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

Canadian Forces Snowbirds CT-114 down in British Columbia

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.

Canadian Forces Snowbirds CT-114 down in British Columbia

Old 27th May 2020, 03:38
  #221 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Alberta
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by cncpc View Post
I just got this email from a guy who has investigated hundreds of accidents for a well known government agency. But not military. While it only suggests a remote possibility, it does identify an issue that could stand to be corrected. If this did happen, it had to be starboard inlet, as we can see on the departure photo that the port side is removed. Admittedly, not likely with a marshaller staring right at it, but it is one of things that could have made the "pop" and could have resulted in at least a partial power drop. Anyways, yellow might be a better color. <br>
____________________________________________________________ ___
Yesterday I wondered aloud if perhaps an engine inlet cover was left installed on one side that was subsequently ingested during the takeoff run.

As you can see, the engine inlet cover design is a major failure. Instead of high visual conspicuity to prevent inadvertent omission, they went the opposite route. The covers are essentially invisible, camouflaged by using the identical colour to the surrounding paint work.

Letís see if we can guess why they did this . . . .so that the aircraft looked good in photos?

History has proven convincingly that humans are not reliable at repetitive tasks. And if something can be screwed up - it will be eventually.

This may have nothing to do with the accident but it is an opportunity to address the latent defect before it does.
home cooking near me
And the red flapping flag ??
Bksmithca is offline  
Old 27th May 2020, 05:30
  #222 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,894

Airbubba is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 14:41
  #223 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: yyz
Posts: 32
There is a picture on avcanada that shows an object entering the inlet. I only have 8 posts since 2005 so I don't have URL privileges
rigpiggy is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 15:53
  #224 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: West Coast Canada
Posts: 4,078
If an inlet cover was left on the engine would have cooked itself on start up.

The video stills purportedly showing bird being ingested are very suggestive, with the caveat that they have not been verified by a competent authority. If it did eat a bird it would have been at just about the worst possible time and place.....
Big Pistons Forever is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 15:56
  #225 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Leicester
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by Bksmithca View Post
And the red flapping flag ??
That's cute. Cos no-one ever missed anything with a RBF flag right...
DaveJ75 is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 18:41
  #226 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 750
Stills from video on departure from YKA


Still 1 from video

Still 2 from video

The next few stills from the video show no object behind (or otherwise near) the aircraft.
Could be bird, could be drone, could be video artifact. Until further analysis or announcement from official sources, I'd say bird seems most likely.
grizzled is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 21:42
  #227 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by DaveJ75 View Post
That's cute. Cos no-one ever missed anything with a RBF flag right...
I'm not championing the covers left on theory. My post was really about a very experienced retired accident investigator noticing that the failure to not paint something that doesn't fly with the aircraft different from things that should be there on start up is a potential start to an accident sequence. To BPF, I don't know enough about how engine temps would be effected by one cover left on. Particularly where there are two intakes. As far as an abstract discussion goes. I do think that there is enough air flow through the other intake to get a start, and that after start, the blocking fabric would at least have come partially into the intake, although it might have been restrained for going all the way by one or more bungee cords in its securing bits. If it was in there, still held back, it would likely be in trail of the intake stream. It is hard to imagine it staying there. The pop sound? Yes, it is just like the sound our vacuum makes when it finally sucks some blockage through into the bag.

There have to be many other holes in the cheese for this one to have happened. Marshaller misses it, pilot, sitting right beside a cover on misses it getting into the plane, covers not counted in the stowing process...lots of things had to go wrong for this to happen. There are photos that are said to be from the taxi out. The accident aircraft, the No. 2, is seen with the left cover showing a hole and no attachments. The second photo shows a hole on the starboard side, but it isn't clear whether that is the accident aircraft. It would seem likely that the No. 2 would be blocked by No. 1, but... I think that in this scenario, even taxi power is going to bring a cover at least partway down the intake tunnel. The straps? If they are gone, it should be back in the compressor and that surely would have made an issue right there.

Not seeing the red strap? Both valid posts. I do remember years ago doing a walkaround on an Aztec on the South ramp at VVR, starting up, getting taxi clearance for a 27 departure, or 26 maybe, and hold at Mike. Go about 50 feet, meet a King Air coming in. Hear him say on Ground "Let that guy in the Aztec know he's dragging a five gallon pail full of concrete". How can you miss a five gallon pail of concrete tied by yellow rope to the tail ring of your airplane, especially as you'd have to walk around it?

The dot in the picture? If it's a video artifact, it is unusual if it would be alone. And that it would survive several frames. There is a large bird that flys by in the opening frames of the Pelton video, coming from the departure area. Drone? I fly a drone, and they get small quick in the sky. And, it does seem to have a bit of DJI drone shape. But, those drones all have GEO zones, no flies, and you would need a custom unlock with paperwork from the airport to fly there. That wouldn't happen, and at least the most common type drone couldn't lift off in that area, or lift off somewhere else and fly there. Other real cheap drones? Don't know.

What is unusual is that nowhere in the sequence, particularly at the pop time, is there any sign of flame at the tailpipe.
cncpc is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 21:53
  #228 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2019
Location: Leicester
Posts: 52
Originally Posted by cncpc View Post
I'm not championing the covers left on theory
My comment was aimed at the poster who implied that a remove before flight flag was an adequate attention getter! History shows that to be a sadly ineffective barrier. I'd be surprised at the aircraft achieving an initially successful take-off via one intake but I agree with the rationale of what you say - it's often surprising what causes an accident and the interaction of such things even more so.
DaveJ75 is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 22:16
  #229 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Alberta
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by DaveJ75 View Post
My comment was aimed at the poster who implied that a remove before flight flag was an adequate attention getter! History shows that to be a sadly ineffective barrier. I'd be surprised at the aircraft achieving an initially successful take-off via one intake but I agree with the rationale of what you say - it's often surprising what causes an accident and the interaction of such things even more so.
Dave. Reading the post left me with the impression that because the cover was red it wasn't obvious to either the groundcrewman or the pilot especially with a red flapping flag.
BkSmith
Bksmithca is offline  
Old 29th May 2020, 22:38
  #230 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by DaveJ75 View Post
My comment was aimed at the poster who implied that a remove before flight flag was an adequate attention getter! History shows that to be a sadly ineffective barrier. I'd be surprised at the aircraft achieving an initially successful take-off via one intake but I agree with the rationale of what you say - it's often surprising what causes an accident and the interaction of such things even more so.
No worries, Dave. He just asked a question that was a valid observation. I didn't reply, but my reply would have been the same as yours.

The longer the RCAF goes without making any comment, the more likely something unpleasant to admit seems. Not even an acknowledgment that there was a power loss in the climbout?

cncpc is offline  
Old 30th May 2020, 05:25
  #231 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Itinerant
Posts: 750
My guess: The RCAF is more concerned right now about how they are going to explain another issue with the old Weber ejection seat. Regardless of the aircraft being outside the limits for that seat, there is video that clearly shows that 4 seconds after the canopy leaves there is still no seat separation nor initial chute deployment for at least one crew member.
grizzled is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2020, 18:08
  #232 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: toronto
Age: 56
Posts: 71
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/sno...VwXlBfkIls5noA

Looking at a bird strike.
standbykid is offline  
Old 1st Jun 2020, 19:19
  #233 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Bulgaria
Posts: 41
Snowbirds fatal crash may have been caused by bird strike

The Royal Canadian Air Force says itís focusing on a bird strike as the reason of Snowbirdís CT-114 Tutor aircraft that crashed in Kamloops on May 17.
A preliminary investigation report posted today says a close look at video footage of the plane just before the crash showed a bird very close to the planeís right engine intake ďduring the critical phase of take-off.Ē

Source: https://aerobaticteams.net/en/news/i...rd-strike.html
alexhara is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2020, 03:58
  #234 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: CEH2 (Black Diamond, Alberta)
Posts: 5,616
Photo and caption from the CBC report:

India Four Two is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2020, 04:53
  #235 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Everett, WA
Age: 66
Posts: 3,329
Originally Posted by Big Pistons Forever View Post
If an inlet cover was left on the engine would have cooked itself on start up.
Perhaps not at start up, but with half the inlet blocked, the engine would have been very unhappy at anywhere near takeoff power set. The 'half inlet' would choke well short of takeoff power airflow, probably resulting in a surge.
tdracer is online now  
Old 2nd Jun 2020, 05:34
  #236 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: yyz
Posts: 32
Originally Posted by tdracer View Post
Perhaps not at start up, but with half the inlet blocked, the engine would have been very unhappy at anywhere near takeoff power set. The 'half inlet' would choke well short of takeoff power airflow, probably resulting in a surge.
I think it would overtemp well before a surge
rigpiggy is offline  
Old 2nd Jun 2020, 21:24
  #237 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 133
Originally Posted by rigpiggy View Post
I think it would overtemp well before a surge
There is a photo somewhere back in this thread of one of the two aircraft on the taxi out. Not sure if it is the accident aircraft, maybe someone has a means of identifying it further, but the right side inlet on that aircraft does not have the cover on, nor are there any stretched bungee cords coming down the outside of the inlet. At that point, you wouldn't expect to see it in place anyway, but for it to become a problem later, there would have to be something holding it back from reaching the engine. I don't know if there are any grabby things down that inlet tunnel, but it is hard to imagine something that large staying hung up some where before the compressor all that time at takeoff power before going into the compressor.

Pretty knowledgeable commentary on the Canadian site from a Canadian military guy. He points out that in that takeoff, the pilot would have been entirely focused on lead's left wing. The only warning he might have had would have been aural, or maybe a light out of the corner of his eye. Or, he saw the bird flash by on the way in.

By now, the RCAF knows what initiated the zoom as the pilot would have told them. They are suggesting bird strike, so I'd doubt Capt. MacDougall told them something different, if his recall is intact. I'd expect Capt. Casey was monitoring the gauges.

Looking at the Pelton video frame by frame, there is some evidence of an object in the sky that would be consistent with striking the aircraft some frames later. It appears for several frames over No. 1's wing, and briefly in front of No. 1.
cncpc is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2020, 02:47
  #238 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 5,894
Originally Posted by cncpc View Post
There is a photo somewhere back in this thread of one of the two aircraft on the taxi out. Not sure if it is the accident aircraft, maybe someone has a means of identifying it further, but the right side inlet on that aircraft does not have the cover on, nor are there any stretched bungee cords coming down the outside of the inlet.
This is the accident aircraft with a crewmember (Captain Casey) wearing a gray helmet in the left seat. The lead aircraft had a crewmember with a red helmet in the left seat.

Pictures from the Saspotting Facebook page.




Airbubba is offline  
Old 3rd Jun 2020, 04:00
  #239 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,982
cncpc

Iím not questioning the thrust of your post but I feel it is worth pointing out that Capt Casey almost certainly would not have been watching the dials.

Whilst she was undoubtedly an experienced passenger she was non-aircrew. Her job would have been to sit back and enjoy the view.

BV
Bob Viking is online now  
Old 3rd Jun 2020, 18:09
  #240 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Canada
Posts: 133
I understand that she isn't aircrew, but she was a pilot. Not sure what quiet cockpit rules the RCAF has.

I did get some timings off the Pelton video. They are in editing format. Min;sec;frame number. Shot at 30 frames per second.

Bang - 0;44;00
Initiate zoom: 0;46;26
Turn left has begun - 0;52;27
In 30 deg bank - 1;00;23
Spin starts - 1;14;28
Eject - 1;21;26

It certainly looks like this was following the established procedure for power loss. Went bad on the spin, and the seat didn't work.

cncpc 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 © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.