Air Charter crashes at Essendon

[piecrust]

I would say that both engines had failed. Does anyone know if this plane had auto feather?

 

 

[facthunter]

They do have auto feather but TWO can't auto feather. That possibility is locked out by the logic in the system. Nev

 

 

[turboplanner]

They do have auto feather but TWO can't auto feather. That possibility is locked out by the logic in the system. Nev

Have a look at the discussion on prune; that's beginning to look like a possibility.

 

 

[facthunter]

I haven't yet. The emphasis is on "auto". Auto is to get the aircraft performance. (Almost instant) and have control in the Yaw, by drag reduction. I'm hesitant to speculate on these things. They have the CVR which will have some noises to analyse. Single pilot may not have the voice info you get with two. Nev

 

 

[dutchroll]

I would say that both engines had failed. Does anyone know if this plane had auto feather?

The B200 King Air comes standard with an autofeather system. The B200 should also be able to climb away with the gear up and one prop feathered at max weight (unlike smaller less powerful twins where the 2nd engine will just carry you to the scene of the accident). It's not lacking power on one engine, so that will be something the investigators will need to look at. Why did it fail to achieve this?

Public commentary has of course ranged from reasonable to mind-numbingly stupid. As an example of the latter, I present to you this comment on the 7 News FB page and my response to the guy:

 

Commenter: "The onus is on the pilot to check the plane before each flight to make sure everything is working properly, and to either not fly it until it's repaired or to commence repairs themselves if able to do so. Therefore, portioning blame onto the pilot is quite acceptable as he either didn't perform these checks or ignored potential safety issues."

 

My response: "So.....is it normal that your icy cool stare at a piece of complex machinery just scares it into submission and makes it keep working forever?"

 

 

[BLA82]

Commenter: "The onus is on the pilot to check the plane before each flight to make sure everything is working properly, and to either not fly it until it's repaired or to commence repairs themselves if able to do so. Therefore, portioning blame onto the pilot is quite acceptable as he either didn't perform these checks or ignored potential safety issues."

My response: "So.....is it normal that your icy cool stare at a piece of complex machinery just scares it into submission and makes it keep working forever?"

FFS is this guy serious, some of these guys seriously need a smack in the mouth. And to think Journalisim is a University Degree. I think my three year old son could do better.

 

 

[ben87r]

FFS is this guy serious, some of these guys seriously need a smack in the mouth. And to think Journalisim is a University Degree.

Journalism is a degree, you just don't see anyone doing it anymore.

 

These days at best I would call them uneducated and uninformed reporters. And at worst? Well it's probably not fit for Ian's lovely site here.

 

Even 60 minutes has gone down the drain.

 

 

[facthunter]

I was deadheading once and the operating Captain informed us after we were all loaded we would be transferring to another plane as this one was unserviceable. He then got out and went to do the walkaround of the plane next to us. A passenger noticing this loudly commented. "Just look at that! He's just found things wrong with this plane and now he's trying to find something wrong with "that" one." . (and they are allowed to breed) Nev

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

The B200 King Air comes standard with an autofeather system. The B200 should also be able to climb away with the gear up and one prop feathered at max weight (unlike smaller less powerful twins where the 2nd engine will just carry you to the scene of the accident). It's not lacking power on one engine, so that will be something the investigators will need to look at. Why did it fail to achieve this?Public commentary has of course ranged from reasonable to mind-numbingly stupid. As an example of the latter, I present to you this comment on the 7 News FB page and my response to the guy:

 

Commenter: "The onus is on the pilot to check the plane before each flight to make sure everything is working properly, and to either not fly it until it's repaired or to commence repairs themselves if able to do so. Therefore, portioning blame onto the pilot is quite acceptable as he either didn't perform these checks or ignored potential safety issues."

 

My response: "So.....is it normal that your icy cool stare at a piece of complex machinery just scares it into submission and makes it keep working forever?"

Quite simply, that journo should be fired

 

 

[dutchroll]

Wasn't a journo. It was a very uneducated member of the public. I'm not sure which is worse sometimes!

 

 

[Jerry_Atrick]

Oops (just out of a pub and read coomentator) though whatever that commentator does - he should be fired as obviously has no concept if reality

 

 

[cooperplace]

Wasn't a journo. It was a very uneducated member of the public. I'm not sure which is worse sometimes!

if you connect with journalists, you sometimes find that they are hungry for the facts, keen to be educated, and can be worked with. I talk to them quite a lot in regard to my profession, which is in the sciences, and they usually make an effort to get the facts right. There seems to be a lower level of accuracy in the media reporting on aviation, but I think one solution is for people with expert knowledge to gently correct them. Journalists (most of them) are human.

 

 

[ben87r]

CP in regards to the aircraft being reported as a single engine aircraft a simple google search would have corrected that, so I'm assuming they didn't even go to the effort for that?

 

 

[Akromaster]

if you connect with journalists, you sometimes find that they are hungry for the facts, keen to be educated, and can be worked with. I talk to them quite a lot in regard to my profession, which is in the sciences, and they usually make an effort to get the facts right. There seems to be a lower level of accuracy in the media reporting on aviation, but I think one solution is for people with expert knowledge to gently correct them. Journalists (most of them) are human.

I'm with you there and you put it more eloquently than I would have...I started to reply but decided against it. I make it a habit to read from many sources anyway because, as we all know, there are "alternative facts", plus it helps one form a balanced view on things. The way media is these days, not only do they have to be first out in mainstream media, they're competing against the social medium so there's bound to be pressures to get stories out before they're fully verified...often just quoting from an "official" spokesman I find who themselves aren't experts, like quoting from the emergency services.

 

 

[Bats]

if you connect with journalists, you sometimes find that they are hungry for the facts, keen to be educated, and can be worked with. I talk to them quite a lot in regard to my profession, which is in the sciences, and they usually make an effort to get the facts right. There seems to be a lower level of accuracy in the media reporting on aviation, but I think one solution is for people with expert knowledge to gently correct them. Journalists (most of them) are human.

With respect CP, dealing with journalists in relation to something fact driven and generally not sensational, is a very different matter to feeding the frenzy that is the latest headline or newsclip. In the latter instance the old maxim of; "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" holds sway and I have quietly watched on as a spokesperson delivered a factual and unemotional statement and then made the mistake of answering a few repetitive questions at the end. A sound bite from one of these made for a lurid headline which was almost 180 degrees opposed to the content of his statement and as far as Joe Public is concerned, that is about all they'll absorb and remember.

 

 

[turboplanner]

With respect CP, dealing with journalists in relation to something fact driven and generally not sensational, is a very different matter to feeding the frenzy that is the latest headline or newsclip. In the latter instance the old maxim of; "don't let the facts get in the way of a good story" holds sway and I have quietly watched on as a spokesperson delivered a factual and unemotional statement and then made the mistake of answering a few repetitive questions at the end. A sound bite from one of these made for a lurid headline which was almost 180 degrees opposed to the content of his statement and as far as Joe Public is concerned, that is about all they'll absorb and remember.

A journalist is entitled to print what the interviewee says.

I've certainly been caught out at the end of an interview, and learnt a valuable lesson

 

The most famous Australian example of open mouth disease was the Alan Bond interview, where he effectively provided evidence which triggered a conviction.

 

 

[turboplanner]

I haven't yet. The emphasis is on "auto". Auto is to get the aircraft performance. (Almost instant) and have control in the Yaw, by drag reduction. I'm hesitant to speculate on these things. They have the CVR which will have some noises to analyse. Single pilot may not have the voice info you get with two. Nev

.....have a look at prune; was the auto feather disarmed by the throttle position; the guys discussing this are experienced twin engine pilots, including a couple of B200 pilots!

 

 

[dsam]

Here is a network 10 clip where Ben Morgan (AOPA) is given a chance to put his views to the broadcast media, and handles the issue very well, although I feel he possibly should have mentioned CASA by name, as a body with some responsibility for speaking up in the support of safety over inappropriate property development.

 

 

RA-Aus.... where are you.....? SAAA....? Time to be supportive!

 

 

[Alan]

In one of the early videos of the roof where the aircraft impacted, there are clear slice marks presumably cut by a rotating propeller. No doubt the experts can determine whether that engine was at operational rpm from that.

 

Alan

 

 

[bexrbetter]

No doubt the experts can determine whether that engine was at operational rpm from that.

They can determine that from the background noise in the radio communications.

 

 

[bexrbetter]

Some similarities?

 

2014 Wichita King Air crash - Wikipedia

 

 

[BLA82]

RA-Aus.... where are you.....? SAAA....? Time to be supportive!

Staying out of it which I believe is a good idea.

 

 

[Cosmick]

Some similarities?2014 Wichita King Air crash - Wikipedia

Not knowing if in the right or wrong, the Lame's in this case who conducted very recent maintenance would be very concerned about any possibility of mechanical cause.

 

 

[turboplanner]

Staying out of it which I believe is a good idea.

No, members of both bodies are affected, and plenty examples of where rents have been jammed up, recreational aviators have been pushed out.

What the press has uncovered in the Essendon crash case is that the commercial development on this airfield should not have been there; even nailed two individuals for it, that the City of Essendon warned about the development, which would be prohibited under Council zoning, and given us an excellent chance of reversing the situation.

 

Those two presidents should have been on top of a rare occasion where the developers touts, who have a financial interest in calling for airports to be closed after incidents like this, have had a severe reversal and there is now some mementum to get rid of them.

 

 

[Ron5335]

Speaking of similarities

 

Investigation: 198001471 - Beech Super King Air 200, VH-AAV, Sydney (Kingsford Smith) Airport, NSW, 21 February 1980

 

Same date, 37 years apart, & left engine failure on take off.