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

ZS-BRV was due to be ferried from South Africa to the Aviodome in The Netherlands this month.It had been repainted in the old Martins Air Charter livery. News is coming in that it has crashed (on landing?) at Pretoria today. It broke into 3 parts and there are reports of 21 injuries.

I found a picture of ZS-BRV taken a couple of days ago with this note:



https://www.jetphotos.com/photo/9002145

Was the Martin's Air Charter lettering added (or revealed?) in the past couple of days?

I believe the titles were added very recently.

How does one modify the thread title? I think Pretoria, South Africa needs to be added. Mods, can you help?





Done.

Senior Pilot

Aviodome reports it as a test flight. Is it customary to carry 19 pax on a test flight? Of course they may have all been personnel so to speak.

Of origin yes. However, it was reported in several publications as having been converted to an CV-340. I have also seen it referred to as a CV-440, which it is not. Confusion may arise from the fact that the previous owner had 2 Convairs with that registration at one time or another.

Casualties reported: https://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/N...ports-20180710

Video of the takeoff seems to show engine smoke:

yes it seems it blew the left engine just before or at rotation on the video - such a shame - one of the crew died RIP very sad
gorgeous old aeroplane - now in bits and gone forever
donated from Rovos Rail - sadly they had a very bad train crash a while ago with their vintage restored train which killed several crew

it seems the a/c was trying to get back to the airport PDQ and didn't make it crashing into a field after clipping a warehouse

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 fair anxiao, several news sources are now quoting that one of the pilot's died.

Which just shows how careful you have to be when re-quoting other sources. I shall not divulge my information here but even the EMS spokesperson did to know who had died.

To the press, anyone forward of the flight deck door is a pilot. If you know aviation, that is not a correct assumption.

Just stop being ghoulish until the next of kin have been informed.

Keep your hair on! I see no indication that anyone was being "ghoulish" here!

The SACAA can be relied upon to publish a full investigation is due course, their work is always to a very high standard.
How good would the single engine performance be under hot & high conditions ?
The Convair would have a captain and a FO up front so "pilot" is ambiguous, would they also have a FE ?

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.

The two pilots are personal friends of mine. Both are in a critical condition in J'burg hospitals.

They were taking the aircraft to the Aviodome tomorrow, expecting to complete the delivery within a week. The two SA engineers were accompanying them as they did for the delivery of the first aircraft to Australia.

It was to be a quick "run around the block" with the passengers those who had worked on and with the aircraft during their return to service following Rovos' choice to gift them to museums.

Let's keep those injured in our thoughts as many are quite ill and condolences to the deceased.

The facts will some later.

https://cimg2.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.gmf...e578abeb08.jpg

From a South African aviation site. Taken shortly after takeoff.

The aircraft began life as a Convair C-131D-CO Samaritan, which was the military version of a 340. Registered in South Africa as a 340.

edited fatality
 

edited fatality seems I gather from later news and AVh it was reportedly the engineer (one of 2 on the flight?) who sadly succumbed to injuries RIP

seems the a/c went straight through the warehouse (not clipping it) :(

such a sad occurrence that a vintage airliner honoured for a historic Dutch charter airline ends of like this - condolences to all

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?