8 killed in Minnesota plane crash
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8 killed in Minnesota plane crash
Sorry if already posted, I did have a look but couldn't see any reference already..
8 killed in Minnesota plane crash - CNN.com
8 killed in Minnesota plane crash - CNN.com
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Update.
Fortunately Hawker accidents are very rare these days, but this was a very bad accident, obviously weather related. Lots of coverage;
LiveLeak.com - At least 7 dead after small business jet crashed in Minnesota
FlightAware > Discussions :: View topic - N818MV Hawker 800A down in Minneosta accident . . .
ASN Aircraft accident British Aerospace BAe-125-800A N818MV Owatonna Airport, MN (OWA)
LiveLeak.com - At least 7 dead after small business jet crashed in Minnesota
FlightAware > Discussions :: View topic - N818MV Hawker 800A down in Minneosta accident . . .
ASN Aircraft accident British Aerospace BAe-125-800A N818MV Owatonna Airport, MN (OWA)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: MAN
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fortunately Hawker accidents are very rare these days, but this was a very bad accident, obviously weather related
Weather at Owatonna at 09:55 included: wind 170 degrees at 6 knots, broken clouds at 3700 feet, temperature 19 degrees C, pressure 29.83.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Weather related . . .
Raytheon Hawker 800 crashed - Flight ECJ81 crashed
Point well taken. Actually hadn't meant to shoot from the hip, I had just watched CNN reports showing brutal storms in the area at the time.
Depending on which news source, the area had just been hit/or was being hit with a savage storm, as the map above shows.
Point well taken. Actually hadn't meant to shoot from the hip, I had just watched CNN reports showing brutal storms in the area at the time.
Depending on which news source, the area had just been hit/or was being hit with a savage storm, as the map above shows.
Last edited by robbreid; 1st Aug 2008 at 03:06. Reason: updating info . . .
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a first glance it did look like they where racing the storm to the field, however, they obviously circumnavigated the main cell but were still doing 280kts at 2900 ft, slowing down in time to 130kts (I think approach speed)
FlightAware > Live Flight Tracker > Track Log > ECJ81 > 31-Jul-2008 > KACY-KOWA
What anybody could see on earlier live shots, was tire marks leading of the end of the runway, taking out half of the LOC antennas and then kept going in an arc finishing by cartwheeling into the cornfield.
I knew the captain, we used to work for the same flight school years back. These days my company shares the same hangar with his - RIP CJ
FlightAware > Live Flight Tracker > Track Log > ECJ81 > 31-Jul-2008 > KACY-KOWA
What anybody could see on earlier live shots, was tire marks leading of the end of the runway, taking out half of the LOC antennas and then kept going in an arc finishing by cartwheeling into the cornfield.
I knew the captain, we used to work for the same flight school years back. These days my company shares the same hangar with his - RIP CJ
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://static.cbslocal.com/station/w...unications.mp3
Reports were lightning all quadrants and at the very end a report of windshear with 20 knot loss one 1 mile final and 20 knot loss at the runway. Radar showed some nasty weather east of there moving east a couple hours after the crash.
Reports were lightning all quadrants and at the very end a report of windshear with 20 knot loss one 1 mile final and 20 knot loss at the runway. Radar showed some nasty weather east of there moving east a couple hours after the crash.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...little update, locals say weather was NO factor...
I guess (hope) this time we will know what caused the crash. Engines and parts of the fuselage are not burned too bad (actually not at all - I wonder why?).
I guess (hope) this time we will know what caused the crash. Engines and parts of the fuselage are not burned too bad (actually not at all - I wonder why?).
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wild West
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is another metar from the time.
KOWA 311355Z AUTO 32031G42KT TSRA 18/16 A2982 RMK AO2 P0002 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311335Z AUTO 30036G55KT 2SM +TSRA SCT002 SCT014 BKN022 19/17 A2984 RMK AO2 VIS 1V5 P0022 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311355Z AUTO 32031G42KT TSRA 18/16 A2982 RMK AO2 P0002 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311335Z AUTO 30036G55KT 2SM +TSRA SCT002 SCT014 BKN022 19/17 A2984 RMK AO2 VIS 1V5 P0022 LTG DSNT ALQDS
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Minneapolis Star Tribune today says weather was a major factor in the accident . Indicated they landed with a tailwind with major cells 5 miles from airport. Had a similar situation landing to the west at PHX. A headwind on landing switched to a 30 knot tailwind on short final so went around due to a big cell east of the airport flying an MD80.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JetA: the Metar you quoted was not the latest before they landed (sort of).
Before you post (and imply that they landed in that kind of weather) make sure you get the time stamp right. There where two more issued between the storm and the crash:
KOWA 311415Z AUTO 32008KT 10SM TSRA SCT037 BKN045 OVC050 18/16 A2988 RMK AO2 P0003 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311435Z AUTO 18003KT 10SM -VCTSRA SCT038 SCT049 BKN100 18/16 A2985 RMK AO2 P0005 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311455Z AUTO 17006KT 10SM RA SCT018 SCT029 BKN037 19/17 A2983 RMK AO2 P0009 LTG DSNT E THRU S
They came down at 14:44Z after circumnavigating the main cell.
However, the wind obviously shifted on them and they landed with a 6kt tailwind (maybe they didn't even realized it) - that certainly could explain why they landed long and tried to go around (according to the mechanic on the field who witnessed the accident). I think it could even be mechanical trouble on the go-around.
The CVR has been recovered, we will know soon.
I think the storm that went through the area comes handy to the press, so they can write something.
Before you post (and imply that they landed in that kind of weather) make sure you get the time stamp right. There where two more issued between the storm and the crash:
KOWA 311415Z AUTO 32008KT 10SM TSRA SCT037 BKN045 OVC050 18/16 A2988 RMK AO2 P0003 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311435Z AUTO 18003KT 10SM -VCTSRA SCT038 SCT049 BKN100 18/16 A2985 RMK AO2 P0005 LTG DSNT ALQDS
KOWA 311455Z AUTO 17006KT 10SM RA SCT018 SCT029 BKN037 19/17 A2983 RMK AO2 P0009 LTG DSNT E THRU S
They came down at 14:44Z after circumnavigating the main cell.
Preliminary NTSB report:
http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/a...a/02_818MV.txt
WEATHER: KOWA 311455Z AUTO 17006KT 10SM RA SCT018 SCT029 BKN037 19/17 A2983
http://www.faa.gov/data_statistics/a...a/02_818MV.txt
WEATHER: KOWA 311455Z AUTO 17006KT 10SM RA SCT018 SCT029 BKN037 19/17 A2983
The CVR has been recovered, we will know soon.
I think the storm that went through the area comes handy to the press, so they can write something.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wild West
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phil77,
While I agree that was not the WX they landed with, it is an indicator what was around and what type of wind shifts were possible.
As for your suggestion about something mechanical, I would be more inclined to believe that if they were on the ground they probably already had their lift dump deployed before trying to go around. They would have had seconds to get the flaps out of lift dump (70 degrees) and air brake closed before being able to raise the flaps from 45 to 15 for the go around. All of that on a wet 5500 foot runway with a tailwind. The odds were stacked against them with only a few seconds to decide to stay on the ground and go off the end of the runway or try to get her cleaned up and takeoff again with a tailwind.
Either way it was a no win situation.
While I agree that was not the WX they landed with, it is an indicator what was around and what type of wind shifts were possible.
As for your suggestion about something mechanical, I would be more inclined to believe that if they were on the ground they probably already had their lift dump deployed before trying to go around. They would have had seconds to get the flaps out of lift dump (70 degrees) and air brake closed before being able to raise the flaps from 45 to 15 for the go around. All of that on a wet 5500 foot runway with a tailwind. The odds were stacked against them with only a few seconds to decide to stay on the ground and go off the end of the runway or try to get her cleaned up and takeoff again with a tailwind.
Either way it was a no win situation.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: toronto
Posts: 427
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Listening to ATC that I posted previously about the 20 knot loss at 1 mile final, 300 ft, and another 20 knot loss at the runway it isn't the voice of the accident aircraft. Was it the aircraft in front of them? This sounds like a windshear incident. Maybe they tried to salvage the approach then tried to go around. Significant wind currents must have been changing then causing them difficulty because they were VFR for the final phase of their approach.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wild West
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bubblers,
From listening to the recording it seems to me like it was two airport frequencies on that recording. You had the pilots and ATC talking and you had ground talking to an airport maintenance vehicle regarding taxiway G and E.
Owatonna is a Unicom with no ground control and no taxiway G and E. Plus the Wind shear alert was from an aircraft landing on Runway 31 when there is only a runway 30 at Owatonna.
It must be some sort of overlap that is causing confusion.
From the pilots being told that they could expect a 8kt head wind to having a 6 kt tailwind is something that could happen to anyone. What a sad and tragic situation.
From listening to the recording it seems to me like it was two airport frequencies on that recording. You had the pilots and ATC talking and you had ground talking to an airport maintenance vehicle regarding taxiway G and E.
Owatonna is a Unicom with no ground control and no taxiway G and E. Plus the Wind shear alert was from an aircraft landing on Runway 31 when there is only a runway 30 at Owatonna.
It must be some sort of overlap that is causing confusion.
From the pilots being told that they could expect a 8kt head wind to having a 6 kt tailwind is something that could happen to anyone. What a sad and tragic situation.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JetA, I'm glad you clarified that, its just that too many people posting stuff like "the news said the weather was to blame" and your post did not come with any explanation.
...and I agree with your "lift-dump-explanation"; after posting the above, my boss and I talked about the same issue. It sounds like a valid scenario that they tried to go-around with the flaps down (I was told 90deg in lift dump position?!).
Mechanical: I actually became a victim of hear-say too... somebody told me the mechanic on the field has said, that he only heard one engine on the go-around - that why I mentioned it COULD be a mechanical too.
...and I agree with your "lift-dump-explanation"; after posting the above, my boss and I talked about the same issue. It sounds like a valid scenario that they tried to go-around with the flaps down (I was told 90deg in lift dump position?!).
Mechanical: I actually became a victim of hear-say too... somebody told me the mechanic on the field has said, that he only heard one engine on the go-around - that why I mentioned it COULD be a mechanical too.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: fl
Posts: 2,525
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airplane crash eyewitness recounts scene
You are right, many freq's were on that recording so the 20 knot losses were at another airport near there. This video of the mechanic demonstrating what he saw shows a normal landing ending up in an attempted go around. The NTSB portion of this article says the plane had a CVR and it is on the way to be played so that should help explain the attempted go around.
You are right, many freq's were on that recording so the 20 knot losses were at another airport near there. This video of the mechanic demonstrating what he saw shows a normal landing ending up in an attempted go around. The NTSB portion of this article says the plane had a CVR and it is on the way to be played so that should help explain the attempted go around.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Wild West
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Phil77,
I just looked it up in my books and the number is 75 degrees for the lift dump.
I regularly take a Hawker 800xp into 5000 foot strips without thinking about it, knowing that I have the T/R's to help me if I need them. But the straight 800 they were flying didn't have T/R's even though the landing numbers don't include the T/R.
My copilot and I were just discussing that situation ourselves this morning.
I have never did a touch and go in a Hawker in the simulator with the lift dump deployed. We always did the go around before the flair and before touchdown. The amount of time needed to get the flaps out of dump and the air brake closed then have the flaps start going up to 15 degrees plus have the engines spool up from idle would be a hand full for anyone who was prepared for it on a 8000 foot strip with a head wind let alone a 5500 foot strip with a tail wind. Throw in that fact that they were decelerating all the time they were on the runway dirty until the engines were up and they started to accelerate.
Like I said before it was a no win situation.
I just looked it up in my books and the number is 75 degrees for the lift dump.
I regularly take a Hawker 800xp into 5000 foot strips without thinking about it, knowing that I have the T/R's to help me if I need them. But the straight 800 they were flying didn't have T/R's even though the landing numbers don't include the T/R.
My copilot and I were just discussing that situation ourselves this morning.
I have never did a touch and go in a Hawker in the simulator with the lift dump deployed. We always did the go around before the flair and before touchdown. The amount of time needed to get the flaps out of dump and the air brake closed then have the flaps start going up to 15 degrees plus have the engines spool up from idle would be a hand full for anyone who was prepared for it on a 8000 foot strip with a head wind let alone a 5500 foot strip with a tail wind. Throw in that fact that they were decelerating all the time they were on the runway dirty until the engines were up and they started to accelerate.
Like I said before it was a no win situation.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Zone of Alienation
Age: 79
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In jets, when reverse thrust is activated you are committed to the landing rollout, off the end or not. I'm curious why Hawker training doesn't mandate the same policy regarding lift dump?
And regarding the no-win situation, I'd rather go off the end at 80 kts. than the alternative.
And regarding the no-win situation, I'd rather go off the end at 80 kts. than the alternative.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: USA (PA)
Age: 47
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reversers are not the issue, they retract in a mere second or two.
The liftdump "feature" JetA was talking about, basically commits you to land.
After landing you have to pull a t-handle out and over a stop and drop it back in. That prevents an inadvertent deployment but also prevents a hasty retraction and as JetA pointed out, a 5500 foot strip can be short in a jet if you land long in the first place, wet and with a tailwind it can get real ugly...
I was told, a scenario for a go-around after the lift-dump has been deployed has not been taught in school (yet).
"why did they deploy them in the first place?" someone might ask. Could be a misunderstanding and the pilot flying didn't know that they were deployed on the go-around. There isn't really the time for checklists. Split-second decisions and all odds against you, very sad indeed
The liftdump "feature" JetA was talking about, basically commits you to land.
After landing you have to pull a t-handle out and over a stop and drop it back in. That prevents an inadvertent deployment but also prevents a hasty retraction and as JetA pointed out, a 5500 foot strip can be short in a jet if you land long in the first place, wet and with a tailwind it can get real ugly...
I was told, a scenario for a go-around after the lift-dump has been deployed has not been taught in school (yet).
"why did they deploy them in the first place?" someone might ask. Could be a misunderstanding and the pilot flying didn't know that they were deployed on the go-around. There isn't really the time for checklists. Split-second decisions and all odds against you, very sad indeed