Another Cessna? not fatal thank goodness

[Jabiru7252]

It's interesting that the pilots story has now changed from "loss of rudder control" to "engine failure"? That's a pretty major change in the story - unless the journos who reported it initially, mis-reported the story.

 

Perhaps the pilot reported loss of 'bladder' control after engine failure?

 

 

[Possum1]

It has been 20 years since I put in 30 hours in a C206. When you apply power, because of the torque and slipstream effect of that big propeller in front of you, if you are not ready with a very strong application of rudder or rudder trim, the aircraft will bank strongly to the left.

 

I clearly remember that for a full power take-off, rudder trim neutral, if you are not ready with right rudder with all the physical strength that you have, the aircraft will depart the runway into the ditch on the left. Similarly will be this effect in the climb but not as bad because after the take-off, you should have wound the engine back from full emergency power to 25"/2500rpm and the slipstream effect forcing a bank to the left will be less pronounced. For an extended climb, rudder trim is essential if you do not want your right leg to develop the "shakes."

 

Whether the above is pertinent to the crash, I don't know but any 206 pilot knows about its predilection to do a left turn.

 

Otherwise, I found the Cessna 206 to be a joyful brute of a plane to fly and thoroughly enjoyed the experience and the enormous amount of power you had at your disposal.

 

 

[BackcountryAeropup]

let him who is without sin cast the first stone

One would think casting stones would be a extremely risky endeavor. You could hit anther one and spark a uncontrollable burn. You'll get locked up for that.

[Splitty]

More than meets the Eye with Shifty Gerry !

[Hunsta]

I assume neither pilots were a member of this forum?

[turboplanner]

It's interesting that the pilots story has now changed from "loss of rudder control" to "engine failure"? That's a pretty major change in the story - unless the journos who reported it initially, mis-reported the story.

“Loss of rudder control” not something the average journalist would think of in terms of an aircraft coming down.

[onetrack]

Turbo, I was envisioning a possible misunderstanding between pilot and journos, as to what what actually said, and what was reported. But the ABC article reported the pilot explicitly stating (to Seven News) ..."we lost rudder control".

Then, later in the initial reported statement, the pilot claims, "we kept the aircraft under control" .... ?

 

Finally, in another, later report, the same pilot reported engine failure, as the cause of the crash.

I guess if the engine stops and the airspeed drops, you sure won't have too much rudder authority - but I just wonder why engine failure wasn't even mentioned in the initial report? - and why one second he's claiming he, "lost rudder control", and next second he's saying, "we kept the aircraft under control"?

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/plane-crashes-off-fraser-island-survivors-swim-ashore/11910632

[turboplanner]

Turbo, I was envisioning a possible misunderstanding between pilot and journos, as to what what actually said, and what was reported. But the ABC article reported the pilot explicitly stating (to Seven News) ..."we lost rudder control".

Then, later in the initial reported statement, the pilot claims, "we kept the aircraft under control" .... ?

 

Finally, in another, later report, the same pilot reported engine failure, as the cause of the crash.

I guess if the engine stops and the airspeed drops, you sure won't have too much rudder authority - but I just wonder why engine failure wasn't even mentioned in the initial report? - and why one second he's claiming he, "lost rudder control", and next second he's saying, "we kept the aircraft under control"?

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-29/plane-crashes-off-fraser-island-survivors-swim-ashore/11910632

 

We'll get to learn about it in fine detail from ATSB; prelim report is now up, File AO-2020-10.

Note: this isn't the fine detail; ATSB are obtaining that and will produce a final report with all the details in it in a few months time.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2020/aair/ao-2020-010/

[Hunsta]

We'll get to learn about it in fine detail from ATSB; prelim report is now up, File AO-2020-10.

Note: this isn't the fine detail; ATSB are obtaining that and will produce a final report with all the details in it in a few months time.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2020/aair/ao-2020-010/

So is every incident logged with ATSB? Or is it only if its deemed nessasary to report on?

[turboplanner]

So is every incident logged with ATSB? Or is it only if its deemed nessasary to report on?

I've never seen a document from ATSB specifying any classes they will or won'y get involved in. It seems to be pretty much all GA accidents,except for a few where no lessons would be learned by spending money on an investigation. For example there was one aerobatic crash where a very experienced pilot was killed and there was no ATSB investigation.

 

In the case of RAA, ATSB has stepped in on a few occasions, and on others has been called in by RAA for expert work, but in the bulk of cases serious accidents are investigated by RAA, and in the case of fatalities the State Coroner usually conducts a hearing, the State or Territory Police carry out the investigation, and usually call in RAA for technical assistance. RAA makes their report to Police, Police make the combines report to the Coroner and the Coroner decides how the person died. The only information we get from these investigations is the Coroner's report, and you need to be alert to when the hearing is and when the report is published.

[onetrack]

No, not every incident is reported to the ATSB, and numerous reported events do not raise an inquiry, if the incident is not deemed to be of any significance.

 

The relevant laws are Sect 18 and 19 of the TSI Act 2003. Remember this much - "it is not the function of the ATSB to apportion blame for transport accidents or incidents".

 

Here are the FAQ's relating to the TSI Act ...

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/legislation/trans_safety/tsi_qa/

 

Note that an "Immediately Reportable Matter" (or incident), is an incident that affects Transport Safety in Australia - whether it be air, rail or ship. The Responsible Person has 72 hrs to report a Reportable Matter.

 

And below is the Enforcement Policy of the ATSB and the TSI Act 2003.

Note that where there has been a failure of a Responsible Person to report a "Reportable Incident" under Sect 18 and 19, the ATSB first relies on education of that Responsible Person as to their responsibilities under the TSI Act 2003.

 

Secondly - only in the worst cases of failure to report an incident (such as potential criminal activity, or where there has been death or serious bodily injury), will the ATSB then refer the matter to the AFP for possible prosecution under the relevant Criminal Code laws.

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/about_atsb/legislation/enforcement-policy/

 

The TSI Act 2003 ...

 

https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00617

[onetrack]

Coroners findings (Inquest results) are usually listed on every States relevant Departmental website, by year. I do not have links to every States website, but here is the West Australian Coroners Court findings, listed by year.

 

https://www.coronerscourt.wa.gov.au/I/inquest_findings.aspx?uid=6256-4150-5-7479