Two dead in light aircraft crash, Port Macquarie

[turboplanner]

That would do it.

 

 

[onetrack]

Aircraft is said to have conducted a low level pass of the airstrip and clipped the windsock in the process

If such is the case, then there will be evidence in the form of a damaged windsock - and it would have to be very obviously damaged, to cause an aircraft to crash.

 

 

[poteroo]

Aircraft is said to have conducted a low level pass of the airstrip and clipped the windsock in the process

Hard to believe!

 

What you can't see from 200 ft AGL, (well clear of trees and windshear), in a strip inspection - isn't worth the risk.

 

 

[turboplanner]

If such is the case, then there will be evidence in the form of a damaged windsock - and it would have to be very obviously damaged, to cause an aircraft to crash.

I don’t think the windsock would cause the crash, but it would be proof of altitude in the circuit.

 

 

[alf jessup]

I don’t think the windsock would cause the crash, but it would be proof of altitude in the circuit.

TP

Windsock itself probably wouldn’t cause the crash but if it hit the support pole I’m guessing it could

 

 

[turboplanner]

That too.

 

 

[onetrack]

The ATSB investigation has been opened. The victims names have been released - Grant Burley, 51 and his fiancee, Suzanne Rohleder, 50.

 

Investigation: AO-2017-105 - Collision with terrain involving Cessna 310R, VH-JMW, 40 km SSW of Port Macquarie, NSW, on 28 October 2017

 

I find it hard to believe this apparently, "highly experienced and extensively qualified pilot" could make such a simple and stupid mistake, as hitting a windsock.

 

His company profile describes him as "a passionate pilot holding multi engine, fixed-wing, and rotorcraft licenses, and has ferried many aircraft, and crossed all major oceans, often solo in single engine aircraft."

 

Grant Burley | Burley White & Co

 

His aircraft charter operation reflects his passion, with this 1980 310R recently totally rebuilt on a major basis (obviously with cost no object), and with Burley claiming it was now the fastest and best equipped 310R in Australia.

 

Welcome to BurlAir; Fast, Quiet, Comfortable

 

It will be interesting to see what the ATSB find. The fact there was only a "small fuel spillage" (according to SES responders), and no post-crash fire, may be a possible hint to the cause of the crash.

 

Even though they were nearly at their destination, there still should have been a modest quantity of fuel aboard. I don't think I've seen too many twin-engine aircraft crashes where there wasn't a fuel-fed fire on impact.

 

To compare a similar disaster - Tony Mangan's 310 crash at Mildura in Nov 2015, generated a fuel-fed fire, and he was on final approach to his destination airport, the same as Grant Burley.

 

Perhaps of the greatest concern is that the ATSB investigators were totally unable to pinpoint a cause for Tony Mangans crash.

 

Investigation: AO-2015-129 - Collision with terrain involving Cessna 310, VH-BWZ, near Mildura Airport, Victoria on 6 November 2015

 

 

[turboplanner]

The crash is reported 400 north of the airfield in the left photo near Johns River. South of the clubrooms, close to the strip is a white dot, which could be the wind sock.

 

In the second photo, this strip is down at the bottom left corner of the photo and the Port MacQuarie airport can be seen at the top right corner of the photo.

 

To have hit that windsock (if that's what it is, could indicate pilot incapacitation, or maybe the partner trying to get it on the strip (pure speculation I know).

 

 

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Perhaps of the greatest concern is that the ATSB investigators were totally unable to pinpoint a cause for Tony Mangans crash.

Investigation: AO-2015-129 - Collision with terrain involving Cessna 310, VH-BWZ, near Mildura Airport, Victoria on 6 November 2015

The report stated one engine was not producing power and had no fuel in its fuel line. That prop was not feathered and the flaps and undercarriage were down and in that configuration they say the aircraft would have become uncontrollable very quickly on one engine. So I don't think the cause is a total mystery, what they couldn't tell is why the fuel ran out for that engine, either through lack of fuel, tank selection or other cause such as a blockage.

 

 

[Camel]

The report stated one engine was not producing power and had no fuel in its fuel line. That prop was not feathered and the flaps and undercarriage were down and in that configuration they say the aircraft would have become uncontrollable very quickly on one engine. So I don't think the cause is a total mystery, what they couldn't tell is why the fuel ran out for that engine, either through lack of fuel, tank selection or other cause such as a blockage.

Just saying, Just to be clear this is the other aircraft VH BWZ not VH JMW

 

 

[Happyflyer]

Just saying, Just to be clear this is the other aircraft VH BWZ not VH JMW

Yes.

 

 

[pylon500]

Have heard now from different sources regarding a windsock being at the crash site.

 

There is a lot of bushland around the airstrip, and although I think I remember there being fences around the strip, there may well have been an animal problem on the strip.

 

Scenario; On approach pilot see animals, initiates go'round, pulls to right of strip to observe animal movement and inadvertently hits windsock?

 

Totally speculation.

 

 

 

[ave8rr]

ATSB Prelim Report.

 

Investigation: AO-2017-105 - Collision with terrain involving Cessna 310R, VH-JMW, 40 km SSW of Port Macquarie, NSW, on 28 October 2017

 

 

[Downunder]

Makes it seem as if it was a "straight in" but no time stated for when radar was lost. That would tell if he did a low pass and come around again or lost it coming straight in.

 

Lost the left engine on late final in the end?

 

 

[pylon500]

Makes it seem as if it was a "straight in" but no time stated for when radar was lost. That would tell if he did a low pass and come around again or lost it coming straight in.Lost the left engine on late final in the end?

Some more speculation and assumed facts;

I'd only met the pilot, and flown into his strip a few times.

 

Runway preference was usually 34, as approaching 16 tended to be down the face of the local hills.

 

Circuit direction onto 34 was usually right hand, once again due to close proximity of the local hills.

 

The approach profile could be interpreted as joining a R/H circuit for 34.

 

Fuel mismanagement would seem unlikely for a pilot that made a hobby of international ferry flying, but...

 

*No mention in the report of the presence of the windsock at the crash site.

 

Hopefully his GPS systems may shed more light on what happened.

 

*

 

Will have to keep following the investigation.

 

 

[Thruster88]

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2017/aair/ao-2017-105/

 

The final report.

 

Out of fuel followed by loss of control due aerodynamic stall. Always fly the aircraft regardless of what is happening.  

 

 

[poteroo]

Electronic Fuel flow is a great aid to fuel management, but in small aircraft it relies on a known starting volume.   If the tanks are filled, then there will be a known volume on board. Where calculations become murky is if the tanks contain less than FULL, and pilot does not dip them accurately, or perhaps relying on a quick glance at tank tabs, and then fails to adjust down to the actual startup quantity.

 

Always filling a tank to FULL is a good safety action.  It is also possible to adjust the 'k' factor on the pessimistic side, ie, to operate on a fuel flow of,  say, 5% higher than actual. A small margin perhaps, but possibly enough to balance a too optimistic fuel calculation.

 

A lesson for us all, again.