Thread: Airnorth Embraer crush, 2 death

It was engaged in a training flight - I wonder if the check pilot pulled an "engine failure after take-off"? I thought that these had been banned after the Essendon crash - or maybe that was only at night?

The other likely cause of course is an actual engine failure, probably due to fuel mismanagement, although with the plane empty there should have been plenty of performance available (hot & humid?) - but what may not have been available was a margin of control if it was slow and dirty (flaps & gear still down, propeller unfeathered).

Even in the best of circumstances losing an engine on takeoff in a light twin is likely to be exciting.

Of course, it could be something entirely different, such as a control failure or sudden incapacitation of the PIC (pilot in command). I suppose wake turbulence could be a possibility if a heavy had just left, but the Embraer is a bit big to be affected that badly.

John

Originally Posted by JDNSW

It was engaged in a training flight - I wonder if the check pilot pulled an "engine failure after take-off"? I thought that these had been banned after the Essendon crash - or maybe that was only at night?

John,
Asymmetrics are still practiced a lot. I think your referring to the Partenavia crash off Rwy 26 at Essendon - that was a while back now (1980?) - I can't recall fully, but there was an issue with the ailerons on that one too. PN68's never fly well on one donk.

Yes, assymmetrics are often interesting - the Brazilian should do ok on one donk. Perhaps a single engine go round or perhaps a combination of lots of things.

Originally Posted by Sleepy

John,
Asymmetrics are still practiced a lot. I think your referring to the Partenavia crash off Rwy 26 at Essendon - that was a while back now (1980?) - I can't recall fully, but there was an issue with the ailerons on that one too. PN68's never fly well on one donk.

Yes, assymmetrics are often interesting - the Brazilian should do ok on one donk. Perhaps a single engine go round or perhaps a combination of lots of things.

Yes, that is the incident I was thinking of. As you say, the Brasilia should do OK on one engine, particularly empty, but I suspect things could get interesting with a combination of hot + humid (high density altitude) and if the airspeed was a bit low. And at that altitude there would be zero chance of recovery. I think it is still correct to say that statistically speaking, if you have an engine failure on a single compared to a light twin, you are more likely to have an accident in the single, but you are more likely to have a fatal accident in the twin, because any accident is likely to be a loss of control not a forced landing. And people walk away from most forced landings, but not often from loss of control accidents.

But this is all simply speculation anyway. It will be interesting to see what comes out. Anyone know if they have flight data recorders? I would think they would with that number of seats in a modern aircraft.

John

Yeah I think they would have a "Black Box". I'm not quite sure but above a certain number of seats (16?) it is required for charter acft.

if you have an engine failure on a single compared to a light twin, you are more likely to have an accident in the single, but you are more likely to have a fatal accident in the twin, because any accident is likely to be a loss of control not a forced landing

Yes I have heard many say similar. In a single your decision is quite straight forward; Lose an engine and your decision is made - Look and Land
In a twin there is a lot of diagnosis and recovery time that, as you say, you don't have a lot of at low altitude on upwind.

Yes hot+humid does not help

Just found this 197802547

Page 14 has the conclusions.

The 120 have a Black Box.
It is an interesting reading Here
Quote: "Although the Embraer 120 Brasilia is designed to be able to fly on one engine, Atlanta air traffic controllers said the aircraft was having difficulty holding its altitude after reporting its emergency."

On this latest crash...

(from another source)

...were doing EFATO (engine failure after take off) circuits an have had a flame out on their critical engine. From all accounts vMCA (minimum control speed) has played it's cruel part and induced a stall.

They were off 31 at Darwin and ended up n the trees just short of the RAAF golf course, RAAF houses and the main drag to the northern suburbs - Bagot Rd.

Not nice whatever happened. Been pax on that one a few times Darwin back to Gove.

Originally Posted by VladTepes

On this latest crash...

(from another source)

...were doing EFATO (engine failure after take off) circuits an have had a flame out on their critical engine. From all accounts vMCA (minimum control speed) has played it's cruel part and induced a stall.

vMCA is the minimum speed for directional control in the takeoff configuration with the critical engine out and takeoff power on the other engine, usually set by the limit of rudder authority. If the aircraft drops below this speed in these circumstances it will enter an uncommanded turn, and the increased lift induced by the turn will cause a further reduction in airspeed, tightening the turn further, a runaway situation leading very rapidly to a stall, and, with one engine still at takeoff power, almost certainly an incipient spin. If this happens at low altitude the aircraft will hit the ground at a high descent rate (and probably with one wing and nose low, possibly even inverted) before there is any possibility of recovery. The only (slight) possibility of saving the situation is to close the other throttle and land straight ahead. The solution is never to get into this position, which is why avoiding it is practiced!

VMCA varies quite a lot for different aircraft, and tends to be higher for high performance aircraft, and less significant for three or four engined aircraft or those with turbofans or turbojets mounted on the fuselage - even where wing mounted on twins (such as the 737) these are usually a lot closer in than they would be if propeller clearance from the fuselage was needed. The most impressive figure I can recall is the BN2a, where the VMCA is below the clean stalling speed.

John