KingAir crash near Chigwell?
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pace.
2 miles out, 30 seconds roughly into the flight , you'd expect it to be at least 700-1000ft agl, ground does rise from the airfield but not that much. So something happened for them to be level so quickly after takeoff or descend.
Glide speed is 130kts is that enough to be a high speed impact?
I still think the wheel strut separated from the nacelle tends to suggest gear was down..
2 miles out, 30 seconds roughly into the flight , you'd expect it to be at least 700-1000ft agl, ground does rise from the airfield but not that much. So something happened for them to be level so quickly after takeoff or descend.
Glide speed is 130kts is that enough to be a high speed impact?
I still think the wheel strut separated from the nacelle tends to suggest gear was down..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Littco
Yes that scenario is possible too and failing to climb they elected to force land into mist and fog but then what would have caused the aircraft to fail to climb one engine out unless the gear failed to retract at the same time?
Pace
Yes that scenario is possible too and failing to climb they elected to force land into mist and fog but then what would have caused the aircraft to fail to climb one engine out unless the gear failed to retract at the same time?
Pace
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 598
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
more speculation
but ... the lower third of the MLG tyres sit below the nacelle of the B200 with the gear retracted. Now go back to the video and look at the light earth witness marks on the tyre.
It would tend to indicate that the gear was not extended.
It would tend to indicate that the gear was not extended.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Teddy, you are correct, I was sure some had fully enclosed wheels. In this case that is not the case. Also I thought the wheel was on far side of the accident site not the side of impact where the tree was down.. Near where the fire engines parked and the direction the filmer approached from first..
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They were both experienced well trained pilots flying for a good company.
Ok just after rotation at slow speed they may have not contained an engine failure but this was two miles further on.
The temperatures were low, there were no PAX so depending on fuel loading probably light.
There is no reason that aircraft should not have performed well engine out which would have caused them to be flying level low.
So unless the good engine was shut down by accident it doesn't make sense for engine failure
Pace
Ok just after rotation at slow speed they may have not contained an engine failure but this was two miles further on.
The temperatures were low, there were no PAX so depending on fuel loading probably light.
There is no reason that aircraft should not have performed well engine out which would have caused them to be flying level low.
So unless the good engine was shut down by accident it doesn't make sense for engine failure
Pace
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure I agree pace,
1) engine that takes out hydraulic pump so you are unable to retract flaps and gear, it's not going to want to climb well at all.
2) engine failure at vr or very shortly after, identifying the issue, reaction time, lowering nose to get v2 with gear and flaps out . Dealing with the failure, power, prop, fuel assuming no AF, controlling aircraft, gear and flaps maybe a fire to add into the mix. At best you maybe 15-20 seconds into the flight, sinking as you raise the flaps, even if you did it all by the book and start to get a positive rate of climb I'd bet 30 seconds would be gone.. There's a reason engine failure is assumed above 200ft!
You only have to do a go around at minimum to know a TP at vref is a handful, this is with an already feathered prop and 20knts more than you you have at vr, add in the drag of gear and flaps and you're lucky to maintain height..
1) engine that takes out hydraulic pump so you are unable to retract flaps and gear, it's not going to want to climb well at all.
2) engine failure at vr or very shortly after, identifying the issue, reaction time, lowering nose to get v2 with gear and flaps out . Dealing with the failure, power, prop, fuel assuming no AF, controlling aircraft, gear and flaps maybe a fire to add into the mix. At best you maybe 15-20 seconds into the flight, sinking as you raise the flaps, even if you did it all by the book and start to get a positive rate of climb I'd bet 30 seconds would be gone.. There's a reason engine failure is assumed above 200ft!
You only have to do a go around at minimum to know a TP at vref is a handful, this is with an already feathered prop and 20knts more than you you have at vr, add in the drag of gear and flaps and you're lucky to maintain height..
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Theres only one thing with all of these engine scenarios, it has been noted earlier in the thread that rumour/witnesses said the engines were operating normally during the flight.
Noiffsorbuts
Local buzz all seems to suggest both engines functioning...took off but didnt climb..then tanked in going flat out....which all seems consistent with the massive destruction.
Local buzz all seems to suggest both engines functioning...took off but didnt climb..then tanked in going flat out....which all seems consistent with the massive destruction.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normal as in they stayed in fine pitch for takeoff and continued like that or normal they went from fine to course as you would expect for a normal flight?
I would perceive a witness would think normal would be a constant noise like it remaining in fine pitch throughout.. Going from fine to course makes a noticeable noise on the ground, you could easily confuse it , if not knowing, for a problem.
I would perceive a witness would think normal would be a constant noise like it remaining in fine pitch throughout.. Going from fine to course makes a noticeable noise on the ground, you could easily confuse it , if not knowing, for a problem.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATC
I tend to agree with you that the radar traces and transponder readouts will be very revealing but not just in the altitude the aircraft achieved or the descent point from that altitude and whether there was a steep descent but also the track and more importantly the groundspeed.
Pace
I tend to agree with you that the radar traces and transponder readouts will be very revealing but not just in the altitude the aircraft achieved or the descent point from that altitude and whether there was a steep descent but also the track and more importantly the groundspeed.
Pace
"One of the pilots might have suffered the illusion but surely not both?"
The somatogravic illusion is a mechanically induced illusion for which the maths can determine the magnitude of false pitch. An acceleration of 30 knots over ten seconds will give a false pitch of 9 degrees. If both pilots succomb, they will have the same magnitude of sensation. It is caused by the utricle and saccule of the inner ear sending sending acceleration information to the brain which misinterprets it as pitch in the absence of visual confirmation. As in these cases, visual information tends to be the AI/PFD, this information is not as compelling as the real horizon and can be ignored by the pilot. Anyone who has experienced this illusion will tell you that it is incredibly powerful. It takes all your willpower to supress it and believe your instruments.
The somatogravic illusion is a mechanically induced illusion for which the maths can determine the magnitude of false pitch. An acceleration of 30 knots over ten seconds will give a false pitch of 9 degrees. If both pilots succomb, they will have the same magnitude of sensation. It is caused by the utricle and saccule of the inner ear sending sending acceleration information to the brain which misinterprets it as pitch in the absence of visual confirmation. As in these cases, visual information tends to be the AI/PFD, this information is not as compelling as the real horizon and can be ignored by the pilot. Anyone who has experienced this illusion will tell you that it is incredibly powerful. It takes all your willpower to supress it and believe your instruments.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Bohol, Philippines
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moderators please do your job.
This is a professional pilot network.
Why every time there is an accident do we have page after page of theory before the accident report is published?
Why every time there is an accident do we have page after page of theory before the accident report is published?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why every time there is an accident do we have page after page of theory before the accident report is published?
Pilots like to analyse what COULD have gone wrong so we can avoid those potential mistakes ourselves.
The problem with AAIB reports is that they can be some extensive time before the reports are released and there are two problems. Firstly there may not be a definite cause found and secondly by the time the reports come out it is a sad fact of life that people have forgotten about it and moved on.
While a sad event like this is fresh in our minds Pilots are more open to discussing and learning from the discussions even if the possibilities discussed are not THE ONE that brought the aircraft down.
Yes there will be thrill seekers or amateur armchair accident investigators but if the discussions are positive and not stated as fact the living can learn and possibly avoid a similar situation even if NOT for the same reason themselves
As pilots when these accidents occur we all want to feel that Joe Pilot was an accident waiting to happen or his aircraft was a load of junk waiting to crash. When it happens to two good pilots in a good well maintained aircraft flying for a good company it exposes our own vulnerability so I for one hope pilots do discuss what possibly went wrong when the accident is fresh in our minds
When these tragic events occur the first most feel is horror then sadness for the pilots and their relatives and then why? I would have thought "WHY" was a perfectly normal thought to have and to want to discuss with fellow aviators
Pace
Last edited by Pace; 10th Oct 2015 at 07:21.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: In an ever changing place
Posts: 1,039
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFI145
Moderators please do your job.
This is a professional pilot network.
Why every time there is an accident do we have page after page of theory before the accident report is published?
Moderators please do your job.
This is a professional pilot network.
Why every time there is an accident do we have page after page of theory before the accident report is published?
Given that the B200 is an old bird now weighing less than 12500 lbs there is no requirement to have an FDR fitted, one way of fact finding is for people to discuss events such as these.
My own personal opinion is they had one small insidious failure in either the ADI system or pitot static system, departing in fog with no visual reference, falsely leading them to pitch down shortly after take-off, resulting in a high speed CFIT, exactly something that could be easily reproduced in a simulator for people to learn from.
That is the reason why you now teach "Unreliable Airspeed" indications in the sim, learning from the Air France crash, but then you would know that
Last edited by Above The Clouds; 10th Oct 2015 at 18:58. Reason: text
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"When it happens to two good pilots in a good well maintained aircraft flying for a good company " ( quote Pace)
Thats a whole lot of "goods" Pace. Might be wiser to await the outcome of the investigation and then come to a view...things are often not as they might at first seem....particularly to those on the outside.
For what its worth I agree with Above the clouds and i think instrument failure perhaos a failed attitude indicator or blocked pitot giving false speed reading are the most likely explanation.....on the little information we presently have. i have to say that the view from locals is that maintenance issues may well be in focus....
Thats a whole lot of "goods" Pace. Might be wiser to await the outcome of the investigation and then come to a view...things are often not as they might at first seem....particularly to those on the outside.
For what its worth I agree with Above the clouds and i think instrument failure perhaos a failed attitude indicator or blocked pitot giving false speed reading are the most likely explanation.....on the little information we presently have. i have to say that the view from locals is that maintenance issues may well be in focus....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noiffsorbuts
The 3 goods were on purpose )) Until further evidence comes to light that 1 or more of my 3 goods are not relevant we can only go on the fact that the pilots were good , experienced pilots, the aircraft well maintained and that LEA have a good reputation ))
Until that crash site video was released the obvious was loss of control engine failure scenario.
The way the aircraft had smashed into fragments and dispersed over such a large area indicated an almost horizontal crash at high speed
I am sure the radar traces and altitude data will be very revealing
Having experience A loss of airspeed indication in IMC in a piston twin I can see very easily that seeing the airspeed falling back towards the stall it's very natural to push forward on the column! The wind noise alerted me to look at the GPS ground speed and realise what had happened but I was IMC at maybe 4000 feet
This aircraft may have been IMC at 200 feet! I had delay time if this was the case and I stress IF then there would have been almost zero delay time IMC so near the ground!
If the above is not the case it's still something we should consider in fog / mist takeoffs as loss of airspeed in IMC in fog would mean that a fraction of a second instinctive push on the column would give you a face full of trees and I stress that's one of many scenarios possible and maybe not relevant to this crash
Pace
The 3 goods were on purpose )) Until further evidence comes to light that 1 or more of my 3 goods are not relevant we can only go on the fact that the pilots were good , experienced pilots, the aircraft well maintained and that LEA have a good reputation ))
Until that crash site video was released the obvious was loss of control engine failure scenario.
The way the aircraft had smashed into fragments and dispersed over such a large area indicated an almost horizontal crash at high speed
I am sure the radar traces and altitude data will be very revealing
Having experience A loss of airspeed indication in IMC in a piston twin I can see very easily that seeing the airspeed falling back towards the stall it's very natural to push forward on the column! The wind noise alerted me to look at the GPS ground speed and realise what had happened but I was IMC at maybe 4000 feet
This aircraft may have been IMC at 200 feet! I had delay time if this was the case and I stress IF then there would have been almost zero delay time IMC so near the ground!
If the above is not the case it's still something we should consider in fog / mist takeoffs as loss of airspeed in IMC in fog would mean that a fraction of a second instinctive push on the column would give you a face full of trees and I stress that's one of many scenarios possible and maybe not relevant to this crash
Pace
Join Date: May 2011
Location: london
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
at stapleford the avtur is kept next to the kingairs and the avgas is kept to the east apron in static pumps .. impossible i think .. i know rob very well and he is very thorough .. he will test the fuel
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: In the boot of my car!
Posts: 5,982
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dazdisc
I doubt it has anything to do with fuel ) more interesting as they will be very telling will be the radar traces and speed / altitude information
If the aircraft impacted at 2 miles We are looking at 1.5 minutes from
Take off to crash and the aircraft should be near 1500 feet agl
My guess is that it will never have achieved that height but those traces will be very revealing as to what has gone wrong
Pace
I doubt it has anything to do with fuel ) more interesting as they will be very telling will be the radar traces and speed / altitude information
If the aircraft impacted at 2 miles We are looking at 1.5 minutes from
Take off to crash and the aircraft should be near 1500 feet agl
My guess is that it will never have achieved that height but those traces will be very revealing as to what has gone wrong
Pace