I would imagine that they would only have CVR on that year model if anything. The more current model B200/250 are starting to be equipped with ADAS and FAST that will give the aircraft the big brother capabilities of what your mate is talking about.

Don't shoot me because I know little about turbo props.....how would a multiple bird strike affect the engines?

Watching the ATSB press conference and hearing this was a little off-putting, it does seem like a hugely broad (and in this context) irresponsible statement to make.

This video shows the orignal dashcam footage and continues a little later showing the plume of smoke.
Looks like the driver has proceeded straight at the lights and into DFO then u-turned to head back out and catch the plume.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilYVNRO0reQ

A PT6 has a few twists and turns plus a mesh inlet screen before you get to any real critical areas so from an engine point of view there shouldn't be much of an issue.

I don't think you can question the video. No aircraft should be flying across Bulla Rd at that height.....

Take a look at the attached. it's taken from Google Maps. it's roughly the same location the footage was taken.

"clearly visible"

if it wasn't for that big high wall completely blocking view

Maybe got fueled with petrol by mistake?

Turbines can run on "petrol".

Yes will run, but will be way down on power unless fuel density slection has been changed. When you run a turbine on petrol fuel flow increase is large.

Those dash cams usually have a wide angle view 140° so comparing the car footage with a google earth image the field of view is more narrow approx 70°. I presume the footage has been cropped then enlarged giving the poorer image quality. It is possible the smoke was captured but edited out. Car cams film continuously.

One report says the Kingair underwent some level of maintenance only 5 or 6 hrs prior to the fatal flight. Could there be a clue here?
I've know I've seen an article that stated if you are going to have mechanical failure, it will be within a short time after the wrench-benders have been at it.

Not putting any particular blame on wrench operators overall, I personally believe they are 99.99% hard-working and conscientious people - but we are talking human intervention in the nuts and bolts of a machine, and with that, comes the possibility of human error.

I have never forgotten the story of the mission aircraft in PNG that went down with all hands due to an in-flight engine fire - and it was caused by the engineer failing to properly tighten a fuel fitting, because he was distracted by a phone call in the middle of tightening the fuel line.

Maybe. Maybe not. From the video the aircraft doesn't appear to stall. Nevertheless, provided the correct airspeed is maintained, this could be consistent with one engine inoperative, both engines inoperative, partial power loss, or a combination of the three. In other words we'll just have to wait for the report to find out, but nothing I've seen we preclude a misidentification. Thoughts?

Very well done Ben Morgan, that was an excellent interview :D


It makes me sick when I hear the government and airfield operators crapping on about how airfields are all about safety and the commercial developments have all been approved by the ATSB and CASA, blah, blah, blah....
Well the chickens have come home to roost now haven't they. These poor peoples fates were sealed years ago by the greedy developers, and government officials who have allowed seemingly unfettered development to occur, and continue to occur at airfields all over the country.


Its pure speculation as to whether the outcome would have been any different if the DFO wasn't there, but it certainly didn't help!


Clearly something went drastically wrong, and at the absolute worst possible time either just at or after the point of rotation. Speculating further on the cause is probably a waste of time, so hopefully those investigating can get to the bottom of it, and do a decent job of the report this time.


Ps I trust the poster at #114 sees fit to acknowledge Ben Morgan's effort this time after the pasting he gave him on an earlier effort! Credit where credit's due as they say!

Incorrect on every count. From the aircraft's training manual,

Toruk Macto
 

You can watch it here. Good interview.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDlI5IsSHw0

If you are a journalist reading this thread do some due diligence on the how the people responsible for our aviation infrastructure have been squeezing blood from a stone in the name of greed and profit.

The squeeze isnt just at Essendon and it has been happening since the first airfield was built. The Partenavia crash years ago off Runway 26 at Essendon killed 4 children their mother and grandmother.

DFO should never have been permitted where it is.

Tullamarine's original plans for two runways have been sold out to developers and the squeeze is on there too.

What about a crash off either 34 at Sydney? How will that go?



.

Yes, what would happen if a Jumbo crashed into a kindergarten..??
CAsA have expressed grave concerns as to this event for years... and that only related to a PA 32.!
Fear not, the "Regulator" will stop this happening.

Let's not get carried away.......it's impossible to have empty paddocks for miles around airports.......accident will happen......

Yep, that's exactly what I thought when I saw it. It's not the accident aircraft at all. Fooled lots of people, it seems.