Gulfstream G650 Crash - Roswell - 4 Dead

[JustAnObserver]

News reports are just coming in of G650 crash at Roswell International Airport during test flight. 4 Dead. 2 Pilots & 2 Flight Engineers.

4 dead in crash of small plane at NM airport (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/huff-wires/20110402/us-roswell-plane-crash/)

[HS125]

Seconded, a sad day.

They're not very good in any sense of the word but effectively the same write up with first pictures here:
Plane skids and catches fire in Roswell | Roswell N.M. | KRQE News 13 (http://www.krqe.com/dpp/news/plane-skids-and-catches-fire-in-roswell#)

[leonard17F]

Just heard the news from SAV.....
Terrible.................
My saddest thoughts to the crew's families....

[Pugilistic Animus]

Gulfstream G650 crashes in New Mexico, leaving four people dead | savannahnow.com (http://savannahnow.com/latest-news/2011-04-02/gulfstream-g650-crashes-new-mexico-leaving-four-people-dead-0)

not much else on this accident
I actually heard about this first in [I hate to say] Wiki

[GVFlyer]

Very sad, I'm waiting to learn names. Tragic. This is the first time a Gulfstream jet during development has even suffered major damage.

[MikeNYC]

Possibly SN 6002, N652GD. Condolences to all, a very sad day.

[elchinero]

T2 was my plane when I was a Gulfstream flight test (end of gig on 2010-12-31) ... Rolls-Royce BR725 engine "owner'. I will know all four on-board. DAMN!

My eyes just got wet ...

Tony T

[JustAnObserver]

Here is an updated link to story from Washington Post quoting FAA spokesman Lynn Lunsford.

FAA: 2 pilots, 2 flight test engineers killed in crash of small plane at Roswell airport - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/faa-2-pilots-2-test-engineers-killed-in-crash-of-small-plane-at-roswell-airport/2011/04/02/AFfD10OC_story.html)

[Jetstar2Pilot]

I'm very saddened with this. On Flightaware N602AB is enroute fm KSAV to KROW.

A Gulfstream owner just called me to confirm it was one of the test aircraft.

My sincere condolences to the families and to Gulfstream. They build such a stellar aircraft.

[Pugilistic Animus]

For such a high profile jet I'm shocked that there's so little news after so many hours....and I hate to say, perhaps there's a little intentional misleading due to the massive marketing investment Gulfstream has on this plane G4 G6 G450:confused::confused::confused:
however the Aviation Week's site detailed how hot and high testing was to be performed around April for the G-650; so I'm sure this is a 650 airframe---My sincerest condolences for the lost flight test crew in the line of duty

BCA Reviews The Gulfstream G650 (http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/jsp_includes/articlePrint.jsp?storyID=news/bca/2010/10/01/BC_10_01_2010_p82-254096.xml&headLine=BCA%20Reviews%20The%20Gulfstream%20G650)

[GLF5driver]

It appears that the US FAA has now confirmed the accident aircraft was indeed a flight test Gulfstream 650. Our thoughts are with the crew member's families, and the whole of the Savannah community. God bless all.

[Jetstar2Pilot]

What a shame. It appears N652GD flew into KROW a week ago from Telluride. Obviously doing high altitude testing.

I'm very sad at this time.

[Pugilistic Animus]

for the type of clientele this this plane is marketed to this could be a huge blow...no matter what the outcome...obviously there's an information damage control campaign in effect at this time even the identification of the test airframe is suspect:suspect:

I really hope this is not the end of the program-these clients do expect quite simply 100% safety and will not realized that the risks of experimental test flying are still here---truly a shame---very sad story, at all levels---and at this point Aviation Weeks is not what Gulfstream needs now

“We’ve been pretty successful up to this point with the G650. But I don’t want to say anything that might jinx something. A little talk goes a long way,” said Pres Henne, Gulfstream’s senior vice president, programs, engineering and test.
:\

[elchinero]

<<For such a high profile jet I'm shocked that there's so little news after so many hours>>

One of my (ex)flight test associates (just) e-mailed to me that NO info re: this is going out of Hangars 9 & 10 via e-mail, www, and phone.

TT

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

1. Condolences of course.

2. Roswell isn't really "high" - it's just under 4000ft. Which makes it a very useful place to test for 'normal' field performance, since you can extrapolate the results there to 10kft, which is a typical max TO altitude unless you do dedicated tests at La Paz or similar.

Its also useful for performance purposes due to the nature of the runway and the amount of local activity. Throw in typical decent weather and its no surprise many OEMs use Roswell for performance testing.

3. I'm not surprised Gulfstream have locked themselves down; with NTSb involved, anything that gets out might be deemed to have been "released" and NTSB jealously (and properly) protect their right to approve (or not) any data released regarding an accident under investigation.

[elchinero]

<<Which makes it a very useful place to test for 'normal' field performance, since you can extrapolate the results there to 10kft, which is a typical max TO altitude unless you do dedicated tests at La Paz or similar.

Its also useful for performance purposes due to the nature of the runway and the amount of local activity. Throw in typical decent weather and its no surprise many OEMs use Roswell for performance testing.>>

10-4 on that purpose. Weeks and weeks of field perf test matrix ... Dawn 'til dusk. 365/24/7 (in general)

[filejw]

P A , It has only been six hours since the accident and its a 4 or 5 hrs flight from SAV, what kind of info could be released. The powers that be at Gulfstream are most likely getting on scene only now.

[Jetstar2Pilot]

A G200 from KSAV is just now arriving at KROW. Plane is registered to Gulfstream.

[monkey_wrench]

What dreadful news and brings into sharp focus the risks that exist in certifying aircraft.

The Gulfstream family is a small one and my thoughts are with all Gulfstreamers in Savannah tonight.

[Pugilistic Animus]

P A , It has only been six hours since the accident and its a 4 or 5 hrs flight from SAV, what kind of info could be released.

Simply that the accident aircraft is confirmed to be a G-650

It does not seem like a good sign when basic info is not released...

[fireflybob]

FAA confirms Gulfstream G650 Roswell test accident (http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/flightblogger/2011/04/breaking-faa-confirms-gulfstre.html)

[GVFlyer]

2. Roswell isn't really "high" - it's just under 4000ft. Which makes it a very useful place to test for 'normal' field performance, since you can extrapolate the results there to 10kft, which is a typical max TO altitude unless you do dedicated tests at La Paz or similar.

Its also useful for performance purposes due to the nature of the runway and the amount of local activity. Throw in typical decent weather and its no surprise many OEMs use Roswell for performance testing.

3. I'm not surprised Gulfstream have locked themselves down; with NTSb involved, anything that gets out might be deemed to have been "released" and NTSB jealously (and properly) protect their right to approve (or not) any data released regarding an accident under investigation.

The 13,001 foot runway at Roswell is also useful if you're rejecting take-offs with 90% worn brakes at Max Gross Take-off Weight.

[VFD]

T2 was my plane when I was a Gulfstream flight test (end of gig on 2010-12-31) ... Rolls-Royce BR725 engine "owner'. I will know all four on-board. DAMN!
Tony
Would there be additional Flight Data Recording going on during this phase of testing?
Just might give a clue as to what in the world happened.

[junkyardfreightdog]

Cleared unrestricted climb!

[khorton]

I know several of the Gulfstream test pilots, and am deeply saddened by this news. I'm dreading the release of the crew manifest.

Would there be additional Flight Data Recording going on during this phase of testing?
Just might give a clue as to what in the world happened.

They would have been recording a huge amount of flight test data, but the recorders almost certainly don't have any specific fire protection. So it may take a lot of work to retrieve any of the flight test data. Depending on what type of test they were doing, they might have been transmitting telemetry, which would normally include quite a bit of data, but not as much as would be recorded on the flight test recorders.

[theficklefinger]

Curious what brought it down.

V1 cuts and single engine departures are pretty straight forward.

I know they were trying to hire some flight test guys...new guys at the wheel?

[bizjets101]

Local press are reporting gear collapse, sliding and hitting a 'structure' and bursting into flames, ended up right beside the control tower.

AvWeb reporting aircraft was taking off, became briefly airbourne - came back down hard - collapsing the gear . . .

Gulfstream 650 Down, Four Dead (http://www.avweb.com/avwebflash/news/Gulfstream_650_Down_Four_Dead_204417-1.html)

Local News Coverage (http://www.kob.com/article/stories/s2047568.shtml)

N652GD Gulfstream G650 airframe number 2.
Gulfstream Press Release (http://www.gulfstream.com/news/releases/2011/gulfstream-confirms-crash-of-g650-flight-test-aircraft.htm)

http://i845.photobucket.com/albums/ab20/bizjets101/N652GD.jpg
photo Ned Harris/Flickr (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ned_harris/with/5087135066/)

[junkyardfreightdog]

http://http://www.aopa.org/aircraft/articles/2011/110402gulfstream_g650_fatal_crash.html

a few more details in this article. eye witness says a wing tip struck the ground first.

[doubleu-anker]

Pugilistic Animus

".......these clients do expect quite simply 100% safety......"

Then the clients are deluded, as this tragedy has illustrated. While mankind has his sticky little fingers anywhere near machinery, there will never be 1000% safety.

[flt_level]

sad news indeed. Thoughts and prayers go out to the family's and colleagues.

Flt test guys have to be respected for pushing these machines past there limits so that us regular guys can operate within a safe operating margin.

I wouldn't expect the 650 image to suffer in the long term. After a period of grieving, the sales and marketing machine will be in full swing.

They will communicate the risks of certification testing and just how far these a/c are pushed, therefore achieving a safe product backed by a history of excellence.

This doesn't in anyway take the shine off what is truly an awesome airplane.

[Nordstrom]

This is a truly tragic accident, as all crashes that involve loss of life are.

After reading the thread it surprise me that some professional pilots seem to forget the inherent risks in developing new airframes. While technology has come along way since steam gauges and radial engines, and computer modeling reduces many risks in build, the fact remains that testing, building new aircraft has it's risks.

For any of us side liners who operate these aircraft on a regular basis, who think we understand the development process and engineering that goes into to this is just full of himself.

No doubt they will find what happened. There were more perameters being measured on that aircraft then normal. Gulfstream isn't playing damage control with the public or the NTSB or the FAA. Everyone in these groups (NTSB and FAA) were aware of the testing and have access to record, and info will be exchanged properly.

For those spinning this up, your a disgrace to our profession, you could barely fold a paper airplane for you kids to play with, let alone make any reasonable judgement of a new aircraft under test in what went wrong.

The world is watching and they will surely have answers to the question "why" in the near future

My condolences to all involved and to our profession on this sad day. It reminds me, and should be a reminder to all of us, that no matter how far technology comes, there are still inherent risks to flying airplanes, and our profession.

[BabyBear]

fit_level, are you not jumping the gun somewhat in assuming the cause of the accident was 'type specific'. It is possible the aircraft was within test tolerance and a non related event/occurence is responsible.

[steveb15]

After reading the thread it surprise me that some professional pilots seem to forget the inherent risks in developing new airframes. While technology has come along way since steam gauges and radial engines, and computer modeling reduces many risks in build, the fact remains that testing, building new aircraft has it's risks.

Too true Nordstrom. This may have been a sad first for Gulfstream but the Challenger 604 certification program suffered a fatal crash back in 2000 when
2 pilots perished at Wichita.

ASN Aircraft accident Canadair CL-600-2B16 Challenger 604 C-FTBZ Wichita-Mid-Continent Airport, KS (ICT) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20001010-0)

[Oldschoolflyer]

Terrible News, my heart goes out to the families of all involved, and to all the wonderful people at Gulfstream.

[Nordstrom]

Steveb15

This may be true about the 604 program, but this is the purpose behind flight testing, to discover problems associated to design.

The 604 may have been set back, but the set backs are obstacle to get over in the certification program. Today the 604 has developed to the 605 and a number or Regional Jets developed from the some of the data I suspect.

Gulfstream will continue to move forward, as cautious as they entered the process, but with a reminder that the business they are in is subject to failure and is sometimes life threatening. not the first and sure not to be the last.

I have done multiple hours of take off and landing training in similar Gulfstreams G450 and G550 and must say several hours of this is tiring. Either way aircraft malfunction or pilot error, it's tragic.

When these things happen it touches a spot in my soul knowing that it could be anyone of us who this happened to if you are active in the profession.

They (Gulfstream ) has been at this game for decades and now with more brain trust with General Dynamics absorbing them. They will continue to make the finest corporate aircraft of it's size in the skies, no question in my mind.

The G650 will get certified and become yet another milestone for Gulfstream but not without trials, failures, and now loss of life

The nature of the beast, sad but true.

[I.R.PIRATE]

Very sad to hear this news today. RIP folks.

With a relatively clean slate in terms of non-human error hull losses, Gulfstream seem to have been putting out a statistically very safe line of aircraft.

One has to wonder if the addition of Fly By Wire into the 650, might not hold a clue to what went wrong here. In general the entire range is pretty docile throughout the flight entire flight regime - this sounds like something to do with controlability, or uncommanded flight control input. In my mind, the company has pretty much just improved on its existing line and design philosophy with each new type - this is the first model that has strayed from Gulfstream's mainstay of mechanical controls and direct pilot input. Airbus also struggled in the beginning with the A320. Hope this is not the case with the 650.

[Shell Management]

Very sad news.:uhoh:

What is the 'red window' in the photo above?:confused:

I wonder what the risk assesment for this testing concluded. :confused:
NTSB recommended risk assesments for flight testing after that Canadair accident a few years back.:D

Any owner who expects 100% safety needs to back that expectation with $$$. They need to pick a modern aircraft, invest in IS-BAO SMS accreditation, intensive crew training, and be prepared to cancel higher risk flights.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

The sweep of the wings, make for an interesting cross wind situation, when landing or taking off.

Jusat ask any Citation Ten driver, how much latitude there is for wing tip clearance under normal, and abnorrmal operations.

[Gulfstreamaviator]

Thinking more ABNORMAL......

trying to say that under normal circumstances, there is very little room for error, and we do not know the flight profile, it was a flight test aircraft, so is expected to be at the cutting edge most of the time...

[Shell Management]

Do you understand what a crosswind is?:ugh:

[mutt]

Did you consider that Gulfstreamaviator is actually a Gulfstream pilot, who understands "crosswinds" and flying Gulfstreams.......

[Shell Management]

Briefly, but I also did wonder why anyone would think a less than 10 kts crosswind a challenge.

[I.R.PIRATE]

I am no guru, but I strongly doubt that 10kts X-wind is enough reason to scribble a whole airframe.

Horses for courses though, but there is nothing wrong with G4/G5/G450/G550 ability to handle crosswinds - technique is fairly simple. Recently had 27 kts at 90 degrees, no problems.

Even less problem for test pilots - lets face the facts. I dont think this accident had much to do with the prevailing met - - or else this program is doomed from the get-go.

[Shell Management]

I.R.PIRATE

I totally agree an unrelated red-herring!

[Tequilaboy]

We all know that despite best efforts, skill, training this industry can be fraught with risk.

Despite all the conjecture and comment everyone spares a thought for all those and their families throughout this period.

I hope a great deal can be learnt from this be it conditions or engineering to make this industry asnsafe as the standards we all strive to achieve.

My condolences to all involved on this sad day and the loss of I am positive some great peers and colleagues in the industry.

[GVFlyer]

Would there be additional Flight Data Recording going on during this phase of testing?
Just might give a clue as to what in the world happened.

VFDAll Gulfstream developmental test articles have real time telemetry streaming to the test trailer which monitors all systems. This includes transmissions from a constant Hot Mic among the pilots and flight test engineers.

[GVFlyer]

Too true Nordstrom. This may have been a sad first for Gulfstream but the Challenger 604 certification program suffered a fatal crash back in 2000 when
2 pilots perished at Wichita.

ASN Aircraft accident Canadair CL-600-2B16 Challenger 604 C-FTBZ Wichita-Mid-Continent Airport, KS (ICT) (http://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=20001010-0)While the two mishaps appear similar, it is too early to speculate about causation. It could be many things - the test card called for the circuit breakers failing the left hydraulic system to be pulled, then at rotation the right system fails; anomaly during brake testing, the card calls for rotation at 107 knots and rotation occurs at 101 knots, an engine could have failed at a critical time in an airplane compromised for another kind of test, there could have been a glitch in the developmental fly-by-wire FCS occurring at the worst time in a flight - the cause will ultimately be known, but right now we should be thinking about the fine flight crew that was lost in this tragic mishap.

In the CL-604 JAR-OPS testing mishap at ICT, three people actually perished - the co-pilot, who was on an orientation flight, died from massive burns 36 days later. It's the nature of burns that you generally succumb to them, normally from a secondary infection. His family put up a website for him while he was alive - I visited it daily. While the mishap occurred because of aftward fuel migration in a test article already ballasted to its rear C.G. limit (the test was to begin at 41,000 feet, the Brits had questioned the CL-604's high altitude longitudinal stability), the real culprit was Bombardier's deficient test program. Neither pilot was a graduate of a recognized test pilot school, adequate risk assessments were not being accomplished, there was no "build-up" to the test being performed and the test had a higher level of complexity than the pilot flying had ever attempted.

[theficklefinger]

Starting to sound like high speed abort that went really bad.

Shouldn't be too hard to figure out, all the wreckage is on the field. Any pics?

[Pugilistic Animus]

Then the clients are deluded, as this tragedy has illustrated. Yes, the super-rich tend to be deluded concerning such matters as mortality; it's a sad fact that Gulfstream surely understands...I hope the program is not catastrophically jeopardized...nevertheless it's a shocking accident...on what was a well performing test article

I have a few guesses and speculations in my head but I'll keep them to myself; other than to say that the goals for high speed flight and TO and landing at low speed tend to be diametrically opposed-aerodynamically and that certain aspects of that program seemed very optimistic---no LE devices etc...I know:ouch:


I totally agree an unrelated red-herring!
are you always talking about things you can't understand?---be an ass somewhere else SM:=

[His dudeness]

I wonder what the risk assesment for this testing concluded.

NTSB recommended risk assesments for flight testing after that Canadair accident a few years back.

You´re obsessed with that ****e aren´t you?

IF a testpilot needs a risk assessment to know a test flight is risky, then....

Lets assume the risk assessment said: very risky, so what then, should the testpilots stop testing airplanes or at least high risk tests, even though they are most likely prescribed by FAA/EASA ?

[Stratocaster]

Sadly, I didn't attend any course/training at the National Test Pilot School, however I believe they do a risk assessment before every flight. Everything's even online: NTPS Test Hazard Analyses (http://www.ntps.edu/about-joomla/43/163-test-hazard-analyses).

Enough said, I guess...

[GVFlyer]

I wonder what the risk assesment for this testing concluded. All Gulfstream test plans go through a safety review board where risk level is determined prior to their approval. Area's of higher risk are noted on the test card. Each flight is thoroughly briefed to the flight crew by the originating flight test engineer prior to the flight on which the test card is flown.

[bizjets101]

Video from the accident site;

The Kathryn Aviation Report: Gulfstream G650, Gulfstream Aerospace Corp., N652GD; Roswell International Air Center - KROW, New Mexico (http://www.thekathrynreport.com/2011/04/gulfstream-g650-gulfstream-aerospace_03.html)

[jamie2004]

had to refresh the page when i saw this thread title, didn't believe it upon seeing it and didn't want to either. Very tragic indeed and not looking forward to seeing the names on manifest when released.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

You´re obsessed with that ****e aren´t you?

IF a testpilot needs a risk assessment to know a test flight is risky, then....

Lets assume the risk assessment said: very risky, so what then, should the testpilots stop testing airplanes or at least high risk tests, even though they are most likely prescribed by FAA/EASA ?

"That ****e", as you so elegantly phrase it, just happens to be very important indeed.

Neither a pilot, nor an engineer, needs to do a risk assessment to understand that test flying is inherently risky. That is not the point of a risk assessment process. The point is to understand what the risks are, specifically, and to identify what actions you are going to take to mitigate the risk or address the consequences.

Concluding that a test is "high risk" doesn't lead to the conclusion "scrub the test" - it leads to the question, "what can we do to reduce this high risk to an acceptable level?" The risk assessment is the first step in achieving the goal of exposing the test crew, and test vehicle, to no unnecessary risks and to no unidentified risks. Thus making the testing process, while inherently risky, as low risk as can be reasonably achieved.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

What is the 'red window' in the photo above?:confused:

Red usually means an experimental part.

I'd guess it's either;

1. A replacement installation for a window that incorproated a controllable port the simulated a hole in the fuselage of a defined size, so that you can do cabin depressurizzation assessments by opening the hole, retaining the ability to close it again to continue flying or in the event the test goes badly; or

2. A window replacement being used to mount something in that location - perhaps a camera installation to observe the wing LE.

If I had to pick one, I'd say #1. Usually you wouldn't need to go to that extent to mount a camera.

[BreezyDC]

Thanks, Mad (Flt) Scientist. Excellent summary of appropriate and necessary risk management in flight testing (amongst other aviation activities).

[jackx123]

here is an example

Photos: Learjet 45 Aircraft Pictures | Airliners.net (http://www.airliners.net/photo/Untitled-(Air-Ambulance)/Learjet-45/1882278/L/&sid=53a5fe7d3cd4fac9a8ab38cff736ea9f)

[SpeedTrap47]

The Learjet has COVERS not experimental parts. Covers are RED for visibility to ensure they are seen when installed.

The Gulfstream window is actually "Flight Test Orange" not RED and is used for external probes to my recollection.

Unairworthy parts are marked RED such as when unairworthy but on-ground useable landing gear or wheels are used for moving aircraft

[bizjets101]

Gulfstream Identifies Employees Killed in G650 Crash -- SAVANNAH, Ga., April 3, 2011 /PRNewswire/ -- (http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/gulfstream-identifies-employees-killed-in-g650-crash-119152104.html)

"We mourn the loss of our colleagues and friends and extend our deepest sympathies to their families," said Joe Lombardo, president, Gulfstream. "The Gulfstream team has already rallied to support the people these men left behind, and we know that the local and aviation communities will do the same. On their behalf, we ask for your kindness, support and understanding as they, and the rest of the Gulfstream family, grieve the passing of these fine professionals."

[SpeedTrap47]

"Mr. Crenshaw is a business jet test pilot and a former US Air Force test pilot, university professor, and airline pilot with over 11,000 hours of flight time. He is an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) with both domestic and international flight experience and an FAA Certificated Flight Instructor in single engine, multi-engine, and glider aircraft. He is also an FAA Designated Engineering Representative (DER) as a Flight Test Pilot for Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation with type ratings in the Lear 35, Gulfstream II, Gulfstream III, Gulfstream IV-SP, and Gulfstream V/G450/550. He is currently the Chief Project Test Pilot for Gulfstream commercial and special missions test programs. Prior to his work with Gulfstream, Mr. Crenshaw was the Chief Test Pilot for Northrop Grumman. At the USAF Test Pilot School, he taught both in the classroom as Chief of Academics and in the cockpit where he was a flight instructor in the Northrop T-38 Talon, De Havilland Beaver, De Havilland Twin Otter, and gliders. After retirement from the Air Force, he flew for Northwest Airlines flying DC-9’s (-10, -30, and -50 models). Mr. Crenshaw is an Associate Fellow of the Society of Experimental Test Pilots, a member of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), and a member of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)."

[Phenom]

Very sad yet interesting news...

http://i918.photobucket.com/albums/ad23/cashforce/010120011/DSCN457020-20Wreckage-thumb-560x420-121372.jpg

[GVFlyer]

"Mr. Crenshaw is a business jet test pilot and a former US Air Force test pilot, university professor, and airline pilot with over 11,000 hours of flight time. He is an Airline Transport Pilot (ATP) with both domestic and international flight experience and an FAA Certificated Flight Instructor in single engine, multi-engine, and glider aircraft. He is also an FAA Designated Engineering Representative (DER) as a Flight Test Pilot for Gulfstream Aerospace Corporation with type ratings in the Lear 35, Gulfstream II, Gulfstream III, Gulfstream IV-SP, and Gulfstream V/G450/550. He is currently the Chief Project Test Pilot for Gulfstream commercial and special missions test programs. Prior to his work with Gulfstream, Mr. Crenshaw was the Chief Test Pilot for Northrop Grumman. At the USAF Test Pilot School, he taught both in the classroom as Chief of Academics and in the cockpit where he was a flight instructor in the Northrop T-38 Talon, De Havilland Beaver, De Havilland Twin Otter, and gliders. After retirement from the Air Force, he flew for Northwest Airlines flying DC-9’s (-10, -30, and -50 models). Mr. Crenshaw is an Associate Fellow of the Society of Experimental Test Pilots, a member of the Aircraft Owners and Pilots Association (AOPA), and a member of the Experimental Aircraft Association (EAA)."

Kent was also the Chief Test Pilot for the B-2 Program.

[SpeedTrap47]

Cmdr. Vivan Ragusa, was the US Navy test pilot on the X-31 VECTOR program

[550-5239]

It is obvious the entire crew had impeccable qualifications; sometimes fate truly is the hunter...

[GVFlyer]

What is the 'red window' in the photo above?:confused:

It's a metal plate replacing a window on which an additional TAT probe is mounted.

[SpeedTrap47]

Kents professional resume can be Googled (esi-website)

[jetopa]

posted by Mutt:

Did you consider that Gulfstreamaviator is actually a Gulfstream pilot, who understands "crosswinds" and flying Gulfstreams.......


Dear J.,

yes, actually he is!

[Gulfstreamaviator]

41,000 ft at present over Malta, listening to the war birds, in my warm cozy Flight Simulator, drinking hot chocloate, and watching Top Gun.

glf

[rak64]

The pilots performed takeoffs with c.g. locations ranging from 35.0 percent MAC to 42.0 percent MAC. The pilots reported that aft c.g. positions caused them to rotate at a somewhat higher rate. The pilots noted that these effects were more noticeable when they used increased rotation rates (about 6° instead of the normal 3° rotation rate). When increased rotation rates were used, the pilots noted that the stick shaker frequently activated but only briefly. The pilots also indicated that the simulator was controllable at all c.g. locations using both normal and increased rotation rates.

from
NTSB Abstract AAB-04/01 (http://www3.ntsb.gov/publictn/2004/AAB0401.htm)

To operate in the transsonic region usually critical airfoils are used. They are known for bad behavior esp. in stall. Airfoils during the desin phasis are tested under sterile conditions. I do not know that airfoils are tested for the rotation phasis.

In a situation just after T/O plus a elevator deflection it is thinkable that the down turning side, defect the aileron down, what increase the average angle of attak, what can cause a partial loss of the airstream attached to the airfoil (stall), what cause reduced lift of that side, known as control reversal.

The only imediate solution i know is to reduce the G-load by moving stick forward. Remember weight is G-load multiply with mass. So the partial stall could not develop to a full one.

As i know simulator are used in aviation industrie using table to look up for the datas, IMHO this kind are not able to simulate dynamic situations. It needs blade technology or CFD to get validate datas.
regards
rak64

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

@rak64

1. I believe it is premature, to say the least, for a discussion of the accident to CL604 C-FTBZ "5991" to be conducted in this thread. So far the only similaroty we have between the two events is that they were flight test aircraft on takeoff, and resulted in the unfortunate loss of all aboard.

2. I wouldn't trust CFD methodology to capture the stall characteristics of a real wing; if that's what you want then validated table-lookup is far better, but that requires someone go get the data for the validation ... ultimately, the beast has to be flight tested, with the risks that brings.

[GVFlyer]

Mad Scientist:

I believe rak64 is referring to the October 2000 Challenger 604 mishap in which the crew effected a >9 degree-per-second rotation rate before encountering a departure stall.

[theficklefinger]

Flight test pilots have the job of finding problems, limitations, issues, for the express purpose of guys like me not having to find them with a plane load full of passengers.

I hope these guys didn't die in vain, and that a problem was found, something was learned, some issue is now solved.

[jackx123]

The Learjet has COVERS not experimental parts. Covers are RED for visibility to ensure they are seen when installed.

The Gulfstream window is actually "Flight Test Orange" not RED and is used for external probes to my recollection.

Unairworthy parts are marked RED such as when unairworthy but on-ground useable landing gear or wheels are used for moving aircraft

Precisely my point, blended with a bit of my sense of humor.

Have you ever seen any "first" flight of a new aircraft painted in any particular color except perhaps green?

[monkey_wrench]

I was reminded today that early in the G-IV Flight Test programme Gulfstream had a lucky escape with an aircraft carrying out VMCG testing. One reason for the Vortilons on the leading edge.

[GVFlyer]

That occurred in 1986.

[hawk37]

GVFlyer and monkey_wrench;

Can either of you elaborate?

[SpeedTrap47]

Have you ever seen any "first" flight of a new aircraft painted in any particular color except perhaps green?
Yes "aluminum"

[Gulfstreamaviator]

The G650 struck its right wingtip on the ground as it took off from Roswell International Air Center around 9:30 a.m. local time, following high speed taxi testing. The plane then hit the ground, causing the landing gear to collapse, and skidded along the runway before catching fire and coming to rest only 40 feet from the control tower. The takeoff was the 10th of the day and was part of the testing of takeoff performance and brake systems.

[GVFlyer]

hawk37
Can either of you elaborate?

A minor mishap transpired during G-IV "unstick" testing. The jet partially stalled and banged a wingtip. Vortilons were added to the wings to control airflow at high angles of attack. Again, the test pilot was imminently qualified - he was later sequentially selected to be the GV chief test pilot then the Boeing 717 chief test pilot.

[hawk37]

A minor mishap transpired during G-IV "unstick" testing. The jet partially stalled and banged a wingtip

Thanks GVFlyer.

Would fly by wire prevent this high an angle of attack on a G650?

Or maybe envelope protection is normally diabled this close to the ground?

[barit1]

NTSB preliminary (http://www3.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20110403X03645&key=1), apologies if already posted.

[GVFlyer]

Would fly by wire prevent this high an angle of attack on a G650?

Or maybe envelope protection is normally diabled this close to the ground?

In that you're comparing dramatically different wings, it's really comparing apples to orangutans unless you're only conceptionally speaking. In that case it would be determined by the FCS control laws and whether it was a hard stop or soft stop system.

[Volume]

Or maybe envelope protection is normally diabled this close to the ground? Envelope protection is probably disabled during flight testing to determine the borders of the envelope. Thats what testing is for.

[specialbrew]

Very sad indeed.....

NTSB Issues Preliminary Report on G650 Crash
The flight-test Gulfstream G650 that crashed in Roswell, N.M., on Saturday “was performing a takeoff with a simulated engine failure to determine takeoff distance requirements at minimum flap setting” at the time of the accident, according to an NTSB preliminary report released this morning. The two test pilots and two technical specialists aboard were killed in the crash, and the twinjet was destroyed. The report said the aircraft slid approximately 3,800 feet from where the first wing scrapes were seen on Runway 21 at Roswell International Air Center Airport, and struck several obstructions before it came to rest on fire, but upright about 200 feet from the airport’s control tower. In a statement issued this morning, Gulfstream pledged its cooperation with the NTSB. “We are participating fully in the aircraft investigation, and will resume flying the G650 only when we and the [FAA] are satisfied it is safe to do so,” said Pres Henne, Gulfstream’s senior vice president for programs, engineering and test. The airframer noted that all other certification and production work on the program would continue. Earlier this week, Jay Johnson, chairman and CEO of parent company General Dynamics expressed his sympathy for the families of the crew, along with his confidence in the 650 program. The accident G650, S/N 6002, had accumulated more than 425 flight hours since it first flew in February last year.

[787FOCAL]

One of the pilots was named Dave Mccollum in case anyone knew him.

[GVFlyer]

David McCollum was a flight-test engineer.

[Graybeard]

That name Dave McCollum is spookily similar to Dave McGollum (sp?), who was copilot of the flight test Canadair that was lost over Edwards in about 1980. The FTE bailed ok; Dave bailed almost too late, and was in hospital six months recovering from broken legs, etc. The Capt didn't get out. I met Dave in about 1983, when he was FAA pilot DER.

GB

[theficklefinger]

Maybe someone can elaborate on 'unstick testing'.

Would that be similar to holding the yoke back on departure and trying to find the lowest airspeed the plane comes off into ground effect? Or is that more of a dynamic yank back type of maneuver to get the plane into ground effect?

Also, 'envelope protection'...that set up in a flight computer somewhere in fly by wire aircraft?

[FCeng84]

I have no connection to Gulfstream and thus my comments are not specific to this event.

Vmu is the minimum unstick speed. It is the minimum speed at which the airplane can generate enough lift with its tail on the ground to takeoff. This speed ends up being the basis for some of the takeoff operational speeds and associated field length requirements.

The testing to demonstrate / determine Vmu involves rotating early and having the tail in contact with the ground at the time that liftoff occurs. The trick is to get the tail down at just the right moment so that it does not drag too much and yet the demonstrated Vmu is as low as possible. Tail skids (a suitable block of wood) are often used during this testing.

I am aware of control law provisions on non-Gulfstream fly-by-wire airplanes that reduce the likelihood of an inadvertent tailstrike during takoff, but I don't know of any that completely prevent hitting the tail. To do so would be to reduce the available performance of the airplane and thus in my opinion would not be wise.

[GVFlyer]

That name Dave McCollum is spookily similar to Dave McGollum (sp?), who was copilot of the flight test Canadair that was lost over Edwards in about 1980. The FTE bailed ok; Dave bailed almost too late, and was in hospital six months recovering from broken legs, etc. The Capt didn't get out. I met Dave in about 1983, when he was FAA pilot DER.

GB Dave Gollings, who since his retirement from the FAA has been a consultant DER, was the co-pilot on this CL-600 certification flight.

The jet was Challenger serial number 1001. During stall testing the jet pitched-up and could not be returned to controlled flight without deploying the stall chute.

The least desirable stall characteristic any jet can have is to pitch-up when it stalls, the reason being that the wing can blank out the horizontal stabilizer causing a loss of pitch control and the ability to get the nose down to fly out of the stall. A stall chute, when deployed, gets the nose down to reestablish airflow over the tail and subsequent pitch control. It is then cut away.

The crew could not get rid of the stall chute after getting the nose down. Subsequently, there was insufficient thrust available for sustained flight and controllability was suspect. The three crew members bailed out. Pilot Eric Norman Ronaasen died when his chute did not deploy. Dave who was functioning as the scribe received minor injuries. Flight-test engineer Bill Scott was not injured.

This stall characteristic seems to be emblematic of the breed. During Global Express development while demonstrating recovery from unaccelerated aerodynamic stalls with a FAA test pilot at the controls, the Global also pitched-up and could not be returned to controlled flight without deploying the stall chute.

[rak64]

The least desirable stall characteristic any jet can have is to pitch-up when it stalls, the reason being that the wing can blank out the horizontal stabilizer causing a loss of pitch control and the ability to get the nose down to fly out of the stall.
That is a common explanation. But there is a better one.
Flaps settings are not only alter chambers it alter as well average incidence angle.
Assume the fuselage itself acts as a wing.
That can lead to situations in which the wing produce less lift than the wing.
the scenario is at low IAS and at low flap settings the fuselage can produce more lift than the elevator can counteract.Supercritical wings are knows (esp. the earliest) for poor lift creation, what increase the effects. That lead into a not controllable but stable situation, in that the wing itself isn't stalled, called superstall. During landing the flaps are set, running the wing at notable higher angle of attack than the fuselage, so that the fuselage can't produce lift.
I used x-plane for investigation the flying wing and lather on together with a fuselage formed from wing shape. I discovered severe problems with liftoff and also in diving, when the fuselage produce lift (in that case-negative lift).
That isn't a suspect into the case, just a comment into the general relation. If more discussion about this, admins split into a own tread.

[atakacs]

Apparently flight tests resumed a few days ago with airframe 6001.

Any news about the Roswell crash ?