red750 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 From Yahoo News' Aaron Bunch Australian Associated PressWed, 21 October 2020, 4:01 pm AEDT A rusty light aircraft pilot and an inexperienced flight instructor died in far north Queensland after their plane slammed into the ground during a training exercise, a crash investigation has found. The pair simulated an engine failure about 20 seconds after take off at Mareeba Airport in December 2019, the Australian Transport Safety Bureau said. Their twin piston-engined Angel 44 rolled rapidly to the right before the accident, which fatally injured the pilot and instructor. Transport Safety Director Stuart Godley said the duo lost control of aircraft at a height from which it was too low to recover. "Power was not immediately restored to the right engine to discontinue the exercise and the pilots were unable to maintain altitude ... with the aircraft banked towards the inoperative engine," he said. Their plane hit the ground in a cornfield 475 metres north of the runway. Witnesses spotted the aircraft touch down on the runway, accelerate and take off again before the crash. After take-off, the aircraft climbed to about 100-150 feet before banking to the right. Neither the pilot nor the instructor had any recent experience in the aircraft, which had not been flown regularly for more than two years, investigators found. The pilot had also not flown for three years before the accident, which likely resulted in a decay of skills at managing tasks such as an engine failure after take-off. The instructor had limited experience in multi-engine planes with retractable landing gear and had only once before flown the Angel 44 aircraft, several years earlier. Dr Godley said it was likely the instructor didn't know how long it took for the landing gear and flaps to retract - approximately 14 seconds - and the detrimental effect that would have on the plane's ability to climb with only one engine firing. "In light twin-engine aeroplanes, loss of power on one engine shortly after take-off poses a high risk due to low height above ground, low airspeed and generally limited single-engine climb performance," he said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Binghi Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 What a list !!!...😧 . 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thruster88 Posted October 22, 2020 Share Posted October 22, 2020 It seems like more people die in twins from simulated engine failures than actual engine failure. After the one at Remark I thought there may be a new regulation about minimum height for such risky operations. https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2017/aair/ao-2017-057/ 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ryanm Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 The rules shifted somewhat shortly after the fatal crash of an Air North EMB-120 in Darwin several years ago, but fell short of capturing the smaller Twins unfortunately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRviator Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 That AirNorth one was downright stupid - and almost a carbon copy of a B1900 that lost control at Williamtown a year or so earlier doing the exact same thing! If you go to Flight Idle on your typical auto-feather equipped engine, you are no longer simulating "just" an engine failure. You are simulating an engine failure and the failure of the autofeather system. And as has been found many times over, almost all light piston and an awful lot of turbine twins will not accelerate yet alone climb away like that. We will continue to have accidents until people want to learn from the mistakes of others. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 who would trust an instructor after that. Why did he try an engine failure when both he and the pilot had so little experience. Over the years I have seen many instructors and many of them are forgotten as they were poor. Anyone who doesn't know the dangers of twin flying should not be trying to fly one and this pair certainly demonstrate that. Maybe the pilot trusted the instructor. I certainly don't trust instructors and when I find a good one I try to put it around so others may know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KRviator Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 Centaurus over at PPrune mentioned a similar accident at Camden around a decade earlier. A MECIR checkride was underway and as part of the briefing, the checkee, a current airline pilot, refused to accept an EFATO below 500AGL at night. The ATO agreed to this. They flew Bankstown-Wollongong-Camden and almost immediately on rotation at Camden - at night, remember - what does the ATO do? Fail an engine, with predictable results. The ATO received serious, ultimately fatal, injuries and the checkee serious injuries. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 (edited) "You idiot! You've killed us all." From memory, the final words of the PIC of the RAAF 707 after the check captain pulled power on both engines on one side off Sale in the Bass Strait. "I've hit the...(Guy cable supporting 2XL's broadcasting mast)." Final transmission from the Snowy's Pilatus Porter, killing the pilot and 2 office girls,as it crashed in ground fog. Cooma Airport, 15miles away was clear. So many preventable tragedies. Edited October 23, 2020 by Methusala punctuation Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Binghi Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 24 minutes ago, Methusala said: "You idiot! You've killed us all." From memory, the final words of the PIC of the RAAF 707 after the check captain pulled power on both engines on one side off Sale in the Bass Strait... ... The Angel 44 instructors recent experience is documented. Obviously some issues and a cause there. Though, I’m a bit mystified how it is a RAAF check captain could be doing a ‘manoeuvre’ outside of what would be considered safe practice ? Were it something that they had been doing for several years with-out issue ? . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 (edited) Please note, I am not the "first without sin", Just remember this accident and the fact that, as Yenn says,"Over the years I have seen many instructors and many of them are forgotten as they were poor." The Board of Inquiry concluded that the instructor devised a demonstration of asymmetric flight that was 'inherently dangerous and that was certain to lead to a sudden departure from controlled flight' and that he did not appreciate this. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19911029-0 I'm not wishing to be controversial, a stirrer or indifferent to the suffering of families or others. Just saying. Don Edited October 23, 2020 by Methusala punct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flying Binghi Posted October 23, 2020 Share Posted October 23, 2020 5 hours ago, Methusala said: Please note, I am not the "first without sin", Just remember this accident and the fact that, as Yenn says,"Over the years I have seen many instructors and many of them are forgotten as they were poor." The Board of Inquiry concluded that the instructor devised a demonstration of asymmetric flight that was 'inherently dangerous and that was certain to lead to a sudden departure from controlled flight' and that he did not appreciate this. https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19911029-0 I'm not wishing to be controversial, a stirrer or indifferent to the suffering of families or others. Just saying. Don Yep!, Methusala, as always, a lot more to it. A long list of one thing leads to another... “The Captain acted with the best of intentions...” “...The Board of Inquiry concluded that the instructor devised a demonstration of asymmetric flight that was 'inherently dangerous and that was certain to lead to a sudden departure from controlled flight' and that he did not appreciate this. The Board noted there were deficiencies in the acquisition and documentation of 707 operational knowledge within the RAAF combined with the absence of effective mechanisms to prevent the erosion of operational knowledge at a time when large numbers of pilots were resigning from the air force. There was no official 707 QFI conversion course and associated syllabus and no adequate QFI instructors' manual. There were deficiencies in the documented procedures and limitations pertaining to asymmetric flight in the 707 and a lack of fidelity in the RAAF 707 simulator in the flight regime in which the accident occurred, which, assuming such a requirement existed, required actual practise in flight. 'The captain acted with the best of intentions but without sufficient professional knowledge or understanding of the consequences of the situation in which he placed the aircraft,' the Board said...” https://aviation-safety.net/database/record.php?id=19911029-0 . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Methusala Posted October 24, 2020 Share Posted October 24, 2020 Yep, going asymmetric when you don't know the consequences will surely lead to unpleasant consequence, agreed. Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted October 24, 2020 Share Posted October 24, 2020 Once committed to this action the best way to stay safe would have been to reduce power on the running engine. That would have resulted in a descent, but not had the yaw brought on by full power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now