Navajo overshoot

[Mick.B]

Piper Navajo pilot crashes through fences in Carrum Downs emergency
By Matthew Schulz From: Herald Sun

A LIGHT plane crashed through fences and skidded to a halt in a paddock in sight of one of Melbourne’s busiest tollways this afternoon.

Emergency crews were called to Carrum Downs about 1.45pm after the twin-engined plane with just a pilot aboard, overshot a private runway not far from the Eastlink Tollway.

Air Services Australia spokesman Bryan Nicholson said air traffic controllers at Moorabbin Airport were alerted to the "hard landing", but the flight had not been in controlled airspace at the time.

Ambulance Victoria spokesman Ray Rowe said paramedics were called to the site off the Frankston-Dandenong Rd, between Thompsons and Wedge roads, but the man in his 30s did not need treatment.

That near-miss follows another similar incident near Koo Wee Rup about the same time, when another light aircraft, with two aboard was forced to land in a paddock north of the Tooradin Airport.
The CFA said the pilot and their passenger were not injured

[VH-XXX]

VH-JBI was the Navajo.

[Draggin_tail]

Lightning strikes twice.

http://i85.photobucket.com/albums/k46/wanderin_dave/JBI.jpg

[VH-XXX]

Was that the one at Point Cook on the weekend?

[Draggin_tail]

Yep, landed RWY 35 when the wind was something like 170/25.

[eocvictim]

That is a seriously short strip. I've always wondered if it was a mock strip for forced landing training. Even if you threw it on you'd struggle to get it out without a headwind.

[Homesick-Angel]

Woudnt that make lightning striking thrice with Carrum, point cook and tooradin?
17/35 closed at YMPC as per notam. Anyone got more info on this one? Not far from the fence by the looks of things.. Downwind landing perhaps?

[VH-XXX]

Yep, landed RWY 35 when the wind was something like 170/25.


Already answered above.


What happened at Tooradin?

[PA39]

"Terrain...pull up......Terrain....pull up". :eek:

[Jabawocky]

Looking at the photo, it is pointing into wind now :E

Some folk never do work out how a wind sock works do they.:ooh:

[flywatcher]

Looks rather like left hand propeller feathered. Could be more to it than meets the eye.

[Aimpoint]

Maybe he thought feathering would create less thrust and help slow down...

[Pilotette]

What is the published length of that strip?

[Horatio Leafblower]

17/35 is 1374m according to Jepps.

[Homesick-Angel]

The air force (and others), manage to put some fairly hefty equipment down on the strip. Length shouldn't be an issue..... unless you land downwind..

As someone stated earlier tho, could be other issues i guess.. Something that is pretty common for the area (I wasn't in melbourne on the day) is howling northerlies at and above about 1500 ft, and the seabreeze at Ground level. If you were under the pump with some other failures, you might miss it??

The Tooradin issue was mentioned in an earlier post

That near-miss follows another similar incident near Koo Wee Rup about the same time, when another light aircraft, with two aboard was forced to land in a paddock north of the Tooradin Airport.
The CFA said the pilot and their passenger were not injured

[VH-XXX]

Riteo, the Tooradin one was back in June 2010 when a 912 Skyfox taildragger complete with instructor and student had a poorly running engine however the instructor elected to fly anyway, ignoring the knocking noise he was hearing earlier in the day and crashed into a paddock thus severely damaging the students aircraft.

[TOUCH-AND-GO]

Did this just happen at Point Cook recently or a while back?

I can confirm that the runway is 1374m long. Did most of my training there!

Yep, landed RWY 35 when the wind was something like 170/25.

What the hell was the pilot thinking? :}

[VH-XXX]

On Saturday or Sunday this weekend.

[Jerr]

The accident happened Saturday afternoon. Runway 17 35 had a notam issued around 6pm. Late tonight the aircraft was moved next to the control tower with 3 to 4 jacks holding it up.

The aircraft was flying in to pick up scouts who had been visiting the RAAF
museum.


JERR

[jas24zzk]

Saturday in melb was a crappy day to go flying really. Did YLIL-YHOT and return in a baron with return departure being just after lunch.

Wind on the ground at ylil was a northerly, but at altitude it was a southerly... this was confirmed as a southerly at YHOT. (35 knots on our tail for the trip)

Was sitting in the 'lounge' at YCEM a lil later when the change came through, and it was a rough transition. Made our viewing of a guy doing his tailie ticket more entertaining.


Interesting comment about #1 donk being feathered...appears that way to me also.

[Pilotette]

1374m is not exactly what I'd call a "seriously short strip" but it would certainly start to feel like it with that kind of tailwind! Can anyone confirm whether a circuit was flown or did he do a straight-in approach?

[training wheels]

Trying to follow the sequence of events here, so the same aircraft overran the runway at Pt Cook as pictured above, got fixed and flew to Carrum and overran the runway again there?

[Wanderin_dave]

Trying to follow the sequence of events here, so the same aircraft overran the runway at Pt Cook as pictured above, got fixed and flew to Carrum and overran the runway again there? Other way around. Carrum incident appears to have happened 2 years ago.

I saw it looking pretty sorry on sunday morning. Looked like he went off the end at a fair clip, gave it a boot full to swing it around, slid sideways through a shallow ditch which folded up the gear and stopped short of the fence. Can confirm the left engine was feathered.

[eocvictim]

The strip at Carrum is a seriously short strip, at about 600m, (fence to fence) for a nevergo. However Driving past it only looks 400m because its hard to see the cut out in the fence-line.

[VH-XXX]

600 metres is damn short for a Navajo at the best of times given varying conditions. Maybe near empty or half full would be ok. Not surprised it ran off. I've also seen a Caravan on the Carrum strip and not the Barwon Heads kind.

[T28D]

If you open the Navajo manual you will find 600m is no where near the ASDA for a light Navajo.

[Advs]

The incident in carrum, happened during takeoff and it was really wet. He had his park brake still on and full power and sliding down the runway. Somehow managed to overrun

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

If you open the Navajo manual you will find 600m is no where near the ASDA for a light Navajo.

Don't know about a Chieftain but 600 M is certainly doable in the little Navajo!

Dr :8

[T28D]

Really ASDA ???????????? no chance

[Checkboard]

Try calculating the TODR then. :rolleyes:

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

Actually, ASDA for 17/35 at YMPC is 1374m.
You don't calculate it, it comes from ERSA RDS.:E
(Smartarse mode off)

[Kharon]

Borrowed this from an old mate - Thanks old mate. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

I hoped it may help with the thought process, it's for a 'Chieftain' but you'll get the idea.

Aerodromes with less than a 1000 meter sealed strip should be considered critical. It is not that the aircraft cannot take off from a shorter distance, however, if the aircraft cannot SAFELY GO, logically, it must be able to SAFELY STOP. The take off is considered critical.

PIC should not attempt a take off from a strip or runway which has a TODA less than the TORR equivalent to ASD under the ambient (WAT) conditions. A 60 meter clearway may be used in the calculation SOP reduce the HWC by 50%, down wind take off is forbidden.

PA 31 – 350 can, at MTOW operate from a little as 870 meters. The accelerate stop distance (ASD) required for the same weight is approximately 1300 meters. The accelerate go distance is longer again, approximately 1800 meters although the manufacturer does not provide this information.

PA 31 350.- Example. For a Max gross Take off (25°C/ 0 wind) The minimum length chart requires 822 metres. The ASD chart calls for 1158 metres. CAO 20.7.4. factors for the minimum length (850 meters) by 1.226. The minimum length requirement becomes 1008 metres which allows a MTOW of 2744 kg, this weight will allow a further refining to define the actual factor for the weight.

PA 31 350. - Example. The Vmca for the type is placed at 76 KIAS, Vsse is placed at 92 KIAS. The OEI rate of climb speed is placed at 106 KIAS at MTOW. There is a 21 knot speed deficit to recover from a Vr of 85 knots and 14 knots from Vr of 92 knots to achieve VYSE. TOSS 95 knots only provides a margin over the stall, and does not imply climb performance. The need to achieve some form of climb performance is obvious.
E&EO accepted - I did cherry pick the entire thing for the nuggets. Anyway - it's worth a thought or two.

[Checkboard]

It is not that the aircraft cannot take off from a shorter distance, however, if the aircraft cannot SAFELY GO, logically, it must be able to SAFELY STOP.
Not logically at all! The aircraft was initially certified under Part 23 of the Federal Aviation Regulations/CAO part 101/CASR part 23. It isn't required to meet any accelerate/stop requirement.

[T28D]

Yup logically, it is a very corageous pilot that puts himself/herself and pax at risk but commiting to an aircraft carrier type operation out of a short strip in a Far 23 twin.

You just need to look at their (any aircraft) performance figures and a wise head simply wouldn't do it.

Stayin Alive I believe is the words to the song, a wise pilots hymn.

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

Yup logically, it is a very corageous pilot that puts himself/herself and pax at risk but commiting to an aircraft carrier type operation out of a short strip in a Far 23 twin.
You just need to look at their (any aircraft) performance figures and a wise head simply wouldn't do it.

You are not serious are you? You're just jerk'in our chain!

Dr :8

PS: Man have I lived a dangerous life!

[Checkboard]

If you attempt to apply FAR25 type performance to a FAR23 aircraft in a commercial operation you will go broke.

If you are nervous flying a single or piston twin and want to apply ridiculous performance penalties to them you are perhaps in the wrong job.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

So how many PA-31 drivers out there in GA land are gonna rock up to their boss tomorrow and say, "I'm not going unless there's 1500m there!":hmm:

Bear in mind if you are using manufacturer's data, ie. Piper manual as the POH, the CASA safety factors do NOT have to be applied.

6.1 Subject to paragraph 6.3, the take-off distance required is the distance to accelerate from a standing start with all engines operating and to achieve take- off safety speed at a height of 50 feet above the take-off surface, multiplied by the following factors:
(a) 1.15 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 2 000 kg or less;
(b) 1.25 for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights of 3 500 kg or
greater; or
(c) for aeroplanes with maximum take-off weights between 2 000 kg and
3 500 kg, a factor derived by linear interpolation between 1.15 and 1.25 according to the maximum take-off weight of the aeroplane.
6.2 For aeroplanes operated on land, take-off distances are to be determined for a level short dry grass surface. For aeroplanes operated on water, take-off distances are to be determined taking into account the maximum crosswind component and the most adverse water conditions for the aeroplane type.
6.3 Where there is an approved foreign flight manual or a manufacturer’s data manual for an aeroplane that sets out the take-off distance required for that aeroplane, then that aeroplane must be operated so as to comply with either the requirements set out in paragraphs 6.1 and 6.2 or the requirements relating to take-off distance set out in either of those manuals.
Note: The data contained in some manufacturers’ data manuals is unfactored and makes no allowance for degraded aircraft performance. Where there is a considerable difference between the data in a manufacturer’s data manual and the data in the flight manual for the aeroplane then the manufacturer’s data should be treated with caution.

But we are talking about busted-arse 40 year old clunkers now....:rolleyes:

[Kharon]

As I said, it's only offered as food for thought.
Should have explained properly, the text is part of a briefing related to exactly what Chimbu was talking about, the art of 'nutting it out' before blasting off. That is; OK, it's short, it's hot and old girl is heavy, so if one quits just as I get to the trees, how do I get home for tea with Mum??.

Using rotate speeds of 90 knots and the gear retracting, the aircraft is certainly in a position to rapidly accelerate to 95 knots. On a minimum length strip, the chances of stopping from 85 knots without damage are limited. The chances of accelerating from 90 to 106 are definitely limited without planning and forethought.

There are no available details for OEI 'second segment' acceleration. The difference in acceleration capability between that available on two engines, compared to one engine provides an element of uncertainty. The manufacturers provide detail of the expected single engine climb performance. The CAO require a 1% gradient at all heights up to 5000 ft in ISA conditions. If the aircraft cannot climb below Vyse, then, the aircraft must have room to safely stop after a failure or a "suitable" OEI landing area accessible.

It is most hazardous to attempt, at tree top height, an acceleration segment from below Vsse to a SEBAC (Vxse) speed. On a hot, turbulent day, attempting to feather and secure an engine, whilst achieving a correct asymmetric balance and attempting to find performance for acceleration is difficult from a strip which only allowed acceleration to 80 knots before the DER.

The manufacturers indicate that in high ambient temperatures, to achieve adequate engine cooling in the critical case, the rate of climb may require a reduction of 50 fpm, (an increase in speed).

PA 31 example. At 3175 kg the expected rate of climb is 200 fpm at 25°c. At a Ground speed of 106 knots (still air) and a 50 fpm deficit, the achieved gradient is 1.4 % climb. To achieve a circuit height of 1000 ft AGL there needs to be ::11 miles of obstacle free gradient, straight ahead! (1000 x 100 / 1.4%). OC gradients are based on a take off surface splay (safe area) distance limit of 3000 metres or 7500 metres.
I think the point being made is that without a good knowledge of what you have to work with, the laws of physics and dumb luck will only get you so far. Murphy rules. The boys discussing the SE turn back are saying the same thing - know your aircraft, know the limits and think about it. That can't be bad.

[By George]

In the seventies Australian Air Charterers from Moorabbin operated the contract to service Gabo Island using Navajo's and Aztecs. Graham Cambell was the Light House Keeper with his lovely wife Dot. We generally only had light loads of mail and fresh food etc. The strip was around 700m. We all knew an engine failure on take-off was a free swiming lesson. The Navajo was prefered to the Aztec because of its better brakes for the landing. You couldn't apply Airline thinking of ASDA, you'd never go. It was all approved by 'The Department of Changing Names' and each pilot had to be 'strip endorsed'. Our only real concern, was wet grass but Graham kept the strip short and raked up the dead mulch to keep braking action.

[T28D]

It is all about choices and how you value your and your pax lives.

You are not serious are you? You're just jerk'in our chain!

You roll the dice, you take the consequence when it goes bad.

:eek: :eek: :eek: :eek:

[forever flying]

http://i361.photobucket.com/albums/oo59/nick0857/IMG_0671.jpg

[desmotronic]

Hahahaha pa31 at mtow level accelleration to blue line with a dead engine YOU ARE DREAMING old mate. Gear travelling, cowls open engine not yet fully secured.. snowballs in hell spring to mind.

ASDR nil wind is from experience more like 1200m @ 3342kg with vg's. From memory the book says ASDR is 1270m @ 3175kg so a bit conservative in many cases. Less than 900m you would probably need flap and 75kt rotate aswell so forget it.

Thanks Kharon/oldmate but if it's less than 106 I'll take my chances at min speed through the fence at the end of the runway.

[VH-XXX]

I see Chieftains operate easily from 950 metres all day, any day, in almost any weather. But, I guess if things go wrong, it might all end in tears as others have eluded to!

[Kharon]

Desmo- Thanks Kharon/oldmate but if it's less than 106 I'll take my chances at min speed through the fence at the end of the runway.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif


Exactly, and well said; I believe that is the object of the exercise. An accurate appraisal (we're stuffed) a carefully constructed escape path (14th fairway Kickatinalong) and a well briefed take off plan (through the fence at 40 KIAS) worked out prior to commiting is much better than an "oh crap' Vmca related inverted landing.

XXX - I see Chieftains operate easily from 950 metres all day, any day, in almost any weather. But, I guess if things go wrong, it might all end in tears as others have eluded to!


No problem with 8 or 950 meters, provided you are aware of the risk element, the period of uncertainty with two good donks is very, very short; that period on one donk can last the rest of your life. No one is advocating 'nil ops' but everyone can agree that if you don't 'nut' it out before, there'll be precious little time during.

[43Inches]

The poor old PA31, everytime one crashes everyone comes out with how an EFATO is going to kill you and the various ways of not flying to prevent this.

The reality is the aircraft has a long documented history of crashes and most have nothing to do with engine failure and the ones that are were not during the initial take-off period.

Around 80% of PA31 fatal accidents seem to be weather related, this encompasses;

- Loss of control in IMC
- Impact of high terrain whilst in IMC (most of the South American accidents have this as a common factor)
- Loss of control during instrument approach, there are far too many of these around the world where the pilot simply flew into the ground during an ILS
- Loss of control and inflight breakup in severe weather
- Terrain impact whilst circling to land
- Runway overruns/departures due to weather conditions

Many of these can be put down to poor training/currency/poorly maintained or lack of instrumentation.

The remaining 20% have a number of engine failures included however most are en route or during arrival. A common theme being extending gear or flap too early and losing control at low speed. In some cases a failed engine was not feathered at all. There have been many other successful landings with a properly handled failure and secured engine. It is hard to find many examples over the 40 year history of the aircraft of the engine failing at high speed during take-off. This is different to turbine based aircraft which tend to suck in things during takeoff to cause a failure around this critical time.

Another more type specific related cause of accident is departing on auxillaries or just simply running out of fuel due to poor fuel management.

Whilst dealing with an EFATO early on take-off is critical in the PA31 it is equally critical as to how the aircraft is managed if flight is continued especially when to introduce drag. There are many other things that will prove lethal if not thought out prior to the event.

Did JBI overshoot due to an engine failure during take-off?

[Kharon]

43 " - - Loss of control in IMC
- Impact of high terrain whilst in IMC (most of the South American accidents have this as a common factor)
- Loss of control during instrument approach, there are far too many of these around the world where the pilot simply flew into the ground during an ILS
- Loss of control and inflight breakup in severe weather
- Terrain impact whilst circling to land
- Runway overruns/departures due to weather conditions

Many of these can be put down to poor training/currency/poorly maintained or lack of instrumentation.
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

Could not agree more; I guess I was using the OEI scenario to highlight 'awaremess situation'. EFATO is always a great tool for producing thinking, where am I, where do I want to be, how do I get there and the two biggies, what have I got and what's in the way.

The old saw – "avoid high performance weather in low performance aircraft" always get 'em thinking.

Yep, the PA 31 does get a bit of stick, but it is an aircraft most can relate to and a classic POM numbers versus survival Touch wood, never met a really evil one yet, but some have, on occasion, tried my patience. -

Anyway - it's all in a good cause.

[Capt Fathom]

You pussies would not have lasted 10 secs in PNG!

Aviation can be a dangerous business. Leaving the ground surrounded in aluminium is not without its dangers.

However, you can run with the safety aspect only so far. At some stage, you have to make a decision, and take off!

Get over it.... And get on with it. It's not that hard!

[Stationair8]

I was always under the impression that JBI was flown by a well known and longtime YMMB CPL, or has that changed over the last few years?

Used to operate an RFDS PA-31/310(no VG kit) into a 625m airstrip, all fitted on the P charts as per the Australian flight manual, must have been legal otherwise the CP wouldn't have allowed.

Promair used to operate their PA-31/310's in Cape Barren Island when it was under 600m in length, in the mid 1980's.

[MakeItHappenCaptain]

At max wt?