PDA

View Full Version : PA 31 Darwhine ?


tinpis
25th Jul 2008, 04:35
Engine trouble Tiwi bound and a landing in a field?
All ok apparently

SmoothCriminal
25th Jul 2008, 07:16
I hear that it's a AustralasianJet machine and made it to 18, but rather a tad short of the keys and taxied in!
Flew over a mates house in the nearby suburb from what he says about 300 feet with pops & bangs and its not on the final for 18

But thats what I heard ;) , Glad all ok

Smoothie....:ok:

AussieNick
25th Jul 2008, 07:22
Any more news on this?

great to hear at all involved are ok

world traveler
25th Jul 2008, 11:57
I heard that it stopped short of the threshold of 18, pretty much in front of Hardys, and then was quickly towed away from there... Which leads me to ask, isn't there a requirement for multi-engine aircraft (especially those engaged in RPT)to be able to climb out on one engine in the case of a missed approach to get back to LSA/MSA? I am happy to stand corrected if there is no requirement, but i though i read it somewhere? God help most light twins!

Lasiorhinus
25th Jul 2008, 13:43
isn't there a requirement for multi-engine aircraft (especially those engaged in RPT)to be able to climb out on one engine in the case of a missed approach

For those in excess of 5700kg, refer CAO 20.7.1B, and yes, you are correct.

For aircraft like the PA31, less than 5700, refer CAO 20.7.2, and there is no such requirement. There is a takeoff climb gradient specified, in para 4.1.1,

Additionally, no aeroplane having a maximum take-off weight exceeding 3 500 kg shall take off at a weight such that the take-off climb gradient with the critical engine inoperative is less than the obstacle-free gradient specified for the take-off distance available. Where the obstacle-free gradient specified for the take-off distance available is less than 1.9%, the take-off weight shall be determined on the basis of a 1.9% gradient.

aviation_enthus
25th Jul 2008, 13:48
Not if it was a double engine failure!!:}
*as reported on ABC radio this afternoon

tinpis
25th Jul 2008, 17:49
Bloody Nora! ...could a done a bit of shopping at Bunnings!


NADJA HAINKE

July 26th, 2008

SEVERAL people cheated death when their passenger plane reportedly touched powerlines and plunged towards houses during an emergency landing in Darwin yesterday.

The Piper Chieftain was on its way to the Tiwi Islands about 10.30am when the 20-minute flight struck trouble.

A passenger said that first one engine, then the second, failed -- forcing the Australasian Jet aircraft to turn around.

Airport operations manager Bob Calaby said the light plane lost altitude within seconds.

"I understand they came in very low over the suburb of Millner, touching a powerline with a wing,'' he said.

Up to five passengers and a pilot were believed to be on board the chartered aircraft.

The stricken plane was forced to land in a field short of the airport strip.

All the passengers and pilot were unharmed.

Australasia Jet general manager Malcolm Walshe said the safety of the passengers was the company's priority.

"There was no damage to the aircraft and there's no people hurt,'' he said.

"There'll be a report and some sort of investigation into the incident.''

The passengers were later flown to their destination.

Mr Walshe praised the efforts of the pilot in the emergency landing:

"It was carried out perfectly.''

Australasia Jet has the NT's largest fleet of charter aircraft.
Northern Territory News (http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2008/07/26/4806_ntnews.html)

The Voice
25th Jul 2008, 21:41
:uhoh: land in a field short of the airport strip makes it sound like there's acres and acres of land around the airport not inside the perimeter fence ...

I'm sure it would have read better if the word field was replaced with scrub or saltbush ..

tinpis
25th Jul 2008, 23:10
18 undershoot area
Hardys is the hangar top right hand in the picture ?
If he was dodging power lines on McMillans Road :eek: they are bloody lucky they made it here :uhoh:

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/tinpis/18undershoot.jpg?t=1217027243

The Voice
25th Jul 2008, 23:22
Hardys Hangar is just above and to the left of the S in Slade Court

doesn't matter which way you look at it, darned lucky to make it back to land given the clipping of anything generally isn't good for airborne metal things!

for info, the hangars below the Slade Court scribe are I believe Pearl; Pearl; NJS; NJS; not sure about the last 2 on the RHS

tinpis
25th Jul 2008, 23:53
Hardys Hangar is just above and to the left of the S in Slade Court
:rolleyes: dats wot I said

Also in todays NT chip wrapper some one is suggesting the UFO sightings down in Feral-Deedoo may in fact be a YAK?
That smoke you see folks isnt bush fires... http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y150/tinpis/anim_cryingwithlaughter.gif

Pinky the pilot
26th Jul 2008, 00:46
Any info on the reggo of the a/c?

morno
26th Jul 2008, 00:59
What is it with double engine failures lately? Are the levels of experience really dipping so low in these operations that they're forgetting that very vital thing called fuel? :confused::confused::bored:

I know it's always best to wait for an accident investigation report, but really, what else causes 2 engines to fail one after the other, :ugh:.

morno

Led Zep
26th Jul 2008, 04:44
These naughty aircraft and their tendency to "plunge." :=:}

tinpis
26th Jul 2008, 04:48
Yers.....one prefers "plummets" :hmm:

captaintoocool
26th Jul 2008, 04:55
"Australasia Jet general manager Malcolm Walshe said the safety of the passengers was the company's priority":mad:

yeah right, if i know one person who has pushed and keeps pushing pilots over the line of safety, it's mr.Malcolm Walshe!!!!

I can't believe he still gets away with it the PR$#@!!!:=:mad:

Lasiorhinus
26th Jul 2008, 05:07
Not if it was a double engine failure!!:}
*as reported on ABC radio this afternoon

Two in a week? Gee, I'm glad those old Chieftains are safer than single engine turboprops... :}

Di_Vosh
26th Jul 2008, 11:42
Pinky, I heard it was ZMK.

Good riddance! ZMK performed like a slug at the best of times! :ugh:

multime
26th Jul 2008, 11:55
God LASI

Your sounding more like a CASA inspector everyday.
For someone in Adelaide to pay so much attention to Northern affairs is beyond me. Why don,t you just come up here.?
Just totally confused.
M:E

multime
26th Jul 2008, 12:03
Great work TIN

As usual you have out done us all with your intellect, wit and amiable charm.
Not to mention, - he knows how to post smileys, now.
The world is Doomed.!!!

M:ok:

Stationair8
27th Jul 2008, 00:49
Could have been a lot worse, if it had plunged into the Bagot road community and destroyed that lovely new fence that Tinnpis has constructed.

bushy
27th Jul 2008, 03:05
Chieftains do not do these naughty things unless they have a reason to. These things are nearly always caused by people.
High commercial pressures, low technical experience, and temporary pilots will result in things like this.

Similtaneous double engine failures are usually caused by one thing. And the result would be the same if they were turbines, regardless of how many engines there are.

Was this one a double engine failure??

If we ever get a group of career long term GA pilots we will get less of these occurances.

betaman
27th Jul 2008, 04:05
Well at least this guy was luckier than the last PA31 that had a double engine failure in YPDN. Didn't quite make it onto rwy 11 & landed a tad short!

Must be something in the water up north;)

Van Gough
27th Jul 2008, 04:33
If we ever get a group of career long term GA pilots

Id do it if the money & conditions where good and the machines had all the fruit :)

Stormynights
27th Jul 2008, 04:50
I would do it too

nothing like real flying !!

What is the likely outcome for the pilot if it was due to running out of fuel ?

Stormy

Dog One
27th Jul 2008, 04:50
Press reports indicate that one or both of the engines were heard surging and back firing after take off. A not uncommon problem with those engines is the common magneto drive can strip, causing the timing to change. Also a magneto failure can also do the same. In my experience on the type, you are better off feathering the offending engine.

A video clip of the news shows the aircraft being towed back to the hangar, and neither engine is feathered!

Harry Cooper
27th Jul 2008, 06:27
The reason that neither prop was feathered was because neither of the engines had failed fully. Both engines were operating with severely reduced power. From what I understand the pilot landed short on 18 and was able to taxi clear of the runway before shutting down and being towed back to the hangar.

tinpis
27th Jul 2008, 07:14
I have had a mag drive fail after TO in a PA31 350
The engine stopped dead as a dodo
No coughing or banging

sms777
27th Jul 2008, 11:21
Like tinpis said, if the mag fails the engine will stop dead for sure.
No spark, no fire. On the other hand a loose magneto will alter the timing to the point that the engine will pop, bang, and loose power but it will not fail.

sms777
27th Jul 2008, 11:51
If i remember correctly on the 540's there is an amplifier box in conjunction with the magnetos that gives a shower of spark when you crank the engine. If that fails the engine becomes extremly difficult or almost impossible to start. It has nothing to do with the normal operation of the magneto however.

tinpis
27th Jul 2008, 21:22
shower of spark when you crank the engine. If that fails the engine becomes extremly difficult or almost impossible to start

My membry tells me the same thing :ok:

In fact the engine that failed on me that morning long ago wouldnt start because of that and had to have a mag change or whatever was required
Imagine my surprise (not to mention the motoring journalists who were paxing:eek:) when the bloody thing quit on climb out. :uhoh:

Dog One
27th Jul 2008, 22:16
The failure of one magneto will not cause an engine to stop, how-ever, the failure of the common drive will, as both mags cease rotation or retard/advance to the point where they will not fire.

Some years ago (read many) the magneto suppliers were having a problem with the points spring tension, and we were getting about 300 hrs life out of a mag before the points welded together.

During that time there were a few flights returned with one mag out. The only inflight shutdown I remember was when one of the common drives failed and caused both mags to fire out of time. The resultant back fires only ceased when the engine was shutdown.

The only other type of failure I have had on PA31's was a fuel control unit which caused a dead cut just after becoming airborne on the usual dark night. Fortunately the OAT was low and we had enough performance to climb out and return.

tinpis
27th Jul 2008, 23:31
How they managed to certify a single drive to both mags remains a mystery to me :uhoh:

victor two
27th Jul 2008, 23:43
Considering this thing never actually made it back to the runway for landing anyway, another twenty seconds of flying outbound before turning back would have put him in right over the northern suburbs with a lot less options for any sort of safe landing. Regardless of what caused the failure(s), those passengers are a whole lot luckier than they may realise.

Be interesting to see what the ATSB says about this incident after they have looked into it.

bilbert
28th Jul 2008, 00:54
A mix of AVTUR and AVGAS can have the same effect!

pithblot
28th Jul 2008, 04:47
That would do it, but would the engines continue running long enough to get round the circuit? I think Bob Hoover logged a few interesting moments once when both engines really did fail shortly after take off after they ingested the Kero mistakenly added to his Shrike. It’s a potentially fatal mix and an easy mistake to make.

I was in Darwin last Saturday morning. In fact I was at the crocodile farm, just off the 11 extended centre line and I heard what I thought was a PC9 running in low & fast. When I heard the second one I went outside to see The Roulettes do their stuff only to see the PA31.

My guess is he was at about 400ft when I saw him – but that is only a guess. I’ve never heard a piston aircraft engine rev so hard. The engine would scream for up to two seconds then cut back to nothing and then surge again. I couldn’t tell whether it was one or both engines surging.

What really concerned me is the aircraft’s wheels remained extended as he made a left turn towards Left Base 18, descending continually until he disappeared out of sight.

But for the Grace of God there would have been tears.


PITHBLOT

Brian Abraham
28th Jul 2008, 07:06
How they managed to certify a single drive to both mags remains a mystery to me
All that is required is,

FAR 33.37 Ignition system.

Each spark ignition engine must have a dual ignition system with at least two spark plugs for each cylinder and two separate electric circuits with separate sources of electrical energy, or have an ignition system of equivalent in-flight reliability.

Bear in mind you only have one oil pump, and other single point failures, so the question is where do you stop with redundancy.

Dog One
28th Jul 2008, 10:16
If both engines were affected, then fuel quality or lack of it would have to be high on the list. If it was AVTUR contaminated, depending on the ratio of the mix it may have enabled the engines to produce some power. I know of a PA31 refuelled with Avtur in error, and fortunately, the pilot opted for a longer runway which was away from the terminal. Taxying out he had both engines stop as he lined up!

Crankhandle
28th Jul 2008, 12:05
Just a test of memory Tin, that magneto drive failure of yours, did the same thing happen to another Chieftain belonga the same company a day or two earlier or later or would that be another time and place, confusion reigns

tinpis
28th Jul 2008, 19:14
Thank you Brian :ok:

crankhandle
Over thirty years ago matey cant recall , but yes it was the company you are thinking of
Think it was a short time later I had one let go in a Chieftan but that was the turbo charger falling off!
Then there was the B58......:uhoh:
Just as well yer had two.

Edit to add this is in no way intended to reflect on the company(long ago ceased)
Their maintenance was always superb and the aircraft at the time were pretty well new

Dog One
28th Jul 2008, 22:11
Good point Tinpis, in our day the airframes were relatively new, ie most in the 5 - 10 year range. Those same airframes are now 30 plus years old!