Andrew Miller, Piper Seneca V, OO-TML, in-flight breakup - September 2009 Portugal.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andrew Miller, Piper Seneca V, OO-TML, in-flight breakup - September 2009 Portugal.
On 15 September 2009, our wonderful son Andrew, 21, a student of the NLS (a Dutch ATPL training school) was killed – together with another student and instructor – during an IFR night navigation flight just north of XAPAS in southern Portugal.
Although we have some theories as to what may have happened, we would welcome any information, tips, advice which would help us find the cause and possibly prevent any such accident occurring in the future.
Although we have some theories as to what may have happened, we would welcome any information, tips, advice which would help us find the cause and possibly prevent any such accident occurring in the future.
Last edited by wunfoDREW; 16th Nov 2009 at 21:59.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's only an observation, but the report says the wreckage was spread over a "very large area".
The Seneca is a fairly small aircraft, and while I don't have a sense of scale from the map on page 8, it does cause me to wonder whether the distribution is evidence of an in-flight break-up.
The report also says Faro radar lost transponder data about 40 seconds before all other information.
I don't know whether the trail direction is consistent with winds at the time.
Just my humble opinion.
The Seneca is a fairly small aircraft, and while I don't have a sense of scale from the map on page 8, it does cause me to wonder whether the distribution is evidence of an in-flight break-up.
The report also says Faro radar lost transponder data about 40 seconds before all other information.
I don't know whether the trail direction is consistent with winds at the time.
Just my humble opinion.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Andrew Miller's accident
Dear Mrs. and Mr. Miller. I am so sorry for your loss. No parent should ever have to bury one of their own.....
In looking at the preliminary report, I did a rough estimate in googlemaps, and would agree with others that an in-flight break up did occur. The wreckage by my rough calculation is spread over approximately 1000 meters or or more.
With just the factual data contained in the report and a review of the pictures, I would suspect that it is possible the pilot and instruction loss situational awareness at night, possible some spatial disorientation, that led to an unusual attitude, from which recovery was not possible.
With wreckage spread over such a large area, it is possible that a very high rate of speed occurred in a spatial-disorientation scenario, leading to the breakup.
The factual data indicating the gear(lever) being in the DOWN position could be consistent with an attempt to recover from a very high rate of indicated airspeed.
Engine lever control positions would seem to be consistent with normal engine operation.
I am at loss as to what events may have proceeded such a scenario, as the instructor was reasonably experienced. The PF also seemed to have a bit of flight time as well.
Again, I am only speculating. Aircraft just don't come apart...a series of events leads to in-flight breakups, and the common theme is that an over-stress condition be met....a severe overspeed and/or an inappropriate recovery to lead to this.
I'll be interested in reading more data....
I am again so sorry for your loss......
In looking at the preliminary report, I did a rough estimate in googlemaps, and would agree with others that an in-flight break up did occur. The wreckage by my rough calculation is spread over approximately 1000 meters or or more.
With just the factual data contained in the report and a review of the pictures, I would suspect that it is possible the pilot and instruction loss situational awareness at night, possible some spatial disorientation, that led to an unusual attitude, from which recovery was not possible.
With wreckage spread over such a large area, it is possible that a very high rate of speed occurred in a spatial-disorientation scenario, leading to the breakup.
The factual data indicating the gear(lever) being in the DOWN position could be consistent with an attempt to recover from a very high rate of indicated airspeed.
Engine lever control positions would seem to be consistent with normal engine operation.
I am at loss as to what events may have proceeded such a scenario, as the instructor was reasonably experienced. The PF also seemed to have a bit of flight time as well.
Again, I am only speculating. Aircraft just don't come apart...a series of events leads to in-flight breakups, and the common theme is that an over-stress condition be met....a severe overspeed and/or an inappropriate recovery to lead to this.
I'll be interested in reading more data....
I am again so sorry for your loss......
Last edited by OD100; 16th Nov 2009 at 22:46. Reason: Edit
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Europe
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't wish to pre-empt an official inquiry, and forgive me if I appear to be stating the obvious.
But if the evidence points to an in-flight break-up, and the weather appears - as the report states - suitable for training, then I imagine the only other reasonable conclusion is that the airframe suffered a catastrophic failure.
Only the official investigation will be able to determine whether or not the aircraft was structurally sound.
I do know, however, of one in-flight break-up of a Seneca in 2002 which was attributed to pilot disorientation, and subsequent excessive manoeuvres. I mention this only because the accident about which you are inquiring occurred at night, over what appears to be featureless and unlit terrain, an environment which can test even highly-experienced crews.
But if the evidence points to an in-flight break-up, and the weather appears - as the report states - suitable for training, then I imagine the only other reasonable conclusion is that the airframe suffered a catastrophic failure.
Only the official investigation will be able to determine whether or not the aircraft was structurally sound.
I do know, however, of one in-flight break-up of a Seneca in 2002 which was attributed to pilot disorientation, and subsequent excessive manoeuvres. I mention this only because the accident about which you are inquiring occurred at night, over what appears to be featureless and unlit terrain, an environment which can test even highly-experienced crews.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you for your replies.
As far as situational awareness is concerned, it was planned to be a use of "autopilot and flight director" IFR training flight, which was made in excellent weather conditions on a straight airway. The area, whilst being sparsely populated, does have a number of villages and small towns, which should have been clearly visible.
Both propellers - according to preliminary report type MC Cauley 3AF32C522/82 NJA-6 - appear feathered. That the cockpit controls do not confirm this is interesting.
Does anyone have any opinion as to why the left engine has no cowlings at all and the right one does?
We value your continued input.
As far as situational awareness is concerned, it was planned to be a use of "autopilot and flight director" IFR training flight, which was made in excellent weather conditions on a straight airway. The area, whilst being sparsely populated, does have a number of villages and small towns, which should have been clearly visible.
Both propellers - according to preliminary report type MC Cauley 3AF32C522/82 NJA-6 - appear feathered. That the cockpit controls do not confirm this is interesting.
Does anyone have any opinion as to why the left engine has no cowlings at all and the right one does?
We value your continued input.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: NY
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I took another look at the pictures....and yes, both engine propellers appear to be feathered. Very interesting.
It's highly unlikely the props feathered without being commanded. Prop levers are full-forward. It's possible G-force or blunt force from impact pushed the levers back forward. So difficult to say. But examination of the cable positions will determine that.
A more likely scenario is that the props feathered as the engines separated from the aircraft, as the cable on the prop governor pulled away from the airframe.
This would be consistent with prop lever position and the inflight break-up.
It's highly unlikely the props feathered without being commanded. Prop levers are full-forward. It's possible G-force or blunt force from impact pushed the levers back forward. So difficult to say. But examination of the cable positions will determine that.
A more likely scenario is that the props feathered as the engines separated from the aircraft, as the cable on the prop governor pulled away from the airframe.
This would be consistent with prop lever position and the inflight break-up.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hoping this helps
Mr and Mrs Miller, Like many others I find myself with feelings of unspeakable sadness at your loss. I am a retired airline pilot but with a lot of Seneca time in my log-boks.
Firstly, I agree with previous views that both propellors appear to be feathered.
You may or may not appreciate that one would normally only feather a propellor in flight following an engine failure (Feathering significantly reduces the drag and therefore permits improved performance when flying on the remaining engine or - heaven forbid - when gliding if you've lost both engines.)
As a result of mass and inertia (those air-cooled 6-cylinder engines are pretty heavy), it is quite common for engines to seperate from the wing in the event of impact or in-flight break-up. Among the many cables, wires, tubes etc connecting the engine to the wing is the propellor control cable which invariably breaks under tension when the engine assembly departs.
Mine is only one opinion and the grey-matter isn't what it once was but I agree that the propellors went into the fully-feathered position as a result of control-cable breakage when the engine seperated. Incidentally, I can think of no reason why the undercarriage was found to be in the "down" position.
Finally, on the limited amount of evidence about the debris-field, I too would consider this to be an in-flight break-up. I send mylove and best wishes and hope that you find some comfort in the knowledge that your beloved son died doing something that he loved. Regards, Mel
Firstly, I agree with previous views that both propellors appear to be feathered.
You may or may not appreciate that one would normally only feather a propellor in flight following an engine failure (Feathering significantly reduces the drag and therefore permits improved performance when flying on the remaining engine or - heaven forbid - when gliding if you've lost both engines.)
As a result of mass and inertia (those air-cooled 6-cylinder engines are pretty heavy), it is quite common for engines to seperate from the wing in the event of impact or in-flight break-up. Among the many cables, wires, tubes etc connecting the engine to the wing is the propellor control cable which invariably breaks under tension when the engine assembly departs.
Mine is only one opinion and the grey-matter isn't what it once was but I agree that the propellors went into the fully-feathered position as a result of control-cable breakage when the engine seperated. Incidentally, I can think of no reason why the undercarriage was found to be in the "down" position.
Finally, on the limited amount of evidence about the debris-field, I too would consider this to be an in-flight break-up. I send mylove and best wishes and hope that you find some comfort in the knowledge that your beloved son died doing something that he loved. Regards, Mel
Last edited by BoeingMEL; 18th Nov 2009 at 12:47.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With reference to the landing gear.
The throttles and plastic coaming have been bent and distorted towards the gear selector. It is possible that during the impact the gear selector was forced to the down position by the throttles.
The throttles and plastic coaming have been bent and distorted towards the gear selector. It is possible that during the impact the gear selector was forced to the down position by the throttles.
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Herefordshire
Posts: 545
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes Karl..it's possible..
but if the u/c switch was knocked to the "down" position at the point of impact, there would be no power or time for the wheels to extend. IMHO.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wanaka New Zealand
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was wondering why this thread was moved from Rumors and News and would like to point out it was initiated by a KLM 777 Captain who would really appreciate any input that can throw any light on the cause of this accident.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We are heartened by your responses - thank you.
As for our thread being moved - we were informed by the administrator that this was done because we had asked 2 questions and that by doing so, our post had to be under 'questions' which is under ' ground and other ops'. We don't agree, but perhaps we could rephrase our post to have it placed to a higher profile forum - after all, three people have died.
As for our thread being moved - we were informed by the administrator that this was done because we had asked 2 questions and that by doing so, our post had to be under 'questions' which is under ' ground and other ops'. We don't agree, but perhaps we could rephrase our post to have it placed to a higher profile forum - after all, three people have died.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UTC +8
Posts: 2,626
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I speculate in line with OD100's probable theory. Mainly because the Piper Seneca has proven to be a rugged, reliable airframe, produced since 1971, and used in many countries as a multi engine trainer.
Notwithstanding some sort of gross maintenance/overhaul negligence, it is least likely for the airframe to have suffered catastrophic failure on its own.
Catastrophic airframe falure can occur rapidly in any airplane with improper control inputs, especially when exceeding airspeed limitations. Operating limitations can be exceeded in seconds from a resulting dive, spiral or spin without immediate corrective control inputs.
Even without flight data recorders, trained accident investigators can usually trace the probable inflight break-up sequence by studying the metallurgy, ripped airframe parts, deformations and by correlating the debris pattern.
Notwithstanding some sort of gross maintenance/overhaul negligence, it is least likely for the airframe to have suffered catastrophic failure on its own.
Catastrophic airframe falure can occur rapidly in any airplane with improper control inputs, especially when exceeding airspeed limitations. Operating limitations can be exceeded in seconds from a resulting dive, spiral or spin without immediate corrective control inputs.
Even without flight data recorders, trained accident investigators can usually trace the probable inflight break-up sequence by studying the metallurgy, ripped airframe parts, deformations and by correlating the debris pattern.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even without flight data recorders, trained accident investigators can usually trace the probable inflight break-up sequence by studying the metallurgy, ripped airframe parts, deformations and by correlating the debris pattern.
Best left to the experts - not the 'armchair' experts . . .
Anything else is pure speculation.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you all for your input.
To gain as much information as possible is the least we can do for our son and the other two pilots who have lost their lives in this tragic accident.
We continue to welcome further input, including any lateral thinking.
To gain as much information as possible is the least we can do for our son and the other two pilots who have lost their lives in this tragic accident.
We continue to welcome further input, including any lateral thinking.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Wanaka New Zealand
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Akrapovic
Quote:
Precisely.
Best left to the experts - not the 'armchair' experts . . .
Anything else is pure speculation.
Not necessarily, have you never heard of TE901 and UA811.
I think it is misguided to believe that Airlines and Manufacturers can investigate themselves and every time come up with the answers that will make your job safer.
Quote:
Precisely.
Best left to the experts - not the 'armchair' experts . . .
Anything else is pure speculation.
Not necessarily, have you never heard of TE901 and UA811.
I think it is misguided to believe that Airlines and Manufacturers can investigate themselves and every time come up with the answers that will make your job safer.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is misguided to believe that Airlines and Manufacturers can investigate themselves and every time come up with the answers that will make your job safer.
I was referring to trained accident investigators as mentioned previous.
If you're going to make a point I suggest you at least quote correctly!
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Vancouver, BC.
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The responsibility for air accident investigation, within ICAO, rests with the State where the accident occurred, and usually with the support of the country of registration, the airframe and engine manufacturer and the operator. One sincerely hopes they will come up with an unbiased, unfettered and comprehensive report as to the causes of the accident. Though it is often a long and arduous process.
Although, I have to agree with Akrapovic- anything posted here is going to be in absence of the material evidence and formal investigation and is at best, informed speculation. That said, following the AF447 discussion here on Pprune, I felt some serious professionals engaged their collective knowledge on the issue and I did wonder if those looking into the accident wouldn't have benefited from reading some of the theories considered there. So perhaps, something of value to the bereaved may come forth here. I hope so.
Although, I have to agree with Akrapovic- anything posted here is going to be in absence of the material evidence and formal investigation and is at best, informed speculation. That said, following the AF447 discussion here on Pprune, I felt some serious professionals engaged their collective knowledge on the issue and I did wonder if those looking into the accident wouldn't have benefited from reading some of the theories considered there. So perhaps, something of value to the bereaved may come forth here. I hope so.
Last edited by no sig; 23rd Nov 2009 at 22:01.