Aircraft down in Canley Vale

[ga_trojan]

If CASA want to get serious they should ban IFR piston engine charter.The only reason that these aircraft keep flying is because companies are allowed to fly them by the government. It is ultimately about money. Piston twins are the cheapest form of transport available. If they were no longer available, people would be forced into a Kingair, which is safer.

I remember coming home fuming one day after flying a bunch of mining folk around in a good condition but 30 year old piston twin. These guys had just come back from a trip to China. Curious about the GA scene over there I ask them what aircraft they chartered in China. 'Oh we usually get a Learjet' was the reply. This is coming from a company who haggles about price regularly I ask why then when in Australia do these same people fly around in piston twins. 'Oh because in China that's all that's available.'

Yet here we were in Australia, working in a multi multi billion dollar industry, spinning the roulette wheel when these guys could easily afford a kingair, and only flew in a piston twin because it was cheap and were allowed to fly.

How many more charter piston twins do we need to crash in this country before we start looking at moving the GA industry into the 21st century?

[Air Ace]

How many more charter piston twins do we need to crash in this country before we start looking at moving the GA industry into the 21st century?

Or more likely, look closely at operator philosophy, maintenance standards and most importantly, pilot training?

It may surprise you ga_trojan, but I suspect the King Air statistical accident record in Australia is not much better, and possibly worse than the PA31 series, comparing the number of airframes that have operated here.

Without giving Australian King Air fatal accidents too much thought, I remember King Air 200 at Adavale; King Air 200 into the sea wall at Sydney; King Air 200 VH-SKC that flew itself across Australia and the King Air C90 at Toowoomba. I'm sure there are a number more that have slipped my mind.

[GADRIVR]

Air Ace... those points too. But at the end of the day, it's about the aircrafts ability to do the job when the crud hits the fan. Bit pointless quoting book figures when they were only relevant decades ago

I would ask this question of you and others. Would you be willing to put your loved ones on a Mojave this morning?

Me personally... nope. Call in the RFDS or AMBOs.
By the way... you seem to be slipping into conjecture about the cause of the accident. Just a thought.

[Air Ace]

Would you be willing to put your loved ones on a Mojave this morning?

Yes.

...you seem to be slipping into conjecture about the cause of the accident.

Nope. Just keeping an open mind until an authoritive Report is published.

[MTOW]

I'm not familiar with the Mojave. Can anyone say whether its engines have fuel injectors or carbys?

[ZEEBEE]

Whilst I think that PA31 Nevergo is intrinsically dangerous with the single gear driven magnetos, something here doesn't stack up.

From 7000 ft Nth of RI the options should have been pretty comfortable unless RI was fogged out (which does happen).

In fact, if he had an engine out near RI, he was actually REQUIRED to put down at the closest suitable airport and that would have been RI I would have thought.

Certainly he was by all accounts a professional pilot and his demeanor in the last few seconds implies that, but somehow a situation that should have been manageable went sour. That's sad.

A colleague here in PH with a C404 would have been delighted to have had the same options a few years ago.

[Kermit750]

Would you be willing to put your loved ones on a Mojave this morning?

Not in a million years!

[Air Ace]

MTOW.
PA-31P-350 Mojave - Two 260kW (350hp) Lycoming TIO-540-V2AD turbocharged and fuel injected flat six piston engines driving three blade constant speed Hartzell propellers.

ZEEBEE.
At last someone is thinking.

[Kermit750]

Zeebee,

Im not sure how long you've been in the game, but Im sure you're aware how easy it is to judge someone in Hindsight. Usually a good idea to form your own opinion and let it dictate your own operating principles, but definitely not voice them like that the day after a fatal.

Ive been in exactly the same situation and I carried on to Bankstown knowing I was familiar, I had altitude and I could make a constant descent all the way to final. I back Andrews decision completely, although unfortunately the outcome was not a good one.

NEAREST SUITABLE is not quite as specificic as you may think.

[43Inches]

Assuming an air worthy, serviceable PA31 of any flavour has an engine failure are you suggesting yesterday's accident is the inevitable outcome?

Having practiced full feather shut downs in the Chieftain/Navajo I think some of these comments are pretty far from the mark. Have returned to land with one close to idle due to a prop malfunction at close to max weight. There were a number of operators who had in flight shut downs during the crankshaft plague who were able to fly to the nearest aerodrome (or further) and land. The performance is not great but it should climb, let alone maintain level. If your PA31 failed to climb or maintain altitude clean on one engine at low level there is something wrong.

Report it get it fixed before someone has a real problem and relies on that performance.

CAO 20.7.4

8 EN-ROUTE CLIMB PERFORMANCE
8.1 Multi-engined aeroplanes engaged in charter operations under the Instrument Flight Rules or aerial work operations under the Instrument Flight Rules must have the ability to climb with a critical engine inoperative at a gradient of 1% at all heights up to 5 000 feet in the standard atmosphere in the following configuration:
(a) propeller of inoperative engine stopped;
(b) undercarriage (if retractable) and flaps retracted;
(c) remaining engine(s) operating at maximum continuous power;
(d) airspeed not less than 1.2 VS.

8.2 Multi-engined aeroplanes (other than those specified in paragraph 8.1) must have the ability to maintain height at all heights up to 5 000 feet in the standard atmosphere in the configuration specified in subparagraphs 8.1 (a), (b), (c) and (d).

If it can climb at 1% it can maintain altitude at that height. If the aircraft can not achieve this at max structural weight the take-off weight must be reduced.

Light twin aircraft have a higher accident rate, piston or turbine, due to the nature of the operations.

[GAFA]

15 years ago I lost a turbocharger on the left hand engine in a PA31 (with vortex kit) on climb about 500' from RWY29 at Bankstown whilst on a Bankrun (morning DEP). With one good engine and no turbochager on the left the aircraft barely climbed. After that experience I can see losing one completely could/would give you no climb performance.

Does anyone know if the Mojave can be fitted with the vortex kit (like all other PA31's), giving it an increased take off weight?

[dogcharlietree]

I'll wait for the competent, authoritive ATSB report

Some pilots are still waiting for "the competent, authoritive ATSB"
Don't be lulled into the false assumption that because they are a government authority that they are competent.

competent |ˈkämpətənt|
adjective
having the necessary ability, knowledge, or skill to do something successfully

[goin'flyin]

Can anyone advise how far Nth of RIC he was when the engine failed?

I was just listening to the ATC tape archive, and his initial call on return to YSBK was "12nm to run @ 1,500ft". Seeing he was (apparently) at 7,000 when the engine let go, and it's only 22 nm straight line from RIC to BK, that seems to me to be a significant amount of height loss in not a lot of miles. The numbers just don't add up to me.

EDIT: I have never flown a Mojave, but have observed them depart BK numerous times. They do appear to confirm the "curvature of the earth" rule during the initial climb at least.

[bentleg]

Singles are safer as they glide better, land slower and don't fly in cloud.

When a single has an engine failure the pilot has only one option, look for somewhere to land. In some cases a twin pilot take the same option. There are many cases where a twin pilot has "pushed the envelope" trying to get to a field when the better option might have been look for somewhere to land. (Easy to say with hindsight)

I am talking general philosophy and am not making any judgement on this accident. I await the formal report with interest.

PS - Singles do fly in cloud.

[The Green Goblin]

Green Goblin; you are wrong.
when an engine fails you control the aircraft, carry out the emergency checklist (from memory usually) as per the aircraft's applicable manual, ie. set max power, reconfigure the airframe if applicable. When the aircraft is trimmed and checklists are complete, you then start to make decisions based on your location, performance etc. This cision process must not be unnecessarily rushed.

Singles are safer as they glide better, land slower and don't fly in cloud.

You're a twit mate, seriously think about it.......isn't it obvious you do these things? These should be done by rote.

You need to adapt to your situation. If you are nice and high and you ascertain you have a bit of margin up your sleeve do some problem solving (whilst you have made a decision to divert etc) If not i.e EFATO, do your instant recall stuff, secure it, brief the punters and get her down.

I don't want to get into a pissing contest with you, we could go in circles all day. You can blindly fly in a straight line following your checklists and playing airline pilot. I'll be pointing it somewhere safe straight away with Plan A, B and C all ready to go while I'm doing phase 2 items problem solving and taking stock.

[tea & bikkies]

As mentioned in an earlier post, things do not add up here. There had to be other factors that led to this terrible accident. It does not appear to be a clear cut case of clinical engine failure, followed by prop feathering given the dire situation Andrew was faced with. At this stage it has not been determined whether the "failed" engine was indeed able to be featherd due to the nature of the problem. Furthermore it has not been determined whether the "good" engine was developing max power, for whatever the reason. Obviously he was faced with a diabolical situation, credit where credit is due.

T&B

[elche]

live engine running rough

Not sure if this has been mentioned yet but...

A bloke playing golf at the Fairfield golf course saw the plane fly over head at around 400ft with the right engine feathered and the left engine running rough.

I heard the bloke on 2GB. He is a pilot and aircraft owner at BK.

[K3nnyboy]

I am sure the pilot did the job with the best of his ability, knowing how stressful it'd be if it happens to myself. Proud of him cos no one was hurt on ground!!

One thing that got me though (if I get caught up in the same situation) was that even if RIC was in fog, would any of you guys consider ILS at RIC, knowing there's gonna be low vis upon arrival; with clouds being below the DA??

[capt.mofo]

Sorry - where is the report that he lost an engine? I didn't come across this anywhere - did he report this to ATC?

As for aging GA twin pistons in charter - are they safe. The immediate question has to yes. They were thought to have been at some point in time otherwise they would not be allowed to operate. Are they safer than newer modern turbine aircraft - of course not.

Do we see Kevin 747 riding pistons? Or the NSW state premier give up her chartered Twin Turbines for a Twin piston? NSW Premier Kristina Keneally slated for $4m spending spree | News.com.au
Perhaps if the government had to use them then the laws might be changed.

The fact is where cost is an issue the cheapest option ALWAYS wins. (Unless your an asylam seeker Private VIP jets transport asylum seekers)

To those involved my deepest sympathies. And to all my fellow pilots out there be careful! Especially if the aircraft is older than you!

[capt.mofo]

Kennyboy -

One thing that got me though (if I get caught up in the same situation) was that even if RIC was in fog, would any of you guys consider ILS at RIC, knowing there's gonna be low vis upon arrival; with clouds being below the DA??

No - I would take a field that I could see anyday. 200 odd feet off the deck with no vis on a single engine is not the place you want to be - EVER.