Correct, and as clearly stipulated by the OP in the thread title.

Sad news indeed.

The problem with that type of a/c is, loose an engine on T/O or near the ground as it seems in this case you're going down, period. If, and i mean if you get the prop feathered you will delay the inevitable. Remember you will have 5 minutes on the good engine, if you're lucky at max power. Also Wonderboom is 5500' approx, if memory serves me correctly.

Seems they were so unlucky. There but for the grace of God go I.

Wonderboom has the additional problem of its location in a valley which acts as a heat trap, the temperature can get seriously high pushing the density altitude to nasty levels. Way back in the 70s I barely managed to get a C150 over the fence.
There are no reports of the conditions on the day but density altitude is a good candidate for a contributing factor.

The left engine was trailing smoke.

The Dutch news has just reported a second fatality. This was a person inside the building which was struck by the aircraft.

Any autofeather on an aircraft like that?

This article by John Deakin about the CAF's C-131 implies that the type does have an autofeather option: https://www.avweb.com/news/pelican/182145-1.html

It will be important to establish details of any other test flights since the refurbishment. Had the a/c performed normally in previous air-tests? Then no reason to deny a jolly to those who had done the work.

more here as the story breaks in Australia,
Vintage plane crash: Qantas pilots fight for life

A second person has died as a result of a plane crash during a test flight in South Africa that left three Australians, including the two pilots, in hospital.Qantas said in a statement the airline’s pilot community was in “deep shock” after A380 captains Douglas Haywood and Ross Kelly, who is retired, were critically injured.The pair boast more than 37,000 hours’ flying experience between them and more than 30 years’ service with Qantas. Most on board were *pilots, flight engineers or aviation enthusiasts.“We were deeply upset to learn that two Qantas pilots, one current and one retired, were on board the vintage aircraft involved in an accident in South Africa on Tuesday,” a Qantas spokesman said last night.“This news has shocked the Qantas pilot community and everyone’s thoughts are with the families. We’ve reached out and are providing whatever support we can.”
https://cimg0.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...8c7bd8d51b.jpg

Video of the takeoff:

It's winter in South Africa so the temperatures are not that hot, but yes the airport is at 4100 ft elevation.
Can't find data for the past days but the current forecast for the next week does not go past 21C.

Still the aircraft type has only 44 passenger seats, so it was not exactly empty.

This article discusses the single engine shortcomings of the Convair 440, a development of the Convair 340.
http://aviationweek.com/bca/convair-...ine-out-return

Turning back to the airport is not a realistic option in these circumstances. Our procedures called for a forced landings withing 45 degrees of our heading.

The CV-440 was my first "real" flying job nearly 30 years ago - 2 of the 3 we flew have subsequently crashed ( one departing SJU under similar circumstances - ours were based in the states). It was mostly "On-the-Job Training", fortunately the Captains I flew with were very experienced and doled out prodigious amounts of "tribal knowledge". I honestly don't remember that much about the plane (other than it was old and leaky - even back then), but, almost every Captain was loathe to arm the Autofeather switch. Apparently it was implicated in several accidents when a faulty BMEP sensor (kind of a torque gauge) would trigger an autofeather of a perfectly functioning engine/prop. I believe the AUTO RICH/AUTO LEAN settings could get you in trouble pretty quickly, as well...

One of the crash reports cites a pilot stating that it was unlikely to climb at over 500'/min single-engine - I remember that number being our 2-engine rate-of-climb (mostly due to cooling issues). It was a very stable platform ( and a very robust airframe - I can attest to that), but, incredibly busy for the non-flying pilot to keep temps in the ideal range for different phases of flight adjusting cowl flaps, oil cooler doors, not reducing power below 100 BMEP for descent, etc...

I still have some old flight manuals from the mid-50's when our planes were operated by Delta Airlines...

Thank you for your words, tha'ts why I am on PPrune... to read statements like yours...

That the pilots were experienced, is of no doubt. What I would be interested to know is this. How much of that experience was relative to that type of a/c and recent?

They were both very active flying members of HARS, so they were flying a number of similar aircraft, from Constellation to Catalina. And a Convair.

Both have been heavily involved for a number of years with the Historical Aircraft Restoration Society (HARS) south of Sydney. Together, the aircraft they have flown are the DC3, Caribou, Convair 440, Lockheed Super Constellation, Lockheed Neptune, PBY Catalina plus others.
They have been Senior Check Pilots with Qantas and are well thought of both operationally and socially.
I'm sure that a lot of people in Qantas and further afield are concerned for all that have been involved in this terrible accident.

Unfortunately your post # 7 left me in some doubt, particularly as you quote in part a post that has been deleted in its entirety. I cleared up any possible confusion by making a categorical statement that aligns with the OP.

Does anyone know the actual location of the accident?