Yes - did. It didn't appear so I repeated the post and was told I couldn't post because I'd just posted the same post. Eventually my post appeared - see above.
The report found that there was a flaw with the fuel transmission to this right-hand side engine which could have been giving more power than the left-hand side engine. This means there was a potential for the plane to be unbalanced as it landed.
“The aircraft may well not have ended up inverted on its back had both engines been delivering equal and balanced power,” Healy-Pratt, from specialist aviation lawyers Stewarts Law LLP, said.
“Indeed the power imbalance probably resulted in one wing dropping and hitting the ground first, resulting in the aircraft rolling over.
The rigging is hardly Honeywells fault. Neither is the old engine new engines differences in power spool up.
Honeywell have actually quite a good pilot education program and also engineering thats quite reasonably priced.
It doesn't matter what limits the OEM put in the manuals if the operator doesn't spend the money on the maint your not going to have a pair of well rigged engines.
Rigging the engines takes a day for two engineers and also a test flight. Its normally done as required after some major maint with the control runs or after a heavy check.
If the loonies would just start walking into law firms rather than schools when they are feeling a bit batey with the world, then we might start to see some progress.
It's a long time since I worked on TPE331s, but what has spool up time got to do with this? The engines run at 100% RPM except in cruise where it's 97%. I suspect you mean an un-even increase in power due to throttle stagger or internal FCU issues.
Manx2 is from January going to be called "Citywing" due to management buyout but Noel Hayes will remain as Chairman. I always thought buyouts meant you got rid of the old owners but apparently not in this case.
Funny how they still use the flight numbers of FLM (NM) even after their departure from M2. Now its flown by Van Air and Links Air according to the website. Who will be the extra 2013 AOCs? Van Air are starting up again in Shoreham under with another virtual airline Brighton City Wings doing a Ryanair style to Paris Pointoise i.e. only 22 miles away.
I wonder how the increase in APD for all aircraft over 5700kgs is going to effect pax numbers as it goes from £0 to £13 in April so their fare advantage goes. Altough the IOM Gov will not impose new APD in IOM.
Anyone got a spare Caravan II for BLK-IOM operations?
This smells a bit, too. The lawyers won't sue a company with no money, but Honeywell and co are fair game. A question to those of you who have flown this aircraft. If there was a fault, as they are suggesting, wouldn't the crew have noticed this on the first two attempts and compensated accordingly?
They have to issue a statement on the status of the investigation every year until the final one is issued.
On that note if any of the affected familys are reading my thoughts will be with you on the day. An update report coming out just before will be like a knife twisting in the wound.
And the pilots familys please don't let the technical side of the pilots actions hang to heavily. Most experenced crews know that they were given way way to much rope to hang themselves with. So technically they will be held at fault but most of us know that they are victims of the operation and managment that employed them.
These Garrett engines must be the most responsive turboprop engines ever.
The props are direct drive from the engine! There's no 'free' turbine to spool up in the efflux from the gas generator before power is delivered.
The ear-bending racket is another story, but you could never accuse these things of slow response. On approach, the engines are turning at 100% rpm anyway!
On the J41 they delivered almost instantaneous response to power lever movements. Ten times better than the engines fitted to ATPs or -8s for instance.
Still, no point sueing the pilots- even though it was clearly their fault the thing came to greif- as they're dead.
Their attempt to Sue Garrett will come to precisely nothing. As it should.
He was referring to an interim report by the Air Accident Investigation Unit (AAIU) which was published last February and identified a problem with the sensor on the right-side engine of the plane. The report found that there was a flaw with the fuel transmission to this right-hand side engine which could have been giving more power than the left-hand side engine. This means there was a potential for the plane to be unbalanced as it landed.
The crew made three attempts at landing. I am no expert but I would have thought that they would have detected this imbalance on the first attempt and compensated accordingly. This suit IMHO is a blatant attempt at screwing money out of companies who can appear to afford it. Like you, AK, I hope it comes to nought.
To true Atom for all there issues manging the things on start up they really are a cracking engine. Use 20% less fuel than the free turbines as well.
There is always a slight inbalance but then again there isn't an airframe after 15 years old that flys straight either.
If you gave a crew a straight airframe and engines perfectly in balance and all the other good stuff the crew would more than likely think there was some thing wrong with it.
around below DA - culpable negligence by the crew - next please!
