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

King Air down at Essendon?

Old 24th Sep 2018, 11:50
  #981 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 3,363
Received 193 Likes on 81 Posts
I think the slash marks look like they are made with less aircraft yaw.
How much yaw do you need for the nose and left mains to be following the same path?
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 11:52
  #982 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 3,363
Received 193 Likes on 81 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
Spoken like a life member of the Monday morning quarterbacks club.
Unfortunately the results bear me out.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:00
  #983 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,166
Received 16 Likes on 12 Posts
Originally Posted by Old Akro
I understand that the B200 is certified under FAR 23. Paraphrasing FAR 23.677 it says essentially that the aircraft should have enough control authority to land in any trim position.
nope, it says a trim system runaway which the pilot stops then must be able to safely control it etc.
djpil is online now  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:00
  #984 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Australia
Posts: 51
Received 4 Likes on 2 Posts
Originally Posted by Old Akro
Trevor, A CASA FOI declared him to be competent about a year prior after extensive review.
To be clear, an FOI found that he satisfactorily met the required standards for an IPC, probably in a cheaper and simpler aircraft than the B200 (since the required engine failure simulations would not have been permitted in a B200 aircraft with the availability of a sim). Said FOI also specifically recommended additional B200 sim practice / refresher training, a recommendation which apparently wasn't taken up.
Look Mum - no hands is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:03
  #985 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: The Swan Downunder
Posts: 1,137
Received 87 Likes on 51 Posts
And a Trim Runaway can only apply to the elevator trim, since the other two are manually controlled screw jacks.
Xeptu is online now  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:10
  #986 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The silver lining of the subsequent litigation will include a far more rigorous analysis of all this stuff.
Not necessarily, Leady.
FGD135 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:11
  #987 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: QLD - where drivers are yet to realise that the left lane goes to their destination too.
Posts: 3,363
Received 193 Likes on 81 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
There was an accident, so your analysis of what could and should have been done better bear you out? Please tell me you don’t work for ATSB.
My comments were in relation to previous statements that the pilot wasted valuable time talking on the radio. Three seconds prior to impact the aircraft had already ceased to fly. Airspeed was decaying, and rate of descent was increasing rapidly. The damage was already done.
Traffic_Is_Er_Was is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:28
  #988 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 669
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Three seconds prior to impact the aircraft had already ceased to fly. Airspeed was decaying, and rate of descent was increasing rapidly. The damage was already done.
His leg had given out. Perhaps it was at this point that he surrended and made the radio call.
FGD135 is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 12:49
  #989 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 227
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
The silver lining of the subsequent litigation will include a far more rigorous analysis of all this stuff.
About the only sensible comment that you have posted in prune in years.
zzuf is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 13:12
  #990 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 227
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon

There is this thing called “google”. You can use it to search for answers to questions like the difference between “slip” and “skid” in an aircraft. It will also give you information about why skids create greater risk than slips.

I’d commend that search to you.

Or become a student pilot and you’ll learn about this during your training.
FDG 135 It is always enlightening to see a post such as yours i.e sideslip is sideslip left or right irrespective of aircraft attitude or manoeuvres.
Lead whatever, always uses the same technique to appear to display superior knowledge without ever actually a commitment to such a demonstration.
I don't know who he is, but he always displays the corporate arrogance which infects certain pilots of a particular Australian carrier.
For me, I am just a dumb test pilot graduate. Thankfully there are a bunch of tp graduates in said carrier way smarter than Lead whatever.
He did, however make the point that there is a long way to go on this report.
I believe that it will be shredded by those chasing the biggest bag of cash.
zzuf is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 13:22
  #991 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 227
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by FGD135
His leg had given out. Perhaps it was at this point that he surrended and made the radio call.
There is no evidence of what the rudder forces were and the relationship to those acceptable to the certification authority, or even if the simulator was in any way representative of the aircraft under these circumstances.
Typically acceptable rudder forces, these days (they change with the certification basis) are about 200lbf. I known, as a typical unfit pilot, i could hold 400lbf rudder force for over 30 seconds in a no risk environment.
This report opens more questions than those answered.
zzuf is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 13:33
  #992 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: The Outer Marker hut
Posts: 229
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
He may have passed a number of skills based assessments but this looks like a dose of complacency coupled with a lack of discipline, both of which can be suppressed long enough to pass a flight test. It’s virtually impossible to test for hazardous attitudes and when these traits are observed and reported by people other than check pilots, it becomes an impossible hot potato for HR. I see it every day, competent guys let down by an overly relaxed attitude.
bazza stub is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 13:54
  #993 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: australia
Posts: 172
Received 11 Likes on 7 Posts
"The ATSB found that the pilot did not detect that the aircraft’s rudder trim was in the full nose-left position prior to take-off."

Haven't read the complete report, but I hope they have an explanation as to how the trim got there in the first place.
exfocx is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 13:56
  #994 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: australia
Posts: 227
Received 3 Likes on 3 Posts
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
FGD: You keep talking about ‘sideslip’.

Wouldn’t an uncorrected rudder trim cause a ‘skid’?
You show as much knowledge about sideslip and aircraft handling as you do about Vmcg.
Still I am not surprised.
zzuf is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 15:41
  #995 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have never flown a Kingair but was working tonight with someone who has a lot of experience on the type in this report. He stated that there is a possible fcu drive shaft fault that results in a runaway engine and believes this is what happened. Looking at the amount of damage on the wreckage, how could this not be discounted from what happened? I have read the report and the engine examinations seem to be a bit glossed over. (My opinion only). Hope this is not an ATSB high profile prang that blames the deceased pilot for expedience.
jobsright is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 16:11
  #996 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Vermont Hwy
Posts: 565
Likes: 0
Received 9 Likes on 5 Posts
Originally Posted by jobsright
I have never flown a Kingair but was working tonight with someone who has a lot of experience on the type in this report. He stated that there is a possible fcu drive shaft fault that results in a runaway engine and believes this is what happened. Looking at the amount of damage on the wreckage, how could this not be discounted from what happened? I have read the report and the engine examinations seem to be a bit glossed over. (My opinion only). Hope this is not an ATSB high profile prang that blames the deceased pilot for expedience.
Very simply, yes it can happen.
FCU technicalities were never my strong point but basically there's a cavity in which flyweights are driven. If the seals leak and fuel gets into this cavity, the lubrication is removed. Eventually the coupling driving the flyweights will break, the FCU thinks this is an underspeed (when it's not, the engine hasn't actually slowed down) and it will schedule fuel in. Only thing to do is shut it down.

Tell-tale sign is if you've got a bit of fuel dropping from the nacelle. If there's any blue colouring to it, don't fly. Blue grease is used to lubricate the drive coupling. When fuel gets into the cavity and mixes with the grease, it'll vent out and drip onto the ground at some point.


A factor or not here? I don't know. Incredibly rare failure I believe.
Car RAMROD is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 20:09
  #997 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: back to the land of small pay and big bills
Age: 50
Posts: 1,218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I think there is definitely a possibility that the pilot applied all the trim in response to something..I feel like he deserves the benefit of the doubt for now
mattyj is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 20:26
  #998 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Australia/India
Posts: 5,420
Received 498 Likes on 253 Posts
Originally Posted by zzuf
You show as much knowledge about sideslip and aircraft handling as you do about Vmcg.
Still I am not surprised.
In all of the aircraft that I’ve flown during the last 33 years:

- the application of a bootfull of rudder during otherwise coordinated flight results in skidding away from the direction of the applied rudder

- failure to set the trim properly results in skidding away from the direction the rudder is miss-trimmed.

Perhaps all those aircraft are unique in that respect.

There is a difference between slipping and skidding, and there are consequences of the difference. You should research the issue. You might learn something.
Lead Balloon is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 20:30
  #999 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: At Home
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I have flown King Airs for almost 20 yrs, mostly on the B200. While reading this Report, iam not really happy with it. For me the Report raises more Questions than Answers.
And yes, i have been in Simulators several Times. And have done Checkrides in the Actual AC. In EASA Land it is a Class/Type Rating, so no credits flying Seneca or similar.

1 : At the weight and Temperature the AC would definitly fly on both engines. Clean or Flaps Appr.
2 : Ruddertrim full over is putting a lot of strain on you, but i think i could hold the Trim for at least lets say, a Minute. But it would be unmistakable on the TO run
3 : Why didnt the AC climb? . Why didnt the Pilot raise the Gear? ( With the Climb Penalty of ca. 500ft/min and an OEI Climbrate of 400-600ft/min, you have no Chance with the Wheels down.

4 : Why did the Take Off Roll take that Long?


5 : One Thing that Comes to my mind is, that most Pilots are late or Carefull with using Rudder to Stop Asymetric flight, but if a building Comes Close.....

Ok a Rolling T/O on a short RWY(below 2000m) would be off Limits to me, as it will use to much Rwy, but thats not the reason for the crash
The T/O Speeds seem very low to me. Acc to Experience VR is roughly 100KTs ( exactly ist 95kt limited by 110% Vmc) and VYse flaps up is 121KTs
Rotating with under 100KTs Flaps up, or rotating a bit fast gets you in the Air with a beeping Stall Warning and a Sluggish Flying AC.
Most Pilots accelerate immediatly to 160kts Cruise Climb and never climb any slower.

And most Pilots i know would use on Rwys below 1500m in any case Flaps Appr for T/O, sacrifying 1% Climb Gradient in Exchange for a Solid flying AC directly after T/O

My Impression was : Engine related Failure, or untrained Pilot in KA200

Sorry!
Propsforever is offline  
Old 24th Sep 2018, 21:51
  #1000 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: On my V Strom
Posts: 354
Received 25 Likes on 16 Posts
Oh Akro - spare me. A CASA FOI deemed him competent. That means nothing. Scrub up for the test, be a good boy, pass test which is limited in the full extent of airborne emergencies, and then ignore the FOIS call for remedial training and then go back to bad habits.

Begs the question - how does an FOI pass a guy and then give him the option of remedial training if you feel like it?
Trevor the lover is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.