KBTL Hawker 800 crash

I’m not familiar with Honker heavy maintenance, does the wing get demated at some of the heavy checks like a Lear? Or does it seem more likely that the aircraft over stressed during a botched stall test?
 
Roger Roger said:
I’m not familiar with Honker heavy maintenance, does the wing get demated at some of the heavy checks like a Lear? Or does it seem more likely that the aircraft over stressed during a botched stall test?
Click to expand...

I never flew one but they were around at a previous job. By all accounts they were built like a brick poop house.
 
Roger Roger said:
I’m not familiar with Honker heavy maintenance, does the wing get demated at some of the heavy checks like a Lear? Or does it seem more likely that the aircraft over stressed during a botched stall test?
Click to expand...
They have to take the TKS panels off and evidently putting them back on is a bit of a delicate process. So then some poor dumbass (like,say,me) has to go stall and see whether it flips over and crashes.

I don't think that thing was missing a wing, but my eyes are getting old along with the rest of me. My money would be on pulling through the pusher and winding up in a deep stall.
 
bp said:
didnt someone intentionally snap roll a hawker a buncha years back? my impression has always been they are brick sh thouses
Click to expand...
They're built like they thought they'd never have to be disassembled. The deepest I ever got with a Hawker was removing/reinstalling the tail cap so we could remove/install the horizontal stab. I don't recall the actual amount of bolts that holds that entire tail together, I just remember trying to torque them properly and install the cotter keys in a difficult position repeatedly for days. I've always heard the rumor that that airplane in particular is as overengineered as it is because all of the old school engineers from WWII were kind of on the chopping block when the Hawker was being designed and they saw a Learjet land and went to have a look. Then they dropped acid and kept their jobs designing all sorts of steampunk nonsense like the landing gear. Go look at any jets MLG and it's pretty obvious how it works, do the same with a Hawker and you might spend some time scratching your head. I'm not saying it doesn't work, it's just overly complicated and that's why no one ever copied it. They are built like a brick • house, if that • house was in Willy Wonkas Chocolate Factory.
 
Boris Badenov said:
They have to take the TKS panels off and evidently putting them back on is a bit of a delicate process. So then some poor dumbass (like,say,me) has to go stall and see whether it flips over and crashes.

I don't think that thing was missing a wing, but my eyes are getting old along with the rest of me. My money would be on pulling through the pusher and winding up in a deep stall.
Click to expand...
Tbh I didn’t watch it and was going off the impressions of others.
 
Boris Badenov said:
They have to take the TKS panels off and evidently putting them back on is a bit of a delicate process. So then some poor dumbass (like,say,me) has to go stall and see whether it flips over and crashes.

I don't think that thing was missing a wing, but my eyes are getting old along with the rest of me. My money would be on pulling through the pusher and winding up in a deep stall.
Click to expand...
The TKS panels have stall "strips" mounted on them. Again my Hawker experience/knowledge is very limited and I hate working on them with a blind hatred. The airplane in question was at an airport with a big MRO onsite. It'd been there since March and this was the first flight since. I have no idea about what might've happened but it seems likely it was related to to whatever MX was completed. Has Duncan Aviation said anything?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top