caravan crash at caloundra
 

a brand new cessna caravan has run off the runway and through the perimeter fence at caloundra after a practice glide approach went wrong. apparently the prop was in feather and the aircraft glided a bit far down the runway before touchdown (the wrong end piano keys) and had insufficient braking without the prop. a bit embarrasing for the instructor pilot i'm told:ooh: :uhoh:

Any idea if that Caravan is the jumpship at Caloundra?

Dear oh dear, don't tell me Al's lost another one!!!!!

That now makes two Aus Caravans crashed, that I know of, that were practicing a glide approach whilst the propellor was in feather.

Have to ask the question, why do these glide approaches have to be practiced with a fully feathered propellor. Surely it makes more sense to set a power setting that gives a rate of descent/glide speed to that experienced with the prop feathered.

There would then be a useable power system should it all go pear shape.

Should be a message here for those in the Single Turbine Instructor/ check/training role.

And I'm sure someone can point us to the requirement for this exercise as part of the training or is it another case of "because I can" :sad: or worse "watch this". :uhoh: :{

I don't recall the manufacturer recommending this practise, or it being included in the POH.:rolleyes:

Don't know about the caravan but PC-9 glide approaches were flown with 5 psi set to simulate full feathered prop.

How are power settings made in the Caravan? psi?

[oh.. before anyone says it, no answers like Power Control Lever or throttle required :D ]

Engine or A/C manufacturer POH?

It wasnt als,

It was aerotropics! brand new took delivery ytday, whoops

I wonder if it was like the Toyota ad.


crunch....... "Bugger.."

In other news I know you'll all be disappointed to hear I wasn't Australian of the year. :E

Does anyone know whether this is a requirement, is it legal? Was it a test flight?

If it was a test flight (new aircraft delivery and all) and the prop failed to unfeather, I can see this accident chain developing, but I can't for the life of me understand the requirement to demonstrate in a single engine aircraft, a feathered engine out approach for real.

I'm with Gen Ties on this one. (judgement reserved until all the facts are public, of course)

It happened doing a glide approach during an endorsment, it is not required to have the prop feathered. Normally the students feathers the prop then the instructor sets zero thrust.

Aerotropics? Perhaps they should have sought advice from the hangar next door?

Why practice it in an aircraft with a PT56 anyway? :E

I've seen one chew up and spit out a massive wedge-tailed eagle. After landing the inertial seperation thingy (can't remember the proper name) was pulled and an eagle claw the size of my hand fell out!!

The correct way to simulate zero thrust in the C208 is Min Prop RPM 1600 and set 300-400 ftlb torque depending on speed.
Never feather the prop below 3000 ft AGL and . Do not use Lo Idle in flight.

I assume low idle is engine running, prop in feather?

Hope they've got Breach of Warranty Insurance or similar and who is gunna pay the insurance company if they come after the PIC as they are fully entitled to do.

Last I heard they were pretty pissed off with all these amateur factory test pilots.

Chaps ANY thing you do which is NOT specifically described by the manufacturer and regulatory authority in the POH breaches the new aircraft warranty (not related to Breach Of Warranty insurance) and voids the insurance. Who then pays???

Breach of Warranty Insurance: This insurance is meant to pay the ships/aircraft mortgage in the event of a claim being denied because of a warranty that was not kept. I.E. for example the aircraft was not operated or maintianed according to agreed parameters, usually the manufacturers requirements and certification documents.

The basic principle of insurance is "in the utmost good faith". They will insure you provided you operate the aircraft in accordance with some fairly strict boundaries or warrantys on which you both agree. Step outside em and all bets are off.

Then it's a lawyers picnic.:{

Never flown a 208 so can someone who has explain to me how you can finish up 400+ metres past the upwind end of a 700 metre runway ?:eek: That includes any retardation effect of a 2.5m chain wire fence as well.:confused:

WZJ was the one, registered 20 Jan 2006. ooops

tipsy

The C208 glides extremely well, even the float equipped version. At 90 kts the descent rate is only 550 fpm land or 650 fpm floats.

In normal approaches when the power gets below about 500 ftlb there is significant prop drag. It can be heard and I call it 'discing'. If you pull the power all the way back to the stop with 1900 rpm set you get a massive braking effect (depending on airspeed) and pilots tend to experience and use this propeller effect during approach to advantage. Nothing wrong with that, except the noise.

With the prop feathered,you don't get that effect and rarely are pilots shown real zero thrust during training, therefore the tendency is to overshoot (CDA).

Lo Idle is for ground ops 52%Ng. Hi Idle is min 65%Ng. Once the power lever is past this setting it doesn't matter, unless you pull power back and then the engine should not slow below 65%. If you have Lo Idle improperly set in flight, the engine will slow down to 52% which is barely self sustaining and can be a flameout risk (hence CS).

Yep it glides like a cessna:}
Why practise this? seems pointless to me when you consider setting zero-thrust is no big deal:hmm: (bit over 1000 C208B hrs here)
This wont be the first overshoot, and wont be the last...perhaps teaching students how to side-slip an aircraft to lose excess height on approach should be considered.
(and no you dont stall and spin with flaps down if you side slip properly..try it at altitude...it works!)

History always repeats itself and the cowboys get caught out everytime. Feathering a single engine to "practice" a glide approach is as idiotic as cutting mixtures after take off to "simulate" a practice engine failure. It's called "practicing bleeding" and is just as stupid. You have to have a serious look at the CASA designated FOI who should have been aware of this dangerous practice going on under his nose but failed to stop it. The CFI should be sacked for lack of supervision.

bilbert

you state

"Lo Idle is for ground ops 52%Ng. Hi Idle is min 65%Ng. Once the power lever is past this setting it doesn't matter, unless you pull power back and then the engine should not slow below 65%. If you have Lo Idle improperly set in flight, the engine will slow down to 52% which is barely self sustaining and can be a flameout risk (hence CS)."

Sorry....you are so totally wrong.

Low idle can be used both on the ground and in the air. Hi idle is only required for max reverse, nothing more/nothing less.

Intermediate idle (memory?? 62%) is required for ground aircon ops.

Proper operation should never (hi idle/lo idle) result in a flameout.

"bilbert" if you are endorsed on the Caravan (or even any PT6 powered aircraft) and you believe in what you have posted, all I can say is that you may have misunderstood, or the instructor didn't teach what he should have.

Perhaps it is time to revisit the books.

First thing I thought of when I saw the title of this was "Hope everyone is OK", but it seems nobody else really gives a root about stuff like that and just use it as an excuse to show how smart they are after the fact.

Anyway, may be a bit sensitive at present with a few collegues departing for good... but hope all involved were OK after the incident.

ABC

It is sad enough to lose friends in the real world but to see lives put at risk in the training world just makes your blood boil.

In cases such as this, IMHO, comment is fair.

(BTW, I too hoped everyone walked away, as I am 100% sure all the other posters did).

Have to agree with Gen Ties there bilbert, did a fair bit of parachuting and we used to point the thing at the ground from 15,000ft , Vne -5kts in low idle , it never flamed out in the 1000hrs I did it and the same company has never had a flame out that I know of. The reason is that if you decide you really really want some reverse action and you want it now.....Hi idle is where you want to be.(less time to spool up and deliver power). We had no need for reverse on our long runway. Cheers.

I dunno where this low idle/high idle rubbish comes from..even on the B200 you can run in Low idle with no problem!

Where I flew the Van (we had 2 on Para Ops) one guy decided to try a bit of beta on descent..silly bugger ran out of forward elevator in about .2 second:hmm: :}

What the **** is intermeditate idle
 

"Intermediate idle (memory?? 62%) is required for ground aircon ops." What the???

Gen ties i am presuming you have a 208 endorsement. Could you explain where the intermediate idle detent is? Or do you just set 62% by the gauge. Unless of course you are just winding me up in which case hook line and sinker.

There is no risk of flame out simply by being in low idle, however there is a risk of flameout moving from hi to lo in flight, if that handle comes back one more notch then bingo flameout due to your own stupidity.

It is pretty simple lo on the ground hi in the air. There is only one correct way to do it. It is not a matter of "well it works for me".

Getting away from the caloundra incident as it hi/lo idle does not seem to be a factor. But the level of knowledge from people supposedly with endorsements is very worrying.

Have seen said instructor do one stupid act in the past, so maybe this should not really suprise me, am not commenting on his skill more his judgement.

Sorry, But it is not rubbish, If you flew the van, you should know why high idle is used from the T/O to landing.

Gen Ties & CJAM
Check your C208 FM. Section 4 Normal Procedures - Before Takeoff Checklist and amplified section.
All C208 instructors should be reqd to do the FlightSafety course.
2500 hrs C208 500+ C208 Instruction ATO and still learning.

Bilbo, we're not talking about retarding the condition lever to low idle whilst in flight, we were meaning leaving it there all the time, the only effects will be greater discing effect and longer to spool up when needing reverse.
by saying that it is barely self sustaining you made it sound like the flame was at risk of being blown out while low idle is selected......when maybe you meant the pilot is at risk of shutting the engine down by mistake.....is that what you meant?

Hair of the dogma

OK, intermediate idle was a bad choice of words, but there is a min pwr setting for use of the aircon. (BTW I made no mention of an intermediate idle ident).

The min pwr for aircon ops are generally higher than lo idle, so the condition lever has to be moved forward to achieve that setting.

I take that you realize that numerous power settings are achievable between lo and hi idle which may be set by moving the condition lever anywhere you want it to be.


Bilbert,

you may very well be right re the AFM procedures requiring the condition lever to be moved to Hi prior to take off, but that is not what caused my response to you.

QUOTE
"If you have Lo Idle improperly set in flight, the engine will slow down to 52% which is barely self sustaining and can be a flameout risk (hence CS)."

That my friend, is wrong. 52% is not barely self sustaining, it is just LO IDLE. There is no way known that Pratts would have an cockpit achievable power setting that would even come close to causing a flameout.

Justathought

QUOTE
we were meaning leaving it there all the time, the only effects will be greater discing effect and longer to spool up when needing reverse

And with you I totally agree, that says it all in a nutshell.

Either way, it seems to be a trickey manouver...... :E

By name, and by nature tail_wheel ;)

What if, or maybe, or absence of presence......
 

:) :) :) :) :) :) Nope, don't say it, just don't say it;) ;) ;) ;)

I note the proprieter of the beachfront 'Green Island Caravan Park' is conspicuously absent from this thread!:}
Was the data logger key retreived from this one?
They have a peculiar habit of dislodging and disappearing from the scene of the 'accident'.:hmm:

What gets me is that the Van touched down at least 60mts off end of the runway. Surely the instructor would have realised that they were way too hot and its not as though a Grand Caravan with 2 on board is going to struggle to get out of a situation like that, especially when they have another 200 or so metres to clear the fence. It sounded like they had it in beta and were giving it plenty so it pretty much comes down to a big stuffup on both pilot's behalf. Happy Australia Day Mr Lipmann!

captain_cranky: Took me a few moments to 'fathom' your last reply. :hmm: :p

... how badly damaged is this caravan?

Sir HC. My guess he'd be maille-ing the bill to the owner!!! :} :}

Does anyone know if there are any links to any pics of this caravan accident??

thanks:ok:

bilbert
Quote
If you have Lo Idle improperly set in flight, the engine will slow down to 52% which is barely self sustaining and can be a flameout risk (hence CS).

Not true, am with Gen ties on this. He is also right about "intermediate idle", bad choice of words on his part but you do have to advance the FCO about 2 cm to achieve the reqire % Ng for air-con operation after start. The FCO is then advanced to Hi idle during the "Line Up Checks" and normally left there until vacating the runway.

Lo/Hi Idle whatever....

Simple fact is the pilot failed to hit the runway. How can you miss ALL of a runway from beginning to end if you weren't doing something stupid like approaching at Vref + 50 or 60knots etc??

Sideslip, flap, managing the decent better far EARLIER than over the threshold, I think these are the questions people should be asking.

Z. :mad: