Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Military cargo aircraft crash - Savannah, Georgia

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Military cargo aircraft crash - Savannah, Georgia

Old 5th May 2018, 09:27
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: S W France
Age: 76
Posts: 191
IIRC the fatal crash of XV180, shortly after takeoff at RAF Fairford, on 24 March 1969, was attributed to one the props going into Reverse. The aircraft then stalled.
Tengah Type is offline  
Old 5th May 2018, 19:50
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Warrington, UK
Posts: 3,459
IIRC the fatal crash of XV180, shortly after takeoff at RAF Fairford, on 24 March 1969, was attributed to one the props going into Reverse. The aircraft then stalled.
Yes, it was:
During climb out from Fairford, Gloucestershire the captain asked the co-pilot to feather No4 engine. However the engine went into full reverse thrust which rendered the aircraft uncontrollable. It entered a starboard wing over, crashed and caught fire. All six on board were killed
UK Military Aircraft Losses
MightyGem is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 00:11
  #43 (permalink)  

Avoid imitations
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 12,577
Accident report here:
https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=19940923-0
ShyTorque is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 00:27
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,434
The propeller stuff is way over my head. I remember something about pitchlock, NTS and helical splines but I forgot it after the oral. Was 'E-handle, HRD' the start of the Navy's version of the shutdown checklist?

Would there be a CVR or FDR on a Guard C-130 going to the boneyard? I was surprised to find both on the Navy T-45 that crashed in Tennessee last year.
Airbubba is online now  
Old 6th May 2018, 09:21
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: S W France
Age: 76
Posts: 191
Mighty Gem

Thanks for the confirmation that the " Little Grey Cells " are still functioning to some extent.

85 Accidents in 1969 - so different to now - Thank God.

Shytorque

Different accident, but coincidently the No 4 in both cases. Is the Savannah accident the third, or have there been others?
Tengah Type is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 11:57
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: West Sussex
Age: 78
Posts: 4,207
Shy Torque, thank you for the link to the L100-30 fatal accident at HKG 22.09.1994. It had eerie reminders of XV180 at RAF Fairford 24.03.1969 as posted by Tengah Type:-

https://aviation-safety.net/database...?id=19690324-1

Your link to that of PK-PLV's accident summary leads in turn to the very detailed, thorough, and excellent report by the HKG CAA, with input by the UKAAIB, the RAF, and the aircraft, engine, and propeller manufacturers:-

http://ebook.lib.hku.hk/HKG/B35839806.pdf

For those interested I would point to the conclusion that the most probable cause was the failure of the #4 throttle cable system (pdf P80) , the cables as fitted (7x7 carbon steel, rather than the later 7x19 stainless steel ones - see pdf P89), and the sheer complexity of the engine control cable runs (pdf P's 157, 158, and 162).

Of course we must await an interim report at least of the OP tragedy before ascribing to it a similar cause, but the vulnerability of the Hercules to an engine control cable break at a pulley, fairlead, or due corrosion, etc, in these two accidents alone is indication of it being somewhat of an Achilles Heel to this very successful workhorse.

Last edited by Chugalug2; 6th May 2018 at 12:23. Reason: Removing ambiguous words
Chugalug2 is offline  
Old 6th May 2018, 12:47
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 56
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Tengah Type View Post
Is the Savannah accident the third, or have there been others?
There have been others. Numerous sources say that a prop reversal is the cause of the loss of control in this one. I don't know know the total number of accidents due to props entering beta range, but I suspect that it's more then the ones which have been mentioned here. I have a co-worker who was involved in one whcih didn't turn into an accident due to his quick thinking. He was engineer on an checkride, and just as the plane lifted off it started an un-commanded turn that the pilot was unable to control, heading for a hangar. He saw that one of the beta lights was illuminated, and reached up and shut down that engine using the T-handle.
A Squared is offline  
Old 7th May 2018, 03:57
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: MSP
Posts: 25
CCTV definitely looks like uncommanded Beta on the left wing. Check out this footage at 2:36 - aircraft will appear top right of the frame.

n6330v is offline  
Old 7th May 2018, 05:56
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,682
😳

Iím glad I hadnít seen that video before getting on a Herc two days ago.

Itís mind boggling how quickly it went from level flight to impact.

Poor buggers.

BV
Bob Viking is online now  
Old 7th May 2018, 06:14
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Who knows where this week.......
Posts: 136
Many years since I operated Albert, but the Brit ones had the Beta light microswitch disconnected - we never had that warning system in my time. I forget now, did it light up the LSGI selector button? And yes, suspect throttle cable failure, T-handle shutdown, leave the throttle alone in case it fouled other systems.

RIP gents, got some old Albert friends up there waiting with a cold one for you.
isaneng is offline  
Old 7th May 2018, 06:48
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Pembrokeshire
Posts: 98
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
Iím glad I hadnít seen that video before getting on a Herc two days ago.

Itís mind boggling how quickly it went from level flight to impact.

Poor buggers.

BV
Different engine and prop control on the J Bob.......FADEC rather than cables and pulleys....
bunta130 is offline  
Old 7th May 2018, 07:13
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,682
It wasnít a J!

BV
Bob Viking is online now  
Old 7th May 2018, 07:36
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: The back of beyond
Posts: 1,610
Can't speak as to the veracity of this report, but it seems the pilot may have had some serious misgivings about this particular aircraft and flight WC130 Co-Pilot did NOT want to fly that plane ? PR informa
melmothtw is offline  
Old 8th May 2018, 02:13
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 875
According to the recently released 911 tapes, one eye witness reports one of the props wasn't turning after take-off.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/yo...ollowed-crash/

911 audio here:
http://www.savannahnow.com/news/2018...nt-plane-crash
RAFEngO74to09 is offline  
Old 8th May 2018, 18:51
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 451
After a string of deadly aviation accidents, the Air Force has directed all of their wing units with flying and maintenance functions to ground aircraft for one day to conduct an "Operational Safety Review."

Active duty wings will have until May 21 while National Guard and Reserve units will have until June 25 to complete the review.

The order from Chief of Staff of the Air Force Gen. David Goldfein comes after a WC-130 aircraft that belonged to the Puerto Rico National Guard crashed outside Georgia last week, killing all nine airmen on board. The 53-year old plane was heading to its retirement in Arizona when it spiraled out of the sky just outside the Savannah/Hilton Head International Airport.

“I am directing this operational safety review to allow our commanders to assess and discuss the safety of our operations and to gather feedback from our Airmen who are doing the mission every day,” Goldfein said in a press release on Tuesday.

https://abcnews.go.com/US/air-force-...ry?id=55017106
ChicoG is offline  
Old 9th May 2018, 01:19
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: virginia, USA
Age: 52
Posts: 792
A very trivial question given the tragedy, but are these airframes still considered WC's? I note the airframe 65-0968 was likely delivered as a HC-130H and even retained the chisel nose but with the Fulton recovery arms long removed, and were later designated WC-130's. Some articles even still call this airframe a "Hurricane Hunter" (like here: http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/20590/puerto-rico-national-guard-wc-130h-hurricane-hunter-crashes-in-a-ball-of-fire-in-Georgia but I presume it has not operated as a hurricane hunter for years. Is WC gear still retained or removed? So once a WC always a WC, or would reversion to C-130H be appropriate? I realize it does not matter, but just an interesting side note to the fascinating history of the C/MC/HH/HC/WC etc -130 line and to their crews over decades of service.
sandiego89 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2018, 08:12
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 278
The USAF report into this crash has now been published. The summary conclusion is

"The board president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the cause of the mishap was MP1’s improper application of left rudder, which resulted in a subsequent skid below three-engine minimum controllable airspeed, a left-wing stall, and the MA’s departure from controlled flight. Additionally, the board president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the MC’s failure to adequately prepare for emergency actions, the MC’s failure to reject the takeoff, the MC’s failure to properly execute appropriate after takeoff and engine shutdown checklists and procedures, and the Mishap Maintainers’ failure to properly diagnose and repair engine number one substantially contributed to the mishap."

https://media.defense.gov/2018/Nov/0...E%20REPORT.PDF
Liffy 1M is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2018, 09:09
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 75
Posts: 5,546
What a very bad outcome that could so easily have been avoided. The Report makes sad reading.

Last edited by MPN11; 11th Nov 2018 at 10:41.
MPN11 is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2018, 10:25
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Alaska, PNG, etc.
Age: 56
Posts: 1,545
Originally Posted by Liffy 1M View Post
The USAF report into this crash has now been published. The summary conclusion is

"The board president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the cause of the mishap was MP1ís improper application of left rudder, which resulted in a subsequent skid below three-engine minimum controllable airspeed, a left-wing stall, and the MAís departure from controlled flight. Additionally, the board president found, by a preponderance of the evidence, the MCís failure to adequately prepare for emergency actions, the MCís failure to reject the takeoff, the MCís failure to properly execute appropriate after takeoff and engine shutdown checklists and procedures, and the Mishap Maintainersí failure to properly diagnose and repair engine number one substantially contributed to the mishap."

https://media.defense.gov/2018/Nov/0...E%20REPORT.PDF
Thanks for posting the link. Without meaning to be disrespectful of the crew, it's hard to believe that the emergency was handled that badly. An engine flameout at a relatively light gross weight in good vfr conditions should have been something that ended in an air return, not the way it did. I'm surprised not to see a summary of the flight crew's experience and recent experience as would normally be included in a civilian accident report done by the NTSB.
A Squared is offline  
Old 11th Nov 2018, 10:58
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Dublin, Ireland
Posts: 278
Originally Posted by A Squared View Post
Thanks for posting the link. Without meaning to be disrespectful of the crew, it's hard to believe that the emergency was handled that badly. An engine flameout at a relatively light gross weight in good vfr conditions should have been something that ended in an air return, not the way it did. I'm surprised not to see a summary of the flight crew's experience and recent experience as would normally be included in a civilian accident report done by the NTSB.
That information is on pages 25-28 of the report.
Liffy 1M is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.