KingAir crash near Chigwell?
Flaymy,
I see your motivation for your post, but it does annoy me when people say "these things climb on one happily."
Yes they can under many circumstances, but the point remains - unlike transport category aircraft - you can operate them commercially where this is not actually achievable if it goes quiet at the wrong time - even with auto feather and all actions performed as per POH.
Yes, you can limit weight to achieve equivalent to FAR 25 performance for the climb out, but that's not actually taking into account the limitations that FAR 25 has with respect to V1, ASDA etc.
I brushed 11 years of dust off my B200 POH/AFM (HFG) and - having never heard of Stapleford - looked up the aerodrome to see that it is 3500' long. Making some assumptions (sea level, ISA, nil wind, 10,000lbs) I plugged those numbers in.
Looking at the speeds for the V2 for the Accelerate GO graph, and those for the best rate of climb, it bears thought as to where the 13kts magically appears from when you're just above the trees.
Whatever caused this tragedy in the long run will hopefully be revealed. But every KingAir (and FAR23 turboprop pilot) should plug some numbers and have a think about what to do if it goes quiet at 95kts on a shortish runway.
We learn from accidents. They prompt discussion. It's not very often that someone finds a new way to crash aircraft.
I see your motivation for your post, but it does annoy me when people say "these things climb on one happily."
Yes they can under many circumstances, but the point remains - unlike transport category aircraft - you can operate them commercially where this is not actually achievable if it goes quiet at the wrong time - even with auto feather and all actions performed as per POH.
Yes, you can limit weight to achieve equivalent to FAR 25 performance for the climb out, but that's not actually taking into account the limitations that FAR 25 has with respect to V1, ASDA etc.
I brushed 11 years of dust off my B200 POH/AFM (HFG) and - having never heard of Stapleford - looked up the aerodrome to see that it is 3500' long. Making some assumptions (sea level, ISA, nil wind, 10,000lbs) I plugged those numbers in.
Looking at the speeds for the V2 for the Accelerate GO graph, and those for the best rate of climb, it bears thought as to where the 13kts magically appears from when you're just above the trees.
Whatever caused this tragedy in the long run will hopefully be revealed. But every KingAir (and FAR23 turboprop pilot) should plug some numbers and have a think about what to do if it goes quiet at 95kts on a shortish runway.
We learn from accidents. They prompt discussion. It's not very often that someone finds a new way to crash aircraft.
Last edited by compressor stall; 6th Oct 2015 at 06:35. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You make a forced landing. Just as you do in a jet if operating below perf A requirements!
That is my point. That is how I line trained my pilots to brief when operating perf B where there ain't no such thing as V1 or V2, and I was nowhere near as qualified or experienced as this guy as far as I can gather from the information released so far. I am pretty certain he knew that.
Note that the LEA B200s are based there, and have been since I can remember. Their pilots are well aware of the performance restrictions, which might well be below even perf B standards if they are not operating a CAT flight.
I am not disputing that this accident might have started with a simple engine failure. My point is that is not the reason it turned into an accident that was not survivable. This might simply be bad luck. People have survived all but unscathed from forced landings in difficult circumstances, and I am sure others have the very best of chances and fly well yet still succumb to bad luck. Nevertheless there is no fundamental problem flying a B200 as implied by some, and no problem positioning from Stapleford. Speculation about performance issues is pointless.
That is my point. That is how I line trained my pilots to brief when operating perf B where there ain't no such thing as V1 or V2, and I was nowhere near as qualified or experienced as this guy as far as I can gather from the information released so far. I am pretty certain he knew that.
Note that the LEA B200s are based there, and have been since I can remember. Their pilots are well aware of the performance restrictions, which might well be below even perf B standards if they are not operating a CAT flight.
I am not disputing that this accident might have started with a simple engine failure. My point is that is not the reason it turned into an accident that was not survivable. This might simply be bad luck. People have survived all but unscathed from forced landings in difficult circumstances, and I am sure others have the very best of chances and fly well yet still succumb to bad luck. Nevertheless there is no fundamental problem flying a B200 as implied by some, and no problem positioning from Stapleford. Speculation about performance issues is pointless.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The pictures of the crash site seem to show a surprisingly large footprint of fragmented destructed material. Clearly significant vertical as well as lateral velocity at impact....consistent perhaps with stall following the event....whatever it was?
You make a forced landing.
I canīt think of a reason to land ahead if it is "only" an engine failure...
If there are trees there and uphill after departure as just suggested, it is entirely probable that an engine failure at Vr could put you into the trees, and any survivability is really in the hands of fate.
Nevertheless there is no fundamental problem flying a B200 as implied by some, and no problem positioning from Stapleford
The pilot was by all accounts highly experienced. It is plausible that he found himself in a situation where nothing could save the aircraft and he was in the hands of fate. There but for the grace of god go us all.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Footage shows aftermath of fatal Essex plane crash - Metro
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...04317490,d.d24
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rc...04317490,d.d24
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot see what speculation other than the aircraft must have impacted at high speed to break up and disperse so far apart ((
The video does bring home the horror and reality of such a tragic accident ( my heart goes out to all involved directly or indirectly and hope the AAIB can shed some light onto what happened with such an experienced crew and reliable aircraft for this to occur (
Pace
The video does bring home the horror and reality of such a tragic accident ( my heart goes out to all involved directly or indirectly and hope the AAIB can shed some light onto what happened with such an experienced crew and reliable aircraft for this to occur (
Pace
Having just now watched the video, the wreckage trail would not seem to fit a pattern of low and slow loss of control.
Rather it would seem to fit a pattern of wings level high speed a few miles from the airfield.
Rather it would seem to fit a pattern of wings level high speed a few miles from the airfield.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please tell me if this is unwanted speculation, from the video it looks like the rear wheel shown wasn't stowed as it's unmarked and come off away from the nacelle, and also part of engine can be seen and again it's hard to tell but it does look like the prop is feathered as it's bent up rather than course or fine position..
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Compressor stall
"Yes, agreed but this is inconsistent with the previous claims that these things climb perfectly well on one."
No it isn't! You are misunderstanding performance class B (or any sub-A) operation of aircraft. In such cases on certain runways there will always be times in the departure at which an engine failure results in a forced landing, regardless of the OEI performance of the aircraft. That is the entire point of perf A take-off requirements, to remove this possibility, so anything less than this standard leaves the possibility.
"no matter how good you are, if/when your time comes and it goes bang/quiet on takeoff you may be in a position where no action can save the aircraft. Comments by others here show that not every KingAir pilot gets this."
Clearly, but that was not the point I was addressing.
"Yes, agreed but this is inconsistent with the previous claims that these things climb perfectly well on one."
No it isn't! You are misunderstanding performance class B (or any sub-A) operation of aircraft. In such cases on certain runways there will always be times in the departure at which an engine failure results in a forced landing, regardless of the OEI performance of the aircraft. That is the entire point of perf A take-off requirements, to remove this possibility, so anything less than this standard leaves the possibility.
"no matter how good you are, if/when your time comes and it goes bang/quiet on takeoff you may be in a position where no action can save the aircraft. Comments by others here show that not every KingAir pilot gets this."
Clearly, but that was not the point I was addressing.
Flamy,
To wrap up this digression as it would seem that this has nothing to do with the accident.
The inconsistency to which I refer lies in the fact that you and others made general comments like:
For a non transport category aircraft (B200) that statement can be true. And that statement can be false. Hence the inconsistency with the above quote.
I am well aware of the certification of Perf A / B or FAR 25/23 etc but there are many who aren't.
There are a great many people - particularly those who have just graduated from an old 402 or some such - who erroneously believe that the flash fast B200 is always perfectly capable on one.
To wrap up this digression as it would seem that this has nothing to do with the accident.
The inconsistency to which I refer lies in the fact that you and others made general comments like:
Second this aircraft is perfectly capable on one engine.
I am well aware of the certification of Perf A / B or FAR 25/23 etc but there are many who aren't.
There are a great many people - particularly those who have just graduated from an old 402 or some such - who erroneously believe that the flash fast B200 is always perfectly capable on one.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My personal thoughts looking at the video is a high speed impact which would not be conducive with an engine failure and loss of control occurring at a relatively low speed.
Given the nearest metar at the time;
EGSS 030920z auto 35004kt 0600 R04/0750 FG VV/// 11/10 Q1015
I would be interested with investigating possible instrument failure leading to disorientation shortly after take-off, main engine shaft and propellor damage will provide evidence of engine failure or under power at the time of the crash.
Given the nearest metar at the time;
EGSS 030920z auto 35004kt 0600 R04/0750 FG VV/// 11/10 Q1015
I would be interested with investigating possible instrument failure leading to disorientation shortly after take-off, main engine shaft and propellor damage will provide evidence of engine failure or under power at the time of the crash.
Last edited by Above The Clouds; 7th Oct 2015 at 18:23. Reason: text
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The debris field one thing, but what about the damage to the fairly large mature trees. These appear to have been topped well above ground level.
Awful accident. My condolences to the families and those at LEA.
That video is troubling me. The length of debris field beyond the initial impact in the trees makes me think that both engines were running and the impact at a very high energy state. There's a lot of speculation on here about OEI or disorientation/loss of control. I don't buy the instrument failure option, it's likely to have had an analogue cockpit and a mix of electric and air powered instruments.
So if disorientated for another reason (wx) height/speed/roll/pitch would, for me involve controlling the speed with a power reduction and a lower energy crash if they didn't recover in time. As it was an experienced Captain/examiner I'm ignoring any possibility of crew error for now.
That's leaving me thinking they knew their orientation, the engines were good but for some reason they couldn't control the aircraft - elevator failure, flight control cables or similar - and an attempt to control pitch with power until out of height and options and by now carrying substantial airspeed.
Stapleford seems a harsh environment (grass and with that asphalt transition) to thrash a King Air in and out of daily - how many hours were on that airframe and what could have critically failed during take off to cause a loss of pitch or perhaps roll control?
That video is troubling me. The length of debris field beyond the initial impact in the trees makes me think that both engines were running and the impact at a very high energy state. There's a lot of speculation on here about OEI or disorientation/loss of control. I don't buy the instrument failure option, it's likely to have had an analogue cockpit and a mix of electric and air powered instruments.
So if disorientated for another reason (wx) height/speed/roll/pitch would, for me involve controlling the speed with a power reduction and a lower energy crash if they didn't recover in time. As it was an experienced Captain/examiner I'm ignoring any possibility of crew error for now.
That's leaving me thinking they knew their orientation, the engines were good but for some reason they couldn't control the aircraft - elevator failure, flight control cables or similar - and an attempt to control pitch with power until out of height and options and by now carrying substantial airspeed.
Stapleford seems a harsh environment (grass and with that asphalt transition) to thrash a King Air in and out of daily - how many hours were on that airframe and what could have critically failed during take off to cause a loss of pitch or perhaps roll control?
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instruments
from recollection everything was via an ADC. We experienced an inverter failure P1 side during an approach one not so fine day, solution was to switch both to the P2 inverter and all was well. Switch as I recall was on the lower portion of LHS instrument panel.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I Still think the presence of the gear separated from the airplane means it was down at the time, 2 miles from the end of the runway you'd expect it to be up unless they where going for a forced landing.
Also the prop you can see in the video detached from the engine segment looks very much like it feathered at the time, but that really is making an assumption from a poor video..
Glide speed on a kingair must be around 130knts? is that classed high speed
Also the prop you can see in the video detached from the engine segment looks very much like it feathered at the time, but that really is making an assumption from a poor video..
Glide speed on a kingair must be around 130knts? is that classed high speed
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Gone
Posts: 1,665
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SammySu said
"it's likely to have had an analogue cockpit and a mix of electric and air powered instruments".
Correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll9R8ym6qzI
"it's likely to have had an analogue cockpit and a mix of electric and air powered instruments".
Correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll9R8ym6qzI