Aircraft down, Lancefield, Vic [Archive]

mickjoebill

9th Apr 2016, 11:03

Very sad - PIC very (as in super) experienced Capt and an absolute champion of safety and emergency procedures. A/c was exceptionally well maintained and well equipped.
...AT

Lack of spread of debris, ground witness marks and the size of the cordoned off area would indicate a pancake impact?

What are spin or recovery characteristics of the Brumby?

I was on Mount Macedon at the time, the weather in the area was calm and sunny, a beautiful day..;(

Mickjoebill

training wheels

9th Apr 2016, 11:12

Very sad - PIC very (as in super) experienced Capt and an absolute champion of safety and emergency procedures. A/c was exceptionally well maintained and well equipped.

Condolences to his family and the family of the pax.

AT
Was he a retired TAA Capt by any chance? If so, I met him many years ago at Sunbury airfield. Condolences to his family.

cowl flaps

9th Apr 2016, 11:26

Was he a retired TAA Capt by any chance?

'was a former Ansett Captain'.

Squawk7700

9th Apr 2016, 11:33

Oh dear. Instructor and student, Terry Otway, CFI of the flying school. Both pilots, doing a GA to RAA conversion. Story updated to include "spiral dive." If anyone could fly a plane well it was Terry.

Captain Garmin

9th Apr 2016, 13:46

I found Terry a wonderful helpful instructor and true gentleman in all manners. He was also a very conservative and careful pilot and imparted that onto others.

I hope for a detailed investigation shared publicly so that I can learn a final lesson or two from an old (not bold) pilot and friend.

You'll be sorely missed by many Terry.

CG

By George

9th Apr 2016, 20:42

One of the best Check Captains from the Ansett era. A true gentleman, gone, but the memories of the good times live forever.

Deaf

10th Apr 2016, 16:01

Mods might not like this

O' f*** RIP etc – but there need to be changes in reporting

Am inThailand with dental so on Novocaine and Scotch maybe back in time to put on the suit

My understanding of the facts is:

A/C: FAR 23 cettified

PIC: Experienced - COMMENT – Have had many converstations with him regardings stallss pins etc (see my posts about accidental spin in my RAA J160)

STUDENT – GA pilot doing RAA conversion (in what RAA rate as a High Performance a/c) – COMMENT - Unlikely to be PIC incapitation

LOCATION About where I would go out of Penfield to give me nice margin AGL for stalls

All of this requires a proper investiagtion. Useless as ASTB often is it is better than a VICPOL investigation (maybe with RAA assistance) so some turkey of a coroner can make a meanenless report in 202?

This system is a direct threat to my life and anyone who flies RAA

Novacaine has woth off now

spinex

11th Apr 2016, 00:01

Last I heard the ATSB are investigating, but given an apparent high speed impact, fire, no CVR or FDR and apparently no aviation experienced, eye witnesses, the possibility exists that they won't have much more to go on than what we can glean from the press reports.

I remember my own GA to RAA conversion and cocking up an incipient spin recovery - thinking back on it, a loose camera, fire extinguisher, headset bag etc flying into the footwell could have made the situation difficult to recover from. Yes they should all be securely stowed, but things work loose and many aircraft don't have any real way to secure loose items anyway.

I quite agree about the coroners reports though, with a couple of exceptions they have only the haziest appreciation of the activity they are investigating, an over developed god complex and are prone to getting diverted into irrelevant side issues.

Dick Gower

11th Apr 2016, 01:07

The significance of this accident is that it happened to somebody with the experience, attitude and ability of Terry Otway. He was a straight shooter who will be sorely missed.

Squawk7700

11th Apr 2016, 01:20

A/C: FAR 23 certfied

I can't find any references to this.

Leadsled makes references to them as being "tested" here and "meeting" the design standards but I can't see anything about them actually being certified. Happy to be corrected.

http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/555328-exactly-why-would-should-you-buy-not-buy-brumby.html

Jabawocky

11th Apr 2016, 05:28

Spinex
Last I heard the ATSB are investigating, but given an apparent high speed impact, fire, no CVR or FDR

Did this aircraft have DYNON glass panels? I think it might have based on others I have seen.

If so, they have a very good record in surviving crash/fire events and the ATSB and Dynon have successfully retrieved all manner of flight data before. If that is the case they will have a very good picture of what went wrong.

Dora-9

11th Apr 2016, 05:44

The significance of this accident is that it happened to somebody with the experience, attitude and ability of Terry Otway. He was a straight shooter who will be sorely missed. As I'd expect from Dick, absolutely spot-on.

Sunfish

11th Apr 2016, 21:21

Looked at Brumby once. From what I saw on the website, it didn't pass the smell test. The Chinese connection underlined business naivety and the "prop jet" and Cirrus comparisons indicated a certain technical naivety.

Furthermore, are RAA teaching spinning?

spinex

11th Apr 2016, 22:48

Well then I guess the ATSB et al can all go home - our little ray of sunshine didn't like the smell of it. Actually the Brumby is one of the more robust RA offerings, almost overly so given the weight constraints and it generally enjoys a good reputation. And no the RA Aus operations manual hasn't changed - intentional spinning remains verboten and strangely enough nowhere has it been suggested that this is what they were doing. A fumbled stall recovery, leading to a spin is one of the more likely scenarios.

Squawk7700

12th Apr 2016, 01:32

Sunfish - Looked at Brumby once. From what I saw on the website, it didn't pass the smell test. The Chinese connection underlined business naivety and the "prop jet" and Cirrus comparisons indicated a certain technical naivety.

What do you mean by Looked at Brumby once?

Was this before you started building your Zenith CH 750 or whatever model it is? If so, you have a shady timeline recollection Sunfish. The Brumby announcement regarding China came about on August 24th 2014 and your blog says that you started your Zenith in around March 2013.

Brumby Aircraft Signs China Deal (http://www.australianflying.com.au/news/brumby-aircraft-signs-china-deal)

This feels eerily similar to this one: http://www.pprune.org/pacific-general-aviation-questions/480371-plane-crash-bundaberg.html

airtags

12th Apr 2016, 04:45

had the glass

Sunfish

12th Apr 2016, 22:35

From memory, Skyview software from edition 13.0 has flight data logging capability.

I am wrong about the Brumby too - it was the Lightwing website that didn't pass the smell test. Software, electronics, cars, catamarans and ...aircraft?????

Godot64

13th Apr 2016, 09:34

it was the Lightwing website that didn't pass the smell test. Software, electronics, cars, catamarans and ...aircraft?????

Best you don't look into Textron too closely then - they have financial services, fuel systems, tools, electronics, aero engines and lawnmowers, as well as aeroplanes large and small, helicopters, and simulators.

I reckon diversification is the name of the game in aviation now, unless you're Cirrus (wholly owned by the People's Republic of China), or Piper (wholly owned by the Sultan of Brunei). While a single-minded focus on aviation is admirable, it carries undeniable financial risk.

Ultralights

13th Apr 2016, 12:03

you talking the Hughes lightwing? Howard is a very knowledgable aircraft builder. and an all round good bloke as well. drop in and say Hi and have a look around his factory next time your in Lismore.

A37575

13th Apr 2016, 12:39

A fumbled stall recovery, leading to a spin is one of the more likely scenarios

It is hard to fumble a stall recovery when most LSA are designed not to drop a wing at the point of stall. Most LSA simply mush gently down with no discernible wing drop. My understanding is the RAA syllabus of training includes stall recovery from a dropped wing.

To be compliant with this published requirement, there are instructors who deliberately force the aircraft into grossly improbable attitudes then apply rudder to manually force a wing drop while the LSA still had adequate flying speed. Airframe stress results and in the long term can lead to serious consequences including component failure.

With many GA and RAA instructors adhering to the hoary old (incorrect) teaching of picking up a dropped wing with rudder, the scene is set for a potentially deadly combination of slow speed near the stall and excessive rudder deflection which is the recipe for a spin. Some LSA engines require the throttle to be held firmly back against a spring in order to obtain idle power. This is because there is often a tendency for the throttle to creep forward unless firmly held back. Worse still, if some power is left on, it can lead into a flat spin.

It is good practice during a preflight briefing on stalling to discuss the correct recovery from a wing drop at the point of stall. However it is not good instructor practice to then artificially and deliberately place the aircraft into gross upset attitudes simply to meet a compliance requirement in an aircraft designed with benign stalling characteristics.

LexAir

14th Apr 2016, 05:30

A37575, I was taught, quite correctly, many years ago when doing aerobatics that one does not "pick up a dropped wing with rudder" one stops further yaw with rudder. Could you please explain why, when the wing is stalled, stopping further yaw with rudder is incorrect?

Clare Prop

14th Apr 2016, 06:03

Getting airspeed back is a higher priority. The aircraft will do that by itself, and get close to balanced, if the pilot would stop doing whatever they were doing to artificially create the situation in the first place.

Stopping further yaw with rudder is correct in a fully developed spin but most aircraft can maintain roll control through a stall and will only be yawing if the pilot is giving it a bootfull of rudder and has put it out of balance deliberately.

Cloudee

14th Apr 2016, 09:05

It is hard to fumble a stall recovery when most LSA are designed not to drop a wing at the point of stall. Most LSA simply mush gently down with no discernible wing drop. My understanding is the RAA syllabus of training includes stall recovery from a dropped wing.

A37575, you need to get out and fly a few more RAAus aircraft if you think this. Quite a few will bite you if you stall out of balance.

A37575

14th Apr 2016, 14:39

A37575, you need to get out and fly a few more RAAus aircraft if you think this. Quite a few will bite you if you stall out of balance.

You have misunderstood the point I am trying to make. There is a big difference between practicing stalls on aircraft that will always drop a wing sharply at point of stall (think some war-birds) and then doing the same with aircraft that merely waffle in a stall and by design simply don't normally drop a wing sharply.

But to deliberately throw around an LSA over the sky and abuse it with ridiculous unusual attitudes and throw in a boot-full of rudder, all to pretend its a vicious aeroplane that drops a wing at the stall, is not only poor airmanship, but a potential hazard to the next bloke to fly it.

A37575

14th Apr 2016, 14:47

Could you please explain why, when the wing is stalled, stopping further yaw with rudder is incorrect?

You have got me there because I cannot locate that quote on anything I have written on the subject.

Tankengine

15th Apr 2016, 03:43

Everyone needs good stall/spin training.
The standard in GA generally is terrible, if RAA cannot do spin training at all then you need to go to a gliding club or GA aerobatic school and get the training regardless.
Sometimes the most begnign aircraft will bite under some circumstances. (C of G, power on, etc)

LeadSled

15th Apr 2016, 08:48

With many GA and RAA instructors adhering to the hoary old (incorrect) teaching of picking up a dropped wing with rudder,A37575 et al.,
The above must be forgiven, as they are only complying with the "Competency Standard" published by CASA for handling a "dropped wing".
Actually, in the real world of real aeroplanes ( or is it "airplanes") I would very strongly suggest you employ the technique applicable to the aeroplane.

Sometimes the most begnign aircraft will bite under some circumstances. (C of G, power on, etc)

Tankengine,
Too true, try a "good old C-172, at aft C.of G with landing flap ( particularly the "barn door flaps) --- just about where you will be with Mum and the kids packed in for a weekend away ---- it will, with very minor mishandling, flick on its back.

Everyone needs good stall/spin training. The standard in GA generally is terrible, if RAA cannot do spin training at all then you need to go to a gliding club or GA aerobatic school and get the training regardless.

I could not agree more.

Tootle pip!!

PS: The Brumby 600 has impeccable handling compared to almost anything, it complies with current FAR 23 handling standards. Keith Engelesman gave it the tick, and he is a very tough judge.

By George

15th Apr 2016, 22:01

I hope something comes out of the investigation that will prevent this happening again. I knew Terry well, if he could get caught out, anybody can. My bones feel a 'flat-spin' that failed to recover. Terry would have known the correct recovery technique so why didn't it come out? One would think side-by-side seating should eliminate the aft C of G trap.
The Safety Guru's have given us High Vis Vests and prohibit us from flying with a tube of toothpaste but have removed spin training from the syllabus along with certification of spin recovery. Mad, totally nuts in my opinion.
I know in the Grumman AA1 the spar is used as a tank and under certain conditions the fuel in a spin goes outwards towards the tips and can cause the spin to stabilise. Does the Brumby have a conventional fuel tank? I have spun many aircraft and they are all different in some ways and the differences shouldn't be unknown.

airtags

16th Apr 2016, 02:44

Following up on the tragic accident - a funeral for Captain Terry Otway and a celebration of his enormous contribution to aviation, over many years will be held on Friday 22nd April, 11am at Penfield (Sunbury) Airfield. 295 Settlement Road, Sunbury. Ops will be suspended at the airfield from 1000 local

Centaurus

16th Apr 2016, 14:40

Quote:

With many GA and RAA instructors adhering to the hoary old (incorrect) teaching of picking up a dropped wing with rudder,
A37575 et al.,

The above must be forgiven, as they are only complying with the "Competency Standard" published by CASA for handling a "dropped wing"..

Interesting point. On the other hand the CASA Flight Instructors Manual states:

Quote..RECOVERY WITHOUT POWER
Control column forward to un-stall the wings. As the
speed increases ease out of the dive.
Emphasize that if a wing drops, rudder is used to prevent
yaw into the direction of the lowered wing. The wing is
raised with aileron when it is un-stalled.

RECOVERY WITH POWER
Brief the student that the recovery using power is similar
to that when no power is used with the addition that full
power is applied at the commencement of recovery. Point
out that you will be demonstrating that use of power results
in recovery being made with a much decreased height loss
compared with the recovery without use of power.
It is important to stress that power, if used too late,
i.e. when the nose of the aeroplane has dropped below
the horizon, will result in an increased loss of height.
Stress that the recovery using power is the normal
method of recovering from a stalled condition of flight.
Unquote.

john_tullamarine

17th Apr 2016, 09:18

Stress that the recovery using power is the normal
method of recovering from a stalled condition of flight.

... but should go on to include

(a) at low level (AF447 is a good example of why ..)

(b) and where ground contact is a likely outcome.

It remains a pity that the ops and certification folks don't have coffee often enough to get a straight story on this and other subjects ..

djpil

17th Apr 2016, 10:02

It remains a pity that the ops and certification folks don't have coffee often enough to get a straight story on this and other subjects
Interesting you stated that as I had the same thought while at a recent flight test certification seminar. Certification guys had no idea of the relevant changes via Part 61. FOIs etc I spoke to in the crew room (so-called by the presenter - others might call it a lunch room) were intrigued by our group and wondered what it was all about then expressed a keen interest in participating in a future one. But they need a special seminar - not the current rules but all of the differing certification standards that apply to aircraft in current use.

People seem to latch on to just one part of cert reqts applicable at one point in time. eg normal category spin - one turn to recover after a spin of one turn - nope, it may actually be much longer from a spin aggravated by gross mishandling.

agilekhan

19th Apr 2016, 01:32

I've read on this thread that, the way to recover from a "dropped wing" stall is to apply full rudder. I'm a pilot in training and was being trained by Terry himself, we never practised that stall. Having said that I recall Terry mentioning to me when they first bought the Brumby and flew it in to Penfield, the rudder wire snapped on the way.

The school had it repaired since but when I read about the stall recovery manoeuvre, I couldn't help but think about that incident. Could a rudder failure have caused the crash?

john_tullamarine

19th Apr 2016, 08:59

a recent flight test certification seminar

drat ... I thought that was on at the end of April .. intended to go as I haven't been to one for a few years .. maybe next time around.

People seem to latch on to just one part of cert reqts applicable at one point in time

Hence our oft-exhorted story here that the TCDS design standard makeup needs to be reviewed as a matter of course.

Worse is the situation where a person in authority latches onto a design standard requirement where there exist multiple options .. and then decides that the one which applies is the one which appeals .. regardless of the fact that the OEM chose an option incompatibly different in handling considerations. Has caused me heartache in the past ..

the way to recover from a "dropped wing" stall is to apply full rudder

First time I observed this technique was shortly prior to first solo. The instructor put in a bootful of top rudder and within the space of an eye blink, I was observing the ground through the top of the windscreen.

Not a good general technique unless the POH indicates, specifically, that it might be required.

allthecoolnamesarego

19th Apr 2016, 12:47

Agilekhan,

Only ever put in enough rudder TO PREVENT FURTHER YAW.
You are not picking up the wing, you are stopping the yaw.
Stall,
Simultaneously lower the nose sufficient to unstall the wings (usually a release of the back pressure is sufficient) and increase power
Rudder to orevent further yaw
When the wings are unstalked, level the wings WITH AILERON
Recover from dive.

Stalls are not scary, go a d practice with an instructor, then practice by yourself. I tend to practice one at least every third flught or so.

agilekhan

20th Apr 2016, 00:33

Squawk7700

20th Apr 2016, 01:27

Agilekhan, I would suggest that your above suggestion may be bordering on shaky legal grounds for anyone to comment definitively. I would suggest that based on experience, that crash investigators would investigate aircraft primary controls as pretty much their first port of call, before the wreckage is relocated where other components such as engine are further inspected to determine if it was delivering power at the point of impact etc.