LearJet35 Crash KFLL

[flarepilot]

mongo


I didn't select the learjet crew

try hooking in other things besides ears

[M-ONGO]

CRM... Please.

[flarepilot]

apology please

[M-ONGO]

Your right. I apologise profoundly.

Please allow me to look back and reflect upon your superior knowledge and airmanship, I don't know what I was thinking, having an opinion.

Please, again, accept my most sincere blah blah blah, Captain. I look forward to crewing an aircraft with you, I feel my operation will learn so much. I'll carry a pocket mirror, just to assure you are still breathing skip.

Just let me know when your bags are ready to collect from your room, I'll show you good CRM. Please may I have one more chance, I feel I can offer such good R/T skills to your operation.

FSI agree, I make great coffee, how do you take yours sir? After only 21 years of G/A flying, I'd love to help you... Maybe we have? Are you the lonesome guy on a nightstop (layover) telling yourself you're a hero?

[flarepilot]

Mongo...thanks for the apology...


BAck to the topic...a lear 35 crashes.


anyone out there familiar with the electrical system of the lear 35...would losing a generator, along with a compromised electrical system unpower the attitude gyro/display?

while most planes have a bus tie or something similiar, does the lear automatically place the essential items on the operating generator?

[marck_c]

Why does every accident discussion have to degenerate into a pprune pissing contest?

Anyway back to the Lear 35. Losing a generator is not a big deal, as the offside instruments should be powered and functioning normally. The bus tie sees to this. In the event of a dual generator failure, the standby horizon should be powered by the emergency batteries. Depending on the aircraft configuration, this can provide sufficient power for 30-60 minutes of flight. This accident was over in a mere matter of minutes. I doubt electrical failure was an issue. In addition, the wx at the time was clear vmc. Even though it was at night, there should have been enough lighting from the shoreline lighting to provide adequate visual reference. Those familiar with operations in the South East Florida area can attest to this.

[pigboat]

Earlier on I asked if the Lear had rudder bias but no one cared to answer. The old Garrett powered Hawker I flew came equipped with two rudder bias struts. What the rudder bias system did was sense that an engine had failed and automatically applied rudder in the direction of the good engine. In case of an engine failure, essentially what you did was to place both feet flat on the floor and FTFA.

[specialbrew]

I can confirm that the Lear35 does not have rudder bias......

[His dudeness]

Why does every accident discussion have to degenerate into a PPRuNe pissing contest?

Thats easy.... and a given. So lets move one.

@pigboat: most airplanes I flew were rudder bias equipped too, but that just meant you´d had to use (a little) less force. Is the Hawkers rudder bias really that good ? (never flown one...)

[pigboat]

Dudeness the Hawker I flew was a 1AR, with the Garrett engines in place of the Vipers. It was an old one, sn 075. The engines were the same as those used on the 700 series, but at a MTOW of only 21,500 lbs as opposed to the 25,500 lbs of the 700, the performance was decidedly more sprightly. Part of the mod was the installation of a second rudder bias strut, and I seem to recall two were required because of the increase in thrust over the Vipers. In any case, they were a no-go item. I may have exaggerated slightly about both feet flat on the floor, but only very slightly.

[Darren999]

Engine out

I happen to fly a Little in the Lear 35..

If on climb out an engine decides it doesn't want to work anymore, which ever one. Directional control is maintained through rudder only, not aileron.

I will be looking to immediately dump fuel, to get to max landing weight, if required. I will be certainly opening the cross flow valve to avoid an unbalanced fuel situation..
The 35 flies perfectly well on one engine. I see no reason why a well managed engine failure cannot be controlled and landed. There but for the grace of god go I..
My 02 cents.
I would not venture to say what happened to this unfortunate crew

[Mach Tuck]

My dear Surplus1, I have no desire to engage in a pissing competition with you or anyone else for that matter, I merely wished to share my experience, maybe even for the greater good.

There is of course no question that a twin on one should be perfectly controllable in every way under normal conditions. It is when a manoeuvre is mishandled that problems [U]may[U] occur. And I'd venture that the probability of a mishandle after an unexpected engine failure is greater than it is under training or testing conditions.

On this occasion I witnessed a pilot far more able than me enter and mishandle a simple manoeuvre at a speed appropriate to the configuration; controlled flight was departed, some height was lost and controlled flight was re-established. No big issue except that had the manoeuvre been entered some 200ft closer to the ground I wouldn't be writing about it.

Sobering is the word I'd use to describe the experience, not bogus.

[Green Guard]

Never turn into the dead (left) engine

..even if you have close obstacle on right side ?

or you are only one half pilot.... another half something else

[surplus1]

Anybody want to speculate on the possibility of losing one and then shuting down the good one by mistake?

[412SP]

Surplus,

re: shutting down the good engine.....I was thinking the same thing. Night, possible eng failure, a little confusion, kill the wrong motor.

It's possible.

[PURPLE PITOT]

Possible, as is anything, but unlikely. Loose an engine on a 35 on take off and it's bloody obvious which one has gone.

[surplus1]

We all know anything is possible but I'm not so sure about the unlikely. They had just flown into the infamous black hole after takeoff and then a sudden engine failure. Sure the PF knew which one he lost. Did the other guy?

Were these two proficient as a crew? Had they trained together? How long ago? What procedures did they follow; how was the CRM; was the QRH handy; did they use it? What are the memory items in their operation?

Lots of questions, no answers (yet).

[con-pilot]

Anybody want to speculate on the possibility of losing one and then shuting down the good one by mistake?

And has happened on a few occasions.

Possible, as is anything, but unlikely. Loose an engine on a 35 on take off and it's bloody obvious which one has gone.

I cannot speak on the Lear 35 in that condition, as my time in the 35 is very limited.

However, there was a DC-9 accident in the Great Lakes area where the crew lost power on one engine just after takeoff and the pilot flying pushed on the wrong rudder. The DC-9 basically did a snap roll into the dead engine and the altitude was too low to effect a recovery and all on board were killed.

This happend a long time ago and the airline involved was a name of a company not normally assoicated with air carriers.

That is all I can remember about the accident.

Surplus, does that accident ring any bells, seeing we're about the same age?

[eelb]

However, there was a DC-9 accident in the Great Lakes area where the crew lost power on one engine just after takeoff and the pilot flying pushed on the wrong rudder. The DC-9 basically did a snap roll into the dead engine and the altitude was too low to effect a recovery and all on board were killed.


Midwest Express DC-9-14, KMKE, 1985

Aircraft Accident Reports | NTSB | Online Full-Text Resources | Find Information | Hunt Library | Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University

[surplus1]

Con-pilot,

I did know about that accident back when it happened, mostly because I had been flying the DC-9-50 as captain a few years before that and used to have the habit of revewing accident reports in aircraft I have flown. I stilll do that sometimes even though I don't fly anything at this point.

In all honesty I did not recall that accident when I first heard about this Lear down at FLL but I have since reviewed the accident report. Scary that one especially since both pilots were captain qualified in the type and current. Sometimes weird stuff happens in airplanes.

Whenever I get that "bold" feeling to which we pilots are often prone, I've always tried to remember this often used phrase:

Aviation in itself is not inherently dangerous. But to an even greater degree than the sea, it is terribly unforgiving of any carelessness, incapacity or neglect. — Captain A. G. Lamplugh (a Brit), ca 1930.

Luckily, that quotation helped a great deal in keeping me out of the trees.