Mitsu MU-2 Down in Tulsa - Sen. Inhofe's Son Aboard?

You would have to be working at it to run out of fuel in the main tank with fuel in the tips for sure. Now the outer wing tanks on the older models don't have fuel gauges, just empty lights but they only hold like 15-20ish gallons per side. So I could see that happening. Sorry it has been several years and most of my time was in the Marquise which was different from the older models.

@Boris Badenov , did you not shut off the fuel valves after shutdown? That is what we had to do to prevent fuel leaking all over the ramp while it was parked.
 
scooter2525 said:
Psh. You are JCs resident mootoo guru.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

No it seems that's Pilotdude3407, who I'm betting hasn't ever seen the inside of one.

ark - Nope, for whatever reason they didn't want us touching the main selectors. Probably one of the ICJ mechanics had rigged something up special...
 
Seggy said:
Surprised no one brought this up yet...

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/bizarre/inhofe-scared-crap-out-airport-workers-192645
Click to expand...
I mentioned that in a thread when it happened a while back, but wasn't going to bring it up in this context. But now that Seggy has popped Sen. Inhofe's cherry...

Inhofe didn't get a briefing or check NOTAMs which announced the closed runway under construction WITH PROMINENT Xs DISPLAYED TO APPROACHING PILOTS. He flew straight in and landed, scattering construction workers. Minutes later Inhofe was all but killed by construction workers and the airport manager (with whom a less-than-cordial relationship existed), and the manager notified FAA which investigated. After certain, ahem, senatorial influence and excuses ("one of my assistants was supposed to get the briefing"), the FAA decided NOT to discipline, suspend or revoke, and PIC Jim is still sharing the skies with the rest of us (and closed runways with construction workers). Inhofe all but got the Administrator to apologize for inconveniencing him.
 
tomokc said:
I mentioned that in a thread when it happened a while back, but wasn't going to bring it up in this context. But now that Seggy has popped Sen. Inhofe's cherry...

Inhofe didn't get a briefing or check NOTAMs which announced the closed runway under construction WITH PROMINENT Xs DISPLAYED TO APPROACHING PILOTS. He flew straight in and landed, scattering construction workers. Minutes later Inhofe was all but killed by construction workers and the airport manager (with whom a less-than-cordial relationship existed), and the manager notified FAA which investigated. After certain, ahem, senatorial influence and excuses ("one of my assistants was supposed to get the briefing"), the FAA decided NOT to discipline, suspend or revoke, and PIC Jim is still sharing the skies with the rest of us (and closed runways with construction workers). Inhofe all but got the Administrator to apologize for inconveniencing him.
Click to expand...

That was the reason for my interest in whether or not his father had a hand in his flight training. The Senator is known for having many of the worst personality traits a pilot can have - I can only hope his son did not pick up those as well.
 
Boris Badenov said:
No it seems that's Pilotdude3407, who I'm betting hasn't ever seen the inside of one.

ark - Nope, for whatever reason they didn't want us touching the main selectors. Probably one of the ICJ mechanics had rigged something up special...
Click to expand...

More like yours were probably correct where our MX was a more of "that will do" variety.
 
The prelim is out and it appears that he turned into the dead engine. From what I've read that isn't something you want to do in an MU-2. And I believe the report incorrectly stated west instead of east ("...the controller then cleared the pilot to maneuver to the west and...").

http://www.ntsb.gov/aviationquery/brief.aspx?ev_id=20131110X03324&key=1
NTSB Identification: CEN14FA046
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, November 10, 2013 in Owasso, OK
Aircraft: MITSUBISHI MU 2B-25, registration: N856JT
Injuries: 1 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On November 10, 2013, about 1546 central standard time, a Mitsubishi MU-2B-25 twin-engine airplane, N856JT, impacted wooded terrain while maneuvering near Owasso, Oklahoma. The commercial pilot, who was the sole occupant of the airplane, sustained fatal injuries. The airplane was destroyed. The airplane was registered to Anasazi Winds, LLC, Tulsa, Oklahoma, and was operated by the pilot under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, and an instrument flight plan had been filed. The flight departed Salina Regional Airport (SLN), Salina, Kansas, about 1500, and was en route to Tulsa International Airport (TUL), Tulsa, Oklahoma.

According to preliminary air traffic control communications and radar data, the airplane was cleared to land on runway 18L at TUL, and the pilot was instructed to reduce the airspeed to 150 knots. The pilot acknowledged the clearance and speed reduction. Radar data showed the airplane on a straight-in approach to runway 18L. After the airplane passed the runway 18L outer marker, the airplane began a left turn. The air traffic control tower controller asked the pilot about the deviation, and the pilot reported that he had a control problem. The left turn continued, and the controller then cleared the pilot to maneuver to the west and asked if he needed assistance. The pilot informed the controller that the left engine was shut down. The controller then declared an emergency for the pilot and asked about the number of souls on-board the airplane and the fuel remaining. No further communications were received from the pilot. Radar data showed the airplane complete a 360-degree left turn near the runway 18L outer marker at 1,100 feet mean sea level, and then radar contact was lost.

Several witnesses observed the airplane in a shallow left turn; the reported altitudes ranged from 400 to 800 feet above ground level. During the turn, the landing gear was in the extended position, and one engine propeller appeared not to be rotating. The airplane continued in a left turn and the wings began to rock back and forth at a 10- to 15-degree bank angle. The airplane was observed to then make a right turn, followed by a left turn, and then a steep spiral to the left. The airplane disappeared from the witnesses' view as it descended.

The accident site was located in wooded terrain about 5 miles north of TUL at a global positioning (GPS) elevation of about 650 feet. The airplane came to rest upright on a measured magnetic heading of 109 degrees. The main wreckage area consisted of all major airplane structure and components. The left engine propeller blades were found in a feathered position. The landing gear was found in the extended position, and the flaps were in the 20-degree position. Postimpact fire consumed a majority of the fuselage and wing structure.

At 1553, the TUL automated surface observing system, located 5 miles south of the accident site, reported the wind from 140 degrees at 6 knots, visibility 10 miles, scattered clouds at 9,000 feet, temperature 19 degrees Celsius, dew point 6 degrees Celsius, and an altimeter setting of 30.26 inches of Mercury.
 
tomokc said:
Oooh - the feelings of guilt over this. I imagine any CFI would feel terrible knowing that a former student was involved in a fatal crash, but for that student to be your son. Wow!
Click to expand...
My single career/aviation ambition is to not have to 'splain why I did something stupid to my father (or do something stupid and force him to bury me), so it's a two way street.
 
The airplane can be flown safely with an engine shut down as long as the speeds and configurations are correct. Flaps 20 are not supposed selected until landing assured.

Here is the profile for it.
 

Attachments

Pilotdude3407 said:
Another MU2 takes a life.
Click to expand...

I don't know if I'd say that, in fact, I wouldn't. Because the implication is that the MU2 has some kind of hand in the whole deal or malintent, when it's just a piece of machinery; it's just an airplane. Albeit, it's a more unforgiving airplane than other types, with reduced tolerances for a pilot who doesn't give it the proper respect, but it's still just an airplane. And when flown within it's tolerances, by a pilot who flies the MU2, and never lets the MU2 fly him; it's a fine machine. I would venture to say that even turns made into the dead engine when single engine can be done, at varying speeds/altitudes, and when kept coordinated, especially turns made into the non-critical engine.

Many thought he F-104 was dangerous, due to its high accident rate in the Luftwaffe, when really, it was simply a plane that didn't tolerate low experience pilots or those pilots who either didn't know, didn't understand, or didn't respect, its particular tolerances that it needed to be kept within, and how unforgiving it was if said pilot didn't keep it there.

That's on the pilot. That's not the fault of the plane.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious as to his time in type, recency in type and twins in general. Flight Safety every 6 months an not much else really isn't proficient.
 
I think he had 3,000 hours TT, so you'd assume that he was proficient in twins. Also, it was daytime severe clear VMC. He was on a straight-in visual inside the OM (5.6 NM from the threshold at 1,668' AGL if on G/S), so all he had to do was secure the dead engine (which he did) and continue the approach, not touching anything except the throttles.

He apparently didn't go into full engine-out mode (mixture, props, throttles, flaps up, gear up, etc.) because flaps were 20 and the gear were down.

Damn.
 
tomokc said:
I think he had 3,000 hours TT, so you'd assume that he was proficient in twins. Also, it was daytime severe clear VMC. He was on a straight-in visual inside the OM (5.6 NM from the threshold at 1,668' AGL if on G/S), so all he had to do was secure the dead engine (which he did) and continue the approach, not touching anything except the throttles.

He apparently didn't go into full engine-out mode (mixture, props, throttles, flaps up, gear up, etc.) because flaps were 20 and the gear were down.

Damn.
Click to expand...
Full engine out mode like you are saying does not apply to the MU-2. While it is certified like a light twin, because that is what it is, it must be flown like a jet. Power up, clean up, identify, verify, feather is wrong in this thing. It must be accelerated to vyse/vxse for the flap setting and then cleaned up.

To just clean up while too slow will set yourself up for stall/spin vmc nastiness.

If you are really bored or need an insomnia cure here is the full SFAR 108 from the FAA.

The flight maneuvers section is Appendix D toward the bottom.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top