Expert: Lidle Crash Probably Due to Mechanical Failure or Other 'Distractions'

Oct. 12, 2006 — -- The small plane crash that killed New York Yankees pitcher Cory Lidle, Wednesday, was probably caused by a mechanical failure, ABC News aviation expert John Nance said Thursday.

"What we probably have here is something catastrophic going on in that airplane," said Nance. "Fire, engine progressively coming apart and ... something going wrong because we've got two qualified guys on a clear day who suddenly are unable to figure out that their airplane is headed [into a building]."

Lidle reportedly boarded a single-engine Cirrus SR20 plane Wednesday afternoon with flight instructor Tyler Stanger for what was presumably a flight around New York City. The pair took off from a New Jersey airport, circled around the Statue of Liberty, flew past lower Manhattan and then north above the East River.

After passing over the 59th Street Bridge on the reportedly 20-minute flight, the plane smashed into a condo building on the Upper East Side, killing both Lidle and Stanger.

Nance based his assessment on the reported flight path and eyewitness accounts.

A Stalled Plane or Flight Distractions?

Because of the flight path and the fact that the plane did not end up in the East River, Nance said he did not believe the plane had stalled.

"If he had stalled, we would not have had the flight path that we had with the airplane kind of wobbling and aiming at the building and then at the last second, trying unsuccessfully to bank away," Nance said. "That's the indication of pilots who don't know they're aiming at the building. They're fighting something else and at the last second, they see it looming up and it's too late to do anything about it."

One eyewitness reported hearing grinding and downshifting, which Nance said does not describe the sounds of the piston engine in the plane the two were flying.

"Considering that the flight path has been reported to be erratic ... the altitude loss is erratic and there's no reason to believe that they were aiming for the building purposefully, then the only thing left is distraction," he said. "How do you get distracted in a small airplane with a clear canopy? You get distracted if you're fighting for your life somehow, and that means either flight control problems or something else."

The crash site is located in the East River visual flight corridor. Inside the corridor, small aircraft can fly without having clearance from air traffic controllers. Pilots are then required to use visual flight rules.

A Crowded Sightseeing Flight Corridor

Although the corridor has existed for around 30 years and is often used for sightseeing, according to Nance, few pilots have experienced problems other than a few helicopter accidents due to mechanical problems.

Now, federal aviation officials reportedly have temporarily ordered that all planes flying below 1,500 feet over New York City be under the authorization of air traffic control.

"You remember the old adage that we used to use in the Air Force all the time that 10,000 'atta boys' are wiped out by one 'aw, s***,'" Nance said.

But after the Sept. 11 attacks, some may question why the flight corridor was even open to recreational planes in the first place.

Small airplanes are not a serious threat, according to Nance.

"You never see al-Qaeda or any aggressive organized terrorist operation using a small airplane," Nance said. "All you're going to do is very minimal damage. You're certainly not going to bring the building down. ... So opening this up [flight corridor] to light aircraft or to people under visual flight rules is really not a threat."

Nance, for one, does not believe that having to navigate the busy corridor, which is frequently used by sightseers, necessarily caused the accident.

"While it's perfectly legitimate for us as a news organization to turn around and say, 'well, this has called into question the existence of the ... corridor, how it's been used and whether the traffic has been getting so heavy lately, but that is probably a separate issue from this accident," he said. "This accident might have occurred if they had been flying on an instrument flight plan over the city, too."

Because Lidle had an instructor with him in the cockpit, inexperience was probably not a factor in the crash, according to Nance.

"Here is a fellow who, regardless of what he's like as a ball player ... on the ground, [he] seems to have taken flying very seriously," he said. "It's an accolade to his seriousness that he would take an instructor along with him flying anywhere close to downtown. ... I don't see the earmarks of anything with inexperience here."

Nance said the crash was not consistent with a pilot who was flying recklessly.

"You've got an airplane that's making a turn. It's not a really tight turn and suddenly the turn flattens out and the airplane is heading for a building and descending, ... none of which is consistent even with wanting to buzz or wanting to do something illegal," he said. "You've got an instructor who is going to lose his license without question if he's doing this on purpose."

Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board began sifting through the crash debris Thursday to determine the cause of the crash.