KingAir crash near Chigwell?
from memory, the metars for stansted either side of the time of the crash gave a met vis of 700m then 1600m and a cloud ceiling of overcast at 100ft. Stansted had been foggy since first light with rvrs down to 250m and the weather was just starting to improve.
q1015=
rip
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Wilmslow and North Yorks
Age: 53
Posts: 402
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Frankly, I'm very disappointed in John Farley's post. As much respect as I have for John, this kind of random speculation does nobody any good.
A PT6 will run on 100LL with time and altitude limitations.
This is a tragic event, losing a Kingair is very rare. Can we just leave it alone until the AAIB have done their thing.
RIP boys 😢
A PT6 will run on 100LL with time and altitude limitations.
This is a tragic event, losing a Kingair is very rare. Can we just leave it alone until the AAIB have done their thing.
RIP boys 😢
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't believe Avgas is the cause!
EIO, auto-feather issue, VMCA, is far more likely but only speculation.
You find yourself loosing an engine shortly after VR close to vmca , auto-feather may or may not work in time and having to pull the other power level, lowering the nose to stop the roll only means you're going to sink, poor vis and a lack of altitude and I fear you can do everything by the book and it may still not be enough..
A very sad day and brings home how fragile life is...
RIP
EIO, auto-feather issue, VMCA, is far more likely but only speculation.
You find yourself loosing an engine shortly after VR close to vmca , auto-feather may or may not work in time and having to pull the other power level, lowering the nose to stop the roll only means you're going to sink, poor vis and a lack of altitude and I fear you can do everything by the book and it may still not be enough..
A very sad day and brings home how fragile life is...
RIP
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very sad.
Always bothered me how small ( relatively) GA companies on tight budgets ( far more so than airlines) can really maintain training, currency and maintenance standards when they are operating so many different aircraft types.
I believe this company operates no less than eight different types.....including just one of a particular type.
Always bothered me how small ( relatively) GA companies on tight budgets ( far more so than airlines) can really maintain training, currency and maintenance standards when they are operating so many different aircraft types.
I believe this company operates no less than eight different types.....including just one of a particular type.
Psychophysiological entity
Training en route? As one who's had a skipper feather an engine at night on a fully laden DC3 - at about 100', I hope today we're a little more cautious. However, to waste these sectors entirely would be such a lost opportunity as so much can be learned on empty sectors.
Tracking away after takeoff at very low level? Maybe reverting to MKI eyeball after instruments failed.
And yes, it's just more speculation.
Tracking away after takeoff at very low level? Maybe reverting to MKI eyeball after instruments failed.
And yes, it's just more speculation.
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: London
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Although any loss of life is tragic, coming down immediately after takeoff from my home Airfield, this one feels so close to home it is particularly heartbreaking. Thoughts and prayers with the families and friends of the crew.
As for the speculation of cause I leave it to others but the only avgas at stap is at the pumps and the KAs are always filled up from the Jet A1 bowser.
RIP
As for the speculation of cause I leave it to others but the only avgas at stap is at the pumps and the KAs are always filled up from the Jet A1 bowser.
RIP
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: london
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shocking accident,
I've flown an 80's KA in and out of Stapleford before and know the airfield well so this feels all too close to home.
Good company , good crew , good airframe.
I can only imagine an engine failure at the worst possible moment, exasperated by fairly diabolical visibility yesterday.
'Birdstrike' is another unexplored possibility I suppose.
I certainly wouldn't fancy my chances in yesterdays vis with a double engine failure..
Deepest sympathies to all involved.
I've flown an 80's KA in and out of Stapleford before and know the airfield well so this feels all too close to home.
Good company , good crew , good airframe.
I can only imagine an engine failure at the worst possible moment, exasperated by fairly diabolical visibility yesterday.
'Birdstrike' is another unexplored possibility I suppose.
I certainly wouldn't fancy my chances in yesterdays vis with a double engine failure..
Deepest sympathies to all involved.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 301
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Different companies.
Also i have wondered if anyone else who has flown the KA has questioned the prop lever design in not having a detent to stop the props going from max to min to feather in 1 go! Ive seen it in the sim where you pull the props back after takeoff and go to far and end up feathering the props. Other pt planes have stops or detents which you physically have pass to go to feather, KA just go straight there.. finding yourself with 2 feathered props in a climb isnt going to be much fun..
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Hants, UK
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Highly unlikely that there was a FDR fitted. In my experience, any CVRs fitted on old King Airs aren't maintained in an operating condition.
Forget the wrong fuel issue. Water in the tanks could be a factor, but a good 'A' Check should have covered that possibility. The position of the crash could be close to the usual point of a reduction to climb power (+/- 500ft AGL) with the associated movement of the propeller levers as mentioned above.
But the met report from EGSS suggests that the flight would also have been IMC almost from the moment of rotation and it's not impossible that a crew hand flying it (unlikely to have engaged the autopilot this soon after departure) failed to manage the aircraft attitude to prevent a roll/pitch excursion with no visual clues and no chance to see the ground before hitting it. Isn't this usually/officially a single-crew operation?
No criticism of the poor souls intended. Just an observation.
Forget the wrong fuel issue. Water in the tanks could be a factor, but a good 'A' Check should have covered that possibility. The position of the crash could be close to the usual point of a reduction to climb power (+/- 500ft AGL) with the associated movement of the propeller levers as mentioned above.
But the met report from EGSS suggests that the flight would also have been IMC almost from the moment of rotation and it's not impossible that a crew hand flying it (unlikely to have engaged the autopilot this soon after departure) failed to manage the aircraft attitude to prevent a roll/pitch excursion with no visual clues and no chance to see the ground before hitting it. Isn't this usually/officially a single-crew operation?
No criticism of the poor souls intended. Just an observation.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: looking out of the window
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wx at EGSS was indeed grim yesterday.
For most of the early morning IRVR was between 200 and 250.
That said, it was improving by 0900 though the recently introduced automatic met observation system makes the later METAR reports worse than the actual observed weather.
For most of the early morning IRVR was between 200 and 250.
That said, it was improving by 0900 though the recently introduced automatic met observation system makes the later METAR reports worse than the actual observed weather.
If it's wings level impact on centreline, there's a prime candidate for that, although unlikely unless the fog was very thick.
If it's not on centreline, or at a steep bank, my suspicions would lead me to ask (rhetorically) what the certification requirements of a B200 with one engine going quiet at rotation are...?
If it's not on centreline, or at a steep bank, my suspicions would lead me to ask (rhetorically) what the certification requirements of a B200 with one engine going quiet at rotation are...?
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: schermoney and left front seat
Age: 57
Posts: 2,438
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@littgo: any KingAir I flew/fly needed an effort to go from low RPM to feather. (creeping from high to low rpm is another story)
OTOH, going fro 2000 Revs to 1600 quickly at T/O power could destroy the gears between engine and prop (overtorque). That would be fairly easy to find out from the wreckage I think...
Thats easy, its an FAR 23 airplane... this airplane from the pics I saw was not Raisbecked and equipped with the old 3 blade props - this means a significant worse OEI/higher VMCA performance compared to a Raisbeck version. The 3 bladers often do not have autofeather - that was an optional, is mandatory with the Raisbeck Hartzell 4 blades. (and IIRC with the standard McCauley 4 bladers of the newer aircraft)
King Air B200
Distance over 50 ft 3300 vs 2760 ft, Acc-Go 6370ft vs. 3990ft (or 4390 with high floatation gear with Raisbeck fully enclosing gear doors)
OTOH, going fro 2000 Revs to 1600 quickly at T/O power could destroy the gears between engine and prop (overtorque). That would be fairly easy to find out from the wreckage I think...
what the certification requirements of a B200 with one engine going quiet at rotation are...?
King Air B200
Distance over 50 ft 3300 vs 2760 ft, Acc-Go 6370ft vs. 3990ft (or 4390 with high floatation gear with Raisbeck fully enclosing gear doors)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE][Isn't this usually/officially a single-crew operation?/QUOTE]
That is my understanding. Apparently on this occasion the unfortunate co pilot who normaly flies Challenger but occasionaly Legacy equipment was acting as a pilot assistant.
That is my understanding. Apparently on this occasion the unfortunate co pilot who normaly flies Challenger but occasionaly Legacy equipment was acting as a pilot assistant.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Manchester
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a more general point Id like to say that I think our turboprop GA brothers and sisters are vastly underrated, underpaid and put upon .....particularly those who operate single crew....when compared to those of us who have graduated to jets.
IMHO the skills required to handle an EFTAO in a prop twin, single crew are much more demanding than a "superior" two crew jet and I have to say nothing would induce me to go back to one.....but it seems this is a right of passage taken as for granted as a step to becoming a "real" pilot.
Maybe, just maybe this might serve as a wake up call ...In particular relating to recurrent training....is this being done properly in a simulator looking at all scenarios or just through bashing a few circuits with a trainer in the aircraft in good old flying club fashion????
Without prejudging the investigation in any way I do hope a long overdue light is shone into some rather dark corners with some appropriate recommendations resulting.
IMHO the skills required to handle an EFTAO in a prop twin, single crew are much more demanding than a "superior" two crew jet and I have to say nothing would induce me to go back to one.....but it seems this is a right of passage taken as for granted as a step to becoming a "real" pilot.
Maybe, just maybe this might serve as a wake up call ...In particular relating to recurrent training....is this being done properly in a simulator looking at all scenarios or just through bashing a few circuits with a trainer in the aircraft in good old flying club fashion????
Without prejudging the investigation in any way I do hope a long overdue light is shone into some rather dark corners with some appropriate recommendations resulting.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Hotel Sheets, Downtown Plunketville
Age: 76
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sticking to facts only, it would appear the aircraft crashed in less than 5 miles/ 2 - 2.5 minutes at most, after becoming airborne. Which end of the tarmac was being used at the time and if both ends were available, then which end was used for t/o. Whatever went wrong could not have happened at the worst moment, particularly in a light twin, leaving very little time and height to recover. According to a PPL trainee who was in the vicinity of the crash, he reported hearing loud engine noise before hearing the noise of the impact and loud explosion.