Light aircraft crash - NT - 25/12/2022 - 2 dead

[onetrack]

News is just filtering in, that a light aircraft on a trip from Gove to Katherine, went missing yesterday morning.

 

Searchers found the wreckage earlier today at a location named Bulman, approximately halfway between Gove and Katherine.

 

Sad to say, both pilot and passenger have been found to be deceased in the wreckage.

 

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-12-25/northern-territory-police-search-for-missing-light-plane-/101808178

[facthunter]

I check weather maps at least once each day. This time of the year the local weather there is a bit unsettled to say the least.  Nev

[red750]

From The Guardian

 

Read more

 

 

Federal investigators said the Cessna 210N aircraft collided with terrain and left a debris field scattered over a large distance.

 

The plane with a 22-year-old male pilot and 43-year-old female passenger on board had been due to land in Tindal, south-east of Katherine, about midday on Sunday.

[red750]

Northern Territory Police identify victims of plane crash near Bulman, north-east of Katherine

 

Report here.   Does not include names.

[Thruster88]

ATSB investigating because it is Cessna 210, most likely a charter. Description seems to indicate an in flight structural failure.  

[Carbon Canary]

Cessna 210 and the ATSB will be investigating.

 

What a terrible time of year for the families involved.

[slb]

Released: 26 December 2022

The following statement can be attributed to ATSB Chief Commissioner Angus Mitchell:

"The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has commenced an investigation into a collision with terrain involving a Cessna 210N single-engine light aircraft near Bulman, Northern Territory about 240 km north-east of Katherine.

"The flight, with a pilot and one passenger on board, was reported missing to authorities after the aircraft failed to arrive at its Katherine destination on Christmas Eve.

"A search, coordinated by the Australian Maritime Safety Authority, located the aircraft in the afternoon on Christmas Day with a debris field scattered over a large distance. Both occupants were confirmed deceased by Northern Territory Police.

"A team of transport safety investigators from the ATSB's Brisbane and Canberra offices are preparing to deploy to the accident site where they will commence the on-site phase of the investigation.

"Given the remote location, the ATSB is liaising with Northern Territory Police to determine the best way for investigators to access the accident site over the coming days.

"The initial ATSB safety investigation will include an examination of the wreckage, assessment of aircraft and pilot records, forecast and actual weather information, and any available recorded data.

"The ATSB’s evidence collection will define the size and scope of the investigation and determine the expected timeframe for the completion of a final report.

"A report will be published at the completion of the investigation. However, should a critical safety issue be identified during the course of the investigation, the ATSB will immediately notify relevant parties."

// Ends

NOTE: The ATSB will not be providing any further statements in relation to this accident until the release of the preliminary report in about 6 - 8 weeks time.

[pylon500]

Pulling the wings off 210's sounds to be a bit of a habit...

[turboplanner]

4 minutes ago, pylon500 said:

Pulling the wings off 210's sounds to be a bit of a habit...

Certainly broke up into little pieces, newly graduated pilot, may have misjudged NT weather.

Fast aircraft (170 kts cruise) no wing struts.

[Jase T]

Plenty of hours in the mighty 210. For those of you that have never flown one. This aircraft will easily and happily cruise well above VNO at 75%power. On a Shiite turbulent day like that I imagine it would be very easy to cause a structural failure (I am betting on aileron or even elevator flutter as opposed to tipping a wing off) if you were not consciously keeping speed under control and well below VNO.  Just my opinion but reading between the lines it sure looks like an in flight breakup.  

Edited December 27, 2022 by Jase T

[facthunter]

I'm not very keen on any of the strutless ones. People have managed to twist the wing off the earlier ones as well by rolling bank on at too high a speed.  Nev

[turboplanner]

16 hours ago, facthunter said:

I'm not very keen on any of the strutless ones. People have managed to twist the wing off the earlier ones as well by rolling bank on at too high a speed.  Nev

The 206 is the better alternative for rough weather and outback landings. 

[facthunter]

Surprising how often the speed of a 210 has got people into trouble. It's not really that fast but requires just a little bit more space and planning ahead..   Nev

[turboplanner]

58 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Surprising how often the speed of a 210 has got people into trouble. It's not really that fast but requires just a little bit more space and planning ahead..   Nev

The extra workload before and in flight decided me against using a vfr light aircraft for interstate business; it involved less hours to catch an RPT+Rental car.

 

I found the controls heavy (but others said I didn't trim properly) but that long nose and power-push in the back were a buzz.

[facthunter]

As long as the seat is locked properly and the runners not worn.. When I first started flying, anything a bit large made me feel sort of overwhelmed a bit.  You  HAVE to adjust to that. A near empty modern jet  has over 1000 HP/Tonne on take off  if you don't use reduced thrust.  That's a  BIG push in the back but the real deal must be the stuff from Cape Canaveral accelerating to over 22,000. mph.  Nev

[poteroo]

When you have an aircraft with a cruise in the 145-150KIAS range, but, a Va of 123KIAS, (@MTOW), there's potential for 'both long term progressive, or immediate, airframe damage. If the aircraft has had a long history of low level survey, and a high TT, say 15,000+ hrs, then there's further potential for there to have been many, many stresses on the airframe. If you look at Va a bit further, then with a light load of 2 people, plus probably low fuel load, the Va is going to be much less than that quoted in the POH. (Lower weight = lower Vs  =  lower Va). Couple the above with flying during the wet in northern Australia, with lots of thermal activity, and there's real potential for airframe breakup.  

 

The sad aspect of the past 210 accidents is that less experienced CPLs appear to be involved. What is being taught to them, either in their commercial training or on the job? Is there too much çommercial' pressure to get the job done today, or is it the more common peer group pressure that most of us felt in our early years pushing tired old 200 series Cessnas around the tropics?

[Bosi72]

On 27/12/2022 at 5:21 PM, Jase T said:

Plenty of hours in the mighty 210. For those of you that have never flown one. This aircraft will easily and happily cruise well above VNO at 75%power. On a Shiite turbulent day like that I imagine it would be very easy to cause a structural failure (I am betting on aileron or even elevator flutter as opposed to tipping a wing off) if you were not consciously keeping speed under control and well below VNO.  Just my opinion but reading between the lines it sure looks like an in flight breakup.  

No aircraft should be flown above Va (or Vb) in any turbulent weather.

 

[turboplanner]

6 hours ago, Bosi72 said:

No aircraft should be flown above Va (or Vb) in any turbulent weather.

 

That would be a simple self-rule to have. 

 

[poteroo]

It's a physical impossibility to instantly slow from cruise IAS down to below Va when the gap is 30kts or more. 

 

It matters not whether it's Va, or Vc that's important.

 

The answer is to be prepared for turbulence by understanding the wx on track, have calculated your Va off your TOW/Vs, learn what constitutes low,moderate and severe turbulence, and learn to fly it smoothly in rough air.

 

BTW, a parallel discussion on pp agrees with the above. It also contains some perceptive views on the content of both CPL and instructor training.

[turboplanner]

12 hours ago, poteroo said:

It's a physical impossibility to instantly slow from cruise IAS down to below Va when the gap is 30kts or more. 

 

It matters not whether it's Va, or Vc that's important.

 

The answer is to be prepared for turbulence by understanding the wx on track, have calculated your Va off your TOW/Vs, learn what constitutes low,moderate and severe turbulence, and learn to fly it smoothly in rough air.

 

BTW, a parallel discussion on pp agrees with the above. It also contains some perceptive views on the content of both CPL and instructor training.

Commercial operations certainly have some different perspectives than private, and in some respects is a thankless task.

[facthunter]

IF you encounter rough air above the desired speed pull the power and don't put in any large control inputs.   Nev

[Mriya]

Surprised how little focus this one had in the media.  Maybe it got overshadowed by the Gold Coast helicopters that collided a few days later!

I have heard via a source who should know that the aircraft did NOT break-up in flight despite the speculation that has occurred on this forum.

[Bosi72]

Speculation was based on news article citing the Federal investigators.

 

 

"...Federal investigators said the Cessna 210N aircraft collided with terrain and left a debris field scattered over a large distance...."

 

[kgwilson]

"Large" can mean anything. It could be one or two hundred metres if the impact was at a low angle of attack rather than all the wreckage being in one place.

[Thruster88]

On 14/02/2023 at 7:01 AM, Mriya said:

Surprised how little focus this one had in the media.  Maybe it got overshadowed by the Gold Coast helicopters that collided a few days later!

I have heard via a source who should know that the aircraft did NOT break-up in flight despite the speculation that has occurred on this forum.

https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/2023/report/ao-2022-067

 

In flight structural overload failure.