and using common sense instead, it just seems like the pilot would have halted his departure after continuing on the ground even after going past the end of the "runway" and still not gaining any lift. He also had plenty of opportunities to put the aircraft down in a field instead of waiting until he was over a freakin' forest!
not to mention he had a touch and go right after taking off
"Loose altitude"? Really? What is "loose altitude"?
Formerly known as the "mile high" club.
None of them made it, obviously....
High altitude,un paved strip,heavy, probaly hot...This pilot did not think this over too well ..
He should have waited or made 2 trips..
Hot, high, over max weight way more likely than the "air pocket" theory. All pilots are capable of error, some of them don't bite, some do. Glad they made it. Scary for sure.
Rest in Peace Little Angel- Your efforts have not gone unoticed by God- welcome into his kingdom
What is this all about? Angel, kingdom...............
commented on wrong article prob. i've done it before too. :D
Stupid people got what they deserved. Their lucky they weren't left paralyzed,
blind and limbless, etc. People like these deserve contempt because they do stupid stuff
like tthis stunt trying to take-off after not realizing they weren't going to get airborne.
Dumb888s. They drive cars too.
Captain, we're going down.
Well, let's film it. And with smiles on our faces.
Doufuss jackasses.
I watched this thing yesterday, with my son and wife....
And I said "either the pilot had a physical problem, or he lost control of the elevator, (Cable, hinge, etc). OR "He wasn't a good enough Pilot to be in the air".
When I learned to fly, (from what I believe was the finest pilot/instructor in the world). Rated for instructing everything up to and including multi engine fixed wing Jet, and Jet Rotary.
He spun in with a student ,IFR,and under the Hood in Bad weather, when the guy froze on the controls during a landing). One heck of a loss to future pilots.
If I was the pilot in this video, he would have (literally) Kicked my but clear across the field !!!
Even Disregarding the Heat, and Altitude, any GOOD experienced, or WELL TRAINED, pilot Would have put her down on one of the TWO clearings shown in the video, BEFORE Piling into the trees.
He used to pull the throttle, ANY time, and to do would, with just a few hundred off the end of the runway was "common".......
This plane HAD several hundred feet, and maybe up to 500, so when the pilot first got her airborne, he should have KNOWN he didn't have the lift, and immediately put her DOWN.....
I hate to say it, but he did NOTHING to save the aircraft except to crash her flying level.
This is the poorest example of JUDGEMENT I have ever seen.......
And if he is to fly again, he should be ordered to start with the "simulator" and retake quite a few hours of instruction with an Instructor who flies the OLD way........
""Landings used to be ALL DEAD STICK"" (no power), unless you had a heck of a crosswind....
However in the words of the Airmen...."Any landing you walk away from, is a GOOD one.
God blessed those guys, and He was indeed the Co-PILOT...
Now, slightly off key, I wonder how many idiots think they can "capture the glory and adrenaline rush" of this?
In this case, if they had left earlier in the day, when it was cooler, they might, just might, have possibley gotten away with it, but later in the day, when everybody had their fill of fun, and it was time to go somewhere for a meal, no way. Friend of mine, (ex USAF captain,) took flight lessons in that part of the country, and he told me he was nervous every time he flew in and out of that area, because conditions could change in an instant, and if one was not "on top of their game" they were going to have problems.
My flight instructor always told me "Fly the plane." That meant be ready for anything that might go wrong. These people were just plain lucky they got out of this mess with their lives. You make sure of your surroundings, the conditions of the day, and last but not least, the condition of the plane. And if any one of those things is cause for concern, you do NOT fly.
Let me fix that for you. FLY THE AIRPLANE! (My instructor was inclined to shout. =;^) )
No matter what else happens, fly the airplane. Engine out? Fly the airplane. Electrical problem? Fly the airplane. You can't do anything else unless you're in control of the aircraft.
A quick P.S.
Sounded like his engine was Purrrring No sputter, or even any change in pitch from take off to "Oh @!$%#"....
I do kinda wonder why he went in with"Full Power" ????
He was trying to climb all the way in.
Speaking of full power, I was curious why he took off with the mixture full rich when, as other reports have indicated, density altitude exceeded 8,500 feet. With the air that thin, no wonder he had no appreciable climb rate.
Don't it make you wonder if he even TRIED to "Maintain" altitude once he it got it up a few hundred and knew by then he was running on borrowed time. And THEN pick a "clear spot and slip it in???
If "Oliver" is correct, then with THAT attitude, it's a wonder he didn't STALL it instead of mowing trees.
Any way you look at it....Those guys are LUCKY, and lookin' at the density of that tree line, they Must have had help to survive it!!!
This is what happens when you film, twitter and text while flying. JUST SAY NO!
Duhhhhh,
I wonder how long he's had a license?
I don't see how anyone but the pilot could tell if he was still trying to climb out when he hit the lumber, from this view, (other than a guess from the rest of his performance here).
But, Don't they teach you to pull the main just before the, Oh ___— !!! Now days?
It sure cuts down on the possibility of FIRE, and it might even cut down the the prop disintegration,
turning into shrapnel?
I know they use "Power ON" landings now, and it always makes me wonder what they'd do with an engine failure just off the runway.....(either end)?
This guy just got shook and if he WAS taught anything he just "FORGOT" it when he realized he was in deep Doo Doo.
He's probably a Real Nice Guy, just not into the REALITY of Flying......
Because he was in denial that he had a problem, couldn't get the airplane to climb, and wasn't about to pull the power or mixture before impact. He thought he'd "miraculously" get over those trees. I hope he gets cited by the FAA. Downdraft my toukas, he was heavy in high density altitude.
Why in the world would they continue to film things after the accident?