Chieftain down in SA
Guest
Posts: n/a
Because it smacks of shonky business, that's why! It makes people wonder what else is being covered up.
Looks like Peterc005 and CB Hunter may win the ribbon for this one, just having a look at the ATSB website and the Investigation is now titled "Fuel starvation and forced landing involving PA31, VH-OFF near Aldinga ALA, South Australia on 29 January 2014".
Might be a timely reminder for all those flying Chieftains and Navajos and the many other aircraft that susceptible to this kind of simple error around the country to be extra diligent, be safe out there boys and girls!!
Might be a timely reminder for all those flying Chieftains and Navajos and the many other aircraft that susceptible to this kind of simple error around the country to be extra diligent, be safe out there boys and girls!!
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: YMMB
Age: 58
Posts: 703
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If it is fuel starvation due to mis-management of the fuel system, it's not the first time it's happened.
Not a hard thing to do and a valuable lesson for others.
The fact that this scenario has been repeated a number of times suggests that Piper should have paid more attention to the pilot ergonomics of the fuel selector system.
My son is coming up thru the ranks and I tell him that this sort of thing will happen to him one day in the hope it will avoid complacency. The place where he does his training are very strict about procedures and check lists, which is probably a good thing.
Not a hard thing to do and a valuable lesson for others.
The fact that this scenario has been repeated a number of times suggests that Piper should have paid more attention to the pilot ergonomics of the fuel selector system.
My son is coming up thru the ranks and I tell him that this sort of thing will happen to him one day in the hope it will avoid complacency. The place where he does his training are very strict about procedures and check lists, which is probably a good thing.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I gather the Piper fuel selector valves have a degree of notoriety for failure?
I'm not familiar with the precise setup on VH-OFF - but a mate (now deceased due to age) claimed he had a fuel selector valve failure on his Cherokee around about 1986-87, which resulted in fuel starvation and engine stoppage, and an emergency set-down on the highway between Kalgoorlie and Coolgardie.
Unfortunately, despite making a pretty faultless dead-stick landing, he clobbered a roadside sign and took off a sizeable portion of a wing, resulting in some pretty major damage. No-one was hurt.
He claimed the valve was sent off for testing and failed twice in 4000 cycles. I'm not sure if that really was the story - and the valve really was faulty - or if he was making it up and he was personally responsible for the crash by neglecting to select the correct tank.
He was inclined to be a little loose with the truth, so I have my doubts about his version. However, I note that fuel selector valve failures, valve leakage, and valve corrosion, feature in a number of Piper discussions and accident reports - without the addition of pilot error in fuel valve selection.
I'm not familiar with the precise setup on VH-OFF - but a mate (now deceased due to age) claimed he had a fuel selector valve failure on his Cherokee around about 1986-87, which resulted in fuel starvation and engine stoppage, and an emergency set-down on the highway between Kalgoorlie and Coolgardie.
Unfortunately, despite making a pretty faultless dead-stick landing, he clobbered a roadside sign and took off a sizeable portion of a wing, resulting in some pretty major damage. No-one was hurt.
He claimed the valve was sent off for testing and failed twice in 4000 cycles. I'm not sure if that really was the story - and the valve really was faulty - or if he was making it up and he was personally responsible for the crash by neglecting to select the correct tank.
He was inclined to be a little loose with the truth, so I have my doubts about his version. However, I note that fuel selector valve failures, valve leakage, and valve corrosion, feature in a number of Piper discussions and accident reports - without the addition of pilot error in fuel valve selection.
It can't be considered difficult to take off & land on the mains, and use aux. for cruise. It's common to many types. Even if the valve failed as the selector passed through 'off', you should still be able to get fuel to that engine thanks to the pressure x-feed system.
It's the simple things that often catch people out Tinstaafl. Last minute charter has come in, pushing last light, boss and client are both getting impatient so you grab the aircraft, bundle your passengers aboard and get going deciding "Stuff the checklist, I'm in a hurry and I've done this a hundred times!" Only to feel that wretched sinking feeling in your stomach as you get 50ft above the ground, the engines start coughing and you realise you forgot to change back to mains after doing a X-Feed check!!
Just out of curiosity and I promise I'm not trying to cast doubts or blame or anything just purely curious. If an aircraft is known to have problems with Takeoff And/or Landing on the Aux Tanks, for example the climb/descent attitude causes the fuel lines to become uncovered, and the refueller has added the fuel that was meant to go to your Mains into your Aux instead so therefore the required fuel is now solely located in your Aux with your Mains being just about bone dry and you go to take off and have an engine failure due to the Mains being empty and the Aux being full, would the ATSB consider that Fuel Starvation because you had adequate fuel but just not in the selected tank or Fuel Exhaustion because the fuel you had in the Aux wouldn't have been useable for the Takeoff anyway?
Just out of curiosity and I promise I'm not trying to cast doubts or blame or anything just purely curious. If an aircraft is known to have problems with Takeoff And/or Landing on the Aux Tanks, for example the climb/descent attitude causes the fuel lines to become uncovered, and the refueller has added the fuel that was meant to go to your Mains into your Aux instead so therefore the required fuel is now solely located in your Aux with your Mains being just about bone dry and you go to take off and have an engine failure due to the Mains being empty and the Aux being full, would the ATSB consider that Fuel Starvation because you had adequate fuel but just not in the selected tank or Fuel Exhaustion because the fuel you had in the Aux wouldn't have been useable for the Takeoff anyway?
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: deepest darkest recess of your mind
Posts: 1,017
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's a simple check in a PA-31. What they would consider if you did stuff it up as you describe is say you failed in your primary task. Fuel sufficient and correct for your flight. P.I.C responsibility. You aren't flying a C150 anymore. It just really isn't that hard to ensure selectors correct and sufficient fuel.
The only way to check x-feed in a PA31 is to switch x-feed 'on' and then switch that engine's selector to 'off'. You would have to do that, in turn, for each engine. No way am I going to be switching fuel off between engine start & take-off. Checking for freedom of movement during a pre-flight, however...
My apologies, I wasn't very clear in my last post but I wasn't being specific to the PA-31 in that example as I have 0 time on that aircraft. As with my previous post before that one I was trying for a more generalised "Slow down, take your time, don't get rushed and make silly mistakes" sort of example!!
Sorry for the confusion
and yes I am entirely aware that this particular situation with VH-OFF could very well be a mechanical error that couldn't be detected by anyone prior to it happening but I always like to think it's never a bad thing to make sure people aren't lapsing into complacency!
Sorry for the confusion
and yes I am entirely aware that this particular situation with VH-OFF could very well be a mechanical error that couldn't be detected by anyone prior to it happening but I always like to think it's never a bad thing to make sure people aren't lapsing into complacency!
A little trick I always disciplined myself with on any twin I flew mainly 'cause I flew so many diff twins was fiddle with, play with & select whatever you need on any fuel selector BEFORE you started the donks. That way from start up to take off any engine (especially high powered units) would have showed signs of the life being brought to halt due my dumb thumbs!:-)
Wmk2
Wmk2
If an aircraft is known to have problems with Takeoff And/or Landing on the Aux Tanks, for example the climb/descent attitude causes the fuel lines to become uncovered, and the refueller has added the fuel that was meant to go to your Mains into your Aux instead so therefore the required fuel is now solely located in your Aux with your Mains being just about bone dry and you go to take off and have an engine failure due to the Mains being empty and the Aux being full, would the ATSB consider that Fuel Starvation because you had adequate fuel but just not in the selected tank or Fuel Exhaustion because the fuel you had in the Aux wouldn't have been useable for the Takeoff anyway?
I've had refuellers remove fuel because the wrong aircraft (mine) was overfilled (oops, wrong Baron). Took two hours under the wing in 38 deg heat, but it was either that or be overweight.
As for checking x-feeds, what's wrong with getting into the habit of confirming your fuel (by PHYSICALLY confirming selector position) every time you line up?
Lights (strobes), Camera (xpdr), ACTION (fuel). Nothing like getting into good habits early.
When I'm cleared for take off, or start to cross the holding point, I have a habit of checking the killer items: pumps, icing protection, flap, trim, engine controls (mixt, RPM & cowl flap as appropriate) & fuel selectors. It's as habitual with me as advancing the throttle to take off.
