A small plane has crashed on the busy Interstate 287 in Harding, located in northern New Jersey. State Police Trooper Christopher Kay says there is a report of three possible deaths in the crash. Shona Sternberg of Hillsborough tells The Star-Ledger of Newark that she was about three cars behind where the plane went down and saw an explosion when the aircraft hit. She says it looked like the right wing was breaking off before the plane went down. (www.huffingtonpost.com) More...
I witnessed this flight go down because of hearing the craft above getting into trouble. I heard the plane from my location far overhead hidden by cloud cover sounding relatively normal but getting louder. There was a loud metallic "slap" sound, something like hitting a raingutter downspout with one's open palm, and then the craft instantly sounded as if it was rolling horizontal at high speed, with a pronounced prop unbalance sound. my location was over 1 mile from the actual crash site, but because of the loud sound, the crafts path was easily tracked south by me even though it was still hidden in the relatively high clouds. when the plane dropped from the clouds after aprox 10-15 seconds, it appeared to be inverted, and was discharging a thin trail of white smoke from the front ahead of the cockpit.There was a pronounced "pop", and the prop became silent as the plane spun directly toward the ground, and the rudder section appeared to separate just as it dissapear from my view. We immediatly drove to the site, (i work for a towing contractor which works for the state pd) and the wreckage was distributed across the highway from south to north. the tail section pieces were located aprox 1/6 mile south of the powerplant which ended up in the center of the northbound lanes after cutting a diagnal path across the roadway thru trees in the center divider. The first main wing that witnesses saw break off aparently first contacted trees and then a 40 foot tall sound barrier wall on an entrance ramp to rt287s as it's spin flattened once the tail came apart. The remaining craft crossed the active roadway and appeard to have struck a relatively new dodge pick up with its wing, although the driver and occupants of that vehicle were unsure as to what happened. The reason I assert this contact is because the damage to the truck appeared to have been caused by something traveling across it's front section, first breaking its passenger side headlamp, then breaking it's grille, next, flattening it's drivers side tire. The entire truck was covered with jet fuel, the scrape mark across the front was in a narrow top to bottom right to left pattern, and the grille rim and tire were filled with a honeycomb material that was soaked with fuel. Interesting to note is the tire(which we changed) was not punctured, but was off its bead. There were various landing gear hydraulics, a fuel pressure indicator, aircraft manual, as well as personal items and other remains, located on the roadway prior to the final impact area and fire site which was concentrated in the center median aprox 50-60 ft across at that point. Other witnesses and I filled out reports by forms handed out by the state pd, no idea what the disposition of them was. This thing was in serious trouble for a fair stretch of horizontal flight,and for a moment, I thought it was a copter in trouble because of the very loud and odd rotating engine and prop sound. Very sad.
I witnessed this flight go down because of hearing the craft above getting into trouble. I heard the plane from my location far overhead hidden by cloud cover sounding relatively normal but getting louder. There was a loud metallic
I couple of days ago I said the following in this Blog: "Thou shalt never believe the reports issued by "eye witness", 99.99% of the cases they don't know what the hell they are talking about. Somebody says now that one of the wings of the TBM 700 separated before the crash. Impossible". To this I should add "Do NOT believe what the newspapers say about accidents, the reporters are very ignorant people who write without knowing anything about aviation matters". There!!!
My thoughts and prayers go to the families of those involved. May the Lord give comfort.
Lesson to pilots: No matter the aircraft or it's deice capability, you cannot always climb out of icing conditions. There may come a time to descend while under control instead of trying to climb until control is lost.
Shouldn't all planes that routinely fly above 10,000 ft. be required to have de-icing equipment, a press report says the TBM700 does not have one? It has a service ceiling of 310.
I fly a TBM profesionally for a company, it is an outstanding aircraft and handles icing conditions very well. Like any aircraft you have to respect it's capabilities and limitations. In 25+ years and close to 10,000 hours I have not found any aircraft that can handle sustained flight in severe icing conditions (SLD) to include heated flying surfaces jets. And yes the TBM like almost all PT-6 powered aircraft does have a particle separator that must be deployed prior to entering icing conditions.
De-icing boots on most small aircraft have a very limited operating envelope. If you use them before there is at least an inch of ice buildup, the ice may not break up and could cause a hollow underneath the ice. They will then be totally useless. They also cannot cope with heavy icing. Best to avoid heavy icing conditions altogether.
I'm very anxious to read the FAA report on this when it is completed. He lost a wing, spiraled, and then crashed... sounds like her was trying to make an off airport emergency landing and possibly struck some power lines? ...or could have been icing, but the Socata's have KI capabilities right? Who knows...too early to tell.
I'm guessing that if it wasn't turned on (and if it needs to be turned on and I think it might), maybe airspeed bled off fast (really fast) and he got too slow too fast. He might have went below the minimum icing airspeed (somewhere around 140 knots?) and stalled?
My respects go out to the unfortunate people that lost their lives today and I hope their families can get through this tragedy.
Hi Doug, sorry for you loss and I'm sure the NTSB will eventually displace the speculation. No words are appropiate during these times but as a pilot I can relate to the desire to fly and know how important flying is to myself. The name "Buckalew" is familar since I knew an "Abby Buckalew" way back from NJ. I only wish the best for everyone and pray for all those affected.
God, the tone on this broad is so civil and intelligent. Really a great crew. I need to just stop reading the newspapers. I is interesting the combination of respect for a fellow pilot along w/ some admonishment w/ an understanding that anyone is capable of using bad judgment. There is a distinct lack of scorn. Very professional
I understand the need to not "rush to judgment" here. But hearing Wisconsin 3737 - a CRJ jet - say the ice was severe at 17,000 feet and their equipment couldn't keep up with the accumulation, it is certainly going to be a factor. Other aircraft on the links you all provided are reporting tops at 17,000, which gives weight to the rule that the worst icing is at the top of the clouds. This should be a major NTSB effort.
Morristown Tower is covered by LiveATC. There's a chance this was picked up by their feed. Archives are already available for 15:00-15:30 Zulu. Worth a shot.
Since the speed tracked is groundspeed, the TAS was probably much higher due to headwinds. I saw 50kts reported somewhere. Severe icing will significantly increase the stall speed as we all know.
To all the forum users here - I appreciate very much your comments about this tragic accident that took my brother's, his families and his colleague's life this morning. It gives us some perspective. I flew with him several times and always felt very safe. His attention to pre-flight checks was impeccable. LIke many of you have said we can speculate all we want, but we are just going to have to wait and see what the NTSB says. I could recognize his voice early on in the tape and he did not sound in distress at all.
as an ex-air controller, I can tell you this pilot had "got to get there-itis" meaning he was so intent on getting somewhere he ignored common sense -- once had a pilot with wife and 2 small kids take off at So Lake Tahoe after we repeatedly advised him of adverse weather conditions - can't refuse take-off clearance..always up to the pilot... anyway he veered off to the east after hitting downdraft we told him about and went into a large snow bank - drove gear up through the wings... thankfully all survived ... used to witness a crash every 2-3 weeks up there... all due to stupid pilots that tried to fly at the wrong time in the the wrong conditions - got story after story
Wayne and other pilot bloggers. I was checking the recent history of this aircraft and it logged less than 20 hours since Aug. 2011 (5 months). Assuming that the same pilot flew it, isn't it too little to keep proficient in a high performance aircraft.
Having the wing come off is not impossible, this happens all the time. All that is needed is overstress of the airframe. Overstress happens after loss of control, loss of control can happen for a variety of reasons. It seems possible that the plane was stalled because of ice build up. The pilot, not having reference to the horizon could easily have gone over Vne trying to effect a recovery, anything beyond Vne will severly damage the aircraft.
To the media. anything other than than an airliner is a "small" plane. I have seen Gulfstream G5's referred to as "small" That is a $50 MILLION plane. The TBM that crashed cost about $3 million new, and was equipped with most of the same equipment as airliners.
As far as general aviation is concerned,about 17% of light plane crashes are fatal, resulting in an average of two fatalities per fatal crash.There are usally about 700 to 800 people killed in private plane crashes each year in the US, that is why they make headlines- it is a relatively rare occasion. There are approximately 40,000 people killed in auto and truck accidents yearly, so it isn't as big a deal, except to the families and friends of those lost.
Most accidents are caused by a combinations of several factors, not just one . That is probably the case here. The NTSB investigators will do a good job, and in time will issue a report.Until that time there will be much conjecture and statements ,much of which will be erroneous. Most people , including the media, don't even know what makes an airplane fly- and certainly not what makes one crash.
May they Rest in Peace, and condolences to the families and friends
Makes me wonder if other aircraft in the area were experiencing icing conditions. I hope the FAA accident investigation team will give us a very detailed report on what possibly happened to cause this unfortunate incident. My prayers for the families involved. May God watch over them.
Get there itus, got them, why take a chance like this with your entire family. a friend and your dog. Sorry but this guy had enough money to fly first on any airline at anytime. When will we ever learn....
Many IFR pilots have lost track of the horizon over the years. Sometimes it's a pilot issue, sometimes an instrument problem. Artificial horizons can malfunction under conditions they are not designed for such as aerobatic maneuvers. In aviation, nothing is impossible.
Doug, It is with a very sad heart i say sorry to you for your loss of family and friends. I can only hope you will find a peace in your heart knowing your brother did what he loved.
For the money, buy a used Citation or King Air. Despite the TBM's cost and performance, at the end of the day, you still have a small single engine airplane. With many of the inherent limitations associated with such aircraft. No matter how much money one spends on an "all-weather" airplane, there are days to humble one's self and use the airlines, or just stay on the ground.
Here is the 00z (7 AM) Sounding from KOKX. Note the saturated layer between 13kft and 19kft and the 50 kt gain in wind speed from the due West (270°) from 10kft to 16kft.
I am a small time pilot, 650 hours, mostly in Mooneys. Alot of actual IFR. I mean absolutely no disrespect, but this reminds me of the Thurmond Munson crash. I guess I am dating myself here. Just because you have the means to fly very high performance complex aircraft, we need to respect that aircraft. Even F-22's have envelopes of what they can and cannot do. My heart goes out to the friends and family. I have lost 2 fellow pilots over the years.
On the ATC tape he declared an emergency at 3:40 seconds. I'm sorry for the families involved, please don't look for answers quickly the results will never change...
I think I listen to ATC the other night and the controller was askig planes to check for a plane that disappeared, They indicated on had crash on the highway 287
It seems to me that there is enough hard data and enough collective knowledge here for this to be a valuable exercise. Human beings like to do stuff like this and overall the habit has served us quite well. While it is not a substitute for the full NTSB investigation, it is worthwhile, nonetheless, IMO.
Checking several of the previous flights of this airplane, on climb, the airspeed varied from 130kts to over 300kts. Wild fluctuation of the graph. Check the previous flights. Sure looks like something was wrong, no steady climb rate either, should have had an autopilot? jd
Even if all the speculation turns out to be wrong, it will cause a lot of pilots to think twice before charging off into challenging IMC. That alone will probably save a few lives, but we will never know whose lives. I doubt most of the folk shouting for a halt to all speculation until the Government tells us what happened would apply that rule in any other aspect of their lives. The arguments for encouraging pre-Government Report speculation are far stronger than the "shut up and wait for the Government to tell you" arguments.
Shutting up and waiting might make the experience of the friends and loved ones more palatable, but it goes against the grain of human nature. I would recommend that folks offended by speculation not read it.
I hope they can figure out if the A/P was engaged on the Accident Flight. That's a pretty smooth climb to be hand flown, even as the climb rate and speed began to deteriorate at around 13,000. Use of the A/P is prohibited in severe icing in the 700, in fact the plane is prohibited from flight in severe icing, as are most boot-equipped aircraft. The POM says that if you should find yourself in heavy ice, one of the first things you do is disengage the A/P. The purpose, i believe, is to give the pilot a better "feel" for what is going on. The A/P can cover up that feel for a while, until it disengages automatically and hands the pilot an iced up, slow, out of trim, uncontrollable airplane. Isn't that similar to what happened to AF447?
Re the other flights, the Local on 4-17 looks to me to be a practice flight, hand flown, which included slow flight and speeds approaching a stall, maybe in different configurations? The 4-19 hop looks like it was hand flown too, with altitudes varying by about 100 feet from the cruise altitude of 4,500. The rest of them appear to have been primarily flown by spinning the dials, with very few if any deviations for very long periods.
One of the things that stopped me from flying myself around was my increasing reliance on the A/P and how my hand flying skills, especially in IMC, were deteriorating. I just wasn't getting enough time to maintain proficiency without all of the automatic stuff working properly. It wasn't a happy decision but it just might have saved my life, and the lives of my family.
I see that my old plane, Bonanza N67799, a B36TC is still very active out in the east and seems to perform like it always did. It's pretty clear to me from looking at its tracks which portions were hand flown and which were A/P.
I'm new to this website and still learning how to use it - pretty interesting stuff here.
After the ATR crash in Roselawn, and the Brasilia crash near Detroit in the late '90's, the FAA went to great lenghts to determine the best methods for the use of deice boots. All of us learned to fly using the 'wait untili the boots are covered before blowing the boots' mentality, and all of us had to chnage our mindset after those two accidents. NASA and the FAA spend lots of time and money researching this, and determined that modern boots do not demostrate the ice bridging that you mention. There are no aircraft in existence that can cope with severe icing, large or small, no matter how they are deiced.
If we waited until we had an inch of ice on the wings before we activated the boots, aircraft would be raining from the sky.
I speculate from experience and the tape, they were in icing from 12k up, from others reporting in the area, fltaware track confirms slowing A/S and climb rate, that plane will climb 1500 FPM up to 25k. Also Most Icing climb A/Speeds must be above 140kts to keep the ice off the parts of the wing that the boots don't reach. Im not an expert and it is speculation, but that is what these post are for I guess or just post condolences and move on.
Unless that airplane flew more on VFR practice flights over the weekend, that's way too little for a high performance airplane like the TBM. Turboprops are not weekend pilot 'toys' for hobbyists that only fly in VFR conditions not too far from home. They're serious traveling machines and things happen fast. I have about 500 hours in turboprops and 2600 in complex twins like Barons - and I flew a lot!
To me, it looks like this pilot got in trouble when he entered the clouds. He told ATC that he was entered "VMC" - but he quickly corrected himself by saying IMC. Those mean visual meteorological conditions and instrument meteorological conditions respectively. Little things like that can imply that you're not flying a lot.
And if you're not flying that type of machine consistently (or at least practicing consistently), it's little things that can add up when you enter the icy clouds. For example, was the pitot heat turned on? If not, the ice will build up on the device that measures the airspeed (air inflow) and it shows you're going faster than you are. The autopilot can correct by increasing the climb even though you're not going that fast and a stall can happen.
Other things can happen like I said before - was the inertial separator turned on that's designed to separate any ice from the air coming into the combustion chamber. Was the intake heat turned on that lets the air into the engine to being with?
Many things can happen if you're not flying at least 100 hours per year in a plane like that. And to me, that's the bare minimum - and I don't think a scheduled airline would allow so few hours - they always fly in teams anyway = cross check everything. That's why, in my view, a 'part time pilot' should actually even try practice harder. And even if they're with an alleged co-pilot, is he type rated or at least checked out in a complex turbine?
Really sorry Doug. It wont bring them back, but lets hope the NTSB can determine exactly what happened. I would encourage monday morning quarterbacks to keep their opinions to themselves and trust the most professional accident organisation do its work
Wings come off when VFR-only pilots fly into clouds then spin out of control and overstress the airframe as is the case when VFR-only pilots fly into clouds. That the plane stalled due to ice build up is a possible reason but that the pilot lost reference to the horizon, impossible since he was IFR-rated.
Sure sounds like ice. If the report the wing broke off is true (?) maybe it happened during the descent. The comment about "get thereitis' applies to a lot of GA accidents and probably some part 121 ops. My condolences to the families.
You should take comfort in the fact your brother was doing something he loved with his family and friend.
Please be prepared as it will be a year or more before you get some answers from the NTSB, which may be incomplete and quite frequently they will list the primary cause as 'pilot error'. Hopefully others will learn or benefit from this in the future.
Even if all the speculation turns out to be wrong, it will cause a lot of pilots to think twice before charging off into challenging IMC. That alone will probably save a few lives, but we will never know whose lives. I doubt most of the folk shouting for a halt to all speculation until the Government tells us what happened would apply that rule in any other aspect of their lives. The arguments for encouraging pre-Government Report speculation are far stronger than the "shut up and wait for the Government to tell you" arguments.
Shutting up and waiting might make the experience of the friends and loved ones more palatable, but it goes against the grain of human nature. I would recommend that folks offended by speculation not read it.
The ice equipment must be operated properly as well as fully functioning. It can be a challenge to keep all aspects of a known ice package working properly. There are so many components that something is always breaking. Severe icing can overwhelm a deicing system leaving barely enough time to react and change altitudes. This flight was only 14 minutes long!
Well that narrows it down to a faulty de-icer. They're always re-calling cars for some defective parts maybe this one slipped past inspection. You can't blame pilot error on bad parts. we'll see what FAA says.
The track looks weird too. Looks like it was completely out of control. I'm assuming that the long straight track off to the northwest was not part of the flight.
Thou shalt never believe the reports issued by "eye witness", 99.99% of the cases they don't know what the hell they are talking about. Somebody says now that one of the wings of the TBM 700separated before the crash. Impossible.
I've lost 4, one of whom cut a meeting with me short because he "had to get to Cuyama in time to do all the things I need to do there and make it back here tomorrow night."
Been a Law Enforcement Pilot for many years,we have experienced several accidents, both Fixed wing and Rotorcraft.Lost co-workers,friends some as a result of the accidents,one shot from the ground.We have learned to not comment,speculate, or try to figure out what happened talking to others,we have kept it private.
So incredibly sorry about your loss, Doug. I worked with Jeff for 12 years and knew him as a talented, warm, generous, friendly, capable and professional person, destined for the very top. His untimely loss is profoundly shocking. I also flew with Jeff (am a pilot myself) and vouch for your comment that his attention in whatever he did, including flying, was done to the highest standard. I cannot believe that he would have taken any chance anyway, let alone with Corinne, Jackson, Meriweather and Rakesh also on board. Let's see what the NTSB says, and hope they look into this as thoroughly as is clearly necessary. In the meantime we mourn them all deeply. RIP, and many prayers.
Let's not speculate; often when there is an aircraft accident, there are five expert accident investigators who know exactly what happened (carb icing on a fuel-injected engine, for example). However, it almost always turns out in the final report to be unrelated to any of these conclusions. The news media screws the facts up enough as it is; no need to give them speculation for a real hay-day.
Yes, by all means, speculate. The flight track of the TBM700 indicates that both the speed and direction were erratic during the last few minutes of flight. Ice can cause fast and unpredictable results depending on the plane AND pilot. Check this link for conditions for this flight. http://avwxworkshops.com/forum/read.php?8,443 How about this scenario? About 30 years ago, in a PA201/R, I was approaching an airport through a thin layer (I could see through it). Although no ice was in the forecast (not too accurate in those days) my pitot heat was on, ice rapidly clogged the ram air. My IAS dropped to 40 knts, causing the gear to automatically partially extend. It was night and the combined "gear unsafe" light and horn distracted me enough to inadvertently start a turn (no autopilot). With a faulty airspeed and VSI indication, and in IMC, it was difficult to know if I was too slow or too fast. Only after leveling my wings and correcting my attitude was I confirmed I was rapidly descending and corrected. After I landed I noticed about 1/2 inch of ice protruding from my pitot tube and the leading edges of all surfaces. I am amazed that there were so many PIREPS of mod rime, mostly after this tragic ending. STAY ON THE GROUND unless you know you and your plane can handle this kind of weather.
Of course it has boots. But I'm not sure if the engine intake needs to be turned on (in conjunction with the inertial separator)with a switch.
But even if that switch exists and it's required to be activated, he could have gone down anyway by flying too slow - maybe even trying to punch through the last (iciest) layer to get over the "extreme" icing.
If the minimum airspeed isn't maintained when a plane is flying through ice, it can stall because the ice builds up under the leading edge of the wing.
Brett, I hear you! I have 30,000+ on the heaviest and most expensive Iron, and God can throw solidified water at you that no systems can handle.
I remember back 50 years ago to when a fellow USAF guy stomped into Operations and slammed a chunk of ice that must have weighed 50 lbs on the weatherguessers desk....
More like 100 kts and since he was flying due west, all of that 100 kts was going over the wings directly. Look at weatherspmd's post above with the skew-t chart. The barbs on the right is true windspeed. So take the groundspeed and add the windspeed*COS(0) = 100* 1 = 100+ groundspeed. Maybe he turned to go south and lost that TAS which lead to a icy stall. Just hypothesizing.
I agree with Doug. The pilot boxed himself in, a sign of inexperience. Amoung other possibilities, the pilot must take action when ice is encountered. If I encounter ice I immediately do everything I can to get out of it. Ice can always become an emergency so forget the origional plan. First I go lower or to an altitude that I know did not have ice. This pilot tried to climb through it for several minutes as idicated by the decreasing airspeed indicating a continual increase in ice. I used to do that 20-30 years ago but no more. Why not simply go down where there was no ice. Even go to 090 and lower where the weather was better, go back and land where you just took off. Forget the important meeting or whatever was so important that he had to get there today. The same applys to all bad Wx, such as thunderstorms over the destination airport. Land somewhere else. If I really had to get there "today", in this case, knowing the Wx will be bad the next day, I would havve left the evening before. I alter the day of departure or return bur +/- 1 day almost 1/3 of the times I go flying now. I might miss a few things, but I also miss the bad weather.
Mr Mcleod, as per the maintenance manual, the inertial separator provides a means to remove solid particles from the ambient air. It does not remove ice from the air entering the combustion chamber. It is used as an aid, to help remove solid particles(ice, rocks, screws), from the air entering the intake plenum of the PT6 engine. Then it would have to make it by the intake screen, then it would be shredded by the first stage compressor blades.
There is no option turn off/on intake heat on the TBM700/850. Warm air is provided at a constant rate from the exhaust stacks to the plenum inlet. IMO, if ice was causing engine performance issues, the pilot would seen peculiar instrument readings.
Was this a Garmin bird? The CAS would have been displaying master cautions and master warnings based of those readings. It really seems to me that this was an airframe ice issue. Anyway, may those lost rest in peace. My regards to the family.
Its all speculation until the NTSB gives an answer, but the icing in the area is not speculation. So one other problem in those conditions then things start happening real fast.
@Astro: One of the great joys of my life is helping the younger generation to learn about things that interest them. I admire your interest in aviation. If you want to really learn about it, I suggest you start where most of the rest of us did, right here:
But, and this should make the "don't speculate" guys happy. Something did apparently go wrong with the prop on the missed approach, and it is listed as a contributing factor to the pilot's failure to, etc.... To my knowledge the propeller mystery was never completely solved.
I should have said that IF it's only about 100 hours per year in the type of complex aircraft, that should be supplemented with recurrent simulator training every six months with consistent weekend simulated approaches in between that biannual recurrent training.
You are making too many assumptions without enough information. Many have been humbled doing so and wished they kept their uninformed comments to themselves.
To astrojet120. Apparently you are not a pilot. Please keep you comments educated. Your repeated comments about age of airplane and 'final check' leaves me to believe you are very young and not very well versed about aviation in general. "Recalling cars"....look up AD's.
John, that's true. But he would have lived if he was wearing his shoulder harness. He hit his head hard on the instrument panel - but he died of asphyxiation - not blunt force trauma. His flight instructor and passenger survived.
TBM's (and Cirrus') have four point restraints now. Munson's Citation had a regular shoulder harness - but he wasn't wearing it.
Sounds like ATC asked jazz7650 to contact him. At 8:13 you hear "i missed the number for Jazz 7650" then at 8:22 you hear what sounds like him calling "N7..." and then he is stepped on. Then at 8:34 Jazz tells "no response". You can't hear ATC talking to him unfortunately. Then you hear them all talking about the icing at FL170 and how it's a "bad deal" It's also interesting to note the steady drop in airspeed but I am not familiar with the TBM700.
As Mike said, easy to speculate but sounds like the icing was severe on the way up and earlier, thought I heard a commercial flight say the boots couldn't keep up.
chalet, I don't mean any disrespect. But I know several IFR rated pilots that have killed themselves and their passengers because they're weren't current. And I don't mean the bear minimum FAA mandated simulated IFR approaches ever six months - even if they adhere to that, that's plenty short of what's truly competent. In fact, if you're IFR rated and you do the bear minimum proficiency requirements, you might even kill people faster because you think you're better than you really are - and when it's too late because the unforgiving machine and weather get the best of you (and it happens fast), it's literally & catastrophically too late.
I am sure recurrent training was required by the insurance carrier. By the time a pilot gets to flying a TBM700 they usually are a serious aviation enthusiast that takes flying and training extremely seriously. These aircrafts attract type "A" personalities, people skilled at multitasking and hyper-focusing.
Doug, I am with you on this, in fact in a previous blog I suggested that perhaps the pilot was not proficient at the time of the accident, see the aircraft logged less than 20 hours since Aug. 1/2011.
Well said Troy - real fast. Also agree that the icing reports are not speculation as the ground speed and rate of climb are not either. As I said, I am unfamiliar with the TBM700. Maybe that's a normal profile looking profile. Either way, very sad for those that have lost loved ones. Safe holidays everyone.
To simply answer the question, No, they shouldn't be required to have de-icing equipment. Icing can happen at any altitude if the conditions are right. There are rules for FIKI, or "flight into known icing conditions." Every TBM model I have worked on have had inflatable air-foil de-ice boots, inflated and vacuumed by B/A. The props have electrically heated boots. The windshields have electric heat, on some models, both windshields are heated, otherwise, just the pilot's will be heated. There are no models with heated leading edges, one PT6 cant make enough hot air to make HLE's possible. There is a heat exchanger for the fuel to pull heat from the oil, but in the TBM's maintenance manual, it says there is not enough heat exchange to warm the fuel much(just because of volume), its really to help keep the oil cool.
As for the link posted by Mr. Mcleod, that polished inlet is only heated by exhaust gases exiting the exhaust stacks. While these gases are very hot, they tend to take the path of least resistance and easily exit out of the stacks, providing little heat to the lip. In my experience with the TBM700 and TBM850, which are very safe and reliable, this accident was likely caused by airframe ice build-up(speculation). If the ice build-up was concentrated around the lip, effecting inertial separator use and engine performance, I would expect there would have been some conversation with control, long before the airplane fell out of the sky, as eye witnesses reported. The MM explains the inertial separator provides a means to remove a maximum of solid particles from ambient air. So, when we start and taxi the I/S should be ON, and during FIKI, the I/S should be ON. Even if the ice was effecting the engine, the pilot would still be able to control the bird on some sort of glide ratio. Clearly something went terribly wrong in this situation. My thoughts are with this family. Rest in peace.
Exactly. A Certificate, along with statutory currency requirements, is not indicative of competence. Hence I voluntarily withdrew myself from the ranks of capable pilots quite a while back. On the other hand, did Lindbergh have an "Instrument Airplane" Certification when he crossed the Atlantic? I doubt there are many of us, no matter how current, who could pull off what he did with similar equipment. I wouldn't dare try, but then again I'm a big chicken.
It seems to me that there is enough hard data and collective knowledge for this to be a valuable exercise. It is understood that it is speculation in-part and that it is not a substitute for the NTSB investigation. Human beings like to talk shop and overall the habit has served us quite well. As someone who is considering becoming a pilot, I find these exercises very informative.
If you reread my post, you will notice that I never suggested that it was the cause of this accident, and nothing I said relates carburetor ice to a PT6A. I was just giving an example of the kinds of things I have seen people come up with. Hence my point; don't speculate publicly without all the information (in other words, until the NTSB puts out a final report).
Metal fatigue unlikely, as most planes are designed to not allow something like a wing to fall off when one component fails. Bad fuel - hard to say, could have been a contributing factor, but more than likely, this was an icing problem. No final check? Please be more specific.
Do GA planes in the US get sprayed with anti-icing fluids prior to take off like commercial airplanes do. Whenever I fly small planes in the U.S. it is always between march and october and in the South so never had to worry about supercold wings.
There is a fair amount of data here. We know there was severe icing in the ~ 15,000 foot range and we're pretty sure the pilot wasn't flying a lot. And if the pilot wasn't flying a lot, was he hand flying the plane in severe icing just like the airworthiness directive directs pilots to do? The AD's are there for a reason - one of the main reasons with regard to he icing AD is so the pilot gets a feel of the controls as the icing builds up - and the autopilot is taken out of the equation (via the hand flying which takes current instrument practice because you're IMC = in the clouds) so it doesn't put the aircraft into an uncontrollable situation if it's deactivated OR it kicks off due to excessive trim pressures.
There are some experienced pilots here who know what they're talking about - it's wise to discuss these issues.
Or, see if you can get the Military to train you, but don't talk to them about recalling cars or 6 year old airplanes being too old to fly during the interview, they might trick you into joining and then put you to work scraping bugs off the windshields of 55 year old B-52's.
I don't trust the Government to tell me everything I want to know. There are a lot of very knowledgable guys here. There are also some who are less knowledgable but we see it as on opportunity to learn. Even it turns out 731CA was knocked out of the sky by a meteor strike, the "shop talk" going on right now serves a useful purpose.
Of course the NTSB can't comment until it completes its investigation, just as a judge or jury can't comment until a verdict is reached. The rest of us, the last time I checked, are free to speculate about all sorts of things - at least in this country.
Yes, if necessary to remove contamination, or to prevent build up of snow while waiting for departure. The fluids used on the ground do not have an affect after takeoff (okay, maybe for 30 seconds, till it all blows off).
A lot of my pilot friends are pushing 90, they don't have time to wait 18 months or longer for the NTSB. They want to speculate now... This is the most interesting topic for them since Reno. I do wonder the story of the College Station crash, which was similar in nature and occurred only about 12 hours before this one; and also killed an entire young family never got "legs" in the news.
I'm going to start a website for aviation enthusiasts who just want to sit quietly and wait for NTSB reports without speculating in advance about what they might say.
How much storage capacity and bandwidth should I buy? Should I create revenue primarily by selling subscriptions or seeking advertisers?
No doubt you are probably correct. This is a public forum though. As you can see above, I did provide some answers to his comments. As to guidance - maybe a little ribbing will help him censor his comments, or, instead of making off-the-wall comments, he will ask questions next time.
Doug, I did not read the AD, sorry. I still stand by my statement about using the AP in icing conditions. If used properly, and monitored, it is safe. Of course, in this case, if it is prohibited, it should not be used.
