C310 problems in Kununurra
 

Heard something on the news earlier about some problems with a C310 in Kununurra. Anyone got any details on this?

From abc.net.au


Plane makes emergency landing
A pilot has been forced to make an emergency landing at Kununurra overnight, after experiencing serious fuel supply problems.

The twin-engine Cessna 310 was on a mail run from Darwin at about 10:30pm AWST yesterday, when it was forced to land 60 metres short of the Kununurra airstrip.

It is believed the aircraft either ran out of fuel or had trouble switching tanks.

The 29-year-old male pilot suffered minor neck and back injuries and was sent to Kununurra District Hospital.

The wings and undercarriage of the $300,000 plane were extensively damaged.

The pilot is expected to submit a statement to the Australian Transport Safety Bureau later today.

Them damn Cessna fuel systems again!! :{

DF.

Any news on the company the c310 belonged to. Speedy recovering for the pilot....


Ang ;)

Believe it was SlingAir's C310. The cone of silence works well in Kununurra. Only a few days after one of their C210s did a wheels up landing too. Wonder what the third thing will be??? :ooh:

Could it be something to do with the recent influx of "Jandakot Generals" appointed to C&T positions in KU? Their aircraft knowledge, navigation skills (what no NDB in the bush?), selection of decommissioned runways, and superior attitudes provide an almost constant source of merriment.
How do you get this red dirt out of my eppaulettes?

The only 310 up that way is slingairs that does the night AAE flight to darwin and back

Excuse my ignorance but what constitutes a ...

?

sounds most amusing.

I believe it means ex employees of Jandakot based companies of varying seniority who have ventures out into the bush to gain management/upper level company experience, but I may well be wrong.

520.

Nothing wrong with the Cessna fuel system if you follow the flight manual. Don't and it'll bite. Flight manual clearly states aux's only to be used in cruise and only after mains have burnt 90 mins. Doesn't sound difficult to follow to me!

Pilot descended, performed a practice approach all on aux according to inside info. Only problem was endurance in the auxs were about 1min too short. :mad:

exmexican,

Are these 'Jandakot Generals' the same people that introduced pilots going home early so that they dont have duty time problems? The ones that stood up to non flying management stating that flying over weight is not allowed. Is it these same 'Generals' that pushed for and got a PAY RISE so ALL PILOTS got paid the award. I hope you do not work for the said company. Very short sighted of you if you do....

These same 'Generals also tried to re-intoduce check lists so that accidents of this nature dont happen. Unfortunately the extemely experienced staff have the opinion that check lists are not required if the training is adequate. Gee, that leaves no room for simple human error does it. Especially when your dog tired and not far from home when you tend to get a touch displacent.

exmexican, I hope you have your facts right in regards to the lack of aircraft knowledge, nav skills and runway selection. They are fairly damning comments. I wonder where your getting your assumptions from. It sounds like to me that you are from KU, so maybe you should face up to them :mad: .........

BTW if you want to get the red dirt out of you eppaulettes, simply wash them. But not in the same wash as your whites otherwise the whites go blue......

See ya later alligator!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Pete O Heat ( and I'm guessing your rank would be General)
Oh yay for the Generals and their powers of negotiation and arbitration! Now I get to work MAXIMUM hours for MINIMUM pay!
Well done boys but save the chest-beating for when you achieve something better than minimum conditions for workers.
Great that the pilots get to "go home early to avoid F&D problems". Does this mean that if they stayed to the agreed time, rather than leaving early, they would exceed F&D restrictions? Sounds like more work to be done in this area.
Any pilot that exceeds weight limits foolishly gambles with his own, and his pax, life. Stupid,stupid, stupid, and should not be a management issue. Sadly, it seems like not a bad risk at the time to many pilots under pressure. A few ramp checks might make companies see sense.
If you are working within the framework of F&D and the spirit of the regulations, you should never be "dog tired", especially to the point that you concoct words like "displacent".
Oops gotta go!

Furthermore, regarding "assumptions" I have made:
1. Battery life will be maximised by turning the fuel ON before starting the engine.
2. When on a non-scenic chtr, coastal is not the most direct route KU-KAL. Seriously, it's not a long leg, remember watch, map, ground.
3. Confidence in GA is not fostered by having to tap your pilot on the shoulder and point out that the selected rnwy is no longer in use. The information is available in ERSA, and this example of poor planning and observation(there are trenches dug through it) does not befit an experienced pilot.
Pete, these are things we can look back on, over a few beers and LAUGH! These, and many other incidents, are not the norm, nor the aim in GA, and there's certainly no "hands up" here for never making a mistake, but you've got to laugh. Vigorously denying or defending them doesn't help anyone.
As for calling me a ":mad:" from the anonymity of this forum, well, words fail me.
And your signoff could not be more misdirected. Tee Hee
Cheers

Now girls - cool it! No childish name calling. OK?

Otherwise someone is going to study Sin Bin architecture. From the inside! :{

W

more ramp checks ay.......... well unfortunatly i dont think that would work seeing it is the pilot who's own hoogly googlies (excuse the sexism.. none intended) is on the line when they do come up to you.

maybe if the operators where to take the blame when it comes down to it all it might improve the situation but other then that i would just place more pressure on pilots to really "fudge' paperwork.

as for the C310 fuel system..... well 90 out of the main etc etc.. if most pilots knew how it actually wokred it could save alot of hassel.... to many 310's having to emergency land due to "fuel starvation"!!!! Might leave many pilots wonderingwhat that grey mist being vented overboard might be :}

Any working pilot that doesn't know their aircraft systems should not be flying. They are suppose to be professional pilots not accidents waiting to happen.

Three hundred grand for a 310???:uhoh: :{

(a mail carrying 310 at that)

Agree with you GoNorth, never had any probs handling the fuel system either.

Dont know what the preconceived myth is about the "310's fuel system"

indeed, this dude was lucky, incorrect tank use was identified as a possible cause of the 310 crash at Newman a 18 months ago, 4 people died that night.

It's not just 310's. It is all Cessna series with tip tanks - 340's, 402's & 421's. And some aircraft have their own peculiar little quirks. I remember an Adelaide based 402B that caught out every pilot that flew it, because you couldn't run on the aux. tanks for as long as the manual said or it would start to cough & splutter!

DF.

Right on Go North,
I've got a heap of time on 402's and 310's and never had a problem. It's a carefree simple system. Can't for the life of me understand how anyone could screw it up. Mind you we'll all read about it when the ATSB report comes out. Maybe it wasn't fuel related. Might have just had too much air in the tanks. Personally, when flying a tip tank cessna that I hadn't flown before, I used to time how long it took from selecting aux's until the engine surged due the tank running dry. Take one minute off that and use that time period every time thereafter. Doesn't get any easier and as long as your vigilant you won't get caught out. Shouldn't be flying the bl00dy thing if you don't understand the fuel system. And as far as that goes who signed off his endorsement???? :suspect: