CESSNA REAR DOOR OPENING - the OLD IS NEW AGAIN
Thread Starter
CESSNA REAR DOOR OPENING - the OLD IS NEW AGAIN
In July 2021 the ATSB released a final report on the issues with opening the rear door of a Cessna 206, VH-AEE, that made a splash landing in the sea off Fraser Island on 29 January 2020. Fortunately the two occupants survived.
The ATSB recommended that CASA make contact with the FAA and Cessna to get the POH re-written to reflect the information that with the flaps down more than 10 degrees the forward rear door could not be opened.
All very interesting but maybe the recommendation is just a little late.
In the CASA publication, Flight Safety Australia, dated November 1998, Page 32, the CASA crashworthiness Specialist, Bruce Byers, wrote about the issues of the forward rear door in a U206 model Cessna 206 in a ditching and problems for the rear pax to open the door and exit the machine.
Me thinks that the ATSB recommendation to CASA is about 23 years late with CASA already aware of the issue.
But nothing has been done in the interval! Old information just recycled. But no action.
The ATSB recommended that CASA make contact with the FAA and Cessna to get the POH re-written to reflect the information that with the flaps down more than 10 degrees the forward rear door could not be opened.
All very interesting but maybe the recommendation is just a little late.
In the CASA publication, Flight Safety Australia, dated November 1998, Page 32, the CASA crashworthiness Specialist, Bruce Byers, wrote about the issues of the forward rear door in a U206 model Cessna 206 in a ditching and problems for the rear pax to open the door and exit the machine.
Me thinks that the ATSB recommendation to CASA is about 23 years late with CASA already aware of the issue.
But nothing has been done in the interval! Old information just recycled. But no action.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: .
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I saw a very short video of another modification now/soon to be available that jettisons the front door even with flaps down.
Both reasonably basic changes that vastly improves safety...it just took how many years and deaths before a regulator made a big issue of it (and then solutions were found shortly thereafter...)?
Both reasonably basic changes that vastly improves safety...it just took how many years and deaths before a regulator made a big issue of it (and then solutions were found shortly thereafter...)?
Let’s not get too bogged down.
It is highly likely in most ‘crashes’ that exits will get blocked. You can’t cater for all contingencies … without building a tank!
It is highly likely in most ‘crashes’ that exits will get blocked. You can’t cater for all contingencies … without building a tank!
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Way north
Age: 47
Posts: 497
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not really an issue;
Just think about 190 + people exiting a narrow body jet through the less than generous escape hatches. More so when the bogan passengers do not listen to the pax briefing about leaving all personal items/baggage behind.
Just think about 190 + people exiting a narrow body jet through the less than generous escape hatches. More so when the bogan passengers do not listen to the pax briefing about leaving all personal items/baggage behind.
And if you an believe it, they say it can be done in 120 seconds using half the available exits.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: .
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Coast Dog STC was in direct response to a Transport Canada AD restricting 206s to five occupants. Only one middle row seat is permitted to be installed with anyone in row 3 (and no baggage/cargo in that area), along with any occupants in row 3 being required to demonstrate they can independently open the rear doors with flaps extended on the day of flight. This primarily came about after a recent 206 on floats flipped and passengers drowned.
Prior to issuing the AD some TC reports made specific reference that the FAA and Cessna had 'tried' to solve the problem in the past, but all acceptable options were too expensive to mandate. Put some restrictions on 206s, and the industry found a couple solutions in no time.
I do not think Beavers have had restrictions put on them, but I know some Canadian seaplane operators have gotten STCs for modified rear doors with simpler to use and better located door handles to help improve egress from an inverted Beaver. There have been quite a few drowning deaths in flipped seaplanes, and the issue is one of the bigger concerns of Transport Canada.
Prior to issuing the AD some TC reports made specific reference that the FAA and Cessna had 'tried' to solve the problem in the past, but all acceptable options were too expensive to mandate. Put some restrictions on 206s, and the industry found a couple solutions in no time.
I do not think Beavers have had restrictions put on them, but I know some Canadian seaplane operators have gotten STCs for modified rear doors with simpler to use and better located door handles to help improve egress from an inverted Beaver. There have been quite a few drowning deaths in flipped seaplanes, and the issue is one of the bigger concerns of Transport Canada.
Last edited by StudentPilot479; 17th Sep 2021 at 07:02.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: .
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The little I saw about the other STC was that it was very similar to the system the 152 Aerobat uses, which is pins released by a cable in the cabin. That was also my first thought for a solution.
