King Air down at Essendon?
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 578
Likes: 21
From: Vermont Hwy
Not necessarily.
The core can still be rotating due to the aircrafts forward speed. See one of my posts on the previous page answering Eddie Dean.
They also state that there was no evident pre-impact internal failures.
There quite possibly could have been some external component that has failed resulting in a loss of power (ie fcu). (note, I am not stating any kind of hypothesis here, just trying to highlight what the terminology in the prelim report is saying).
Like I said previously, the prelim report won't answer all the questions and we have to wait for a more thorough report after further investigation. All this has done is stated some known facts- not necessarily anything about the causal factors..
Spinex, you said it mate, more questions than answers.
Joined: Mar 2017
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
From: Australia
Damn, I guess all we get from this preliminary is that we don't know what happened yet. Clearly the pilot believed almost right away that he had a problem, and within 5 seconds events had caused it to begin rapidly loosing alt.
I don't know the accuracy range of the tracking data, but to my layman's eye, the tracked flight path by ADB seems to also rule out those early reports/speculations that the retail building was the cause/major contributing factor of the crash? I'm not saying building that there was a brain trust moment, just that looking at the VS numbers, and path, it seems that if that building wasn't there, it'd have just come down on the edge of or in the freeway cutting?
I don't know the accuracy range of the tracking data, but to my layman's eye, the tracked flight path by ADB seems to also rule out those early reports/speculations that the retail building was the cause/major contributing factor of the crash? I'm not saying building that there was a brain trust moment, just that looking at the VS numbers, and path, it seems that if that building wasn't there, it'd have just come down on the edge of or in the freeway cutting?
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
From: In my Swag
Not necessarily.
The core can still be rotating due to the aircrafts forward speed. See one of my posts on the previous page answering Eddie Dean.
They also state that there was no evident pre-impact internal failures.
There quite possibly could have been some external component that has failed resulting in a loss of power (ie fcu). (note, I am not stating any kind of hypothesis here, just trying to highlight what the terminology in the prelim report is saying).
Like I said previously, the prelim report won't answer all the questions and we have to wait for a more thorough report after further investigation. All this has done is stated some known facts- not necessarily anything about the causal factors..
Spinex, you said it mate, more questions than answers.
The core can still be rotating due to the aircrafts forward speed. See one of my posts on the previous page answering Eddie Dean.
They also state that there was no evident pre-impact internal failures.
There quite possibly could have been some external component that has failed resulting in a loss of power (ie fcu). (note, I am not stating any kind of hypothesis here, just trying to highlight what the terminology in the prelim report is saying).
Like I said previously, the prelim report won't answer all the questions and we have to wait for a more thorough report after further investigation. All this has done is stated some known facts- not necessarily anything about the causal factors..
Spinex, you said it mate, more questions than answers.
FCU drive shear should go to full noise. Well on a - 20 and -34, maybe -41 and -42 have different arrangement. In my uneducated opinion
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 165
Likes: 33
From: YARM
preliminary report on Essendon accident
Statement on update: Essendon accident
Update of ATSB’s investigation into the collision with retail facility involving B200 King Air VH-ZCR at Essendon Airport, Victoria on 21 February 2017.
The ATSB has today released an update into the tragic accident involving a B200 King Air aircraft that collided with a retail facility at Essendon Airport on 21 February this year. Sadly all four passengers and the pilot died in the accident.
ATSB Chief Commissioner Greg Hood said ATSB investigators have done an extensive amount of work to date.
“Investigators have gathered and assessed a large volume of evidence such as CCTV footage and witness statements. The team has also inspected the engines in close consultation with the manufacturer,” Mr Hood said.
“The aircraft’s fire-damaged CVR was retrieved and transported to the ATSB’s technical facilities in Canberra for examination and download.
“While the CVR was successfully downloaded, no audio from the accident flight was recorded. All the recovered audio was from a previous flight on 3 January 2017. The ATSB is examining the reasons for this.”
Mr Hood said that while the team is diligently assessing the physical and digital evidence, the considerable damage to the aircraft is presenting challenges.
“The extensive damage caused by the collision and post-impact fire has meant investigators are yet to determine a clear picture of the causal factors behind the accident and loss of life,” Mr Hood said.
“I offer my deepest sympathies to the families and loved ones of those on board the aircraft. Every effort is being made to determine the cause of this tragic accident.”
This update does not contain findings. The ATSB will present the findings of its investigation in the final report, due out in around 12 months. Further updates will be provided if significant information comes to hand.
If the ATSB identifies any safety issues during the course of the investigation, it will immediately bring them to the attention of relevant operators and authorities for safety action.
Update of ATSB’s investigation into the collision with retail facility involving B200 King Air VH-ZCR at Essendon Airport, Victoria on 21 February 2017.
The ATSB has today released an update into the tragic accident involving a B200 King Air aircraft that collided with a retail facility at Essendon Airport on 21 February this year. Sadly all four passengers and the pilot died in the accident.
ATSB Chief Commissioner Greg Hood said ATSB investigators have done an extensive amount of work to date.
“Investigators have gathered and assessed a large volume of evidence such as CCTV footage and witness statements. The team has also inspected the engines in close consultation with the manufacturer,” Mr Hood said.
“The aircraft’s fire-damaged CVR was retrieved and transported to the ATSB’s technical facilities in Canberra for examination and download.
“While the CVR was successfully downloaded, no audio from the accident flight was recorded. All the recovered audio was from a previous flight on 3 January 2017. The ATSB is examining the reasons for this.”
Mr Hood said that while the team is diligently assessing the physical and digital evidence, the considerable damage to the aircraft is presenting challenges.
“The extensive damage caused by the collision and post-impact fire has meant investigators are yet to determine a clear picture of the causal factors behind the accident and loss of life,” Mr Hood said.
“I offer my deepest sympathies to the families and loved ones of those on board the aircraft. Every effort is being made to determine the cause of this tragic accident.”
This update does not contain findings. The ATSB will present the findings of its investigation in the final report, due out in around 12 months. Further updates will be provided if significant information comes to hand.
If the ATSB identifies any safety issues during the course of the investigation, it will immediately bring them to the attention of relevant operators and authorities for safety action.
Collision with terrain involving B200 King Air VH-ZCR at Essendon Airport, Victoria on 21 February 2017
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 165
Likes: 33
From: YARM
source: atsb
The ATSB said Airservices ADS-B data showed the aircraft reached a maximum height of about 160ft above ground level while tracking in an arc to the left of the runway centreline before colliding with the DFO shopping centre.
The aircraft was configured with 10 degrees of flap and had its landing gear extended and locked when it crashed.
The engines were taken away from the accident site for further analysis with assistance from the engine manufacturer.
“That examination found that the cores of both engines were rotating and that there was no evidence of pre-impact failure of either engine’s internal components,” the ATSB said.
Joined: Mar 2005
Aviation Qualifications: Military
Posts: 6,563
Likes: 952
From: Aus
Slash marks on the roof from the left prop would seem to indicate it wasn't feathered. Fag packet calcs of slash marks would seem to indicate normal RPM in 2,000 region. Some sort of failure in rudder boost? Any thing else to cause directional control issues?
Joined: Feb 2009
Posts: 2,606
Likes: 0
From: dans un cercle dont le centre est eveywhere et circumfernce n'est nulle part
My belief is that the Pel-Air matter will be further pushed aside while this matter is investigated. Serious as it is, the preceding matter has more concerning aspects to investigate, rather than be a back-squaddie or red herring.
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 4,704
Likes: 589
From: 500 miles from Chaikhosi, Yogistan
Well, the aircraft had a similar horizontal and vertical trajectory (save for the final steep bit) to many Vmca accidents* just without the inverted bit. My comment was about the fact that both engines appeared to be operating could explain the "lack of invertedness".
Why it went left and not up, I don't know.
With the lack of CVR, I fear that the final report will be inconclusive and we'll be debating the least implausible theories for decades to come. Hopefully lead Oxo-bromide doesn't feature.
(*where an engine has failed and with the lack of performance, the aircraft trades height for speed until there is no rudder left to counteract the yaw and the aircraft rolls inverted, usually somewhere just off the end of the runway)
Why it went left and not up, I don't know.
With the lack of CVR, I fear that the final report will be inconclusive and we'll be debating the least implausible theories for decades to come. Hopefully lead Oxo-bromide doesn't feature.
(*where an engine has failed and with the lack of performance, the aircraft trades height for speed until there is no rudder left to counteract the yaw and the aircraft rolls inverted, usually somewhere just off the end of the runway)
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,937
Likes: 28
From: UK/OZ
Not directly related to the accident report.
WebTrak
Above is a link to the noise monitoring data at Essendon airport. The archive includes the accident date.
I note that the tracks of some aircraft appear at the beginning of the taxi or a hover.
Other tracks don't appear until the flight is past the end of the runway.
What method is used to derive the track? Why does the position of the commencement of the track vary between aircraft/flights?
There is no track for the King Air, it seems to fit the category of tracking that does not commence until the flight is past the end of the runway.
The decibel level of both the impact and post impact noises (explosions?) are recorded.
Mickjoebill
WebTrak
Above is a link to the noise monitoring data at Essendon airport. The archive includes the accident date.
I note that the tracks of some aircraft appear at the beginning of the taxi or a hover.
Other tracks don't appear until the flight is past the end of the runway.
What method is used to derive the track? Why does the position of the commencement of the track vary between aircraft/flights?
There is no track for the King Air, it seems to fit the category of tracking that does not commence until the flight is past the end of the runway.
The decibel level of both the impact and post impact noises (explosions?) are recorded.
Mickjoebill
Last edited by mickjoebill; 29th March 2017 at 08:40.
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 578
Likes: 21
From: Vermont Hwy
Eddie, if you fly PT6 gear, if you ever have the chance to shut one down in flight give it a go and have a look at your N1 (or Ng if you prefer that term)- there will be rotation. Been there, done that, and the sims replicate it too.
I'm working from memory here as I don't have access to my manuals right now, but the air start procedure (no starter assist) calls for a minimum airspeed to be reached. Do you know why? Well, in very simple terms, this is to force air into the engine and rotate the N1.
Megan, even with failure of the rudder boost the B200 is very controllable. It is best thought of as an "assistant"- it doesn't give you a massive bootfull of rudder but rather just gives you a bit of rudder to help you out in an asymmetric situation. It's a 10 day item if failed so not exactly critical.
If your calculations on prop rpm are anywhere near correct, that intrigues me.
Comp stall, yes the lack of CVR is very disappointing, the investigation probably wont be able to uncover many useful facts as a result.
One thing I find interesting from the report is the flap position. 10 degrees is not a correctly rigged position. If memory serves me right, the Takeoff/Approach (40%) position is 14 +/-1 degrees.
I'm working from memory here as I don't have access to my manuals right now, but the air start procedure (no starter assist) calls for a minimum airspeed to be reached. Do you know why? Well, in very simple terms, this is to force air into the engine and rotate the N1.
Megan, even with failure of the rudder boost the B200 is very controllable. It is best thought of as an "assistant"- it doesn't give you a massive bootfull of rudder but rather just gives you a bit of rudder to help you out in an asymmetric situation. It's a 10 day item if failed so not exactly critical.
If your calculations on prop rpm are anywhere near correct, that intrigues me.
Comp stall, yes the lack of CVR is very disappointing, the investigation probably wont be able to uncover many useful facts as a result.
One thing I find interesting from the report is the flap position. 10 degrees is not a correctly rigged position. If memory serves me right, the Takeoff/Approach (40%) position is 14 +/-1 degrees.
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 117
Likes: 28
From: australia
At least Ch7,9 and SBS had a Swinburne academic on tonight who gave a sober, measured response. Yes, the engines were developing power. No, we don't know if that meant full power. No, nobody knows why the CVR was blank. Yes, many factors yet to be considered. And thank goodness the SBS guy clarified that Mayday 7 times does not mean 7 transmissions. Better this guy than GT any day
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 490
Likes: 0
From: In my Swag
Ramrod, not flown one but thrown spanners at a few.
You have me thinking about airstart on fixed wing versus B212 which I have seen.
On ground runs on King Air fuel is introduced at about 18% Ng so with an air start does the same apply? Do you just open the condition lever and pour fuel in or is it a proper start cycle?
How do you latch the igniters without hitting the start button?
Appears I may need to brush up on my theory a bit as been working on Jetrangers and light pistons for last few years.
Cheers
You have me thinking about airstart on fixed wing versus B212 which I have seen.
On ground runs on King Air fuel is introduced at about 18% Ng so with an air start does the same apply? Do you just open the condition lever and pour fuel in or is it a proper start cycle?
How do you latch the igniters without hitting the start button?
Appears I may need to brush up on my theory a bit as been working on Jetrangers and light pistons for last few years.
Cheers
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Joined: Apr 2002
Aviation Qualifications: ATPL
Posts: 3,065
Likes: 222
From: Back home again after another fantastic time in Japan; once again back to the 'real world' and continuing the seemingly never ending search for a bad bottle of Red.
Curiouser and curiouser....
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 683
Likes: 3
From: Sydney
Somebody mentioned friction locks a while back. I have spent most of my flying time on Beechcraft and cought out once by it just after lift off. Result would have been similar if it wasn't for my lightning fast reaction.
Got me thinking again.......
Got me thinking again.......
Joined: Nov 2009
Posts: 578
Likes: 21
From: Vermont Hwy
Eddie, hmm those heli whirly thingies. No idea with that witch magic! But on the King Air there's a couple of different sets of switches.
One of them is the "Ignition and Engine Start" which spins the starter and provides spark at the igniters. This switch also has a position to motor the engine without ignition, but that's not relevant for this discussion.
The other set of switches is is the auto-ignition. Without going in to too much detail, these are generally turned on before takeoff and off after landing. If for some reason torque drops below 400ft/lbs the ignition system will energise automatically, providing spark. These switches lever lock into the armed position.
In a no starter assist start, basically have the auto ignition armed, be below 20,000ft and going at least 140ias, condition lever to low idle and monitor the start. Once stable, set power as required.
Sms777, it was me who brought up the friction locks and power lever slide back. There are those pilots who have and those pilots who have not experienced it. And there's probably many, many more who have no clue as to it being possible. You have experienced it, so you know what it's like. In the King Air it'll more often than not be on takeoff when you take your hand off the power levers to grab the gear. I'd probably put money on this being what you had. Am I close?
It isn't that difficult to deal with to be honest, but there is a very real possibility that someone somewhere could stuff it up and not realise what has happened.
Out of this discussion, whether or not there is any relation to this accident, if some people have learnt about the phenomenon then that's good.
One of them is the "Ignition and Engine Start" which spins the starter and provides spark at the igniters. This switch also has a position to motor the engine without ignition, but that's not relevant for this discussion.
The other set of switches is is the auto-ignition. Without going in to too much detail, these are generally turned on before takeoff and off after landing. If for some reason torque drops below 400ft/lbs the ignition system will energise automatically, providing spark. These switches lever lock into the armed position.
In a no starter assist start, basically have the auto ignition armed, be below 20,000ft and going at least 140ias, condition lever to low idle and monitor the start. Once stable, set power as required.
Sms777, it was me who brought up the friction locks and power lever slide back. There are those pilots who have and those pilots who have not experienced it. And there's probably many, many more who have no clue as to it being possible. You have experienced it, so you know what it's like. In the King Air it'll more often than not be on takeoff when you take your hand off the power levers to grab the gear. I'd probably put money on this being what you had. Am I close?
It isn't that difficult to deal with to be honest, but there is a very real possibility that someone somewhere could stuff it up and not realise what has happened.
Out of this discussion, whether or not there is any relation to this accident, if some people have learnt about the phenomenon then that's good.
Last edited by Car RAMROD; 29th March 2017 at 10:33.
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 907
Likes: 0
From: australia
The following from a tin foil hat wearing , conspiracy theory sprouting mate , suggesting I google,
" Munsch Hardt Lawyers, bankruptcy, Enron, and Northwest Airlines "
Supposedly this would produce a theory for why the crash occurred.
Beyond my tolerance level I'm afraid.
Can any Pruners decipher this babble?
" Munsch Hardt Lawyers, bankruptcy, Enron, and Northwest Airlines "
Supposedly this would produce a theory for why the crash occurred.
Beyond my tolerance level I'm afraid.
Can any Pruners decipher this babble?