Light aircraft down north of Bathurst

[Ultralights]

i have just heard of a light plane crash north of bathurst, 2 POB. departed bathurst for Bansktown.... Condolences to all involved.

[assymetric]

Hey Ultra,

Are you assuming that we have fatalities in this one or do you know for a fact.

Hope everyone is safe.

Assy

[Critical Reynolds No]

Strikemaster. No survivors RIP.

[Brian Abraham]

News just described it as a "Strikemaster" on an aerobatic flight. Firefighters had been called out to a fire and found the wreckage in the course of fighting the fire. Assumed to have started the fire.

[Ovation]

FROM BREAKING NEWS:

An Australian Search and Rescue (AusSAR) spokeswoman has said an NRMA CareFlight paramedic was winched down to the crash site late this afternoon.

He found two men dead in the wreckage of the aircraft, she said.

The Strikemaster aerobatics plane was on a joyflight when it crashed near Winburndale, about 16km north of Bathurst, about 3.15pm (AEST), authorities have said.

The crashed plane ignited a 4ha bushfire in a state forest.

A Rural Fire Service (RFS) spokeswoman said a State Forests aircraft was waterbombing the fire and about 24 firefighters were on the ground.

[Ultralights]

I hope its not the Strikemaster that departed williy yesterday afternoon! we helped move the aircraft from in front of the hangar to get a hornet out. the guys doing the pre flight were good blokes....:{
:{

[Dogimed]

may have broken up in midairBy Katherine Danks and Vincent Morello
October 05, 2006 07:50pm
Article from: AAPFont size: + -
Send this article: Print Email
AN ex-military jet that crashed in central New South Wales today killing two men on a joyflight may have broken up in midair.

The pair were flying from Bathurst in a Strikemaster aerobatics aircraft which went down in the Winburndale Nature Reserve in the Turon State Forest today.

The exact time of the crash is unclear but Canberra-based Australian Search and Rescue (AusSAR) requested NRMA CareFlight send a helicopter to look for the missing aircraft about 3pm (AEST).

Former miliary jets are usually equipped with ejector seats, but it's not clear whether this aircraft had them.

NRMA CareFlight senior pilot Ken Vote, who first spotted the wreckage, said the tail of the aircraft was some distance from its fuselage.

"I would suspect that it's suffered some sort of in-flight break-up," he said.

"It's hard to imagine that this piece has hit the ground with the rest of it and bounced a half a mile through the trees.

"It was certainly confirmed in my mind, even when I first arrived, that there would be no survivors."

He said the crash ignited a bushfire that spread over four ha.

"The search in fact was quite easy because about 15 miles (24km) out I saw an isolated bushfire and suspected that this may have been started by an aircraft accident," Mr Vote said.

Two firefighting aircraft arrived on the scene in response to reports of a bushfire, but were unaware what had caused it, Mr Vote said.

An NRMA CareFlight paramedic winched down to the main crash site about 5pm (AEST) confirmed that both men were dead.

NSW Police say it will take some time to reach the site by land because of the remote, difficult terrain.

[Ultralights]

one of the guys i work with is licenced to overhaul the ejection seats in the MIG 15s, and various aircraft including the strikemaster..

when the Mig 15 went down a few yrs back now, he applied to CASA for approval to Inspect and overhaul the ejection seats, CASA denied his aplications:ugh:
and permited the aircraft to fly with Non functioning ejection seats..
i am starting to wonder how many lives allowing somone to overhaul and make those seat operational could actually be saved....

[Captain Nomad]

Yet another sad event for Australian aviation...:{ Thoughts go with the victims involved...

I have shared the circuit at Bathurst with that aircraft a few times (always with plenty of consideration being given to the speed difference...).

I hope this doesn't start a suffocation of the wonderful wardbird movement. Remember the aircraft would have had one of those placards to the effect of 'persons flying in this aircraft do so at their own risk' - there are risks and unique challenges associated with maintaining and flying old (sometimes ancient) aircraft but to imagine an aviation world without them would be a bland picture indeed...

[moreorless]

and permited the aircraft to fly with Non functioning ejection seats..
i am starting to wonder how many lives allowing somone to overhaul and make those seat operational could actually be saved....

If the seats were armed what would be the chance of an untrained person causing themselves a lot of pain or ejecting in error. Inexperienced people tend not to take too much in during briefings etc. I know ejection setas are an additional piece of safety equipment but they in themselves surely pose an element of risk to the untrained. Which risk is greater ?

[VH-XXX]

It would indeed be a shame to see the finger pointed at the Limited category, or experimental for that matter. It's a tough call with these aircraft - built to a military C of A, but operated with Civilians and it's harsh to think that you might sign a waiver and you might not come back. It's no secret that under Limited the aircraft is not maintained to airliner standards, however where do you draw the line on maintance... don't know where I'm headed with this paragraph so I'll end it here.

I would hope that the ATSB performs an enquiry even though it's Limited.

Most disappointing on the news to see the TV crew filming the deceased's family waiting in the terminal and zooming in on their faces when they (the TV crew) obviously knew what had happened and the family didn't yet. A wife and 2 kids without their husband and father, most disturbing, not to mention the pilot.

Fly safe everyone.

[preset]

Does anyone know if this was the Strikemaster based at Ballarat ? If so I flew in this aircraft & yes the ejector seats were inactive however we were wearing parachutes & the briefing was quite good on how we were to exit the aircraft midair if there was a problem.

[Bendo]

SMH website is reporting the pilot was Nick Costin, owner of the aircraft and the company I believe and yes, YWLM based :(

[petitfromage]

a. no bang seats
b. wreckage in 3 pieces up to 1,5km apart. (would seem to indicater a low level inflight break up)

RIP

[Tri-Hard]

Flew with the guy a couple years back when he was operating out of Camden... nice guy...

[moreorless]

The company was Jet Fighter Flights operating out of Bathurst.

[LookinDown]

Ultralights...
The question of wether retaining operational ejector seats in warbirds is not a simple one. By virtue of the design of the earlier systems they really warrant extensive training in their operation and the risk of their use as a lifesaver versus inadvertent or incorrect use becomes highly debatable.

For those who would argue that that any shot at ejection is better than no shot, there was a large hangar in Somalia with several fighter aircraft stored there after being abandoned in the mayhem. A war journo thought it would be an adventure to check out the cockpit on one. Shortly after the hangar had a neat hole in the roof and the war was down one journo.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Firstly, my condolences and deepest symathies to the loved ones of the deceased. May you find the strength to get through this.

[For those who would argue that that any shot at ejection is better than no shot, there was a large hangar in Somalia with several fighter aircraft stored there after being abandoned in the mayhem. A war journo thought it would be an adventure to check out the cockpit on one. Shortly after the hangar had a neat hole in the roof and the war was down one journo.

A similar accident occurred to a local working on an F-5 (?) in Malaysia some years ago.

The fact that some stupid journo with no knowledge or respect for aircraft fcuked up illustrates the fact that in the ejection seat is lethal in the hands of idiots.

After 3,000+ hours on bang seats, I swear by them - provided they are properly maintained, and given the proper training.

I understand that all warbirds in Australia that may have had functioning ejection seats in their previous lives must have those seats rendered inactive. Happy to stand corrected if that's not the case.

[Atlas Shrugged]

Nick, RIP mate......:{ :{ :{

[mattyj]

Was this the Ex RNZAF strikemaster?

[Diatryma]

http://www.airliners.net/open.file?id=0019062&WxsIERv=Oevgvfu%20Nrebfcnpr%20ONP-167%20Fgevxrznfgre&Wm=0&WdsYXMg=Hagvgyrq&QtODMg=Flqarl%20-%20Onaxfgbja%20%28OJH%20%2F%20LFOX%29&ERDLTkt=Nhfgenyvn%20-%20Arj%20Fbhgu%20Jnyrf&ktODMp=Abirzore%2019%2C%201998&BP=0&WNEb25u=Wbua%20Wbuafba&xsIERvdWdsY=IU-NXL&MgTUQtODMgKE=Ng%20NIVRK%2098%2C%20cnvagrq%20nf%20Fvatncber%2 0Nve%20Sbepr%20315&YXMgTUQtODMgKERD=884&NEb25uZWxs=0000-00-00%2000%3A00%3A00&ODJ9dvCE=&O89Dcjdg=&static=yes&width=650&height=381&sok=JURER%20%20%28ZNGPU%20%28nvepensg%2Cnveyvar%2Ccynpr%2Ccu bgb_qngr%2Cpbhagel%2Cerznex%2Ccubgbtencure%2Crznvy%2Clrne%2C ert%2Cnvepensg_trarevp%2Cpa%2Cpbqr%29%20NTNVAFG%20%28%27%2B% 22iu-nxl%22%27%20VA%20OBBYRNA%20ZBQR%29%29%20%20BEQRE%20OL%20cubg b_vq%20QRFP&photo_nr=2&prev_id=0957532&next_id=NEXTID


RIP and condolences to all family and friends.

Di :sad:

[Joker89]

Very sad day:{

I especially feel for the family of the passenger. I wonder if they were aware of the risks involved in such a flight.

[gaunty]

Hmmm sad news indeed.

This

http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/provost6.jpg

was turned into this;

http://www.warbirdalley.com/images/JP-N7075U-aerial.jpg

which was turned into the BAC Strikemaster see below.

BAC represents the accumulation of all the British Manufacturers past.

[Cloud Basher]

Firstly my deepest and sincerest condolences to the family and friends.

Secondly, as someone who has worked on and around bang seats (and even gotten a few rides in them!) I agree that they are indeed a great safety device, but if not maintained and used to the strictest standards they are more hazardous than not having one fitted.In particular the Explosive Ordnance in the seats does not get an easy life and most cartridges and rocket motors have very short lives once installed on aircraft. In saying this it is just another expense that an operator would have to fork out for as part of the maintenance of his aircraft.

I do not believe CASA has banned ejection seats in these aircraft. I believe it is just the fact that no one has come up with an appropriate logistics, maintenance and servicing schedule for the seats along with a training and experience program for the people maintaining the seats to ensure they are initially competent, and then maintain their currency, on the seats. This is where the real cost lies and the fact that there are very few gunnies out there that would now be current or competent to maintain these older style seats, that are invariably fitted to these aircraft, means it is unlikely that anyone would get one installed. Mind you to get a rocket motor and cartridges that are in life for these seats would be nigh on impossible.

Additionally to get the small batches made would also be very very expensive.

Note that it would need to be a very small, but continual supply in order to rotate time expired EO and replace with new serviceable stuff.Mind you the Sabre at Temora might have one fitted and if and when they get a Mirage I believe it would be very necessary to have one fitted in order to enable the safe egress of a pilot in the event of an engine failure....CheersCB

[JDK]

Condolences to the crew's family.

CB: From the Age:

...But CASA had ruled the ejector seats should be disarmed for safety reasons because the firing mechanism uses explosive charges, the spokesman said...

In Australia, Temora Aviation Museum already operate a number of aircraft fitted with active ejection seats, and the chief engineer is Martin Baker qualified on maintaining them. However all the people in those seats are highly trained and experienced aircrew (or ocasionaly VIP guests) and are not paying passengers.

[Ultralights]

i know of a few guys working at Willie that are qualified by Martin Baker, to work on their seats, and those gunnies have been in the game quite a while. so the trained experts are out there.

[moreorless]

Was this the Ex RNZAF strikemaster?

I believe it was VH-AKY ex Singapore.

[noooby]

There is only ONE company in the world who is authorised by Martin Baker to supply cartridges for bang seats used in civvy aircraft, and that is Seatstar in the UK. Get hold of them if you want a quote, he can supply cartridges for pretty much any MB bang seat. Be aware that lead times can be very long, and a deposit is required up front.
Martin Baker cannot and will not supply cartridges to Joe Public directly.
Easy to do, just that most people can't be bothered.
Hawker Hunters must have a working bang seat, no matter where they are being operated.

[moreorless]

There is only ONE company in the world who is authorised by Martin Baker to supply cartridges for bang seats used in civvy aircraft, and that is Seatstar in the UK. .

http://www.ejectorseats.co.uk/a_business_for_sale.htm

Seems they are selling the business because one of the team has moved on to Martin baker. .....

Due to one half of the Directorship taking employment with Martin-Baker in the USA, it will be impossible to carry on maintenance and product/customer support as we have done in the past. To maintain the continuity of correct working practices, at least two people are required to carry out seat maintenance, no question!

Therefore, after 15 years of being the ONLY Martin-Baker authorised, ex-military aircraft ejection seat maintenance facility, we have decided to move on.

[noooby]

It would seem you can't believe everything you read I'm afraid. The present owner of Seatstar is not Mick Cameron. He sold the business a couple of years ago. How do I know?? The present owner of Seatstar is sitting next to me :)
Despite numerous requests, that particular website has not updated their webpage to reflect the fact the business was sold many moons ago.
It is, and has been, work as usual at Seatstar, and will continue as such for the forseeable future.
Cost of making good Strikemaster seats live, about £1000. That will give you 5 years before having to replace the cartridges. £200/year for the cartridge cost.
The MDC (Miniature Detonation Cord) as used in Stikemaster canopies is not allowed anymore, but there is a relatively simple mod, whereby the MDC is removed, and a compressed gas system is installed to jettison the canopy. It would seem this particular Strikemaster already had that part of the ejection system installed, but not the live seats.
Condolences to all involved in this tragedy.
All I can hope for is that other jet warbird operators have a long hard look at the costs associated with making their seats live.
I'm not saying that live seats would have made a difference in this case, I don't know enough about Ejection seats, or this accident to make be able to make that sort of statement. But I for one would like to have the chance to get out if it all turned to custard.

[moreorless]

I too would like to be able to get out in case of an incident - I just wonder how one can quantify the risks involved in haved armed seats with untrained punters against thier availabilty (and obvious advantages) in a real incident such as the one that occurred.

[noooby]

I'm not sure what risks you are talking about. Risks associated with being injured if you have to use the seat, or the risk of somebody pulling the handle just to see if the seat works??
Wouldn't be too difficult to introduce a seat briefing as part of the whole flight experience. Discussion about what will be said prior to ejection, and what seating posture is recommended. Of course, in some cases, there won't be time to discuss the ejection before pulling the handle, it will be a Command Ejection, and you get what you are given. Still better than riding it down though.
As for any risk of a punter pulling the handle just to see if the seat works, I would rate the risk of that happening as the same as, or less than, the risk of said punter pulling the canopy open handle in flight.
After the seat briefing, you could even hand them a certificate stating that they had taken part in training for the Martin Baker Mk xxx seat, as per CASA regulations (if they existed).
Something for the punters wall, and proof that the punter should know what to do and what not to do.

[chimbu warrior]

My understanding is that the main issue with bang-seats is the maintenance, and the only civilian to ever complete the Martin-Baker course on maintenance is the Temora Air Museum Chief Engineer.

[Triton II]

RIP Nick Costin. A geniunely passionate aviator whose marketing skills were an example many adventure tourism companies would do well to follow.
IMO the potential problems with live seats are many.
How do you operate? With the pins in? With the pins stowed? (In a Strikey the stowage is on the right hand coaming i.e the pax side).
I'm not suggesting that this following scenario is what happened, but how much time would you have if your wing fell off at low level (500ft) at 360kts? I don't believe that with pins in (with live seats) there would be any possible way this accident would have been survivable if the aircraft was at 500ft/360kts and the wing separated.
In this situation (perfectly legal under CASA regulations) would a Mk4 MB (0ft-90kts double cartridge) seat save you even if you pulled the handle straight away? Remember you have to wait for the canopy to go as the MDC's been removed. Would even a Mk10 MB (0-0 rocket) seat or later do the job? Would you get out at 3000ft in similar circumstances?
The real answer to these questions is who knows? The only answer we get from this tragedy is that without the seats, the result was a foregone conclusion and a very sad one at that.

[Air Ace]

ABC radio said this afternoon that "the right wing came off". They also said the ATSB investigators were delayed getting to the site due to a 700 hectare fire and the preliminary report would be available in a month.

Wouldn't take the statement "the right wing came off" too seriously just yet. Until the preliminary report is published anything else can only be conjecture.

I have no military experience but I would think bang seats may be far too dangerous in the hands of unqualified commercial passengers and no substitute for maintenance and reasonable operational restrictions? Perhaps consideration should be given to the fact these aircraft are not built to commercial specifications, are complex and maintenance intensive and may have unknown stress in their previous military roles?

[Trash Hauler]

The report that the wing separated has come from the ATSB website. See http://www.atsb.gov.au/newsroom/2006/release/2006_43.aspx

[moreorless]

I would think that with proper fatigue monitoring, reasonable operational limitations there should be no problem with structural failure. Simplistically it comes down to physics / mechanics - there is a certain strength and a large enough force will break it - keep the force down and it won't break.

Not suggesting it broke but ...

[moreorless]

Perhaps consideration should be given to the fact these aircraft are not built to commercial specifications, are complex and maintenance intensive and may have unknown stress in their previous military roles? I'd suggest that all things are known about these aircraft. The military keep meticulous records. As for stress I know the Kiwi's and I believe the RAAF and I guess Singapore kept records of all the G-meter counters after every flight. There are formula's based on those meter readings that establishes the fatigue life of the aircraft.

Not built to commercial specifications - yes - but does that mean they are better or worse. My guess better - look at the environment they are designed to operate in. In all manner of things military sepcs are higher than civil specs.

Just my view :)

[118.9]

Sad news, RIP Nick, condolences to your family and friends.

I had the pleasure of meeting Nick Costin in South Africa 2 weeks ago when he was here to visit Africa's largets air show. Nick also visited a number of operators, including Thunder City (a local civvie outfit that offers supersonic and subsonic flights to the public using Hunters, Buccaneers and Lightnings).
Naturally the Thunder City aircraft all have active and fully serviced bang seats. Their pax spend more time on bang seat training than in the air, but they have good record with over 1000 sorties (see their website ), so it can be done safely.

I hope some good can come out of this tragedy and also that someone with Nicks very deep passion runs with the jetwarbird torch.

[Deaf]

"There are formula's based on those meter readings that establishes the fatigue life of the aircraft."

Those nice graphs you see of stress vs no of cycles for fatigue life have been somewhat massaged - a real graph looks not unlike a shotgun pattern. IIRC the usual fatigue life is the experimental life (from a test airframe) divided by 5 to account for this and there are still problems.

[alidad]

The RAAF had a wing fail on a Macchi the late 90's. Unfortunately the bangseat was of little use then (RIP). A big budget does not necessarily protect you from such an unfortunate event.
The earlier model seats were/are not zero/zero designed ( Z feet, Z speed), nor do they have the stability systems etc incorporated in modern designs. If you end up in a dynamic UA at low level with a major structural failure- your time is up.

The following is a technical overview of the fatigue issues involved.

www.dsto.defence.gov.au/publications/3486/DSTO-TR-1657.pdf

[Milt]

Evidently the Strikemaster suffered a right wing seperation. The usual event when a wing failure occurs under high load is for the two wings to clap together. This negates the potential for crew survival using ejection seats during the following break up. I know - I've been a smidgin away from a wing seperation when a main spar failed and I know that my ejection seat would have been unuseable.

Significant in the accident analysis will be the design g loads for the Strikemaster. I would guess max g to be 6.0 with an ultimate of 9.0. Can anyone advise the cleared max NzW?

[VH-XXX]

You don't see passengers in Cirrus aircraft pulling handle to deploy the parachute, so why would someone be stupid enough to try and eject themselves in flight...?

Has a passenger ever pulled the handle in a Cirrus??? No.

[Joker89]

Article in The Australian today

Crash jet operators urged to reassess safety
Steve Creedy, Aviation writer
10oct06

OPERATORS of Strikemaster fighters in Australia were urged today to reassess the airworthiness of their planes after air crash investigators confirmed that an aircraft that crashed near Bathurst last week came apart in mid-air.

RAF veteran and experienced adventure fighter pilot Nick Costin and a man celebrating his 50th birthday died when the jet crashed during a joy ride in the Central NSW on Thursday.

The Australian transport Safety Bureau said yesterday access to the crash site was still being hampered by a bushfire sparked by the crash.

However, investigators had been able to reach some of wreckage strewn along a trail extending more than a kilometre.

"The team located and examined the aircraft's right wing and reported that the wing had separated from the aircraft fuselage in-flight,'' the bureau said.

"At this stage, the ATSB does not know where in the wreckage trail sequence the wing is located, or the reason for the separation.''

Investigators have also been looking at the plane's operational and maintenance records and expect to release a preliminary report in 30 days.

Meanwhile, the Civil Avaition safety Authority is urging operators of the jets to make sure they have addressed British warnings about problems with Strikemasters.

Australia has issued two airworthiness directives concerning Strikemasters, including a warning about problems with wing components.

"Because of the possibility of a structrural failure we recommend that owners and operators reassess the airworthiness of their aircraft,'' said CASA spokesman Peter Gibson.

"We are pointing to them that there is a 1996 airworthiness directive which talks about the need to inspect the port and starboard main spar upper attachment lugs for cracking.''

[noooby]

Don't remember what the 'g' limits were for a good Blunty.
In my time in the RNZAF, I never saw a Blunty that wasn't 'g' limited (although I only saw them in the twilight of their career). I do remember that some had a 4g limit, but most of the ones I saw had a 2 or 2.5 g limit, and circular patches of silver tape all over the sings where the cracks were being monitored.
Blunty wings didn't like the turbulent air that prevails in NZ :sad:

[moreorless]

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200610/s1759620.htm

But CASA says at this stage there is not sufficient evidence to ground the jets.
Mr Gibson says owners must make decisions on whether to ground their planes or cease joy-flights based on the jet's maintenance history.
"If they've been making regular structural checks then these aircraft should be fine to continue flying," he said.
"For those operators who haven't been doing that recently then certainly our advice is make those checks now."
--------------

The checks should be part of the maintenance program.

There are two AD's out on the aircraft particular to the wings. These limit loading and also prohibit flight after the expiration of 2FI units after the issue of the AD's until the AD's are complied with. My understanding is load restricts are removed after the AD's are embodied.

[asac]

Does anybody here really believe that CASA does anything but a superficial job in overseeing the operations of limited category aircraft. This was a disaster waiting to happen. Heads need to roll at CASA or we will loose more good men. Check out limited category operations at YWOL. It the ASTB does have a full investigation god help CASA.

GIBSON must be stupid how could he say

"If they've been making regular structural checks then these aircraft should be fine to continue flying," he said.

Limited category aircraft fly civilians no if's they must.

[Trash Hauler]

Even when a major structural failuer occurs it would be rash for the regulator to ground all of that type until they are reasonably certain it is a fleet wide issue and all aircraft are in imminent peril.

Remember the JAL 747 accident. Should B747s have been grounded world wide after that accident. Of course not. The cause needs to be identified and then the risk to each aircraft assessed. The same with the China Air B747 breakup. Out of that investigation came a series of recommendations and ADs to prevent a recurrence but no other B747 was in imminent peril (about to have the same failure days/weeks).

In my aviation career I have only experienced one fleet grounding and that was early on in the military. Ironically it was not required as the cause of the accident was identified as a known flight characteristic combined with mis-handling by the pilot.

TH

[VH-XXX]

Said Chieftain is the one that broke apart when it flew through a thunderstorm on the way to Vic last year.

[Trash Hauler]

I can understand why none of the Chieftens were grounded. Severe turbulence from thunderstorm activity is likely to have precipitated the breakup.

http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2005/AAIR/aair200506266.aspx

[Evil Ultralights]

The cause needs to be identified and then the risk to each aircraft assessed.

This is exactly right and why CASA have not grounded the remaining Strikemasters owned by other operators in the country. Fact is the AWB which was issued on the 10th Oct is nothing new. This has been around since the mid 90's. Required wing mods were done on many of the Strikemasters whilst still in the employ of RNZAF for example. Apart from that operators are already required to conduct regular inspections of the wing spars, which is being done and has been done to date by at least 2 of the operators in the country. The plane that crashed by NOT RNZAF as the others are but was ex Singapore Airforce. The pilot flying held a commercial licence for a relatively short period and was not, as is widely reported, an ex RAF or ex RAAF pilot.

Also keep in mind the mods were primarily ordered because of the way the RNZAF and other such Air Forces were flying the aircraft, full of ordinance and in situations with high g loading.

So with the mods and regular NDT inspections which will pick up any fatigue cracks there is no reason to ground perfectly good aircraft.

In the hands of the right people with proper care and maintenance they should be no problem and in fact the other 2 operators of these aircraft have NEVER had ANY maintenance issues of any sort with the planes. Now there is not many aircraft that that can be said about.

Maybe the pilot induced too much rolling G , perhaps it was to avoid something, perhaps a bird. Who knows? These planes do not just "fall apart".

Evil

[Chimbu chuckles]

Would not under wing ordinance/stores tend to help with + G tolerance (wing root bending moments...a bit like zero fuel weight?) If that is the case perhaps lots of pulling in civvy street without under wing stores might aggravate to the fatigue problem rather than mitigate it.

Just wondering.

Rolling G may very well end up being a suspect...am I right in assuming only one wing came off?

I have seen a sort film of a PN68 used for a 'Hoover style' aerobatic display shed both wings simultaneously outboard of the engines as the pilot pulled into a loop:ugh:

[404 Titan]

Chimbu chuckles

Reading "Evil Ultralights" post I was thinking the same thing. Wing ordinance should reduce wing bending moments caused by high “G’s” just as a cargo/baggage load in the wing lockers on some light twins doesn’t need to be included in the limiting ZFW calculations.

As a side note I remember seeing that video of the PN68 with folded wings many years ago. What made me cringe was that the pilot’s wife was doing the PA commentary at the air show at the time.:sad:

[Milt]

404 Titan

The extra weight of under wing stores under applied g will only alter the the wing bending moments locally along the wing. The bending moment at the wing roots will be unchanged as the wings still have to support the fuselage to the same extent at any increased manoeuvre loading. This can become complicted if there is a factor of fuselage lift.

The hazardous effects of rolling g are generally underestimated by most pilots and should receive more emphasis in training.

[moreorless]

404 Titan
The hazardous effects of rolling g are generally underestimated by most pilots and should receive more emphasis in training.

This is a very good point. Cockpit G-meters are centreline in the aircraft and only represent the G-loading at that point and do not indicate wing loading when the aircraft is rolling.

[Arm out the window]

You'd hope that the pilots of these kinds of machines would be well aware of the rolling g limits which would be published in the flight manual.

[moreorless]

You'd hope that the pilots of these kinds of machines would be well aware of the rolling g limits which would be published in the flight manual.

I would hope that pilots of any machine know (sadly most don't) the G limits and know how those G's are determined and how they apply. We all learnt about 2G level turns - 2G's - but of that - where is the 2G and what kind of load is applied on the high wing when - as is typical - the nose is too low and is pulled up with elevator in that "2G" manoeurve to achieve a nil vertical speed rather than some spiral dive look alike.

Don't kid yourself - all pilots of all machines should be aware. All aircraft can easily exceed the structural limits of the aircraft and rolling G is little understood.

[Brian Abraham]

NATOPS manual on the aircraft we flew limited rolling G to two thirds of the symmetrical flight manual limit. Under wing stores did not affect G limits. If flying in moderate turbulence G limit was reduced to two thirds of flight manual limit to allow for turbulence induced additional G. Flight manual limit 6G hence two thirds was 4G. Naturally this may not apply to Strikemaster.

[Runaway Gun]

Underwing stores definitely do reduce the G limits in most aircraft types.

[Milt]

Runaway Gun
In the context of the present discourse we need to understand/comprehend why g limits may be reduced with underwing stores/integral fuel tanks contents and the like.

The current designers will have complex computer programs to provide the answers but we users need a simplistic comprehension as to what goes on when we load up our wings in flight particularly in the case of asymmetric wing loading.

[Trash Hauler]

Please correct me if I am wrong.

I was under the understanding that g limit reduction for external stores was to reduce localised stress at the store/wing attach point.

TH

[Runaway Gun]

Sorry, I'm not an engineer, just a pilot.

I was just stating that most military high-G aircraft I have flown have reduced G-limits and IAS/M limitations when underwing weapons/tanks are attached.

The Rolling G limits are easy. You pull to the G limit, and keep pulling whilst you roll, then the upgoing wing is pulling even harder. Outta limits.

I am not stating that this was to do with Nick's accident.

[asac]

The speculation about g-forces and loading are a very interesting debate. This is much simpler. Where the checks done? Although CASA stated there are two AD's out on this planes wings, were the checks done as per the AD's. Remember although this was a commercial operation, the aircraft operated under limited category status. The list of problems with the way these aircraft operate are mounting. What was the conclusion of the fatality off sydney about 12 months ago. were there any conclusions. What happened about the L39 incidents.

[moreorless]

Where the checks done?

For the NZ aircraft (without new wings) these AD's were embodied. They were not trivial exercises and typically took months to do. Approved schedule of maintenence requires the post implementation inspections to be carried out as mandated by BAC.

I don't know if the Singapore AF did the mods.

The list of problems with the way these aircraft operate are mounting.

There are two kinds of operators !

[Evil Ultralights]

The speculation about g-forces and loading are a very interesting debate. This is much simpler. Where the checks done? Although CASA stated there are two AD's out on this planes wings, were the checks done as per the AD's. Remember although this was a commercial operation, the aircraft operated under limited category status. The list of problems with the way these aircraft operate are mounting. What was the conclusion of the fatality off sydney about 12 months ago. were there any conclusions. What happened about the L39 incidents.

What fatality are you talking about? In a jet warbird?

The L39 incident (which incidently was widely discussed on this forum) was thought to be pilot coming in hot and high. HOWEVER there have been numerous documented incidences from around the world on L39 with brake failures. Anyone who knew the PIC of the L39 that day at Goulburn would say it was NOT pilot error.

As for the mods. It is true the ex RNZAF aircraft carry the mods. The point has been made a few times now and it is important to remember there are 2 type of operator. The remaining 2 in the country using this bird have NEVER had ANY mechanical issues with the plane and all post mod inspections have been done and NO issues or problems found AT ALL.

I guess it will all come out in the wash whether Costins planes carried the mods, whether other mechanical findings are discovered on the aircraft, what they were and how they affected the performance of the aircraft over a long period of time. These planes simply do not fall apart on their own.

Evil

[Wanderin_dave]

Little bit going on about g-limits, rolling g-limits and external stores over here too: http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=248096

[Rich-Fine-Green]

VH-XXX:

You don't see passengers in Cirrus aircraft pulling handle to deploy the parachute, so why would someone be stupid enough to try and eject themselves in flight...?

Has a passenger ever pulled the handle in a Cirrus??? No.

Actually, it happened in the USA August 06. - "Son Heroically Deploys Chute When Pilot Incapacitated"

http://www.aero-news.net/news/genav.cfm?ContentBlockID=68EC0772-9B66-4B9E-BF10-7D8D42B5F9C5&Dynamic=1

According to the article, this event was the second time a Ballistic Chute has been used as a result of Pilot incapacitation.

In the Aug 06 incident, the poor guy had a stroke and died in his seat.

[ratso]

Spoke to warbird joyflight operator at archerfield two days ago.
He indicated a meeting of the countries warbird operators was to take place at Bankstown on saturday 21oct06 with CASA.
Watch this space as they say.

[Evil Ultralights]

Spoke to warbird joyflight operator at archerfield two days ago.
He indicated a meeting of the countries warbird operators was to take place at Bankstown on saturday 21oct06 with CASA.
Watch this space as they say.

This is a farce. Which operators? Only members of various old boys clubs? What about operators that are not members? CASA has not mentioned this to EVERYONE if indeed such a meeting exists.
EU

[Trash Hauler]

Latest from CASA. "Fracture of the upper attachment lug of the right wing occurred. Examination of the fractured lug has confirmed growth of a fatigue crack from the bore of the lug"

http://www.casa.gov.au/airworth/awb/02/018.pdf

[Evil Ultralights]

I guess they are still trying to establish whether mods had been done on that plane particularly and others operated by that company or not. The recommendations offered by CASA in this AWB were already part of the other two operators SOP's anyway.


Evil

[Evil Ultralights]

Hidden truth of joyflight crash pilot

AN ADVENTURE pilot who died with his passenger in a jet fighter crash in October had a history of complaints and investigations into his flying and aircraft maintenance - but after the crash the air safety authority denied all knowledge of his record.

Documents obtained from the Civil Aviation Safety Authority under freedom-of-information laws reveal it conducted at least two investigations and received at least five complaints about the pilot, Nick Costin, but let him continue his air adventure business.

They show that between 2000 and 2002 the authority accused Mr Costin of deliberately disregarding flying safety rules, ignoring maintenance regulations and log-book requirements, and endangering the public at an air show.

Mr Costin died on October 5 after a wing broke off the Strikemaster jet he was flying. It crashed into rugged terrain at Mount Horrible in the Turon State Forest near Bathurst. His passenger, Shane O'Donoghue, who had been given the adventure flight as a 50th birthday present, was also killed.

The crash prompted many industry insiders to contact media organisations and allege that Mr Costin, who owned and operated the air adventure company Jet Fighter Flights, had been subject to numerous complaints and investigations by the authority.

A spokesman for the authority, Peter Gibson, said at the time that there had been no investigation or complaints against Mr Costin: "No investigation; no action taken; [he has] not been grounded … there's nothing current and nothing in recent years," Mr Gibson said.

Yesterday Mr Gibson said in an email: "The dates show that it is four years since an investigation. So the statement 'nothing current and nothing in recent years' is correct. As is the statement he was not grounded."

The documents released showed there was only one occasion when the authority fully followed up the complaints against Mr Costin.

In that investigation, dated July 2002, Mr Costin was accused of flying his plane just "3-6 feet above the runway" after take-off, and then conducting a "half loop with a roll off the top", an aerobatic manoeuvre where the pilot pulls back the control, causing the aircraft to climb vertically before rolling over and flying away in the opposite direction.

The authority found his manoeuvre was "deliberate" and "demonstrated a disregard for the safety rules". The breach was committed over a built-up area "within 5 nm [nautical miles] of a licensed aerodrome and with a passenger on board the aircraft in contravention of a Low Level Acrobatic Flight Approval issued to the holder".

A file note on the investigation report said the matter was of such gravity an infringement notice was appropriate. He was fined $330.

Although this was his only fine, the authority made numerous other allegations against him.

The authority's general manager, Tony Rothwell, threatened to cancel Mr Costin's air display licence after he was seen flying his plane over a crowd at the Aviex display at Bankstown in November 2000, in breach of safety regulations.

Mr Rothwell told Mr Costin by letter that "in order to achieve an appropriate level of aviation safety at air displays" he was considering banning any air show that had Mr Costin as a participant.

"Under the circumstances I believe an appropriate remedy for our consideration would be for CASA to refuse to issue an air display approval … for any air display which included you as a participant for a period of time, and I currently have in mind a period of 12 months," Mr Rothwell wrote. There is also no record of any follow-up by the authority.

In another report, dated May 2000, the authority described Mr Costin's failure to keep accurate log-book and maintenance entries on one of his Strikemasters as "a systematic pattern of non-compliance which has significantly degraded the level of safety for VH-ONP [the Strikemaster]."

The author of that report, John Flannery, a technical co-ordinator from the authority, raised a long series of concerns about Mr Costin and his aircraft, not the Strikemaster that crashed.

They included a recommendation that Bankstown Civil Aviation Safety Authority officials take immediate steps to ground Mr Costin's plane until problems were fixed. It was also recommended that Mr Costin be asked to "justify why there were no entries in the log book for VH-ONP regarding the parts used in assembly of the aircraft and in particular substantiate the wing bolts used for assembly". There is no record of any follow-up to this investigation.

A preliminary investigation by the Air Transport Safety Bureau into the fatal October 5 Strikemaster crash found the right wing of the jet had separated in flight.

Mr Gibson said yesterday there was only one proven offence against Mr Costin. "With respect to the past, the issue of an infringement notice in 2002 appeared to have the effect of ensuring compliance by Mr Costin, because no further adverse matters were received by CASA after that," he said.

Mr Costin's brother, Michael, admitted his brother was the subject of a lot of complaints and investigations but was "a very conservative pilot" and not a "cowboy".

A pilot from another adventure flight operation, Darren Deroia, 43, said the authority should have done more in Mr Costin's case.

CASA letters

http://www.smh.com.au/pdf/1612foicasaletter.pdf

Investigation report

http://www.smh.com.au/pdf/1612foiinvestigationreport.pdf

CASA report

http://www.smh.com.au/pdf/1612foicasareport1.pdf

http://www.smh.com.au/pdf/1612foicasareport2.pdf

[eagle 86]

Surprise, surprise!!
GAGS E86