[mark manda]

Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2005 13:49:07 -0700
From: "Merems" <[email protected]>
Subject: A very bad day at the airport


Fellow builders,

I want to share with you a very bad day at the airport.

I was attending a pancake breakfast with our local EAA chapter at La
Cholla Airpark just north of Tucson AZ. A dozen or so aircraft arrived
and another two dozen or so visitors arrived for a wonderful morning of
food and airplanes. One of the aircraft that arrived was a turbine
Legend (composite, high performance aircraft). It announced it's arrival
with a high speed flyby and landed. However when it went to takeoff,
something went wrong, very wrong. It appeared to lift off the runway
way too early (about 1/3 what you would have expected) pitch up and roll
sharply to the port side. At about 75-100' it was still nose high and
rolling sharply to its port side. Then the nose pitched down. The
aircraft was now heading towards the ground but my view became obscured by
a house and tree line (yes we do have trees in Arizona). A second
later was impact followed by smoke. Both soles on board died. No houses
or people on the ground were hurt.

Since it was a EAA breakfast fly-in there were pilots all around
speculating on what had happened. What went wrong. Some are speculating it
was a high performance takeoff the pilot lost control due to the torque
effect and the 700+ horse power engine. I don't know if we will ever
know. 15 years earlier an RV-4 pilot decided to do a roll on takeoff
at this same airport and killed himself and his passenger.

I hope I never have a day like this again.

Paul

 

[Rick6a]

............when it went to takeoff, something went wrong, very wrong. It appeared to lift off the runway way too early (about 1/3 what you would have expected) pitch up and roll sharply to the port side. At about 75-100' it was still nose high and rolling sharply to its port side. Then the nose pitched down..................................Paul

The details appear eerily similiar to an Army Caribou crash some years ago. In that case, the crew failed to remove the gust locks prior to flight.

http://tinyurl.com/axoap

Rick Galati RV-6A "Darla"

 

[gmcjetpilot]

The details appear eerily similar to an Army Caribou crash some years ago. In that case, the crew failed to remove the gust locks prior to flight. Rick Galati RV-6A "Darla"

We can guess at accidents, but this is not correct. First the Caribou was so damaged that the control lock was never determined to be a cause, only suspect. Also the Horz tail trim jack screw can get water in it and freeze and cause an extreme out of trim condition. It was going thru flight test for a turbine conversion and already had flown +25 hours (not a first flight as some think), the pilot was a Vietnam Vet with 25,000 hours, most in Caribou's; last this tape was never to be released per the request of the family's. The tape is real and was retained by the Canadian Civil authorities or the FAA after the investigation was complete, with the approval of kin, for training purposes only. Some how it got out to the web. Tragic loss three people died , but again the gust lock is in the middle of the wind shield of the Caribou and covers the controls, a very obvious control lock and no final conclusion was possible.

The cause of the 700hp Turbine powered Lancair accident, that rolled over, has yet to be determined, control lock or otherwise. However a similar accident with a Glasair with a turbine engine occurred many years ago. It was determined to be caused by engine torque roll. I understand the P-51 would do the same thing at taking off with full power and rotated at a slow speed. I have never flown a P-51 or turbine Lancair, but the phenomena is well known with high powered single engine aircraft. In my opinion there are no similarities except they where planes, taking off, crashed and the result was several people dying.

The thing to learn or be reminded of is: Be careful when taking off and landing because the ground is close, always fly the same way per the numbers and at fly-ins resisted the temptation to do "airshow" maneuvers you have never done at higher altitudes much less low. G

 

[Rick6a]

We can guess at accidents, but this is not correct. First the Caribou was so damaged that the control lock was never determined to be a cause, only suspect........................... last this tape was never to be released per the request of the family's. The tape is real and was retained by the Canadian Civil authorities or the FAA after the investigation was complete, with the approval of kin, for training purposes only. Some how it got out to the web. Tragic loss three people died , but again the gust lock is in the middle of the wind shield of the Caribou and covers the controls, a very obvious control lock and no final conclusion was possible....................... G

An excellent reminder that there really are good reasons to do a
thorough preflight and to make sure the controls are free.

From R----M-----, FAA now but formerly Army Caribou Pilot. Caution this is
real ugly. Please preflight by the book. I was talking to J-- S--- who
was holding the video camera during this shot. This happened just north of
Winnipeg, and the aircraft was the first version with PT-6-67 Turboprops.

The Canadian DOT concluded that the control locks were still locked when the aircraft took off.

You who have flown the Caribou wonder how that could have happened when it is physically impossible to advance the throttles with the lock on - but this aircraft was being modified (still restricted category) and the throttle quadrant was not properly rigged to accommodate the throttle levers for the turbine engines. Three people were on board; two test pilots and an engineer.

Rick Galati RV-6A "Darla"

 

[gmcjetpilot]

OK thanks

The Canadian DOT concluded that the control locks were still locked when the aircraft took off.

I stand corrected. I talked to the company that produced the engine conversion and that was not their opinion. Never saw the final report, but know that the finding was not conclusive. Also jack screws have been an issue in the past. I did not know that the throttle quadrant was modified to mitigate the control lock safety features. G

 

[Tandem46]

Msg to Rick

Rick,
You must have missed my last post. How do you get that link to work?

Tobin

 

[az_gila]

Torque effect

The cause of the 700hp Turbine powered Lancair accident, that rolled over, has yet to be determined, control lock or otherwise. However a similar accident with a Glasair with a turbine engine occurred many years ago. It was determined to be caused by engine torque roll. I understand the P-51 would do the same thing at taking off with full power and rotated at a slow speed. I have never flown a P-51 or turbine Lancair, but the phenomena is well known with high powered single engine aircraft. In my opinion there are no similarities except they where planes, taking off, crashed and the result was several people dying.

The thing to learn or be reminded of is: Be careful when taking off and landing because the ground is close, always fly the same way per the numbers and at fly-ins resisted the temptation to do "airshow" maneuvers you have never done at higher altitudes much less low. G

Another pilot reported that the plane in question announced over the radio a "maximum performance takeoff" before rolling.

Witnesses saw dust on the left side of the runway at the take-off point, and fresh tracks were in the dirt about 4 ft off the runway.

A leftward flight track and a left hand slow half roll all point to the torque roll effect.... As well as an airframe originally designed for an automotive V-8.

As quoted above, don't do "airshow" maneuvers when not at an airshow.....

gil in Tucson ... resident of La Cholla Airpark.....

Note - above is speculation at this time, no official cause has been determined....

Luckily, no houses or persons on the ground were hurt.... but the crash site was around 300 yards from the Pancake Breakfast location....

 

[Rick6a]

I can't get this to work: http://tinyurl.com/axoap

Tobin

Tobin,

I really cannot answer why you can't access the link, works okay on my end. Hardly computer literate or savvy, I'm sure there must be one person that monitors this forum regularly who can offer any number of reasons you are experiencing those vexing technical problems. Sorry, I cannot help. If anyone can help Tobin, please jump in here.

Rick

 

[LettersFromFlyoverCountry]

Stupid question: What is a "maximum performance" takeoff?

 

[osxuser]

It should be a rotation straight into a VX climb.

 

[DGlaeser]

High performance takeoff

I don't know the book definition is, but when an F-14, F/A-18, etc, takes off in afterburner and upon rotation pull straight up into the vertical while climbing to the flight levels, that is considered a maximum performance takeoff. They'll usually make the request through tower by asking for an unrestricted climb.

Tobin

When I worked at McDonnell Douglas in St. Louis (now Boeing), the test pilots would do that whenever possible - they called it a "Viking departure" (v for vertical I'm sure). One Saturday I was in a Cessna 150 with a student, #2 behind an F-15 that just did a Viking departure. When the tower gave me 'cleared for takeoff', I responded, "OK, but somehow it's just not the same". I think the controller almost choked laughing.

BTW - they don't need afterburner (at least the F-15 or F-18). Word was that the test pilots got Viking departures approved as a 'noise abatement procedure' (all the noise generated near the airport - no A/B). They went vertical to about 5000 ft, then leveled out on course and were out of sight in about 10 seconds.

Dennis Glaeser

 

[gmcjetpilot]

maximum performance T/O

Stupid question: What is a "maximum performance" takeoff?

Bob, to me a max perf TO, in a RV or piston plane means doing every to get off the ground and gain altitude ASAP, I guess the same thing as a short/soft field TO, climb at Vx. If you use the F-18 analogy it is hold it on the deck as long as possible, accelerate to as high speed as possible and rotate at the end of the runway or as late as possible to climb at a steep angle, to impress your buddies. (steep angle = pitch that you can't maintain airspeed and would eventually stall if A/S allowed to decay.)

OK let me open the floor to suggestions for best MAX PERF departure or short field?:::

The only thing I might do different in the RV for MAX PERF, is apply power with the brakes on. Depending on runway length to obstacles in flight path I might accelerate in ground effect (say to 100 MPH) to gain extra speed, using this energy for better initial climb. The RV accelerates so fast you have to be aggressive to get to a Vx pitch angle.

Then only thing I might add is if the surface is soft a notch of flaps (10 deg) during the takeoff roll to get off the ground sooner , accelerate and than bring right up. Of course you know this Bob, it is important to hold your mouth just right and wear the proper sunglasses for Max Perf TO. G