Australia, New Zealand & the Pacific Airline and RPT Rumours & News in Australia, enZed and the Pacific

Rex incident YSSY

Old 17th Mar 2017, 10:39
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 3
Since when is a pan a mayday? When reported by GT!:

Rex plane issues mayday call before emergency landing at Sydney Airport | Perth Now
slocs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 10:45
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 584
standby, fact checking
ozbiggles is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 10:51
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Up The 116E, Stbd Turn at 32S...:-)
Age: 78
Posts: 2,718
OOOpppsss... OK OK, I'll go quietly.

When I saw it, it was very corroded, and I am aware of the wing leading edge separating after a severe pull-up, so the 'story' was....

Apols for 'giving' this one to the US Navy....
Ex FSO GRIFFO is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 11:54
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 165
Is it possible that the prop shaft could literally rip itself apart due to an extremely excessive uncontrolled increase in RPM? That's what uncommanded engine operations would mean to me.
logansi is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 12:14
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,049
If the prop seperated in the approx area of the map above. It should be relatively easy to recover, from someone's lounge room, back paddock or garden. If it's in the blue mountains national park, it would be nearly impossible to find.
Ultralights is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 12:22
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Vic
Age: 51
Posts: 438
Isn't the CT7 engine a fixed turbine. Would the FCU be able to keep the RPM under disc explosion level once the prop came off. What sort of torque value do the SAABs use on descent.

Is there any mode of CSU failure that would drive the blades to fine pitch. I would imagine that the drag of accelerating the engine in this case would keep the RPMs much lower than on a PT6.
Ozgrade3 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 12:40
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,923
I'm pretty sure that P3 was flown by an exchange officer... possibly US Navy?
It was. And a repeat of a US Navy P-3 event at Cocos three years earlier that had similar leading edge collapse but landed safely. Interesting report on the investigation into the RAAF event by ARL. Design errors by Lockheed and manufacturing defects in the leading edge ribs part of the story.

Sad end for a plane IsDon.

megan is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 13:18
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 165
^^ I was referring to prop RPM

The main reason I make the point is too me "uncommanded engine operations" (stated to ATC) likely means an increase in power, because a loss/reduction of power would more likely be referenced as failed engine.
logansi is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 13:25
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: down under
Posts: 391
Originally Posted by Parrot Pilot View Post
I'm pretty sure that P3 was flown by an exchange officer... possibly US Navy?
if I recall correctly, the US officer flying had played a significant role, and not a positive one, in the genesis of this disaster. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
cooperplace is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 13:44
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Going nowhere...
Posts: 311
Originally Posted by cooperplace View Post
if I recall correctly, the US officer flying had played a significant role, and not a positive one, in the genesis of this disaster. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
The Canadian exchange officer & captain flying at the time was but one of the 'slices of Swiss cheese' in the event's evolution.🤔😉
Jetsbest is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 16:31
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by Jetsbest View Post
The Canadian exchange officer & captain flying at the time was but one of the 'slices of Swiss cheese' in the event's evolution.🤔😉
Correct, the guy was on exchange from Canada, not the US.

I believe, happy to be corrected, he was also the Aurora display pilot prior to his posting to Australia. Doing air shows in the aircraft. I've been told this by others, I don't know it for certain.
IsDon is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 16:32
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in a house
Posts: 11
SF340 VH-EKT had torque motor issues immediately prior to this incident.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications...aair199201222/

Crew elected to land without going to torque motor lockout. Prop runaway ensued resulting in loss of control and snapping of nose gear on touchdown. Not saying todays incident is similar but the CT7, like any engine, is not infallible.

https://www.geaviation.com/commercia...nes/ct7-engine

It's been around a while and is pretty reliable.

Job well done by the crew. I'm sure Rex will give them a little bit of extra nothing in their pay check as a reward.
shiftpattern is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 17:34
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: POINT NEMO
Posts: 52
Well done job by the crew, as well as ATC and emergency services.
corrigin is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 17:47
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 59
Interesting that they declared it only as a Pan. Then again I suppose they did have full control of the aircraft and they were Ozzies

I'm sure the pax said "sod councelling, where's the bar"!
Pistonprop is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 21:35
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 454
Auto feather.... Pffft... Auto-jettison!!
Car RAMROD is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 22:05
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 252
Did the flight crew call it a pan pan or was that designated by ATC? Nicely managed by all given the additional medical pan pan at similar time. But should both planes have been allowed 16R then the runway check done? As the taxi time from 16L is long for the flight with the medical emergency.
ChrisJ800 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 22:23
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: World
Posts: 1
Originally Posted by ChrisJ800 View Post
Did the flight crew call it a pan pan or was that designated by ATC? Nicely managed by all given the additional medical pan pan at similar time. But should both planes have been allowed 16R then the runway check done? As the taxi time from 16L is long for the flight with the medical emergency.
The problem is the rex aircraft vacating the runway in time for the medical pan
mrred81 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 22:45
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 53
Posts: 385
Has GT come forward with a theory yet?

Was the aircraft turning from upwind to a downwind air mass?

Has ATSB checked Cash Convertors out in western Sydney in case they have Saab prop for sale?
CharlieLimaX-Ray is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 23:25
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Oz
Posts: 517
Aviate, Navigate, Communicate - perhaps by the time they told ATC, they had everything under control and thought Mayday was no longer warranted.
topdrop is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2017, 23:26
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Next door to the neighbor from hell, who believes in chemtrails!
Age: 71
Posts: 1,627
Originally Posted by Raptor090 View Post
Great job to the crew!

Can't wait for the headlines, "ultralight crash lands at Sydney Airport"
I can't wait for the headlines "aircraft are designed to land with only one prop"

DF.
Desert Flower is online now  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.