King Air 200 down at KICT - 4 Fatal

[HS125]

Reportedly hit one of the FlightSafety buildings....

WATCH LIVE: Four killed, others missing in plane crash near ICT | Local News - Home (http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/911-dispatchers-confirm-plane-down-at-midcontinent-airport/29429372)

Further reports saying they were trying to return to the airport.

[His dudeness]

Blimey.

The crewchief of our mx shop is there right now for recurrent training.

I just hope he is unharmed...

Edit: just got a call, he is okay....

[HS125]

Loos like it went into the simulator halls right on the north-east most corner of the building;

Not looking good for the 4 still missing.

Wichita, KS - Plane Crashes At Kansas Airport, At Least 4 Dead (http://www.vosizneias.com/182729/2014/10/30/wichita-ks-plane-crashes-at-kansas-airport-at-least-4-dead/)

[Niner Lima Charlie]

Just watched a live NTSB report on what they have so far.

Summary:
Three eye witnesses provided similar reports, the airplane started veering to the left after lift off, continued to turn left and impacted the top of the large building.

Building is unsafe and they are working on the structure so the fire department and NTSB can get inside, maybe tomorrow.

Three victims are still inside the building, they were inside a simulator when the King Air 200 crashed and burned.

The airplane was fitted with a CVR. It also has a flight performance recorder, not a FDR, but a digital recorder that might provide some information.

Airplane was fresh out of maintenance and just completed two maintenance test flights with nothing unusual noted in the logbooks. Airplane was being flown to a paint and interior modification center in Arkansas.

Pilot was a retired ATC tower controller, with over 3000 hours. No co-pilot.

[stilton]

Sad, but talk about ironic,


Crashing into a simulator building..

[ATC Watcher]

Met the pilot a few years back, Mark was a retired US controller, well known ,he received twice a award for assisting flights in difficulties as a controller, used to ferry aircraft in his retirement time. Intial reports/rumors say engine failure on take off, this can be a handful when you are alone , which was the case here.
The 3 in the SIM now reported dead as well. Very, very sad.

[ShyTorque]

As an ex simulator instructor, this tragic accident seems bizarre in the extreme to me.

Pilots go training in a flight simulator to carry out stuff that might be seen as too risky in the air. To get taken out whilst doing so in the simulator..... I really cannot think that this sort of accident has ever occurred before.

[His dudeness]

Intial reports/rumors say engine failure on take off, this can be a handful when you are alone , which was the case here.

Yes and no... it is a single pilot airplane after all. Autofeather should been fitted (if the S/N I have googled for the airplane is correct) and should be of great help for that case.
But sitting here in my armchair...is easy. I´m very thankful that I had never to prove that I could handle an engine failure yet. I sure hope it stays that way....

[army_av8r]

One possibility seems to keep going through my head... but since i have not flown a B200 I really cant even begin to dissect it. What are the chances of the prop going into Beta or Reverse while in flight? what protections does the airplane have? and would this be a flyable scenario? I would imagine an empty Kingair, with a few miles of open space and runway, & with a respected Aviator would do OK with an engine out scenario, but something like an engine going into reverse, that seems very difficult to handle down low, over the ramp and buildings. I was at Yingling Aviation the day before the accident, very sad to hear of a loss, especially so close to home.

[HS125]

Latest from the FSI site is the following programs are effected

Caravan G600/G1000, XLS, XLS+, Mustang, VII, M2, CJ3+, CJ4.

Looks as if the others at FSI Cessna/Wichita continuing on schedule.

[Crosswind Limits]

Dreadful accident! Underwent 2 initials and a recurrent at the Cessna Learning Center a few years back. Happy memories of my times there. Very sad for those involved! :(

[Cirrus Falcon]

First, while an engine out situation right after takeoff is tough, a King Air 200 should be able to climb on one engine. So why did it go down? M/E pilots are trained specifically for this emergency (not saying it is easy). Second, with one engine working, why put the plane into a very prominent building? It is Kansas, one big landing zone. I am not a conspiracy-minded guy, but it just does not add up. I hope NTSB will look at the possibility this was intentional. If so, it will be very bad for our industry - I hope it was just a combination of bad luck for the folks on the ground and some set of factors that caused the pilot to be unable to at least maintain altitude on one engine. Turnoprops are so reliable I will be very interested to hear why this one shut down.

[tommoutrie]

That ranks as the most stupid post I have ever read on Prune (which is saying something). I did my first jet type rating in the CJ sim at Wichita many years ago and I find it incredible that people have died whilst training in a simulator. Its also tragic that someone has died whilst flying a plane but thats a risk we all understand to a certain extent.

Whilst I am shocked by incident itself I can accept that its happened and it will have root causes and an event chain that has resulted in this terrible event.

But I find it impossible to understand how, a few days after this awful accident, someone can be so stupid as to post on a pilots forum that a pilot has done this deliberately. I honestly believe there are some professional pilots who still contribute to this site but they are becoming few and far between and you are definitely not one of them.

[ATC Watcher]

Cirrus Falcon, first post, probably last one too.
Total bull if you knew the guy, and totally unrespectful :*.

[Cirrus Falcon]

Tommutrie, I am currently training for my commercial certificate, so no - I am not (yet) a professional pilot. And my speculation (all it was) is hardly unique - I heard the same comment from an airline pilot and CFI. Most pilots are cool, but what about that guy in Texas a few years ago who flew his single engine into the IRS building? We are not all saints. Save your outrage, and do not call people "stupid" just because they say something you disagree with.

[Cirrus Falcon]

ATC Watcher, Did you know the pilot? I did not intend to be (dis)respectful. The fact remains that a powerful twin turboprop went down on one engine with only one occupant, when the science says it should be able to climb...and he hit a prominent building rather than putting it down in a field, or a highway, etc. sometimes people do unexplainable things. Don't make everything personal, be rational. Are you saying NTSB should not consider all possibilities?

[Cirrus Falcon]

TWT, turboprops are more reliable than my spelling, for sure. Thanks, friend.

[galaxy flyer]

Cirrus Falcon,

As a new CPL, you have a lot to learn about aviation. Wait til you've lost friends thru "inexplicable"accidents, then post.

[ATC Watcher]

Cirrus, yes I have met the guy . I said this earlier.
plus we have audio of the ATC communactions.."just lost the left engine "

For the rest I attach a comment on another forum made by an instructor at FlightSafety International :
The preliminary rumors that I'm hearing are that auto-feather failed and the pilot could not feather the engine. If that's the case, you can throw out your armchair quarterbacking. (Which really you shouldn't be doing until you have ALL the FACTS anyway).

And listen to Galaxy Flyer and some others here who have far more experience , and like me probably also lost a few good friends over the years .
Your remark : " when the science says it should be able to climb." would make me laugh if it was not in such tragic circumstances.

[deefer dog]

Cirrus Falcon,

You managed to resist the temptation to post from your join date of March until today. I suggest you wait another eight months before highlighting just how very little you know about aviation, and in the meantime reflect on the crass stupidity of what you just typed.

[glendalegoon]

NOW HOLD ON A SECOND

Some have attacked the posts by an up and coming (in training) pilot called cirrus falcon.

I've been around for quite awhile and when I FIRST heard the EARLY reports, the building was described as an FAA Flight Safety District OFFICE and not a FLIGHT SAFETY SIM CENTER>

I recalled the pilot who crashed his airplane deliberately into a US Treasury/IRS building as a protest on taxes and I had passing thought that someone MIGHT, KEY WORD MIGHT, have been angry at the FAA for something.

SUBSEQUENT reports had me change my mind.


BUT there are some good questions here, and I mentioned earlier that one computer graphic SHOWED THE WHEELS STILL DOWN and the LEFT PROP FEATHERED>

YOU need to get the GEAR UP in just about any twin if you lose an engine in order to get it to climb.

DOES ANYONE know if the gear was found, up or down, in the debris?

IN the grand scheme of all turboprops, the KING AIR is not really that tough to fly. Tough to fly well perhaps!

SO dear CIRRUS FALCON I hope you ignore the posts of some on this thread. BUT let us all wait to find out a few more facts.

AND if anyone has some new facts, please post them!

POSITIVE RATE< GEAR UP!

[Cirrus Falcon]

Ok, ATC. Let's stick with feelings and "rumors", and ignore science. Got it. Just chuck out that POH. Wait, the POH says one should get about 600fpm climb on one engine even at max weight. The POH does not address un-feathered bad engine, as far as I can see, but I found pilot reports that not feathering the bad engine was only marginally worse. As my first post said, I hope this is "just" a tragic accident, but I don't let emotions get in the way of wanting to know WHY innocent people on the ground died.

[Cirrus Falcon]

Defer Dog, why so unpleasant? Sorry you disagreed with my post, which was hardly mean spirited. Your rudeness is not a rebuttal. Get a grip.

[His dudeness]

but I found pilot reports that not feathering the bad engine was only marginally worse.

is simply bull$hite ESPECIALLY when close to VMCA. With 4 blade props feathering is essential not only for climb performance but to maintain controlability... if this unfortunate pilot has gone below VMCA (maybe autofeather u/s or not switched on) his chances were slim.

Forgetitng to retract the gear gives less of a problem than not feathering. Just reduces your rate. Given the location (having been in the same building umpteen times) I´d say it very much like a classic loss of control, airplane turning left with ever steeper bank.

The 3 blade version was way more forgiving in the same scenario, thats why Autofeather is mandatory on anything with more than 3 blades on a B200.

With full fuel and one pilot modern B200 are very close to MTOW.

[tommoutrie]

I'll give you a reason not to post something as stupid as that. The loved ones and friends of those who have lost their lives will be searching for a reason right now. They are likely to find this site and the suggestion that this was a deliberate act will be offensive and upsetting to them. Also, you are talking absolute rubbish. If the failed engine wasn't feathered the aircraft would have been bloody difficult to fly, let alone make it climb. I'd love to see the reference where you got the idea that feathering makes little difference.

I've had hundreds of engine failures, engine separations, compressor surges, electrical failures, hydraulic failures, control jams etc, some of them in the very hall that has been destroyed by the aircraft thats just crashed into it. The rest have also generally been in simulators. Its a certainty that this pilot lost his life doing everything he could to stay alive. Its clear from a quick search about him that he was a dedicated aviation professional and he was well respected by those who knew him. I remember having muffins and special "keep awake during the afternoon session" coffee with one of the instructors who has lost his life and he was an extremely likeable, knowlegeable, friendly helpful bloke who I know will be missed by his family and all who worked with him and I'll tell you something that he is likely to have quietly said
"you learn in this business if you listen more, talk less, and think hard"

[20driver]

This accident illustrates an interesting play on the single vs twin safety. ( I know at least one person who will not fly in a Single, "Twins are safer" )
Turbine engines are very reliable but they do fail. In this case if the plane had been say a PC-12 in all likelihood the pilot would have walked, quite possibly putting the plane down on the runway. (Also if it was a random failure - he would have had 50% less chance of the engine failure in the first place. )

I remember seeing a video of a King Air (pretty sure it was Brazil) flying single engine in the pattern and burying itself on the base to final. If it had been a single the pilot would have had no choice but to do an off field landing. As long as he maintained control things would likely have been OK.

I have never flown a twin but could imagine that a real life failure such as described here would be a handful. He probably only had a few seconds to make his moves and even then there might not have been anything he could have done. I'm pretty sure the NTSB will get to the bottom of it

20driver

Cirrus Falcon - " why so unpleasant" - suggest you read what you wrote. Your posts show lack of technical skill. Social skill are even lower.

[TheiC]

I have never flown a twin but could imagine that a real life failure such as described here would be a handful
Some of us who have, and have trained to fly them appropriately for years, and been tested, are more content doing so than cruising around the world waiting for the unplanned descent to mother earth which surely follows every engine failure in a single.


Having dealt successfully with engine failures in twins, from historic types to turboprops (never in a turbojet, though I have done OEI flying including landings and go-arounds in them), I'd rather rely on my training and skills, than decide that those things are lacking and resign myself to being competent only to fly a single.


I think that reflects how I would like to care for my passengers, too.

[Mad (Flt) Scientist]

With regard to the speculation.... it's interesting that aircraft accidents, at least of high profile, are so infrequent that we almost seem to expect an 'extraordinary' explanation; we don't just 'expect them to happen' it seems.

Personally, without knowing the pilot at all, or anything except what's been stated generally, I would find the theory of a deliberate 'kamikaze' type crash incredible for a number of reasons.

No-one has come forward to suggest the pilot was unstable, unwell, financially troubled or any of these 'markers' that typically come out after a 'suicide'
There appears to be no explicit direct link between the pilot and the facility he hit, other than the fact that both were 'in aviation'
To me the most telling: the aircraft is described as having had an engine failure. Not only are there plausible scenarios where this could have lead to loss of control, but as far as i can recall, no proven 'suicide' event has occurred other than with a fully operational aircraft. That's hardly a surprise - if you intend a dramatic 'end' then you don't need a failure, you already decided your course, and you don't need to induce a failure to provide an 'alibi'.

[army_av8r]

OK, I'm a firm believer that speculating at the round table on Monday morning is a necessary part of pilot training and mentoring, and that even though speculation doesnt change the outcome, it can certainly provide some relevent Table Talk for new and seasoned pilots alike... but to suggest that a well respected Aviator (who transmitted a hasty MAYDAY call during the emergency) would then deliberately crash a plane is ludicrous. I know that this sort of incident has happened before... but it had all the indicators of a preplanned attack, this has NONE. I still speculate that this was more than just a "simple" engine failure on takeoff, but more likely a loss of Prop control or a failure to reverse thrust(which would be worse case IMO) maybe even a simple engine failure, without the ability to Autofeather for whatever reason. I really would be surprised if it was simply an EO on takeoff. but then again, there isn't much of a worse point for that to happen either. I respect people who offer speculation to spark meaningful learning and conversation, because it reminds people to go back and review there own procedures, and knowledge base... but don't bring ridiculous ideas here.

[MungoP]

Let's try to keep this in perspective.. The a/c does not achieve X FPM after losing an engine on take-off.. the a/c does not achieve anything without inputs from the pilot.
What the aircraft 'can' do, with a company test-pilot on a good day who is knowingly going to demonstrate the EFATO characteristics and achieves X FPM climb is not what the average pilot is likely to achieve when faced with a once in a career real life incident where the first few vital seconds are wasted in confusion.
If this poor guy got it wrong it's quite likely that many others out there will also have got it wrong.
As an ex-FlightSafety instructor with 3 yrs of sim training professional pilots under my belt I can testify that it takes practice on a regular basis to achieve a decent standard of handling an EFATO situation and that's when we know what's coming. In real life this event will in all probability never be experienced by the overwhelming majority of pilots flying modern turbo-props/turbo-jets. Without regular training in a quality sim once might be one time too many.

[belowradar]

Just back from C90 GTI Kingair training in. Wichita at flightsafety

Very shocking accident. One instructor is recovering in hospital.

Obviously I paid attention when it came to EFATO drills and I saw for myself that if you do nothing else but fly the correct pitch attitude the aircraft is controllable and will climb away. This is true feathered or not , gear up or not, flaps or not. Emphasised by instructor and examiner who both advised concentrate very carefully on achieving and maintaining the correct pitch attitude with wings level.

Saying that it requires a lot of focus and feels weird to not worry about anything else to avoid getting distracted. There is a natural tendency to want to do something such as we are told to do like Gear, flaps etc but there is a short time window of a few seconds whee if you do not nail the attitude you will most likely loose control. Asfter what seems like a long time but is only a matter of a few minutes you can then clean things up. Practice this many times with special emphasis and it works BUT I was expecting the problem and was being coached very carefully on what to do. The first time I reacted "normally" without expecting it I lost control.

Condolences to all of the people who lost loved ones

[Sir Niall Dementia]

As someone said earlier, its all very well in a new aircraft with a company test pilot at the controls. I used to fly the B200 single pilot around Europe, I loved the aeroplane but it was hard work with just me in the front.
If the auto-feather went on strike when the engine did then the pilot would be faced with massive drag, select the right attitude for the single engine climb, not yet realising/knowing that auto-feather hasn't done it's job, but expecting it to and VMCA+10 will be almost impossible to maintain. Add in the fact that after a few years of service no aircraft is as aerodynamically aligned as it is when it leaves the factory and you may just be adding one or two knots to the problem. Add in the "I don't believe it!" couple of seconds and everything will start to go wrong mighty quick.


I used to do Citation recurrency training in that building, like all FSI locations it is staffed by dedicated professionals who love to fly. The pilot of the B200 seems to have been a similar person. One day Cirrus Falcon will get to be trained by/fly with such people, then he might realise that his comments have been somewhat offensive, many of us on this site have seen dead friends/colleagues have their skills and standards questioned by amateurs who knew nothing about them or their standards and that this is a PROFESSIONAL PILOTS RUMOUR NETWORK and he isn't a pro yet.


SND

[robbreid]

Cirrus Falcon - quit while your way behind, my only wish is you where just a little smarter than you think you are, so you could truly appreciate how dumb you are - as we are aware - your posts are disrespectful, uncalled for and go against all facts as known.

As for the accident - aircraft stayed on the roof, but fuel ignited thru the Cessna Caravan Sim room - lost where a 78 year old FSI instructor - a Russian C208 pilot, and a Wichita based lady operating as a translator for the pilots.

Besides the pilot (fatal) 4 persons where taken to hospital and released that day, a fifth was taken to hospital and remains in serious condition.

[silverknapper]

I'd rather rely on my training and skills, than decide that those things are lacking and resign myself to being competent only to fly a single.


The best statement I've read on prune in years. Well done.:D

[glendalegoon]

NTSB releases preliminary report on last week's deadly plane crash | Local News - Home (http://www.kwch.com/news/local-news/ntsb-releases-preliminary-report-on-last-weeks-deadly-plane-crash/29577468)


things did not go well...gear NOT up...

note reduction of power on good engine

think he got slow, way down low, forgot the gear and bam

[His dudeness]

note reduction of power on good engine

Sorry, but were does it say the good one was reduced ?

One witness observed the airplane shortly after it became airborne and heard a reduction in power on one engine before it entered the left turn. Another witness saw the airplane from about 20 yards away. He said the airplane was in a left turn and approached the hangars east of FSI, then the wings were level as it flew west toward FSI. The airplane's landing gear were "down and locked", the flaps were extended, the rudder was neutral, and the right engine was at full power. The witness did not see the left engine.

[silverknapper]

I'm very surprised at such tripe being published. Who can tell what power an engine is producing from outside an aircraft.

It seems to dispel the theory that Beech were operating it.

[glendalegoon]

error on my part his dudeness..excuse please