Rex incident YSSY
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Perth
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since when is a pan a mayday? When reported by GT!:
Rex plane issues mayday call before emergency landing at Sydney Airport | Perth Now
Rex plane issues mayday call before emergency landing at Sydney Airport | Perth Now
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....
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....
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.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
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.
I'm pretty sure that P3 was flown by an exchange officer... possibly US Navy?
Sad end for a plane IsDon.
^^ 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.
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.
The Canadian exchange officer & captain flying at the time was but one of the 'slices of Swiss cheese' in the event's evolution.🤔😉
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Sydney
Posts: 470
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in a house
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A little South of North
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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"!
I'm sure the pax said "sod councelling, where's the bar"!
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.
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: World
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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?
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?