Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

Convair 340 (C-131D) ZS-BRV crash Pretoria, South Africa

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

Convair 340 (C-131D) ZS-BRV crash Pretoria, South Africa

Reply

Old 12th Jul 2018, 03:17
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cape Town, ZA
Age: 56
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by mrdeux View Post
Does anyone know the actual location of the accident?
Plenty of Google Earth images here: https://avherald.com/h?article=4bafa778
GordonR_Cape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 06:45
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: what U.S. calls ´old Europe´
Posts: 851
There is a 1950s Convair promotion film on YouTube which shows a single engine take-off with a 340 completely on the right engine, claiming this aircraft does not share the typical weakness of the piston twins of that aera.
Might be a San Diego sea level test flight, with a totally different performance requirement.
Volume is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 09:08
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Europe
Posts: 2,999
OK understood megan, but you also quoted only a part of my post and omitted the part which said that it was not a 440 for sure. The post which was deleted (presumably by the poster) stated it was a CV-240. It actually was but prior to conversion, probably when still on the production line. I said that I had even seen references to it as a CV-440 and added that it definitely wasn't (which you omitted when quoting me). OK? Sorted
Hotel Tango is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 09:14
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: welwyn
Posts: 55
Originally Posted by anxiao View Post
rog747 you do not know that a pilot died. You may have read that a crew member died. Please be careful with your terminology, there are next of kin out here trying to find the answers.
To be honest, I doubt looking on this forum would be high on their list of things to do.
LynxDriver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 11:29
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,673
Originally Posted by aterpster View Post
I believe the airplane was certified with a two-man (person) crew. As to single-engine performance just after lift-off, it was problematic. There was no requirement to meet a OEI takeoff flight path when these airplanes were certified. Could the failed engine prop be feathered? I don't have a clue.
I worked for a company that operated 8 recip Convairs in the late 80s. We had all 3 models. While the aircraft may have been certified under CAR4, we operated under FAR 121 and all the normal performance data was available. While Zlinguy's operation didn't use it, we checked the autofeather every runup and used it whenever required by the performance graphs.
MarkerInbound is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 14:13
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: On the Beach
Posts: 2,951
Originally Posted by MarkerInbound View Post
I worked for a company that operated 8 recip Convairs in the late 80s. We had all 3 models. While the aircraft may have been certified under CAR4, we operated under FAR 121 and all the normal performance data was available. While Zlinguy's operation didn't use it, we checked the autofeather every runup and used it whenever required by the performance graphs.
You were able to comply with 121.189?
aterpster is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 14:28
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 350
That crash site (as shown from GordonR_Cape's post) is a long way outside a right-hand circuit for the westerly runway! Handling must have been very difficult. There has been mention of 21degC and 4,100 ft elevation. With limited performance (on an aeroplane from an era when performance was not the same as expected now), the combination of 21C and 4,100 ft would be very significant.
Trossie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 15:02
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,630
Doug ferried the Hars Convair out from South Africa last year.
000
I saw a media photo last year of that HARS Convair taken during its initial take off climb. As a former Convair 440 pilot from over 50 years ago, I noticed that one upper cowl flap was fully open on one engine. The angle of the photo restricted the view of both upper cowl flaps. Normally that would be a serious event as the drag from a fully open upper cowl flap would be prohibitive in event of an engine failure at that stage.
My thought was maybe the cowl flap motor was inoperative and the crew had perhaps mechanically wound the cowl flap to the full open position for a ferry flight due lack of spares at the point of departure. That would be inconceivable to me as the CHT on that engine would be very low with all that cooling airflow through the engine and effect on the cylinders. I wrote to HARS for their comment but received no acknowledgement
Centaurus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 17:00
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 438
Comments elsewhere corroborate what I already understood - Convair 340 ZS-BRV has done little flying in the last nine years (since 2009), with its very infrequent trips aloft comprising mainly moves from Lanseria to Wonderboom to Freeway and back to Wonderboom again for ongoing storage. I'm by no means suggesting the accident flight was the aircraft's first in recent days nor am I casting aspersions on the quality of the maintenance it had been subjected to ahead of the proposed ferry flight to the Netherlands, but the reality is that old piston engines such as the R2800 sometimes 'let go' unpredictably when they have been largely dormant and not run at demanding power settings on a regular basis for long periods. It may be of course that the powerplants were not a factor (albeit that video evidences points to engine problems) or they were changed ahead of its ferry to the Netherlands, in which case this post is meaningless.
EastMids is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 18:02
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Cape Town, ZA
Age: 56
Posts: 26
Originally Posted by Trossie View Post
That crash site (as shown from GordonR_Cape's post) is a long way outside a right-hand circuit for the westerly runway! Handling must have been very difficult. There has been mention of 21degC and 4,100 ft elevation. With limited performance (on an aeroplane from an era when performance was not the same as expected now), the combination of 21C and 4,100 ft would be very significant.
Comments in the discussion on that link point out something crucial: The tracks into both the Wonderboom runways pass over densely populated suburban areas, whereas the crash location is a relatively sparsely built up patch. The suggestion is that the pilots tried to return, but the eventual loss of power forced them to ditch away from the airport.

The left engine did not fail instantaneously, as both propellers can be seen rotating in the takeoff video. What happened to the engine performance after that point should become clear during the inquiry.
GordonR_Cape is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 12th Jul 2018, 23:09
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Wellington
Posts: 76
One of the pilots involved in the accident had an engine failure in VH-TAA (VC-131D, ex ZS-ARV of Rovos Rail) whilst flying in Australia about a year ago. He was aware of the limitations of the single engine performance of the aircraft.
Street garbage is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 00:26
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,630
The left engine did not fail instantaneously, as both propellers can be seen rotating in the takeoff video
The propeller may have been windmilling creating huge drag and an observer would probably not know the difference..
Centaurus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 03:13
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: FL, USA
Posts: 2,116
Originally Posted by Centaurus View Post
The propeller may have been windmilling creating huge drag and an observer would probably not know the difference..
To me it appears that the LH engine is still running as it crosses the fence.
There appears to be no banking to the live engine or any directional control issues as it crosses the fence.
what you do hear is an irregular ‘popping’ sound.
With a radial engine ( or any reciprocating engine) you can have a partial engine failure ( loose a jug) follows by more cylinders failing.
So it drops 1-2-3- Cylinders in a short period of time.
B2N2 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 06:17
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: N/A
Posts: 2,148
you also quoted only a part of my post and omitted the part which said that it was not a 440 for sure. The post which was deleted (presumably by the poster) stated it was a CV-240. It actually was but prior to conversion, probably when still on the production line. I said that I had even seen references to it as a CV-440 and added that it definitely wasn't
The aircraft in question was never a 240. 131D models were based on a mix of 340 and 440 airframes, some of the 131's were converted civil airframes and some new builds. ZS-BRV was a new build 131D airframe and civilianized as a 340-79 in accordance with its TCDS.

Re certification, TCDS,
Type Certificate No. 6A6 (Transport Category, CAR 4b, effective July 20, 1950, and Amendment #1, #3, and #5, except smoke detectors not installed in cargo compartments
Re auto-feather, TCDS,
Ferry permits may be issued to all Model 340 aircraft on which the automatic propeller feathering system is inoperative. Continuous operation with the automatic propeller feathering system inoperative can be accomplished on some Models in accordance with Appendix "C" of the FAA Approved Airplane Flight Manual. Operating procedures, power ratings and performance data contained in Appendix "C" of the Approved Airplane Flight Manual applicable to the CB3/CB16 engines may be used for the CB4/CB17 engines.
Drag from the cowl flaps must be significant, did see a report years ago when a crew found themselves in the same predicament as this, feathered prop and fully closed the cowl flaps on the operating engine in an endevour to gain performance for a quick circuit while placing their faith in Mr. P & W to withstand the abuse. They made it.
megan is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 06:43
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Age: 67
Posts: 356
My dad use to fly the CV 240's for Butlers/Airlines of NSW.

Before that the Airspeed Ambassador.

He always said the Convair would kill him whilst the Ambassador would get him home.

He breathed a sigh of relief when the Covairs were sent to Airlines of SA and Air NSW got the Fokkers
dhavillandpilot is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 07:17
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Australia
Posts: 3,630
Drag from the cowl flaps must be significant, did see a report years ago when a crew found themselves in the same predicament as this, feathered prop and fully closed the cowl flaps on the operating engine in an endevour to gain performance for a quick circuit while placing their faith in Mr. P & W to withstand the abuse. They made it
From recollection the cowl flaps were selected to the trail position (or takeoff/climb position, whatever it was called then) immediately before commencing the take off roll. The drag would be minimal. The difference between trail (or climb position) and closed was also minimal. Certainly in my time you would never take off with cowl flaps wide open and it certainly was never in the Ops manual for the type..
On one occasion at an Australian outback airport with no servicing facilities, we discovered the left engine upper cowl flap failed in the full open position while we were taxiing in after landing.
After discussion with our flight engineer, he suggested he mechanically wind the cowl flap down to the trail or take off position and lock it in place. We then taxied out on one engine until lined up for take off. We then started that engine and when the engine oil temp was within the lower limit for take off we departed and CHT remained normal for the remainder of the three hour flight. After landing we closed down that engine to prevent increase in CHT and taxied in on one engine.
Centaurus is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 15:03
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Ormond Beach
Age: 43
Posts: 1,139
I remember at least a decade back there was a C-131 for sale on ebay still in full US Navy regalia. It looked more or less complete, but was not airworthy. The seller made sure to mention that the aircraft had been inspected by Kelowna Flightcraft (who, as I understand it, own the type certificate) and found to be "restorable to Part 121 standard". However, naturally, the cost of such a restoration was not mentioned. I haven't seen the aircraft since, so I assume it's sitting derelict somewhere.

Sure is a shame about the crash, I believe that was the last airworthy C-131 in the world.
flyboyike is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 13th Jul 2018, 23:16
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Blingland
Age: 50
Posts: 321
Nope, HARS have one in Australia and Conquest Air fly 3 or 4 out of Opa Locka


SyB.
Sheikh Your Bootie is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jul 2018, 00:56
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: MA
Posts: 295
The Conquest craft looks like it has been converted to a CV-580?
RobertS975 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 14th Jul 2018, 01:10
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Rockytop, Tennessee, USA
Posts: 4,213
Originally Posted by RobertS975 View Post
The Conquest craft looks like it has been converted to a CV-580?
If it has, it's missing a prop blade on each side.
Airbubba is offline  
Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service