Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Same link, full points to NZ Herald, they keep the updates coming. Good work getting six tandems out in time to give the pilot a shot too. I wonder did they brief the jumpers for a water landing?

 

 

Posted

1300m, over 4000 ft, reportedly, so they had some time. But it goes really fast descending with an engine failure. Doesn't say what sort of plane.

 

 

Posted

True, I thought I read 400m in the initial report before they updated it, it mostly was based on witness reports though, they have gone to a lot of trouble to update since then. It didn't say it was a Cessna.

 

PAC XL750?

They are a turbine, not likely to have an engine failure, especially a "putt, and conk out" one! although this one says it went off with a BANG! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11383120

 

 

Posted

brief for a water landing: plenty of time for that on the way down, they were tandems after all!

 

Excellent job that no-one was hurt.

 

 

  • Like 1
Posted

Just talking to a friend that jumps on that DZ but aircraft was operated by the other operator. So far it was stated a catastrophic engine failure. covers a wide range of options. Everyone made land, the boats just brought them back to were there was road access. They were around 3 grand when it happened. Took 15 minutes to cut pilot out of monster blackberry bush. Musta been a big bang to coax the pilot out. Most have possibly seen this aircraft on TV in an advert. Pink PAC XL. Pratt and Whitney halo is slipping a bit, seems a rash of PT6 failures around the world over the last 12 months.

 

CAA is giving the usual 'no confidence in participants' with a 'miraculous no one was killed' remark that has ruffled a few collars. Scott is keeping me informed so will see what he finds when they drag the mess out tomorrow.

 

Also 7 pairs of tandems got spanked this afternoon in Melbourne when they pushed their luck (more like didn't look in the sky before they took off) and had very heavy landings in a storm

 

Ozzie

 

 

Posted
This article in another thread quotes the pilot (Clemments) as engine failing at 2000', it isn't a lot of time to get your gear together.

Strange that when I looked at the Incidents/Accidents forum I didn't even see the original thread. Must need new glasses.

 

 

Guest Russell1
Posted
Strange that when I looked at the Incidents/Accidents forum I didn't even see the original thread. Must need new glasses.

Should have gone to SPEC-SAVERS...

 

 

Posted

Brand new jump pilot. Looking forward to reading the incident report on this one. Quite a few contradicting press reports over exit height and where they landed.

 

 

Posted
Musta been a big bang to coax the pilot out

My feeling as well...?

An empty Pac 750 would glide pretty well, but if it's caught fire, might be better to get out.

 

 

  • Agree 1
Posted

That's 2 XL750's down in NZ of recent times, fortunately nobody was killed in this one. Dare I ask how long before CASA makes a statistical "analysis" regarding these aircraft in jump ops in Oz?

 

 

Posted
That's 2 XL750's down in NZ of recent times, fortunately nobody was killed in this one. Dare I ask how long before CASA makes a statistical "analysis" regarding these aircraft in jump ops in Oz?

Umm I think the other one was a converted Fletcher ..... but anyway, this latest one doesnt bode well for passenger ops in single turbines like the Caravan in NZ, which was becoming the norm with AirNZ pullout of the regional routes. If CASA had anything to do with it, the operators of the replacement services would be stuck with using Apaches etc. instead. .... wait - they already are planing on doing just that

 

 

Guest Maj Millard
Posted
True, I thought I read 400m in the initial report before they updated it, it mostly was based on witness reports though, they have gone to a lot of trouble to update since then. It didn't say it was a Cessna.

 

They are a turbine, not likely to have an engine failure, especially a "putt, and conk out" one! although this one says it went off with a BANG! http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11383120

Although Turbines have less failures than say your standard piston engine, failurers are certain possible and should be planned for. There have been a few spectacular failures with PT6 powered aircraft recently throughout the world. Like any machine maintenance and the quality of that maintenance is critical.

 

 

Posted

The PT-6 set new standards for turboprop reliability when it first came on the scene. Obviously as time passes they age but people also become complacent I feel and don't service them as much as might be needed.. They are many times more reliable than pistons on average. It was stated they approached reliability figures for airframe and single engines ships like Caravans and Pilatus were widely used. Any engine can fail. Having another one is one answer, but assymetric flying is critical with handling. Nev

 

 

Posted

One see's a lot of PT-6's doing the vertical descent thing, and usually getting away with it.

 

I, and probably ozzie are aware that some Garrets don't take kindly to sort this treatment, maybe there is a possible problem with the PT-6 under these conditions?

 

 

Guest Maj Millard
Posted

Well even though its a pressureized oil system you still have to wonder where the oil actually is in the reservoir in an extended vertical descent.

 

 

Posted

As long as you do not under drive them ( keep load on the prop) and keep T5 in the green so it don't snuff out the flame and no neg G so the oil press stays positive they can be run in any attitude all day long. Garrets weak spot is their gear box. Seems P&Ws halo has slipped a bit over the last couple years with the PT6 but there are a hell of a lot flying now. Along with the King Airs Twin Otters Caravans Porters there are now the PC12 and Kodiak on the market and the number grows every day. Maybe that affects the production and the law of averages.

 

Other than the pilot driving NMV up a drain pipe the only other problem we have had with our 'van was the FCU trying to snuff out at 4 grand when it went out of trim.

 

There was also the air ambo PC12 flaming out at not over Perth while back. Still rather fly behind a turbine than a piston engine any day.

 

 

Guest Maj Millard
Posted

The advantage with turbine power is it is rotary shaft horse power with nothing stopping and starting in the cycle like a piston. This rotary power make for smooth powerfull generally reliable horsepower. Just have to keep the fires lit and things rotating as designed.

 

 

Posted
As long as you do not under drive them ( keep load on the prop) and keep T5 in the green so it don't snuff out the flame and no neg G so the oil press stays positive they can be run in any attitude all day long. Garrets weak spot is their gear box. Seems P&Ws halo has slipped a bit over the last couple years with the PT6 but there are a hell of a lot flying now. Along with the King Airs Twin Otters Caravans Porters there are now the PC12 and Kodiak on the market and the number grows every day. Maybe that affects the production and the law of averages.Other than the pilot driving NMV up a drain pipe the only other problem we have had with our 'van was the FCU trying to snuff out at 4 grand when it went out of trim.

There was also the air ambo PC12 flaming out at not over Perth while back. Still rather fly behind a turbine than a piston engine any day.

This is from a topdresser version. other than messing up the toggle switches if the flame stops there is not much to be done. (I dont fly them, so wont speculate on the controls - I think there is a manual FCU override power control)

 

TV1 report last night talked about 'a loud bang, engine slowing down, lots of sparks up front and prop stopped' They decided it was 'quieter than normal so time to go'

 

Although the footage of the engine coming out of the water had the blades twisted back and round a fair bit

 

Spose we will wait the 18 mnths for the reportpac3%20-%20Copy.bmp

 

 

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...