Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
I hope there’s enough emergency to explain this.
NASCAR driver and family in plane crash
- Thread starter Inverted
- Start date
knot4u
Repeat Offender
I hope the CVR was working, it'd give a lot of context regarding what and why. Sadly many times the CVR is sort of neglected, the ULB will get changed on time but in my experience the functional test often gets pencil whipped. I've said it before but I'll say it again, I've walked into a hangar with an airplane on jacks and in the work order one of the tasks is a CVR functional test. I'd walk in a few days later and that task would be signed off. I know that the CVR test (again, it's not a check, it's a test) is signed off and the airplane is still on jacks. The problem is the the CVR test requires running engines. I have no idea who was taking care of Biffles jet but I hope they were meticulous and honest because they are under a big illuminated microscope currently. If they were a pencil factory they're going to be exposed.
Pilot Fighter
Well-Known Member
In Part 91, can’t you choose to let it die?
knot4u
Repeat Offender
Not if it's still installed. I don't know much about small pt91 airplanes but in my experience if something is installed it can't just ride around inop for decades. Even small airplanes have to get inspected and eventually a yellow "INOP" sticker isn't good enough. If it's not necessary just remove it rather than maintain it seems common in that world (please understand my direct knowledge about these airplanes or their usage is very limited). But the problem is the CVR was installed under an STC, removing it requires at the very least a form 337, you've altered the approved Type Certificate of the airplane. Just ignoring the issue and not addressing it might seem convenient but it's not a good long term plan. I'm a conservative and I prefer to do everything above board, I don't wander into grey areas much.
Wardogg
Meat Popsicle
knot4u
Repeat Offender
Only if you want it to be.
Wardogg
Meat Popsicle
lolwut?
knot4u
Repeat Offender
IMHO, and I am not an accident investigator, that looks like fire damage after the wreck. What do you see that I’m missing?
Wardogg
Meat Popsicle
Neither am I. Which is why I asked the opinions of others. Maybe somebody that has seen such a thing before. The other nacelle doesn't have such damage on it. Wind was barely blowing according to the METAR at the time. So the heat should be going straight up and not up and over the top of the nacelle half way down the other side.
knot4u
Repeat Offender
In my opinion it looks like the intact nacelle of the left engine of an airplane that landed somewhat intact but on fire. I watched the video your pic came from. Care to share your insight regarding one of the MLG sitting next to the airport perimeter fence? Where'd the wings go? I don't know.
Wardogg
Meat Popsicle
Nah. I'm good. Feel free not to engage me in conversation.
I wish I could agree. But the older Citations have plentiful options to “maintain” them outside the network of Textron (and other reputable) service centers. I’ve seen some discussions on the CJP boards that make me understand why our insurance is just so darn expensive…
knot4u
Repeat Offender
Sometimes cheap isn't cheap, especially when it's about turbine powered aircraft.
mightynimbus
Well-Known Member
Not my SME area, but it seemed like plenty of fuel was getting out ,and on fire, as it all was coming to a stop.
I would guess that fuel could have ended up in a wide variety of spots on and around the stopping point.
It’s difficult to tell fire patterns of items not completely destroyed from a video with a few angles, without being on scene and examining all angles, internal and external. The impact with the approach lighting system seems to have done a large portion of fuselage damage, possibly more than ground impact itself, what with the right wing being mostly gone. Survival wise, depending on the damage from impact, the right side emergency exit may have not been able to be opened, assuming anyone survived conscious and knew how to open it. Even so, either exit would've been surrounded by the pool fuel fire around the aircraft sadly, making even an escape likely not a survivable event.
The Statesville Fire Dept does have a CFR truck at SVH, but it isn’t manned. In the event of an aircraft incident, the first responding off-airport fire truck to arrive from station 2, cross-crews the CFR truck there with personnel from the Engine who are ARFF trained. Unfortunately, this incurs a delay in the response time if the fire crews don’t happen to be there at the airport from off-airport, which they normally would not be. This can be done, because SVH isn’t a 14 CFR 139 airport and has no requirement to have CFR vehicles; as it has no scheduled over 9 pax or unscheduled over 31 pax air carrier service. For airports that do have a singular CFR vehicle but with no requirement to have one, there is also no requirement for full-time manning, and thus a number of different methods of manning get utilized. Even some smaller airports with scheduled/unscheduled airline service, the CFR is only required to be manned during the time of arriving/departing air carrier aircraft.
The Statesville Fire Dept does have a CFR truck at SVH, but it isn’t manned. In the event of an aircraft incident, the first responding off-airport fire truck to arrive from station 2, cross-crews the CFR truck there with personnel from the Engine who are ARFF trained. Unfortunately, this incurs a delay in the response time if the fire crews don’t happen to be there at the airport from off-airport, which they normally would not be. This can be done, because SVH isn’t a 14 CFR 139 airport and has no requirement to have CFR vehicles; as it has no scheduled over 9 pax or unscheduled over 31 pax air carrier service. For airports that do have a singular CFR vehicle but with no requirement to have one, there is also no requirement for full-time manning, and thus a number of different methods of manning get utilized. Even some smaller airports with scheduled/unscheduled airline service, the CFR is only required to be manned during the time of arriving/departing air carrier aircraft.
T/O w/FSII
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the homework.
The NTSB live briefing on Nov 6th at 3:55 minutes in on this video.
View: https://www.youtube.com/live/srB2ezbnP24?si=Dt4I6mVHLwNaD_VG
That’s what that NTSB said. And I wasn’t impressed with it watching it live because we all saw it crash into a 50ft tall building.
The NTSB also didn’t just say the “text was sent” they explicitly said:
“ I can confirm that the NTSB is aware of one brief text from a passenger onboard the aircraft to a family member that read and I quote “emergency landing” again, that’s “emergency landing””
2 minutes and 50 seconds in from the NTSB themselves.
View: https://www.youtube.com/live/k66HfZcpFKE?si=5XY7qT-nigarQfiO
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
This is a little off the topic, but seems like in this day and age, some basic camera should be mounted the airport for these purposes. I envision some sort of camera like we see from carrier landings , but with a wider field of view. Seems it would be a very minimal expense.