Looks like wing stall. High angle of attack.JimCYWG

Look at the comments at YouTube. probably the passenger that has her feet on the rudder pedals.Real tragic accident though.

Ran out of rudder and too much power. It was either try to save it by leaving ground effect or plow into the buildings. From what I can see from outside the airplane I think he chose the option we all would've.

Looks to me like his CG was too far aft. The nosewheel comes up but the plane won't fly. This is typical of an aircraft with it's CG outside the aft limits. He's actually applying too much rudder when he enters ground effect. That stall warning horn had to be blaring and was probably a major distraction. Since he's taking off from a bumpy dirt strip he probably didn't recognize his airplane's condition and attitude,...thinking that it was the condition of the airstrip that was causing his airplane to behave erraticaly and that once he'd become airborne everything would be alright.Tragic accident, looks like they were airlifting out a patient. Sorry, I don't speak Spanish.John M

I agree-looks like a cg problem-the people on the ground were a distraction and pulling out of ground effect was the final curtain-maybe even a stiff crosswind/density altitude-as usual a combination of events that causes an accident.Easy to arm chair figure out after the fact-a matter of seconds for the pilot to figure out. Also there is sometimes pressure when a very sick patient is involved. Very tragic in any case and sad to see.http://mywebpages.comcast.net/geofa/pages/rxp-pilot.jpg

My R182RG nose strut is nearly fully extended when at the aft CG and comparing it to this 182 even though it is of the fixed gear variety I believe it isn't too close to being out of range. But that obviously isn't a very accurate way of judging the CG obviously ;)

Take a look at how loaded that thing is... he's got full seats PLUS whatever else he's got stuffed in the back... including an oxygen tank. I say he was simply overweight with an aft CG (within limits or not, he's still pushing it on the CG alone). Personally, I take one look at that plane and I never would have set foot in it or tried to fly it... ever. I can understand a medical patient situation but... I'm sorry but a plane that overloaded is just a crash waiting to happen.

>My R182RG nose strut is nearly fully extended when at the aft>CG and comparing it to this 182 even though it is of the fixed>gear variety I believe it isn't too close to being out of>range. But that obviously isn't a very accurate way of judging>the CG obviously ;)My hypothesis is this: just after takeoff, the Cessna seems to reach a very uncoordinated flight condition (for unknown reasons). Infact no significant crosswind seems to be present.The Cessna then fails to gain speed out of ground effect.Flaps seems to be extended lower than 10 degrees.Uncoordinated attitude + low speed/high AoA + flaps at 20/30 deg = a lot of additional drag.Add to this the fact that the a/c was probably near max TO weight, and probably there were hot temps and high density alt (from some comments).I don't think aft CG is a factor. If anything, CG being a little aft would have helped, since the aircraft in that case would have had a slightly lower stall speed and slightly less induced drag.Marco

Marco

Looking at it again, you are probably right. His use of 20/30 degrees of flaps could have caused the airplane to enter ground effect too early, especially when performing a softfield takeoff.I think that, after he realized the dire situation he had gotten himself into and his inability to gain airspeed and climb, he probably started to raise the flaps....hoping this would increase his airspeed, but in essence actually created a stalled condition as he decreased the amount of lift.John M

It looked hot, and the plane looked overloaded. Watching the beginning, I thought those people were just getting a chance to sit in the plane, I didn't think he'd try to fly with them in it. That sucks, but that is exactly why you should do a W&B, and have a look at the POH charts before taking off. It is obviously too late afterwards. I think the cause is complacency.

As the aircraft is approaching the camera, one of the wings is dipped suggesting to me that wing is stalled, the only thing to do at that stage is put the stick forword since the aircraft does not have the height to recover if more/all lift is lost on that wing and more power even if available? might only lift the unstalled wing whilst failing to unstall the stalled wing. Really I can not criticise the pilot on those points, since there seems to be people all over place which would make a stick forword option a major issue. Best and warm RegardsAdrian Wainer

I think I'll go with aft CG, and a crosswind, as the pilot appears to correct with rudder, and later aileron. Plane lifts off to quickly, veers to it's right, and pilot doesn't get enough use from ground effect, in an attempt to avoid people and objects. As in, can't stay just 10 to 15 feet off the ground to build airspeed.Or, it's a full aft elevator softfield take off, which gets airborne to soon and can't compensate for the crosswind; and still not being able to use ground effect due to people and objects. And in the end, there is just not enough "extra" power to override this serious problem.This is why, I like extra H.P., instead of just being barely pulled around by the prop.L.Adamson