King Air down at Essendon?

[Old Akro]

http://https://youtu.be/Wbu6X0hSnBY

This guy - Harry Lordings, an ex USAF test pilot has an interesting presentation on VMCA. He's pretty critical of the ATSB investigation into the EMB 120 accident at Darwin suggesting that the ATSB did not understand the concept of VMCA.

He is suggesting that the Darwin accident was really caused by deficiencies in the aircraft manufacturers flight manual.

Lordings says that despite the pilots following published procedures and speeds that that the accident occurred due to a practice engine failure below the actual VMCA. He says that the aircrafts speed below VMCA is demonstrated by its lack of ability to maintain runway heading, since that is the very definition of VMCA.

The Essendon accident shares with the Darwin accident that a straight flight path was not able to be maintained despite the airspeed being significantly above the published VMCA.

Let's hope that the ATSB do a better job of engine investigation than the Whyalla accident, a better job of considering asymmetric issues than the Darwin accident and a better job of deriving airspeed than the Bankstown Mojave accident. For that matter the ATSB investigation of the engine issues of the Bankstown accident was superficial at best.

Whatever happened; the only pilots that think they would have dealt with the emergency better than Max are fooling themselves. There but for the grace of god....

[Judd]

No cvr recording, but obviously working on prior flight. Both engines showing no signs of pre impact failure.

Very odd.

It doesn't surprise me in the slightest. I flew 737's for many years and after reading an article on testing the CVR for one's own voice transmission, the very first 737 CVR I checked by calling "test test test" into the CVR microphone and expecting after two seconds to hear my own voice, revealed no voice. I snagged it in the maintenance record and a defect was found by the technicians and fixed. In fact this happened on numerous occasions on other 737's I flew yet the test needle indicated the CVR was serviceable.

Then I flew for a European airline that had recently bought new 737-500's
I flew one which only had about 40 hours since new. I decided to plug my headset into the CVR jack in the cockpit and check my own voice for clarity.

Guess what? No voice re-transmission. Over the next few months checked the CVRs on other new 737-500's and a couple of 737-400's of that airline and on some discovered identical defects on their CVR voice test. Others were perfectly clear speech re-transmissions and some where the speech was so muffled as to be useless. After those experiences I made it my own SOP to check the correct operation of the CVR before every flight. Over many years I found many CVR failed to record one's voice.

Just because the Boeing 737 (older types anyway) passed the FCOM Supplementary Procedures test of pushing the CVR test switch and receiving a tone through a headset plugged into the headset jack as well as noting the Monitor indicator in the Green band, it doesn't necessarily ensure your voice is recorded or legible.

[sheppey]

ATSB states it will undertake "a review of the aircraft’s maintenance and operational records."

That's fine. Not forgetting of course, that not all defects are necessarily recorded in the maintenance release; even though many are legally supposed to be.

[Horatio Leafblower]

That's fine. Not forgetting of course, that not all defects are necessarily recorded in the maintenance release; even though many are legally supposed to be.

Was the M/R written up on fireproof paper?

[Sunfish]

casa will find defects in the paperwork and crucify the operator/maintainer, no matter how minor the infraction, unless they are 'mates".

[neville_nobody]

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?

One of the deceased was the lawyer who took Enron to court. Another was a FBI agent.

If it had happened 10 years ago assassination might be a motive, but I doubt that if people wanted him dead they would wait some 15+ years.

While there are some 'interesting' deaths surrounding the Enron Collapse. Ken Lay who has to have been the most convenient heart attacks of all time, I doubt that in this instance it would be applicable. Why would they wait so long to knock him off? You would have to also consider what the FBI agent was up to. But again if they're retired what's the point? Usually people get tapped BEFORE they execute justice.

My money would be on some strange control system or engine failure.

[john_tullamarine]

This guy - Harry Lordings, an ex USAF test pilot

Harry Horlings, perhaps ? FTE rather than TP and RNAF rather than USAF but, no matter. He is very pointedly motivated by Vmc matters and has some good stuff to relate.

However, if I recall correctly, did not the ATSB report (without going through the thing again myself), suggest a significant causative problem related to a rather common and inappropriate technique for simulating OEI on turboprops ? One which sort of invalidates the OEM data ?

[Eddie Dean]

Originally Posted by Sunfish

casa will find defects in the paperwork and crucify the operator/maintainer, no matter how minor the infraction, unless they are 'mates".

This is neither the time nor place to vent your paranoia about the regulator and the ATSB.
Old Akro should consider this as well

[pithblot]

Why is that Eddie?

Why can't Sunfish & Old Akro raise these points, here & now, on Pprune?

[OZBUSDRIVER]

Finally sat down with google earth. If ATSB is right with liftoff point on 17 gives a ground run of about 3500ft or 1060m. That is dependent on using Tango and the full available.runway distance.

[Eddie Dean]

Originally Posted by pithblot

Why is that Eddie?

Why can't Sunfish & Old Akro raise these points, here & now, on Pprune?

Five men dead, King Air crashed for no apparent reason. You work it out.

[Sunfish]

the point Eddie, is that the infractions will be prosecuted wether they are material to the accident or not. the decision to prosecute will be a political one as evidenced by the shameful treatment of Domenic James.

to put that another way, i would hate to have had anything to do with the maintenance of the aircraft in question because the possibility exists that i might end up a felon.

[Old Akro]

JT. You are correct , it is Harry Horlings. But his presentation lists being a graduate of the USAF test pilot school in his credentials.

Either way, it is yet another well credentialed overseas commentator finding fault with an ATSB report.

And Eddie, the reason is that it deserves note - right now- is that the ATSB has a long history of sloppy investigative work and of taking the easy way out and blaming the pilot, especially a dead one. The ATSB needs to be put on notice that it will not be accepted again.

Those who knew and respected Max need to be vigilant about the diligence of the ATSB report and the greater group of people who take interest in the quality of the ATSB work will be watching. This is the same organisation that was told by a senate committee to redo the Norfolk Island report and who recently yet again delayed it to the point that 8 years after the incident there is still not a final report.

The Essendon incident is going to be complex. A repeat of the substandard work that the ATSB has previously exhibited should not be tolerated.

[ravan]

"The Essendon incident is going to be complex. A repeat of the substandard work that the ATSB has previously exhibited should not be tolerated."

Hear, Hear Old Akro.

[Connedrod]

Originally Posted by megan

Simple, four bladed prop, ATSB gives the GS just prior to impact, measure the distance between prop strikes, and apply a bit of maths.

So over 24 hours has passed and you still not answered the question of fwd airspeed.
It is impossible to make the statment that the prop was at 2000 rpm with out knowing the airspeed to make the statement as fact.
Then even if the prop is at that speed its still not an indication of power being produced by the engine. Only the torque of the engine is a reflection of power being produced.
As for flap. Was it set, was it going down, was it being retracted.
The only thing that the initial report has relly given is the gear was down and locked.
The only thing with the ASTB is th hey will find weather true or not a reason/explanation for this accident they will not just say we dont know what happened. Also being the type of aircraft involved one would imagine that all maintenence has been done and as a general rule to a much higher standard than GA lower grade aircraft.

[compressor stall]

Huh? I'm no investigator, but my curoius mind would say that if you had slash marks on the ground, measured how far apart they are and you knew the speed at impact, you could infer the rotational speed of the prop.

[oggers]

Either way, it is yet another well credentialed overseas commentator finding fault with an ATSB report.

Not really. It is just a blog from a guy who has a bee in his bonnet and finds fault in any report by any authority that does not focus above all else on the single issue of maintaining a zero slip angle of bank. ATSB, NTSB, AAIB, DTSB and any manufacturer who didn't change their manual after he wrote to them; he knows better than all of them of course.

[megan]

with out knowing the airspeed

You are not interested in airspeed because measurements are being taken from ground impact references (prop slash marks) which relate to GS.

The last data point gives a GS of 108 knots, which equals,

108*6080/60 ft/min = 10944

Four bladed prop - distance over five (one RPM) consecutive blade strikes I measure at 6.9 feet ie one complete prop rotation

Prop RPM then equals 10944/6.9 = 1,586 RPM
I used a mixture of Google Earth and the dimensions between ridges of the roof cladding to work numbers.

Connedrod, quite correct that you have no idea of the power being produced, though touchdown was with yaw about 25° and a 6° descent (rough figures).

[Eddie Dean]

I have been led to understand, from colleagues watching the take off roll, that it won't be a complex investigation.

As far as DJ is concerned, contrary to Sunfish, he was not prosecuted for anything. Most of his peers found his decision making appalling.

Megan, great analysis, you should be part of the ATSB team.

[Squawk7700]

I have been led to understand, from colleagues watching the take off roll, that it won't be a complex investigation.

Do tell more..... flaps, reduced power? Am trying to think what else would be noticeable from the takeoff roll... ATSB did say that it was a longer takeoff roll than normal.