KAPF - Naples Florida - Challenger crash on highway

[MechEngr]

Originally Posted by dragon6172

Very doubtful the truck driver ever saw the aircraft before it hit them.

Steered independently as in the resistance to sideways movement by the truck tires if the truck is not aligned with the motion of the aircraft would tend to independently steer that portion of the aircraft in contact with the truck in a direction the pilots were not intending to go. If that was the nose of the plane then the main gear would follow that change in direction and cause the plane to depart from the intended landing direction.

The truck would be acting more like an out-of-control roller skate. I would have mentioned the truck driver as an agent in the steering if that was what I intended to convey.

[galaxy flyer]

Originally Posted by RatherBeFlying

Kudos to cabin attendant and designers who put in the extra door.

How else would bags be put in the compartment?

[josephfeatherweight]

Kudos to cabin attendant

Absolutely agree. The cargo door is not a designated emergency exit. A fantastic job to assess the main door, overwing exit and think (very quickly) outside the box and head for this exit, guiding the pax to safety. Phenomenal job.

[EXDAC]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

How else would bags be put in the compartment?

Isn't the fact that the baggage door could be reached from the cabin of more importance than the fact there was a baggage door?

[galaxy flyer]

We’ve been briefing pax and F/A on the baggage door as a third means of egress for years, but it was put there to load bags. Most bizjets use a baggage door, it’s not an airliner.

[BFSGrad]

Originally Posted by 605carsten

...if RHS pilot was PF as then the accidental catching of both triggers (that need lifting) on PM arm as he reaches around to select full flaps at same time PF comes back on throttle levers.. hey presto you can now shut both down.

A question for our erudite 601/604/605 drivers: if this scenario occurred, is there any plausible way to recover an engine in sufficient time (~1000 ft AGL, landing configuration, dropping like a stone) to avoid contact with terra firma?

[josephfeatherweight]

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

A question for our erudite 601/604/605 drivers: if this scenario occurred, is there any plausible way to recover an engine in sufficient time (~1000 ft AGL, landing configuration, dropping like a stone) to avoid contact with terra firma?

I would say, there is probably not sufficient time to recover the engines in this scenario.
But I would also add, that the chance of this happening to BOTH thrust levers is extremely remote. I say this having flown as PM from the LHS of a 604 (and actuated the flaps) on many occasions.
The CVR would likely reveal much more - was it recovered/useable?

[BFSGrad]

Originally Posted by josephfeatherweight

The CVR would likely reveal much more - was it recovered/useable?

Preliminary report noted “FDR revealed” L/R engine oil warnings. Thus assume good FDR data. This crash far more forgiving to FDR/CVR than N605TR (Truckee) crash and latter yielded good FDR/CVR data. If N823KD FDR same type as N605TR, then thrust lever (TL) position not FDR parameter. For N605TR, TL position was estimated from N1. However, N605TR FDR did record engine fuel flow as a direct parameter. If same for N823KD, then FDR should make clear if TLs were pulled over gate to shutdown.

[605carsten]

Originally Posted by josephfeatherweight

Absolutely agree. The cargo door is not a designated emergency exit. A fantastic job to assess the main door, overwing exit and think (very quickly) outside the box and head for this exit, guiding the pax to safety. Phenomenal job.

evenmore so when you realize almost everybody who runs commercial bizjets upto 19 pax never have qualified F/A’s.. just cabin servers with some training but nothing to the level of airlines. Its my biggest peeve in this business (same for EASA and FAA)

[Yancey Slide]

Originally Posted by 605carsten

evenmore so when you realize almost everybody who runs commercial bizjets upto 19 pax never have qualified F/A’s.. just cabin servers with some training but nothing to the level of airlines. Its my biggest peeve in this business (same for EASA and FAA)

I wouldn’t say “never”, I know of at least a few ex-UA cabin crew who are now doing charters instead. It’s definitely rare, but not necessarily unheard of.

[605carsten]

Originally Posted by Yancey Slide

I wouldn’t say “never”, I know of at least a few ex-UA cabin crew who are now doing charters instead. It’s definitely rare, but not necessarily unheard of.

Which is awesome but they are bringing their own knowledge and experience with them.. they are likely not being trained nor qualified in the legal sense to act as crew. Thats why its “easy” to pick up work as contract cabin servers on both 91 and 135 gigs..

[Yancey Slide]

Originally Posted by 605carsten

Which is awesome but they are bringing their own knowledge and experience with them.. they are likely not being trained nor qualified in the legal sense to act as crew. Thats why its “easy” to pick up work as contract cabin servers on both 91 and 135 gigs..

Not arguing that there shouldn’t likely be some additional training requirements. Just observing that there are examples of trained people working in that side of the industry too.

[FLHerne]

Originally Posted by island_airphoto

What the heck other than bad fuel or no fuel takes out both engines at the same time?

A fairly recent incident - A321 fuel tanks mistreated with biocide (37 times too much!) after a period of layup during COVID.
Not total failure but serious problems with both engines in flight:
AAIB Formal Report: G-POWN, Engine malfunction after takeoff from London Gatwick Airport

[I can't make it a link, not enough posts on here]

[EXDAC]

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

However, N605TR FDR did record engine fuel flow as a direct parameter. If same for N823KD, then FDR should make clear if TLs were pulled over gate to shutdown.

In what way do the recorded parameters distinguish between loss of fuel flow due to fuel enhaustion and loss of fuel flow due to operation of shut off valves?

Edit to add - I assume fuel quantity, if recorded, would be a clue.

[aeromech3]

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

How else would bags be put in the compartment?

Originally Posted by galaxy flyer

We’ve been briefing pax and F/A on the baggage door as a third means of egress for years, but it was put there to load bags. Most bizjets use a baggage door, it’s not an airliner.

1990's VIP Gulfstream's, I was operating as Flying Spanner/2nd Cabin crew member, security,baggage handler and door operator, Jeppesen manual handler, we had more than one passenger that would send ahead van's full of luggage and shopping; first load larger pieces behind net area in front of RPB (spy hole blocked out), load on top of water tank, back load into toilet compartment and galley, close baggage door then fill remainder of space to ceiling; some pieces were brought in through passenger door; in no way was this an emergency exit, forward compartment housed flight kit, safe, more Jeppesen's and crew bags.
Despite the Gulstream having larger than most cabin windows including over-wing exits, we always doubted due the size of most of our passengers hat they could egress that way and if tried would block the remaining persons!
Thoroughly enjoyable experience as we got away with it

[BFSGrad]

Originally Posted by EXDAC

In what way do the recorded parameters distinguish between loss of fuel flow due to fuel enhaustion and loss of fuel flow due to operation of shut off valves?

Edit to add - I assume fuel quantity, if recorded, would be a clue.

I would expect fuel flow to be a discrete, simultaneous L/R event for engine shutdown compared with an erratic event with L/R variation for fuel exhaustion.

Again assuming similarity with N605TR, the FDR collects data for Fuel Qty-Aux and Fuel Qty-L/R/Tail.

[EXDAC]

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

Again assuming similarity with N605TR, the FDR collects data for Fuel Qty-Aux and Fuel Qty-L/R/Tail.

Thanks for that reference. The NTSB docket for the N605TR investigation says the recorder was L-3/Fairchild FA2100 and includes the full parameter list. That recorder is referenced in several 605 "for sale" ads so it seems reasonble to assume it was standard fit.

[605carsten]

Originally Posted by BFSGrad

I would expect fuel flow to be a discrete, simultaneous L/R event for engine shutdown compared with an erratic event with L/R variation for fuel exhaustion.

Again assuming similarity with N605TR, the FDR collects data for Fuel Qty-Aux and Fuel Qty-L/R/Tail.

In this case the engines failed within 1 sec of each other.. so simultanous as you can get.. no way in heck that tallies with BOTH collector tanks empty at almost exactly same time…

[EXDAC]

How did this fuel shut off design ever get certified if it is so vulnerable to inadvertent activation when aircraft is flown from the right seat? Is this design weakness emphasized when converting to type?

[605carsten]

Originally Posted by EXDAC

How did this fuel shut off design ever get certified if it is so vulnerable to inadvertent activation when aircraft is flown from the right seat? Is this design weakness emphasized when converting to type?

well, its never happened before and its not as weak or as strong as many other types of cutoff.. Sh*t happens (like having a camera push an Airbus joystick nose down during seat positioning etc..).. people getting in and out of seats in flight have caused more kicking of switches and Levers and heck even the Global has a fence either side of the switches after a checklist slid off glareshield on rotation and whacked both off in testflight phase. But early days so lets see what the outcome is of CVR