|
Does the Kingair have external flight control locks?
Not insinuating anything - just interested. |
441 - nope, nothing genuine/approved anyway. I suppose someone could make something up, but why?
Never seen any with external locks either. |
Originally Posted by mickjoebill
(Post 9722548)
Not directly related to the accident report.
WebTrak Above is a link to the noise monitoring data at Essendon airport. The archive includes the accident date. I note that the tracks of some aircraft appear at the beginning of the taxi or a hover. Other tracks don't appear until the flight is past the end of the runway. What method is used to derive the track? Why does the position of the commencement of the track vary between aircraft/flights? There is no track for the King Air, it seems to fit the category of tracking that does not commence until the flight is past the end of the runway. The decibel level of both the impact and post impact noises (explosions?) are recorded. Mickjoebill |
Wrong fuel, contaminated fuel and/or water in the fuel.?
|
What about weight and balance issue/shifting of golf bags during takeoff?
|
1 Attachment(s)
Car RAMROD, I'm presuming these are the prop slash marks.
|
Would anyone know what bus the CVR is powered by? What other systems might be on that bus if for whatever reason it failed/was not energised...?
|
Originally Posted by megan
(Post 9722500)
Slash marks on the roof from the left prop would seem to indicate it wasn't feathered. Fag packet calcs of slash marks would seem to indicate normal RPM in 2,000 region. Some sort of failure in rudder boost? Any thing else to cause directional control issues?
How ever damage between B and C flange is an indication of Tq on inpact but i have yet to see a clear photo of ethier engine. |
Originally Posted by Eddie Dean
(Post 9722471)
fairly sure Ng will go to zero if engine is shut down. Np will do whatever the prop is doing.
FCU drive shear should go to full noise. Well on a - 20 and -34, maybe -41 and -42 have different arrangement. In my uneducated opinion |
Really you can tell the prop was at 2000rpm |
Originally Posted by megan
(Post 9723395)
Simple, four bladed prop, ATSB gives the GS just prior to impact, measure the distance between prop strikes, and apply a bit of maths.
|
In the report, ATSB listed flap setting as 10°. Is this the same as approach flap setting in the B200 which according to my manual is 40% of total flap extension. I can't seem to find actual flap settings in degrees in any B200 training text or AFM.
Also, why would the pilot use flaps approach on runway 17 at YMEN? Looking at TODR I wouldn't have thought there would be any runway length considerations to warrant such flap setting. |
Originally Posted by Obba
(Post 9722385)
Basically says that both engines were running at the time of the crash.
|
Manymak, already mentioned the flaps in a previous post buddy.
T/O App (40%) flap setting is 14 (+/- 1) degrees. Taking off with flap is better. Have a look at many of your performance figures, especially for Raisbeck equipped machines and the equivalent FAR25 numbers. |
Originally Posted by Car RAMROD
(Post 9723539)
Manymak, already mentioned the flaps in a previous post buddy.
T/O App (40%) flap setting is 14 (+/- 1) degrees. Taking off with flap is better. Have a look at many of your performance figures. But at some point if runway length is no problem. Takeoff without flap is more desirable. Have a look at Raisbeck accelerate go distance required charts and see the performance penalty an engine failure at V1/Vr to 35' incurs with flap approach. |
Originally Posted by Car RAMROD
(Post 9723539)
Manymak, already mentioned the flaps in a previous post buddy.
T/O App (40%) flap setting is 14 (+/- 1) degrees. Taking off with flap is better. Have a look at many of your performance figures, especially for Raisbeck equipped machines and the equivalent FAR25 numbers. |
Yes that's true the 2nd segment isn't as good.
But you also get better margin over stall and Vmca with flap at T/O. As long as the numbers work, my preference was with flap. |
In 2,500hrs of operating the B200, I not once took off with approach flap, unless I was clearly in need of it (obstacle clearance take off).
If you suffered a donk failure, you're going to want to clear those obstacles, not reduce your ground roll on a runway where you're already only using like 1/3 of the runway. A colleague I was talking to one day who operated the King Air and used approach flap for take off, went to Flight Safety for a course on the King Air. They showed him the climb penalty for taking off with approach flap. Needless to say, he never took off with approach flap again! morno |
Hear hear Morno! Over 3000hrs on type and I completely concur!
We look at it in the sim and it's a significant point of discussion (along with demonstrating on P charts) with pilots new to the type too! |
If ever I am in the position where I must use an APP Flap take off, I am never comfortable until the flap is retracted. Minimum airspeed, flap and gear extended, windmilling prop, is not a place I would ever like to be in a Kingair!
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 22:59. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.