Reports of a large air tanker crash in NSW

[bob10]

Any follow up on this?

RFS investigating reports of large air tanker crash in southern NSW (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/rfs-investigating-reports-of-large-air-tanker-crash-in-southern-nsw/ar-BBZeRdJ?ocid=spartanntp)

[travelrover]

ABC TV news say local crews reported they saw it crash and likely all on board lost!

Nothing confirmed

[Hugh Jars]

A RAAF P8 is in the locality at the moment.

[travelrover]

ABC now confirmed crash

[Eevo]

strategic tool being used tactically and it crashed. it was operating outside of its scope. is anyone surprised?

condolences to the crews family and the first responders.

[mick88]

Tragic!
The fires have been enough of a tragedy without something like this.


Mick.

[101RRS]

strategic tool being used tactically and it crashed. it was operating outside of its scope. is anyone surprised?


What are you jibbering on about. Its a fire tanker doing exactly what it was converted to do. How do you know it was operating out of its scope? No one knows what happened yet.

[Eevo]

What are you jibbering on about. Its a fire tanker doing exactly what it was converted to do.

no.
vlat is not meant to be used tactically.
its meant to be used for strategic retardant lines.

[DiscoMick]

Tragic situation. Apparently fire crews saw it go down and do not expect survivors.

Meanwhile a fire near the Canberra Airport is out of control and has burned into an industrial estate, where toxic fumes are being released from a burning industrial recycling plant. Several government departments, including Home Affairs, are near the airport, as I saw when last in Canberra

Now 80 fires in NSW, fanned by high winds. It just keeps getting worse.

Australia fires live: Canberra airport closed, reports of air tanker crash in NSW bushfires – latest updates

Australia fires live: Canberra airport closed, reports of air tanker crash in NSW bushfires – latest updates | Australia news | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2020/jan/23/nsw-fires-live-updates-victoria-bushfires-south-australia-fire-sa-australian-bushfire-near-me-cfa-rfs-latest-news-today-thursday?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard)

[101RRS]

its meant to be used for strategic retardant lines.

and how do you know it was not tasked to do that - lets wait and see.

[Eevo]

and how do you know it was not tasked to do that - lets wait and see.

because it is being used inappropriately in australia.

[travelrover]

Tragic situation. Apparently fire crews saw it go down and do not expect survivors.

Meanwhile a fire near the Canberra Airport is out of control and has burned into an industrial estate, where toxic fumes are being released from a burning industrial recycling plant. Several government departments, including Home Affairs, are near the airport.

Now 80 fires in NSW, fanned by high winds. It just keeps getting worse.

Australia fires live: Canberra airport closed, reports of air tanker crash in NSW bushfires – latest updates

Australia fires live: Canberra airport closed, reports of air tanker crash in NSW bushfires – latest updates | Australia news | The Guardian (https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/live/2020/jan/23/nsw-fires-live-updates-victoria-bushfires-south-australia-fire-sa-australian-bushfire-near-me-cfa-rfs-latest-news-today-thursday?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard)

You can monitor the voice coms via Broadcastify just click on the ACT radio button. Sounds pretty frantic in Canberra. We have two new fires here in the Hawkesbury.

[travelrover]

Just an observation, today most of the aerial assets do not have their transponders enabled so you can track via Flightradar24 which is unusual

[travelrover]

confirmed by premier that there are three dead in crash

[4bee]

Just an observation, today most of the aerial assets do not have their transponders enabled so you can track via Flightradar24 which is unusual


??? Why would they do that?

Wouldn't it be safer for everyone if they knew exactly where all the approx 70 or 80 aircraft were, especially in smoke & Low Viz conditions? Even RADAR relies on Transponders for ID not just location on a screen.

[travelrover]

??? Why would they do that?

Wouldn't it be safer for everyone if they knew exactly where all the approx 70 or 80 aircraft were, especially in smoke & Low Viz conditions? Even RADAR relies on Transponders for ID not just location on a screen.

Am sure they track them by other means.
We live in an air force low flying zone and most of the time the military aircraft can not be tracked by Flightradar24 but some days you can!

[DiscoMick]

Three US crew dead in 'routine' water bombing.

Three dead after Large Air Tanker crashes while fighting bushfires in southern NSW
Three dead after Large Air Tanker crashes while fighting bushfires in southern NSW - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-01-23/nsw-rfs-air-tanker-crashes-near-numeralla-bushfire/11893554)

[4bee]

Am sure they track them by other means.
We live in an air force low flying zone and most of the time the military aircraft can not be tracked by Flightradar24 but some days you can!

That could be a Security matter & I have tried to ID known Govt. VIP flights in Adelaide but they don't usually show up especially once on the ground & parked while other commercial flights do. I understood ADS-B was the way to go these days for tracking.

[travelrover]

Yes military use different transponders and this particular aircraft has flown over our place most days in the past few months as we are 12km north of RAAF Richmond where many of these water bombers are based.

[101RRS]

According to the news tonight the aircraft crashed at Peak View which is about 50km east of the fire front - the track they displayed would indicate that the aircraft had been over the fire front and was heading east when it crashed.

No other information given so still a bit early to speculate but they did say it it was on fire as it came down.

[travelrover]

No other information given so still a bit early to speculate but they did say it it was on fire as it came down.

That’s significant!

[Blknight.aus]

Just an observation, today most of the aerial assets do not have their transponders enabled so you can track via Flightradar24 which is unusual

not so unusual, flight radar apps on your phone work in conjunction with known planned flights, if its something un or out of scheduled it wont always show up... occasionally in busy airports you'll get the wrong plane info if

1. the plane you want is scheduled to be late but has made up time and the DB isnt updated
2. the plane you're looking at is arriving on the same flight path/time as the original late schedule of the plane you wanted to find out about.

From the app page


Flightradar24 combines data from several data sources including ADS-B, MLAT and radar data. The ADS-B, MLAT and radar data is aggregated together with schedule and flight status data from airlines and airports to create a unique flight tracking experience on Flightradar24: Live Flight Tracker - Real-Time Flight Tracker Map (http://www.flightradar24.com) and in Flightradar24 apps.

[4bee]

That’s significant!


Maybe it was one of those Laser Bursts from space that they were on about, so instead of it starting another bushfire, it hit the Herc. instead.? :unsure:

:rolleyes:

[DiscoMick]

One source says it disappeared at 1.30 pm while flying over Namadgi NP near Canberra.

[bemm52]

Maybe it was one of those Laser Bursts from space that they were on about, so instead of it starting another bushfire, it hit the Herc. instead.? :unsure:

:rolleyes:
Laser Bursts...........what’s all this about haven’t heard a thing.....surely not true

Cheers Paul

[Eevo]

Laser Bursts...........what’s all this about haven’t heard a thing.....surely not true

Cheers Paul


yeah, its to allow a high speed rain system to be laid between melb and syd.

[p38arover]

yeah, its to allow a high speed rain system to be laid between melb and syd.

Slow rain is better, it allows the water to soak in.

[Eevo]

Slow rain is better, it allows the water to soak in.

ha, must of been a fraudian slip.

[4bee]

Laser Bursts...........what’s all this about haven’t heard a thing.....surely not true





(https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/conspiracists-say-lasers-and-exploding-smart-meters-used-to-start-bushfires-to-make-way-for-a-new-train-network/news-story/24f154722befb3b3c20b748e3336ea19)Bushfire, high-speed rail: Worrying popularity of weird bushfire conspiracy (https://www.news.com.au/technology/online/social/conspiracists-say-lasers-and-exploding-smart-meters-used-to-start-bushfires-to-make-way-for-a-new-train-network/news-story/24f154722befb3b3c20b748e3336ea19)


I doubt the Herc would have had a Smart Meter or two on it's Switchboard but hey, yer never know with AGL.[biggrin]


Why are China, Russia & the USA & who knows who else, developing 'Space Forces/Commands'. Think on.

Donald Trump’s New Space Force Will Have Trouble Catching Up With China’s (https://www.thedailybeast.com/donald-trumps-new-space-force-will-have-trouble-catching-up-with-chinas)

[Hugh Jars]

Just to clear a few myths:

The Herc is perfectly suited for the tasking that was being carried out. They routinely operate tactical navs at very low level. That's their bread and butter. THAT's what they are designed for. They normally fly lower than some of the altitudes they have been operating at while firefighting.

The fire fighting aircraft ARE required to use their transponders if fitted. In controlled airspace they will have a discrete code assigned by ATC. Outside controlled airspace they will use a generic code.

Flight following apps use ADSB to track aircraft, NOT SS radar. Not all aircraft have ADSB, and that is why they don't pop up on Flightaware, etc.

Military aircraft are no different to civil, in the sense of the requirement for transponder fitment and usage in civil airspace. Some may not have ADSB, once again, the reason for them not being visible on apps. Usually (and I say usually), when flying in formation, only the lead has his transponder on to avoid clutter on radar screens.

Every time I've flown in military airspace, all known military traffic have popped up on TCAS (and some unknown). That uses transponders if you have TCAS. Mode C will be visible on TCAS, but RA's will not be coordinated as they would be if both are fitted with mode S.

Who knows what caused the prang? It could be any of a thousand reasons...

[Eevo]

Who knows what caused the prang? It could be any of a thousand reasons...

im going with structural failing due to airframe overloading due to conditions caused by the bushfires.

[JDNSW]

im going with structural failing due to airframe overloading due to conditions caused by the bushfires.

One previous C-130 firefighting crash (not Australia) was the result of structural failure, and there has been at least one other firefighting crash in Australia that resulted from structural failure. But I am guessing that other circumstances are more common, such as "controlled flight into terrain" ( loss of situational awareness or sudden low visibility at low level) or "sudden descent due to air movements".

If it was structural failure this should soon be identified, but the reason for this is likely to take longer.

[PhilipA]

Small In 2014 a c130 tanker lost its wings in the USA-
just type YouTube c130 tanker loses wings.
These are very old planes.
regards PhilipA
its the first thing I thought of when hearing the firefighters description of crashing in flames.
i guess we will have to wait for the black box.

[101RRS]

The retardant/water dump was many km to the west of the crash site - I guess some structural damage could have occurred then that did not down the aircraft - initial reports indicate that the aircraft was heading east after the dump at 400kph and near Peak View and only a few hundred metres above the ground started loosing speed to about 250kph and making a tight left hand turn and went in.

The last act sounds like a stall but who knows what brought it on.

[travelrover]

And no radio contact from a professional crew... suggests whatever happened was pretty instant

[4bee]

One can't help but wonder that in that country they suddenly found themselves enclosed by terrain at a very low altitude, pulled the power off & did a tight turn at low airspeed to get out of a re-entrant, stalled & crashed?

Obviously my thoughts only.

[Tins]

At least Juan can still give measured commentary.....


https://youtu.be/GSPRNGV9sWI

[101RRS]

Again just surmising - based on comments in that vid - maybe the retardant load had not been dropped as the news reported as the guy in the vid indicates the tanker would normally do a dry run first to check the scene out then come back and do the drop.

The track of the aircraft shows it came down from Richmond direct to the fire then turns to the east - maybe the sharp left turn and reducing speed and altitude was the turn to start the run to where the load was to be dropped and something happened in the turn - the slower speed of 250kph reported in the news is close to the 120knots the guy in the vid mentions that the aircraft may do a run at.

He also mentions it may not have a black box and only a voice recorder - seems odd for that size aircraft but seem normal for the class the C130 operated in in the US.

But again all guesswork.

Garry

[travelrover]

Flightradar24 have released this flight path data

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200124/c290bec279191b88f731351d240aadcb.png

N130CG - Lockheed EC-130Q Hercules - Flightradar24 (https://www.flightradar24.com/data/aircraft/n130cg?utm_campaign=website&utm_source=sendgrid.com&utm_medium=email#239de21e)

[4bee]

Like all these incidents, I guess we'll all have to wait on some positive data as to what actually happened from better brains than my limited one.


Tragic nevertheless.

[Hugh Jars]

A look at the debris field suggests the aircraft 'may' have been intact.

The Herc in the wing separation video is an A-model, built 1957. This one is an H-model, built 1981, and heavily modified for the task. They are like chalk and cheese.

They don't normally do "dry runs". They normally follow the spotter aircraft in on its run, first time.

I believe the aircraft had just completed a run.

[Blknight.aus]

as an interesting perspective from a comment about the size of the fires.

"The area of australia that is burnt or on fire started being reported as being larger than some countries, their states and moved to including words like combined"

I'd speculate that some peculiar localised air movment would have had some contribution towards the cause.

you've seen heat rising off of your oven or a plate of steel thats been welded/oxy heated and if the lights right you can see eddy currents as shadows on the floor...

Imagine trying to fly a plane at low altitute (NOE/LAPES levels) over a small country thats on fire along with a vairable payload in constantly variable atmospherice and visabilty.

I can also see the potential for a "surge" incident where a tank might have only partially emptied.


My take is.

too many small things went the wrong way at the wrong time and the plane ultimately fell out of the sky, I don't think a single massive failure (the wings fell off) caused it.

[Eevo]

a close call
there is 1 swear word at the end. mods please forgive me.

EDIT by p38arover: Video deleted owing to language. You should know better

[101RRS]

They don't normally do "dry runs". They normally follow the spotter aircraft in on its run, first time.

I believe the aircraft had just completed a run.

Yes and the Australian media had reported that it had already done its run but in the vid I thought the guy indicated they normally do a dry run first and in an episode of Mighty Planes where they covered the Martin Mars (mentioned in the vid) they also did a dry run first but it is a water bomber not a retardant bomber.

The wreckage is scattered along a km long debris field indicating it did not "fall from the sky" and had considerable forward momentum - it is a shame it did not carry a black box.

Unless something really obvious, it will take some time to work all this out.

Garry

[Graeme]

This morning's news reported that the black box has been recovered.

[4bee]

Unless something really obvious, it will take some time to work all this out.

Nah, AULRO has got it sussed already Gazza.[wink11]


Yep, too many conflicting comments I reckon.

Re Surging. HJ has already mentioned about the tanks having internal Baffles, so unless a main/structural baffle plate carried away which could leave the length of the tank open to a "long" surge I doubt that would be the cause. .........?? I say main because I believe there would be more than one along it's length. Besides, it may have not have had Tank contents at this stage, so it is academic really.

[Eevo]

They don't normally do "dry runs". They normally follow the spotter aircraft in on its run, first time.



im not sure about the VLAT, but the SEATS's do dry runs all the time in SA.

[4bee]

This morning's news reported that the black box has been recovered.

See what I mean about conflicting reports?

[101RRS]

This morning's news reported that the black box has been recovered.

The black box or the cockpit voice recorder - media would not know the difference. The media got who performed what functions in the aircraft cocked up - they said the Captain was the engineer and vice versa where the Coulson media release was the other way around.

Australia Archives - Fire Aviation (https://fireaviation.com/tag/australia/)

I would have expected a black box to be fitted but the guy in the vid said they were not fitted in that class of aircraft and I had heard it also somewhere else before the video - maybe they have to be fitted to operate in Australia but I would have thought retro fitting would have been difficult.

[Hugh Jars]

Investigators apparently have the FDR. For that size of aircraft, FDR and CVR would be mandatory in Australia.

The debris field is over a kilometre long, and is typical of a CFIT, or possibly a windshear event. At least 2 engines are located near the tail section, indicating the aircraft was probably intact during the crash. So it is looking less like a structural failure.

There is no evidence of retardant on the ground anywhere near the crash. I still reckon they had completed their run, which is confirmed by a lack of retardant.

[bob10]

Confirmed voice recorder found. Nothing left but the tail. It would have been quick, small mercies.

Cockpit voice recorder of water bomber recovered from wreckage (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/cockpit-voice-recorder-of-water-bomber-recovered-from-wreckage/ar-BBZjvcM?ocid=spartanntp)

[101RRS]

Investigators apparently have the FDR. For that size of aircraft, FDR and CVR would be mandatory in Australia.

Only if it had Australian registration and airworthyness which it doesn't - its Canadian requirements would apply. The ATSB rep who was interviewed indicated they had the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and didn't mention anything at all about a flight data recorder (FDR).

From the vision of the crash site - the crash has a 1km long very narrow scar with the tail at the very end - so I agree the aircraft was probably intact when it hit the ground.

Garry

[goingbush]

Here are some facts and background of the Aircraft

Fire Aviation - News & commentary about aerial firefighting, air tankers, and helicopters (https://fireaviation.com)

[Old Farang]

Only if it had Australian registration and airworthyness which it doesn't - its Canadian requirements would apply. The ATSB rep who was interviewed indicated they had the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) and didn't mention anything at all about a flight data recorder (FDR).

From the vision of the crash site - the crash has a 1km long very narrow scar with the tail at the very end - so I agree the aircraft was probably intact when it hit the ground.

Garry
Ah, it was N registered, not Canadian. But I think that which category it operates under is more relevant. Restricted, aerial work, or whatever decrees what equipment is mandatory.

[Hugh Jars]

I was aware it was N registered.

For the age of the aircraft, ICAO (overarching authority) require turbine aircraft over 5700kg certified before 1987 to have a basic FDR. This, of course, may have been varied by the FAA.

In Oz, CAO 20.18 specifies:

An aircraft of maximum take-off weight:(a) in excess of 5 700 kg and which is:
(i) turbine-powered; or
(ii) of a type first certificated in its country of manufacture on or after 1 July 1965;
must not be flown (except in agricultural operations) unless it is equipped with an approved flight data recorder and an approved cockpit voice recorder system


The only category of operation specified is ag ops. Fire fighting comes under Aerial Work, according to the CARs. Although 20.18 compliance isn't required of an N registered aircraft, CASA may have imposed additional requirements on the operator in order to permit them to operate in Oz. Who knows?

It's only a moot point.

[4bee]

I was aware it was N registered.

For the age of the aircraft, ICAO (overarching authority) require turbine aircraft over 5700kg certified before 1987 to have a basic FDR. This, of course, may have been varied by the FAA.

In Oz, CAO 20.18 specifies:

An aircraft of maximum take-off weight:(a) in excess of 5 700 kg and which is:
(i) turbine-powered; or
(ii) of a type first certificated in its country of manufacture on or after 1 July 1965;
must not be flown (except in agricultural operations) unless it is equipped with an approved flight data recorder and an approved cockpit voice recorder system


The only category of operation specified is ag ops. Fire fighting comes under Aerial Work, according to the CARs. Although 20.18 compliance isn't required of an N registered aircraft, CASA may have imposed additional requirements on the operator in order to permit them to operate in Oz. Who knows?

It's only a moot point.








Don't yer just hate it when folk bring facts into a discussion:mad: [biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][biggrin][wink11]

[Fourgearsticks]

That video while mostly accurate is not gospel what goes on in Australia. VLATs and LATs do use both water and foam, depending on where the drops are. In heavy bush they mainly use retardant. Unless really tricky, drops are usually made on the first run. SEATs the same.

[Old Farang]

I was aware it was N registered.

For the age of the aircraft, ICAO (overarching authority) require turbine aircraft over 5700kg certified before 1987 to have a basic FDR. This, of course, may have been varied by the FAA.

In Oz, CAO 20.18 specifies:

An aircraft of maximum take-off weight:(a) in excess of 5 700 kg and which is:
(i) turbine-powered; or
(ii) of a type first certificated in its country of manufacture on or after 1 July 1965;
must not be flown (except in agricultural operations) unless it is equipped with an approved flight data recorder and an approved cockpit voice recorder system


The only category of operation specified is ag ops. Fire fighting comes under Aerial Work, according to the CARs. Although 20.18 compliance isn't required of an N registered aircraft, CASA may have imposed additional requirements on the operator in order to permit them to operate in Oz. Who knows?

It's only a moot point.
Sorry mate, I cannot see how it is a moot point. If it had an FDR it would certainly help in the investigation. For sure the aircraft would have been certified under some form of STC. Just what it was with this particular aircraft, or other VLAT aircraft for that matter, I don't know. I seem to recall that there was / is a problem with the 737 tanker in regards to carrying passengers for example.

If anyone is interested the FAA have the following:

https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Order/FAA_Order_8110_56B.pdf

Also, the FAA have the following, where the last paragraph appears to cover what ever you want it to do.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/14/21.25

It is noteworthy that all of the VLAT appear to be operating in Australia under "N" registration.

Casa have the final say, but if they were to require Australian registration then I doubt very much if there would be any operating.

b. Seats. Include the number of seats, followed by “No passengers are permitted.” Repeat this limitation in the aircraft flight manual.
c. Notes Section. In addition to any other notes specified in Order 8110.4 or other FAA policy, include the following notes:

“NOTE: Restricted category aircraft may not be operated in a foreign country without the express written approval of that country.”

[101RRS]

I assume that as the RFS 737 is owned by the RFS (but still operated by Coulsen) it has changed to VH registration or is in the process of changing (all pics I have seen of it still have N rego). I suspect that as part of this registration process that highlighted the issue of not carrying passengers in Aust that may not apply in North America.

[4bee]

Going by Coulson's website some converted DC10's are going to be forthcoming to an Airport near you, shortly. Adelaide is down for one off.

Not before bloody time eh?[bigsmile1] I guess it will based at RAAF Edinburgh. Makes sense. I doubt the CFS 'dromes would be adequate.

As it happens the DC10 was the very first Wide Body I had stepped inside of with UTA in 1977. Perfume in the A/C ducts was lovely & typically French. Until then it was B727s everywhere from Adelaide.

Ah Happy days.

[101RRS]

The DC 10 has been here off and on for quite a while and indeed was parked at Canberra Airport when the Herc went down.

Spectacular vision from mid November up in the Gospers Fire, NW of Sydney - also shows the "Birddog" in action as well.

YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwCHeu31IIY)

[4bee]

Thanks, I had read that elsewhere but good to see Govts.are getting off their arses to take all this seriously. There is hope for the future yet.

[bob10]

The ADF has been tasked with checking the fuel quality.


Hercules and crew lost in bushfire fight - CONTACT magazine (https://www.contactairlandandsea.com/2020/01/23/hercules-lost-in-bushfire-fight/)

[Fourgearsticks]

Going by Coulson's website some converted DC10's are going to be forthcoming to an Airport near you, shortly. Adelaide is down for one off.

Not before bloody time eh?[bigsmile1] I guess it will based at RAAF Edinburgh. Makes sense. I doubt the CFS 'dromes would be adequate.

As it happens the DC10 was the very first Wide Body I had stepped inside of with UTA in 1977. Perfume in the A/C ducts was lovely & typically French. Until then it was B727s everywhere from Adelaide.

Ah Happy days.

There will be 2 DC10's at Richmond, 1 at Canberra and 2 MD87's, one for Adelaide and 1 for Perth

[ramblingboy42]

One can't help but wonder that in that country they suddenly found themselves enclosed by terrain at a very low altitude, pulled the power off & did a tight turn at low airspeed to get out of a re-entrant, stalled & crashed?

Obviously my thoughts only.

Are you a pilot 4bee?

[4bee]

Are you a pilot 4bee?

Nope, I haven't got the brains or reflexes for that. [smilebigeye] Just a general interest is all, like many here & following on from a Late uncle who was a Training Captain with Ansett/ANA back in the DC3 ---DC4 & 6 & 6B---- Electra---B727 days & in WW2 he was with the 'Directorate of Air Transport' dropping supplies into New Guinea.

True to image he also drove a Green MG Roadster.[smilebigeye]

Ed. BTW, the nearest I have got to "flying" was in a B737 Simulator in Adelaide for a Birthday present a couple of years ago. Was quite good although I buggered up the landing in Adelaide & went into the grass.[bigsad]

HJ & Unc. would not have been impressed.:bat:

[101RRS]

Slowly more information is coming out - this morning the RFS Commissioner said that the C130 was tasked for the Adaminaby fire but when it got there conditions were no good so aborted and the aircraft went to its alternative at Peak View (explains the easterly track) - this alternative also explains the decrease in speed and height over Peak View as it was going in for its run - eye witnesses said it dropped its retardant (but has not been confirmed in media briefings) and something happened either as part of that process or just after it.

Possibly in the poor visibility hit rising ground like this near miss [video deleted owing to language]

[JDNSW]

The other factor possible is wind shear - winds up to 100km/h were reported in the area in one news item.

I would not be happy flying anywhere near that low in that sort of wind, forget about the fire! Had one occasion in PNG when I was making a precautionary landing at an airstrip where the windsock had blown away, and my first attempt was downwind - scary, but I had to get down, the weather had closed in.

[Hugh Jars]

I was sent a video that is alleged to be of the last 30 seconds or so of flight. I'm sceptical of it's veracity, but looking at the flightpath it appears there is either some discontinuity or 'editing'. There seems to be a sudden, unexplained loss of altitude between the time aircraft is in or behind the smoke between it and the person shooting the video, and the fireball, which appears to be well below the projected flightpath.

The only explanation I can think of is a stall or windshear (if the video is authentic).

[4bee]

Whatever the reason J, it is a tragic event resulting in the unnecessary deaths of those three airmen. [bigsad]

[Eevo]

this video?

YouTube (https://youtu.be/UH1IlTYmBmg)

[Tombie]

Just an observation, today most of the aerial assets do not have their transponders enabled so you can track via Flightradar24 which is unusual

Flightradar24 and a few other trackers have a service where the AIS is not broadcast to their sites. Kind of like a silent number.

All other aircraft can see the AIS signal.

I can see the transponders as we have the system here (pre-filter).

[JDNSW]

I was sent a video that is alleged to be of the last 30 seconds or so of flight. I'm sceptical of it's veracity, but looking at the flightpath it appears there is either some discontinuity or 'editing'. There seems to be a sudden, unexplained loss of altitude between the time aircraft is in or behind the smoke between it and the person shooting the video, and the fireball, which appears to be well below the projected flightpath.

The only explanation I can think of is a stall or windshear (if the video is authentic).

The pictures of the crash site show a very long scar on the ground with the surviving empennage aligned with it, suggesting a substantial forward speed with the aircraft impacting the ground with a low descent rate relative to the ground (which looks like an uphill slope in the pictures). This is not consistent with a stalled condition, which would result in a high rate of descent and low forward speed, although it could be the aftermath of recovery from a stall. Which in turn could be the result of wind shear.

But wind shear does not necessarily result in a stall - the reaction to a stall warning as wind shear reduced airspeed would be to lower the nose to prevent a stall, which in the circumstances could easily put the aircraft in an unrecoverable position.

There are other possible causes - power loss, for whatever reason (and one item published is that the fuel loaded for the flight is to be tested), or misjudgement by the aircrew, but neither of these seem to me as likely as wind shear.

[bob10]

A video was made, but made private, according to this article. It also says the aircraft veered to the left before crashing. Don't know the significance of that.


Haunting footage captures the final moments of a doomed US water-bomber before it crashed and burst into flames - killing three hero firefighters battling Australia's bushfires (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/haunting-footage-captures-the-final-moments-of-a-doomed-us-water-bomber-before-it-crashed-and-burst-into-flames-killing-three-hero-firefighters-battling-australias-bushfires/ar-BBZplYf?ocid=spartandhp#image=BBZplYf_1|1)

[4bee]

I cannot see the Video, only stills from it, I assume. Why would it be dropping Retardant that far away from the fire & not even close?

Was it an Emergency Dump because of a possible problem?

[Hugh Jars]

The pictures of the crash site show a very long scar on the ground with the surviving empennage aligned with it, suggesting a substantial forward speed with the aircraft impacting the ground with a low descent rate relative to the ground (which looks like an uphill slope in the pictures). This is not consistent with a stalled condition, which would result in a high rate of descent and low forward speed, although it could be the aftermath of recovery from a stall. Which in turn could be the result of wind shear.

Don't forget your basic aerodynamics, JD. The wing can stall at any speed, once the critical AoA is exceeded. In a small aircraft, (with such a narrow operating weight and speed range), it's easier to relate the stall to a given airspeed for simplicity sake. But the principal's the same. I used to demonstrate this to students during training, by inducing the stall warning at high speed (usually in a descent in a lighty). It was rewarding to see the trainee experience a lightbulb moment after the demo.

In the type I operate, we do 'approach to stall' recoveries (in the simulator). The advantage we have is aural/visual warnings, stick-shaker, and "John Howard's Eyebrows" (PLI on the attitude indicator). I've had stall warnings during recovery at near VMO/MMO. The key is to always respect the warning and initiate recovery immediately.

So, the size of the witness marks on the ground can't really be used to determine whether the wing was stalled. All it tells us is the aircraft touched down at a particular groundspeed - the wing may or may not have been stalled, and the aircraft may, or may not have been in a windshear beyond the performance capability of the aircraft with the height the aircraft was above the ground when encountered.

[Hugh Jars]

I cannot see the Video, only stills from it, I assume. Why would it be dropping Retardant that far away from the fire & not even close?

Was it an Emergency Dump because of a possible problem?

Could be. But retardant can be tactically dispensed ahead of the fire front to slow its progress in that direction...

[4bee]

Thanks J, I did ponder that before I posted. From what I could see the foreground looked fairly clear of "burnables" & it did appear to be a long way out.

It appears this particular system doesn't have an "Emergency Drop" as do some other systems so it means a drop is not instantaneous, & it can only do an "Operational Drop" (my term) which takes longer to jettison & if one is in strife then seconds count.


John Howard's Eyebrows indeed.[biggrin]

Also John Howard's head bumps hair growth.

When 'er indoors gives me a haircut I tell her that I do not want a "John Howard".

[101RRS]

Obviously any of the above is possible - just the aircraft certainly cam down in a relatively flat configuration with a lot of forward speed.

I saw the video and has Hugh Jars observed the aircraft crashed well below the projected flight path that the aircraft was on as it went into the smoke.

The video showed the aircraft coming in for its bombing run (no sign of a bird dog aircraft), did the drop OK and started the climbout with a positive climb but then seems to fly into the smoke and then crashes a few seconds later. Whether the aircraft actually flew into the smoke or was just obscured is not clear.

While the pilots were very experienced - a danger spot is where a pilot has to change from visual flight to instrument flight particularly if the aircraft is climbing rapidly and combined with a high work load situatiion - disorientation can occur where the pilot thinks they are climbing higher than they are and the nose is lowered. Unlikely with such highly trained pilots but does happen.

Tracker Crash - HMAS Melbourne 1975

"On 10 February 1975, during an attempted deck landing on HMAS Melbourne at night, the pilot became disorientated after lifting off after a touch and go (bolter where an arrester wire was missed), and then slowly descended into the water (whilst suffering spatial disorientation) rather than climb away in usual easy fashion. All four crew members escaped uninjured to be picked up by HMAS Melbourne boat."

That is just another scenario if the aircraft did fly into the smoke and the pilot became disorientated in the transition from visual to instruments - unlikely but possible.

My thoughts on the video.

Garry

[Old Farang]

Thanks J, I did ponder that before I posted. From what I could see the foreground looked fairly clear of "burnables" & it did appear to be a long way out.

It appears this particular system doesn't have an "Emergency Drop" as do some other systems so it means a drop is not instantaneous, & it can only do an "Operational Drop" (my term) which takes longer to jettison & if one is in strife then seconds count.
Not sure where you got the info that there was no emergency dump. Do you have a link to a source?

Retardant is rarely dropped directly on a fire, that is not its function. The following shows why in this case:

https://the-riotact.com/crashed-tanker-was-protecting-two-thumbs-koala-sanctuary-now-destroyed-by-blaze/353075







News (https://the-riotact.com/category/news)
Crashed tanker was protecting Two Thumbs koala sanctuary, now destroyed by blazeGenevieve Jacobs (https://the-riotact.com/author/genevieve-jacobs)25 January 2020 48 (https://the-riotact.com/crashed-tanker-was-protecting-two-thumbs-koala-sanctuary-now-destroyed-by-blaze/353075#comments)AddThis Sharing ButtonsShare to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to LinkedIn
Share to Email

Share to Print





James Fitzgerald in his wildlife sanctuaries at Peak View. Photo: NSW Koala Country.

It’s been revealed that the large air tanker which went down Thursday afternoon with the loss of all those aboard was protecting the Two Thumbs Wildlife Trust Koala Sanctuary in the Peak View district near Jerangle.
The Two Thumbs Sanctuary’s sheds, houses, machinery and all the koalas in its care were also destroyed in the blaze.

[Hugh Jars]

Garry,

You may have hit the nail on the head. Somatogravic Illusion. All passengers experience it - particularly on takeoff or go-around. How many times have you heard "we were going straight up", when in fact the pitch attitude was only 10-20 degrees nose up?

Somatogravic Illusion.

For a pilot, it can be potentially overpowering. 2 cadets from the college I was working at took off from Ceduna on a pitch black night, with no visible horizon. They were flying a TB-20, which has a reasonable amount of power. They got airborne and crashed within a minute of doing so, within a mile of the end of the runway. Investigations revealed the aircraft was serviceable, and concluded that the main factor was most likely Somatogravic Illusion.

I have experienced it once in my career - taking of in an empty J-32. I glued my eyeballs to the ADI and had to exclude the physiological inputs from my middle ears. What a wakeup call.

These guys were highly experienced ex-military, so would be well aware (and probably experienced this to some degree during their military careers).

[Old Farang]

Some relevant facts about C 130 aircraft:

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-australia-bushfires-hercules-factbox/factbox-c-130-hercules-aircraft-used-as-water-bombers-to-fight-fires-around-the-world-idUSKBN1ZM0KD

Factbox:C-130 Hercules aircraft used as water bombers to fight fires around the world


- Originallydesigned as a military troop and cargo transport aircraft, the four-engineturboprop can be modified to act as a “water bomber” to douse wildfires.
- The aircraft typically carriesa crew of two to six when equipped to fight fires.
- It can carry 15,000 liters(3,960 gallons) of water or fire retardant, which can be released in one largedrop within seconds or several smaller drops.
- The aircraft can be refilled in12 minutes and has a cruise speed of more than 500km/h (311mph).
- It is able to take off and landon short, unsurfaced runways.

[101RRS]

These guys were highly experienced ex-military, so would be well aware (and probably experienced this to some degree during their military careers).

Yes they were very experienced but not immune - I don't know what the post retardant drop check lists are but I assume there are a few things to do straight after the drop other than just a climbout and the crucial point is not when flying VFR or IFR but that point of change when the eyes have to go from outside to the instruments and particularly dangerous if still looking outside and distracted by something that is happening inside and you respond what your inner ear is telling you.

While we can guess at what happened, I am sure the ATSB already has a good idea and we will just have to wait and see.

Very very sad though.

Garry

[4bee]

Not sure where you got the info that there was no emergency dump. Do you have a link to a source?

Yes will locate it later on OF, I've just come inside from being out most of the day..

Fwiw, it was a discussion on the Caulson Website. Will find the link later if you don't find it before me.



Edit. Still haven't found the link but I will keep trying even if it kills me. [bigsad] No Flowers by Request please if it comes to that.[happycry]

It was a Chat between blokes with names like Chuck, Al, Squirrel, [smilebigeye] etc who seemed very familiar with C130 Tanker operations & the impression I was left with was some other brands of A/C had them fitted & some didn't & this was generally thought to be a negative as the C130 didn't.

It may have been deleted by now for whatever reason but Search can't find it nor History on my computer & I have exhausted nearly all the links that sound familiar.

Maybe it was a link following a link following a link etc, but it deffo started with the Coulson Website.?

Alternatively, do you have a link that confirms that it does have such a system, OF?



COULSON AVIATION (https://www.coulsonaviationusa.com/)




.

[Old Farang]

Yes will locate it later on OF, I've just come inside from being out most of the day..
Well I will be very surprised if it doesn't have an emergency dump. I posted a bit earlier a ink, but it is not from any aviation site. I did watch a video where one of the Coulson boys, along with the helicopter manager discussed the aircraft, but they did not mention how the dump works.

For sure with helicopters they have an emergency release, two in fact. Usually just referred to as the "pickle switch".

[4bee]

Well I will be very surprised if it doesn't have an emergency dump. I posted a bit earlier a ink, but it is not from any aviation site. I did watch a video where one of the Coulson boys, along with the helicopter manager discussed the aircraft, but they did not mention how the dump works.

For sure with helicopters they have an emergency release, two in fact. Usually just referred to as the "pickle switch".

I guess it is easier to accomplish an Emergency Dump with a Rotary Wing ie. Dropping away the bag with a small explosive bolt charge, but I suspect it is the mechanics of opening shutters &/or compressed air actions in a C130 air frame that may be the reason that takes the seconds, & we are only talking seconds of delay here, between an Emergency & an "Operational" Drop.


As I said previously this discussion is probably academic now anyway. :rolleyes:

[Old Farang]

I guess it is easier to accomplish an Emergency Dump with a Rotary Wing ie. Dropping away the bag with a small explosive charge, but I suspect it is the mechanics of opening shutters &/or compressed air actions in a C130 air frame that may be the reason that takes the seconds, & we are only talking seconds of delay here, between an Emergency & an "Operational" Drop.
The helicopters that I both owned and flew were fitted with both electric and back up mechanical cargo hook releases. I never had anything to do with them, but the big Air Crane type do have an explosive emergency release when used for logging. The release doors, as far as I am aware, can be exactly controlled for a predetermined release rate, just like top dressing aircraft. The Air Crane uses a separate tank. Not sure if it is held up with a cargo hook or some other means, but I guarantee it is jettisonable.

Seconds is all that is needed, as the immediate reaction of any aircraft is to climb as the load dumps, controlled or emergency.

[Fourgearsticks]

I'm sure the Herc setup has an emergency dump, that load wasn't on full dump and it didn't look to be a normal Herc drop, it appeared less. The drops I've seen this year were usually about 11,000 litres, that drop didn't look like that much.
Watching that video the aircraft flew level after the drop then appeared to pitch up and start a turn to the left, then straightened up and flew into the smoke then descended level several hundred feet into the ground.
You would have thought the crew would be well aware of Somatogravic Illusion and would be covered in their extensive training and re-currency workup preseason.
This was a few years ago, pilot was very experienced, it was a very dark night.
Investigation: 198201382 - Beech 58, VH-AWT, Armidale NSW, 27 March 1982 (https://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/investigation_reports/1982/aair/aair198201382/)

[4bee]

FGS.

A link if you can? [smilebigeye] My comment was based on the Chat discussion I read but for some reason now cannot access but wish I could.



Watching that video the aircraft flew level after the drop then appeared to pitch up and start a turn to the left, then straightened up and flew into the smoke then descended level several hundred feet into the ground.

For some reason I'm not getting to open some Videos only some stills from it but they are not much help in this situation. The last shot was of the AC dropping it's load before it got to the fire, then nothing so I cannot see the above scenario but I take your word for it.

Would actually flying into the smoke cause this because in my mind the crew would have been wearing Oxygen, as they would normally fly above the smoke, but I am not aware what other safeguards there would normally be, ie. total pressurisation etc of the Flight Deck.
Maybe they were but there was a malfunction with the Oxy & once into the smoke couldn't
easily find their way out again, already being smoke affected, & being so close to the terrain it was all over red rover.. All Hypothetical of course, I know. but as 101RS said ^^


While we can guess at what happened, I am sure the ATSB already has a good idea and we will just have to wait and see.

Just wish it had never happened though.[bigsad]

[4bee]

Have just read that PDF report, FGS.


A striking similarity for me is similar to the effect you get when speeding down a Highway say at 110k.
"OOPS there is my turnoff", but I don't take it while still doing 110k The landscape going past the window now doesn't appear to be passing that fast after doing @ 110 for a couple of hours so I must have lost speed, right?.

But my speedo is indicating say 100k & I have to believe my speedo as I normally would do under different circumstances. The corner comes up & I know I have to get my speed well down to take the corner or it could be game over. I know & accept this phenomenon from years of driving in the country, so I safely brake to drop the speed off to say 30 kph even if it means going on & coming back again. So I do, & eventually take the corner. & Bob is my mum's Bro. but if I had relied solely on my eyesight & vision of passing trees the story would have been different because it would not have indicated the true situation..

Also in the dark, when the passing undergrowth is not visible I have to believe my instruments. Hardly the same situation as a plane crash I realise, but the principal is the same. Some would say it is the Inner Ear but me, I think it is the feeling in your nads [smilebigeye] so whatever & wherever it feels right you go for it.


Thanks for listening, you have been a great audience.[biggrin]

[Tins]

https://youtu.be/zGhzpx5Zxw8

[101RRS]

I could agree with his thoughts - dump down wind, windshear and sinking into rising ground. He is critical of the controllers which may or may not turn out to be valid but as he talks about, it is ultimately the decision of the aircraft captain and the primary drop had been cancelled due to poor conditions so the Captain was up to making decisions to cancel - so i would assume that in the aircraft crew were happy with the drop.

He also raises an issue that I also noticed - there does not seem to be a 'bird dog' aircraft leading the way - maybe as it was a secondary target one was not needed.

Again, all speculation until something from investigators is leaked.

Garry

[4bee]

Thanks John. It doesn't get any clearer does it?[bigsad]

[Hugh Jars]

The windshear was basically what I have alluded to in previous posts. The author correctly describes the windshear escape manoeuvre (as flown in a jet).

We don't know (from the footage) whether the aircraft flew into the smoke column, or behind it. If it did fly into the smoke there is another possibility of one or more engine flameouts or other malfunctions due lack of oxygen. CASA Airworthiness bulletin explains:

https://www.casa.gov.au/file/79356/download'token=nn90sTPX

John R.

[101RRS]

A normal climb out would be straight ahead but the aircraft did a mild bank left - most likely to avoid smoke ahead and as it went behind some smoke - my assumption would be that the mild bank left was to pass between plumes of smoke.

Again speculation.

[Old Farang]

Yes will locate it later on OF, I've just come inside from being out most of the day..

Fwiw, it was a discussion on the Caulson Website. Will find the link later if you don't find it before me.



Edit. Still haven't found the link but I will keep trying even if it kills me. [bigsad] No Flowers by Request please if it comes to that.[happycry]

It was a Chat between blokes with names like Chuck, Al, Squirrel, [smilebigeye] etc who seemed very familiar with C130 Tanker operations & the impression I was left with was some other brands of A/C had them fitted & some didn't & this was generally thought to be a negative as the C130 didn't.

It may have been deleted by now for whatever reason but Search can't find it nor History on my computer & I have exhausted nearly all the links that sound familiar.

Maybe it was a link following a link following a link etc, but it deffo started with the Coulson Website.?

Alternatively, do you have a link that confirms that it does have such a system, OF?



COULSON AVIATION (https://www.coulsonaviationusa.com/)




.
Here is some fact sheets from Coulson:

https://web.archive.org/web/20150415073023/http://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed/data/aero/documents/global-sustainment/product-support/2013-hoc-presentations/2013-HOC-Tuesday/Tues%201145%20Coulson%20Aviation.pdf

And the full specs from Lockheed Martin: (H model)

https://www.lockheedmartin.com/content/dam/lockheed-martin/aero/documents/sustainment/csc/service-news/sn-mag-v11-v20/V16N1.pdf

[4bee]

Is this what I am supposed to be looking at? ADS-XL Flow Checks– Flows at 1,600


USG
– Emergency
Dump in 2.1
Seconds
– Coverage Level
Selections from
1-8

[/QUOTE] This is the specified criteria & I was looking for the discussion on the System & it's possible shortcomings they described..

Thanks anyway & I enjoyed the the whole two reads in those Links.. Certainly wouldn't like to have to build one.[smilebigeye]

[JDNSW]

Yes - as I alluded to earlier; level flight into slowly rising terrain.

But if they actually did enter the smoke, not go behind it, they may have lost appreciation of the terrain, and loss of height due to windshear or a drop in power due to the smoke. At that height there is little safety margin.

Another question - was that a retardant drop - or an emergency dump? It looked to me to be upwind from the fire, with the fire presumably travelling downwind.

But I take his point about trying to work in those conditions, and the pressure to do it. There have been numerous occasions during this fire season when aerial support has not been available due to conditions, but it is easy to see the pressure they work under. And this drop was, if I remember correctly, intended to try and protect a specific target, an animal sanctuary.

That AWB raises another point I had not considered. If the aircraft entered the hot air from the fire, while you would expect this to be rising, it not only makes loss of power likely as the bulletin points out because of lower air density, but this lower air density also means a loss of lift, resulting in descent or even just failure to climb as expected. Combine this with rising terrain and low altitude, even without loss of vision due to the smoke, and a collision with terrain is all too likely.

[Hugh Jars]

I think you just answered your own question, JD regarding the last application of retardant.

[Eevo]

That AWB raises another point I had not considered. If the aircraft entered the hot air from the fire, while you would expect this to be rising, it not only makes loss of power likely as the bulletin points out because of lower air density, but this lower air density also means a loss of lift, resulting in descent or even just failure to climb as expected. Combine this with rising terrain and low altitude, even without loss of vision due to the smoke, and a collision with terrain is all too likely.

which is why they should not be used for this purpose

[GregTD5]

Having been involved in aerial firefighting with rotary wing aircraft, I will add a couple of comments from my experiences.

All belly tanks, attached to Helicopters have emergency jettison of the water, I am not involved in fixed wing, but would assume they work on the same principle.
Tank doors are hydraulically operated, powered by the aircraft electrics. The default position for tank doors is always open, until the tank system master switch is activated.
Opening tank doors for the purpose of dropping water onto a fire is conducted by the Pilot operating a toggle switch attached to the cyclic. This switch is operated with one finger only, whilst controlling the aircraft. it is a two way switch, so on Helicopters is used to operating the pump to draw water into the tank.

If there is an issue with the tank opening whilst performing a drop, switching off the Tank master switch will then open the tank doors (Emergency Jettison).
Tanks as fitted to helicopters are not able to be jettisoned, only the water in the tank is.

Underslung bambi buckets are attached to the aircraft via the belly hook and can be dropped from the aircraft cargo hook via electrical or mechanical jettison.

Air Tankers would have a similar emergency dump system available. I can not see them being certified to drop with out Jettison ability.

Retardant as a rule is not dropped on active fire, but is dropped ahead of the running fire, in an area where asset protection is needed. This gives the widest swathe of retardant over an unburnt area, as well as a period of time for the product to get through the foliage. It is very effective for stopping of running fires, as long as they are not spotting ahead and able to jump the retardant line.

Fire Fighting aircraft operate under VFR, so I don't believe that they would have been transitioning to IFR after the drop, they may go to instruments to check wings level and positive rate of climb, particularly if about to enter smoke. Although the idea is to remain clear of smoke where ever possible when operating low level.

My opinion only, controlled flight into rising terrain (CFIT) due poor visibility.

Greg

[4bee]

Thanks Greg. That also clarifies a few things for me.:TakeABow:

[p38arover]

Is this the C130 that crashed? I took this pic on 3rd Jan as it flew over South Windsor preparing to land at RAAF Richmond..

158089

[JDNSW]

Probably. Certainly, if not it, another similar one - I don't know how many C130s Coulson had here. I agree with Greg's conclusion, but obviously need a full investigation, and also to determine what led to the CFIT.

[Hugh Jars]

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200218/f1205589649d18339950a9631caeaafc.jpg
Without a tail number, it’s impossible to tell.
This is tail number 132, taken in 2016 at Hobart on one of my turnarounds.
The tail number of the aircraft that pranged was 134.
I think there are 3 Hercs out here.

[4bee]

Is this the C130 that crashed? I took this pic on 3rd Jan as it flew over South Windsor preparing to land at RAAF Richmond..

158089

Good image Ron.

No wonder it crashed if they killed all the engines like that.[wink11]

[p38arover]

Yes, shutter speed too high. I had to grab the shot when I could - it appeared overhead of the gap between two factory buildings.

I was surprised when I saw the matching prop positions when I viewed the pic on my computer.

Taken with an old 6MP Pentax *istD DSLR and damaged lens I leave in the car all the time. If it gets stolen, I haven't lost a lot.

[4bee]

You could have waited until the four lined up on the wing. I dunno, send a kid out to do a man's job. Tch Tch Tch.[biggrin] But you do have to wonder whether they actually invert the plane on the ground to sign write the names under the wings.[smilebigeye]

[goingbush]

Is this the C130 that crashed? I took this pic on 3rd Jan as it flew over South Windsor preparing to land at RAAF Richmond..

158089

134 had a big 4 on the tail, and the red lettering on the nose, Looks like a 4 to me in your image Ron.

https://4dhm2deucu5yphr93fnr1c2c-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/20263067_web1_Coulson-C-130.jpg

[4bee]

Ron, I also suspect you caught it as the UC was deploying. Note the slight angle of the Nose Wheel. It isn't just quite there yet. Main gear appears to be in place.

Who's a sad bastard? I heard that.[biggrin]

[p38arover]

134 had a big 4 on the tail, and the red lettering on the nose, Looks like a 4 to me in your image Ron.

Yes, I believe you are right. According to the story in the original post in this thread, that was the one that crashed.

[Hugh Jars]

Good image Ron.

No wonder it crashed if they killed all the engines like that.[wink11]

Looks like the prop synchrophase was on [emoji1303]

[Old Farang]

Looks like the prop synchrophase was on [emoji1303]
Just as a point of interest, all engines on a C 130 run at constant speed all of the time. Just the propeller pitch is changed as required as thrust is needed.

[Hugh Jars]

Just as a point of interest, all engines on a C 130 run at constant speed all of the time. Just the propeller pitch is changed as required as thrust is needed.
Correct, but they do have propeller synchrophasing [smilebigeye]

[JDNSW]

Multiengine prop planes tend to make a nasty beat frequency vibration if the prop speeds are close but not exactly the same. Older and smaller aircraft rely on pilot/flight engineer expertise to adjust speeds to exactly the same, but newer and larger aircraft have been fitted with increasingly sophisticated automatic adjustment - I take it from Hugh's comment that the C130 has equipment that even sychronises the relative prop blade positions.

[Hugh Jars]

Multiengine prop planes tend to make a nasty beat frequency vibration if the prop speeds are close but not exactly the same. Older and smaller aircraft rely on pilot/flight engineer expertise to adjust speeds to exactly the same, but newer and larger aircraft have been fitted with increasingly sophisticated automatic adjustment - I take it from Hugh's comment that the C130 has equipment that even sychronises the relative prop blade positions.
That's right, John.

Even jets can get a vibration/harmonic. I notice it sometimes when taxiing around. Not as bad as props, but if the N1 (fan speed) differs by about 1% you can hear it. Once the autothrottle is engaged at takeoff, the N1s are matched electronically.

[bob10]

The reason for the crash still remains a mystery.


Air tanker crash that killed three US firefighters remains a mystery as cockpit audio was never recorded (https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/australia/air-tanker-crash-that-killed-three-us-firefighters-remains-a-mystery-as-cockpit-audio-was-never-recorded/ar-BB10uJd5?ocid=spartandhp)

[superquag]

At the other end of the scale, why not record / video it yourself ?

While learning, I had a small Helmet-Cam attached inside the cabin the wired mic dangling into my headset. Looked out the front and recorded audio of anything that came through. Cheap, simple and invaluable for revision between lessons.

GoPro make a dedicated intercom interface which would still be cheaper than a FDR and possibly just as useful in this type of sad event.

There's a video-cam in all my cars, and I wear a Body-Camera during Bus driving... shows my speedo, steering wheel and the outside world. Lasts for +5 hours per charge
- Best $120 camera I've owned !

[JDNSW]

If it survived the event!

[87County]

..

[p38arover]

At the other end of the scale, why not record / video it yourself ?

While learning, I had a small Helmet-Cam attached inside the cabin the wired mic dangling into my headset. Looked out the front and recorded audio of anything that came through. Cheap, simple and invaluable for revision between lessons.

I used to have a helmet cam when riding my motorbike. But cops don't like anything attached to the helmet. Besides, if I was hit, they'd probably never find the camera to use it as evidence against the driver.

[4bee]

ATSB Prelim. Report.

Preliminary report released about crash of Air Tanker 134 - Fire Aviation



Deleted link.



(https://fireaviation.com/2020/02/28/preliminary-report-released-about-crash-of-air-tanker-134/)

[4bee]

Bugger. Fell for the Three card trick again.

2nd Link from above post should have been.


Two C-130Hs begin the path to transformation - Fire Aviation (https://fireaviation.com/2020/02/28/two-c-130hs-begin-the-path-to-transformation/)

[101RRS]

That ATSB report says retardant was still on the aircraft as the drop had been only a partial drop - yet there is no evidence at th crash site of retardant. In a fire will the retardant boil off and not leave any evidence?

Also the early reports said that the crash debris trail was about a km long - clearly this is not the case from the crash site pics in the report - looks to be only a couple of hundred meters long.

[4bee]

Curious that the CVR had not been in use since it apparently left the US. A fat lot of help that was. One would not like to think that it could be manually disconnected or U/S as part of a check list without someone noticing.

ie. Switch the "ignition" on & a lot of things light up inc. the CVR. No pun intended btw.

[3toes]

I used to have a helmet cam when riding my motorbike. But cops don't like anything attached to the helmet. Besides, if I was hit, they'd probably never find the camera to use it as evidence against the driver.

In this case the police are not just being difficult and looking for a reason to pull someone over. Helmets are not designed to work with attachments like a camera. In the event they are needed to do the job they were designed for the hard attachment will cause a helmet failure. A certain formula one driver had a skying accident which should not have caused the injuries he suffered except for a camera which went through the helmet into his head. I race go carts and cameras are not allowed or this reason.

[Hugh Jars]

The CVR may have been MEL’d as unserviceable, but usually these things must be repaired within a few days. It depends on Lockheed’s MEL.

It’s normal practice to check all circuit breakers prior to each flight. Most companies allow one reset of a popped breaker (on the ground only), before engineering intervention is required.

Without knowing what the culture is within Coulson (and I’m not implying this happened), it would be possible to pull the CVR circuit breaker. If the last recording was in the US, that’s a long time to have no CVR...

[Tins]

https://youtu.be/3pPRovcTXJw

[Tins]

I used to have a helmet cam when riding my motorbike. But cops don't like anything attached to the helmet. Besides, if I was hit, they'd probably never find the camera to use it as evidence against the driver.

Or, of course, evidence against you.

[Old Farang]

The CVR may have been MEL’d as unserviceable, but usually these things must be repaired within a few days. It depends on Lockheed’s MEL.

It’s normal practice to check all circuit breakers prior to each flight. Most companies allow one reset of a popped breaker (on the ground only), before engineering intervention is required.

Without knowing what the culture is within Coulson (and I’m not implying this happened), it would be possible to pull the CVR circuit breaker. If the last recording was in the US, that’s a long time to have no CVR...
I have never had anything to do with CVR's, so how do you pre-flight check them? The breaker may very well be in but the recorder itself faulty.

[Fourgearsticks]

Bloke in video mentions lead aircraft, is it true the lead aircraft paired with the Herc considered the conditions too dangerous to fly and the Herc went without lead aircraft?

[Hugh Jars]

I have never had anything to do with CVR's, so how do you pre-flight check them? The breaker may very well be in but the recorder itself faulty.
Depending on the install, for example the Dash 8 - you press the test button where the cockpit area mike is, and you get a couple of flashes of an LED if it's working. On earlier models there was an analogue gauge like an audio meter that would flick quickly full scale twice to indicate a successful test.

On my current type, it's the same as the Dash 8.

During the preflight, an FDR that fails to test is considered a no-go item, but can be MEL'd for a short period of time (with limitations).https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200301/cc61a65ff215671433b04f6b407a9b01.jpg
EDIT: The CVR panel in the plane I’m flying today. VH-YFV B737-800 about 2 years old

[Eevo]

Curious that the CVR had not been in use since it apparently left the US.


how many flights had it done since it left the US?

[Tins]

Bloke in video mentions lead aircraft, is it true the lead aircraft paired with the Herc considered the conditions too dangerous to fly and the Herc went without lead aircraft?

Bloke in the video, with some experience on type, doesn't know either.

Lots still to come out about this. It's only been weeks.