|
I think the slash marks look like they are made with less aircraft yaw. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10257016)
Spoken like a life member of the Monday morning quarterbacks club. |
Originally Posted by Old Akro
(Post 10257020)
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.
|
Originally Posted by Old Akro
(Post 10256988)
Trevor, A CASA FOI declared him to be competent about a year prior after extensive review.
|
And a Trim Runaway can only apply to the elevator trim, since the other two are manually controlled screw jacks.
|
The silver lining of the subsequent litigation will include a far more rigorous analysis of all this stuff. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10257030)
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. |
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. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10257009)
The silver lining of the subsequent litigation will include a far more rigorous analysis of all this stuff. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10256975)
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. 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. |
Originally Posted by FGD135
(Post 10257056)
His leg had given out. Perhaps it was at this point that he surrended and made the radio call.
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. |
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. |
"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. |
Originally Posted by Lead Balloon
(Post 10256940)
FGD: You keep talking about ‘sideslip’. Wouldn’t an uncorrected rudder trim cause a ‘skid’? Still I am not surprised. |
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. |
Originally Posted by jobsright
(Post 10257205)
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. 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. |
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 |
Originally Posted by zzuf
(Post 10257121)
You show as much knowledge about sideslip and aircraft handling as you do about Vmcg.
Still I am not surprised. - 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. |
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! |
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? |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 05:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.