YTWB ultra-light engine failure?

[Tibbsy]

Anyone know anything more about the ultra-light engine failure at YTWB on Sunday during the fly-in.

[king_daniels]

I did not see, but what I was told, due to fuel starvation possibly from a blockage the motor stopped at about 200ft, he simply put the nose down to maintain airspeed, landed on the grassed area at the end of Runway 11 without damage to the aircraft or to himself, got the motor started, taxied the aircraft back to an area to find out why the engine had stopped, repaired what needed to be repaired and simply took off again to go where he was going. Again, a credit to his training that he didn't bring the aircraft and himself unstuck.

Regards
Daniel

[Tibbsy]

what I was told, due to fuel starvation possibly from a blockage the motor stopped

Aahh, a blockage. That's good. So not a case a too much air in the tank then? :suspect:

[king_daniels]

I am just surmising, if there was too much air in the tank, he would not have got his motor started to taxi, possibly the landing unblocked the hose lines.

Regards
Daniel

[Jabawocky]

...........Or as I have seen before, turning the fuel tap on seems to fix the blockage quite well too:E. Lucky for them a nice winery appeared close by!:oh:

Now I have not ever done this myself, but it has been done with aircraft that have enough fuel in the lines/filters etc to take off - but not for long!

Some ultralights do not chew much at idle so its easy to do if you are not vigilant with your pre take off checks.

[unairworthy]

I first thought you were talking about this guy that crashed on Saturday.

FyV-7H2-m9U

Note the departure UNDER the power line. Unfortunately a partial power loss led to nowhere to go after power was lost after passing under the poweline on takeoff and the aircraft (Gazelle) ended up a write-off.

Would you say that taking off (and landing) under a powerline was negligent?

[Horatio Leafblower]

I bet the Gaz pilot and his instructors would tell you that the power line had nothing to do with the accident... but I bet Dexter was wishing he had another 200' when the noise stopped, and didn't need to hold it down to get underneath! :oh:

I have never flown with Dexter but he seems smart and a hell of a nice guy. He dealt with what was put before him very well, considering his experience level.

I have some very strong opinions about the Gazelle pilot's instructor and the organisation he learnt to fly with, which I have shared here before (and with CASA, and the RAAus) to my ultimate cost. :ouch:

There are some very strong cultural influences there, labelled "bush pilot" by their Club President, which I think are in the wrong packaging and should be labelled "cowboy".

Be that as it may - the whole point of RAAus is to be able to accept, and operate at, a higher level of risk than GA standards allow. It's just that the probability/consequence equation in our minds is sometimes different to reality. :=

[unairworthy]

the whole point of RAAus is to be able to accept, and operate at, a higher level of risk than GA standards allow

There is a difference between operating a light aircraft that's not built to the same standards as a Cessna, versus deliberately flying under a power line for every approach and departure.

So this aircraft engine lost power after passing under the power line, do you think that if the strip didn't have a powerline, thus he wouldn't have to hold the aircraft under it and as such he would have had more height which would have given more options? From what I understand he only needed a few more metres to make safe ground, if the power line wasn't there he would have easily made it down safely.

I note that a passenger was on board too.

I don't believe that any insurance company in the world would pay out for this crash on passenger liability, not to mention hull coverage. Therefore, wouldn't you consider the operation of the aircraft to be negligent? I doubt that the CASA guidelines for the establishment of an AOA would include operating under a power line.

[Horatio Leafblower]

I don't believe that any insurance company in the world would pay out for this crash on passenger liability, not to mention hull coverage.

Is there a mandatory requirement for passenger liability in RAAus ops? No.

Therefore, wouldn't you consider the operation of the aircraft to be negligent?



I doubt that the CASA guidelines for the establishment of an AOA would include operating under a power line.

Ag aircraft operate under powerlines all day every day with very few accidents. There are plenty of private strips I know of with power lines in the vicinity.

Do you mean ALA?

...and what's CASA got to do with it anyway? RAAus aircraft and RAAus certified pilot operating on private property owned by the pilot
:confused:

...Do you in fact know what you're talking about? If you did, you would be able to point to the CASA guidelines on ALAs. :=


Don't get me wrong I am not endorsing the practice and I am fairly sure I would not accept those risks. However, there is no point jumping up and down saying CASA wouldn't allow this or an insurance company wouldn't like that when neither of thse things are relevant in this case. (Was the Guzzle even insured???)

All you can do in these cases is think it through and make a mental note of what you would do differently (this is why we all sit on here and speculate about accident causation). As I said above, I think there were significant cultural/peer pressure factors contributing to the acceptance of the risks in his personal operation.

[Tibbsy]

...........Or as I have seen before, turning the fuel tap on seems to fix the blockage quite well too

Yep, that's what I heard this arvo :E Also heard that the wife who was paxing in the other seat was not impressed... :p

Lucky he landed in the over-run and not on the sports field on the other side of the fence. Would've made it hard to taxi back to have another go.

[VH-XXX]

Anyone know anything more about the ultra-light engine failure at YTWB on Sunday during the fly-in.


What sort of aircraft was it that had the "blockage?"

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Yes, to just restart, taxi back to the end of the strip and TO, you would want to have a pretty good handle on what caused the "blockage" wouldn't you?

Dr :8

[VH-XXX]

A couple of years back a lightie had a similar issue. He tried several times to no avail to sort out the "blockage." Then when he decided that he had it "sorted" he piled in the Mrs and burnt both of them fatally at the end of the runway. The owner of the airpark was left standing at the other end of the runway with a cheque in his hand and a big dilemma.

Take care out there.

[Jabawocky]

Yep Forkie....I assume he must have had his hand on the handle of the FUEL TAP :}

XXX thats the one up at Pacific Haven near Howard Qld.

[onetrack]

I seem to recall that the one of the former (retired) chiefs of BASI in West Oz had a fatal meeting with the ground when his ultralight dropped like a stone just after takeoff, at Beverley, W.A., quite a numbers of years ago? - and the subsequent investigation confirmed he had forgotten to turn on the fuel? :ugh:
Seems extremely ironic, after having been in his position for many years, and probably having closely investigated many crashes that were the result of simple pilot error, that involved forgetting even one of the basic checks. Just goes to show that too many people involved in recreational flying do not have a rigorous, "switched on", and methodical attitude, when it comes to basic checks.

[VH-XXX]

I've seen an engine failure for this reason, but at a field where the club / hangar area is at the very end of the runway. Pilots will jump in, blast off and not have their fuel turned on. It also becomes an issue for them where they barely get a good enough warmup and blast off.

You don't get that where I fly as we are located half way along the runway, so short of an intersexual departure you should have a stoppage well before takeoff if your tap is off.

I just leave mine on 24x7. I figure that way if something goes wrong with the carby or similar, at least I'm going to know about it before I try and fly off.

[Hornet306]

Urban myth! I've been flying at Beverley for 37 years, only fatality to my knowledge was a Pitts Special in 70s which spun off a low level loop below 500'. The only ex-BASI superintendent fatality in WA I know of was a spin-in of a MU2 from high level icing near Meekathara.

[onetrack]

Hornet - Not a myth, although I may have been incorrect in my description of "Chief" - perhaps more like a very senior employee. I recall the incident fairly well, although it was a long time time ago - maybe early-to-mid 80's? Unfortunately, with no ultralight crash database available, I'd have to trawl the newpaper archives in the library to find it again.