The Pacific: General Aviation & Questions The place for students, instructors and charter guys in Oz, NZ and the rest of Oceania.

RAAF Crash East Sale

Old 18th May 2011, 08:06
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,882
RAAF Crash East Sale

Not much info yet.... what did we lose a PC9 ??
VH-XXX is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 08:12
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: PRL
Age: 49
Posts: 41
Just did a google search and found an article about a PC9 crash around 1515hrs local. Appears pilot(s?) ejected safely.
ace4bar's girlfriend is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 08:32
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SE Aus
Posts: 129
RAAF PC9/A plane crashes near East Sale base | Herald Sun
Victor India is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 08:50
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Aus
Posts: 22
the other day there were a few PC9's at Wagga doing low level work
cavok123 is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 09:18
  #5 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,882
RAAF PC-9s grounded after crash | Australian Aviation Magazine

The Australian way... crash a plane, then GROUND all similar types

Last edited by VH-XXX; 18th May 2011 at 11:19. Reason: Oops added the word "ground"
VH-XXX is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 10:27
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Sydney Australia
Posts: 771
At Avalon Airshow the Roulette team aircraft did not all have the big R on the tail. Three were from 2FTS Pearce. I was told that it was because all the higher engine time PC9's had been grounded because of an earlier engine incident.

Now there appears to be another incident..........
bentleg is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 12:08
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Australia
Age: 60
Posts: 145
I remember a CT4 having an engine failure and subsequent forced landing in a friend's paddock off Dunnings Rd just north of Pt Cook; back in the 80's if I recall correctly. No big deal then, no damage during landing as far as I know but a hell of a theatrical performance on behalf of RAAF personnel; armed guards around the aircraft for some time, a huge fuss with the property owner being told to effoff despite property damage and expensive animals nearby; bigger than Ben Hur I remember him saying, I don't recall him being to impressed.

Short video clips just now on ABC of military personnel wearing respirator gear while other individuals in civvies breathing al la naturale.
osmosis is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 22:08
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Tickawarra
Posts: 113
Is the engine a PT6 in the PC9 ?
Yobbo is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 22:37
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: NSW
Posts: 213
It makes no difference re total time of aircraft. Engines/props are on a different overhaul schedule. Hours and cycles on the engine not the airframe dictate its condition. A 10,000 hours airframe can have a "0" time since overhaul engine for example.
TBM-Legend is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 23:08
  #10 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Mel-burn
Posts: 4,882
From memory SOP's are to punch regardless, but I do wonder if there is a minimum. There is mention in this link of ejection at "only 300ft" which makes me wonder what the minimum is.

This is an interesting link:

http://www.ejection-history.org.uk/A...c_9_losses.htm
VH-XXX is offline  
Old 18th May 2011, 23:24
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 581
If the prop doesn't/isn't feathered the thing sinks like a collins class (couldn't resist). Do you waste time deciding if you might make it ( and maybe get that decision wrong)or do you take a well rehearsed option.
I heard someone recalling a story of a RAF pilot I believe, who ejected.
The journo asked him just after the incident when did you make the decision to eject in this scenario?
The pilot replied 10 years ago.
The PC 9 is getting on, who cares if you chuck one away if it fails the makers warranty as long as the crew get out safely.
ozbiggles is online now  
Old 18th May 2011, 23:51
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Victoria
Age: 58
Posts: 984
As long as ejection is initated within the performance parameters of the particular seat installed, and correct seating posture is adopted the risks of injury should be minimal. Where you land is another matter! As a matter of procedure, all ejectees are immediately raced of to medical to get an X-ray.
Captain Sand Dune is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 00:23
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,438
and don't forget that once they abandon ship, its an out of control missile. How much consideration is given to people on the ground?
RENURPP is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 00:59
  #14 (permalink)  
Sprucegoose
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Hughes Point, where life is great! Was also resident on page 13, but now I'm lost in Cyberspace....
Age: 55
Posts: 3,490
Lucky it wasn't a PC-12, where punching out isn't an option!

Oh I see Wally has already broached that topic!
Howard Hughes is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 02:55
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 581
Hi Wal
My comments are just my own thoughts on the matter and not directed at any one (in this case!).
There is a ADF media release from today that now says the boys had departed, had an engine failure, turned back from some distance, tried to restart but it wouldn't and they were not in gliding distance so selected the Martin Baker let down option.
The PC 9 really isn't a good aircraft to try to force land on a paddock, particularly when you have another option. Bang seats have got better over the years and offer a much better option than a relatively high speed landing with narrowish tires and fuel tanks very close to the leading edge.
As for deciding where to leave vs whats on the ground all depends on the time/control you have over the situation. I imagine for those who have done it they tried to control the outcome as much as possible and its the first thing you would think of once you are on the ground.
I had my own policy regarding it but it may have varied in the real case!!!
As for the PT6, the PC9 ones get flogged but I do have awe for anyone who flies one without a bang seat!
ozbiggles is online now  
Old 19th May 2011, 02:57
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Sydney NSW Australia
Posts: 3,049
Punching out in the event of an engine failure is SOP. part of that procedure, is to ensure the aircraft will cause minimal damage on the ground after you leave it. in otehrword, exercise good airmanship and make sure your aircraft is pointed somewhere safe when you pull the handle
Ultralights is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 03:04
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Brisbane
Posts: 1,135
Out of interest, I believe that all the PC-9 frames get rotated through 2FTS and the Roulettes ... to average out the usage.
peuce is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 04:06
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 51
Posts: 6,879
Hey Wally,

Just a few hours later I launched from YSGE to YRED......and it was dark!

And no ejection options
Jabawocky is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 04:18
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Good old Melbourne
Posts: 55
Are the PC9s ejection system similar to the CT4Bs in that does one have to manually jump out of the aircraft?
jieunni is offline  
Old 19th May 2011, 04:35
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 139
Do the RAAF PC9s have zero-zero seats? or would that be too new and expensive (by RAAF standards)
JustJoinedToSearch is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

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