Skydive accident. One dead

[Clayzz]

Feathered is aligned with the wind… WAY less drag.

Until that point, yes, you are totally using the drag of the prop to get down.

Well, I think the prop will FULL feather in the event the engine quits. With the nose down ya got at that point, you’re gonna pick up speed awful quick…

View attachment 132310

Here’s the view out a PAC 750, really a low wing version of the caravan. Nearly 15 degrees nose down.

Is that out of Rayford(sp) by chance?

 

[dmspilot]

Feathered is aligned with the wind… WAY less drag.

Until that point, yes, you are totally using the drag of the prop to get down.

Sorry, had too many trains of thought going at once. I don't see anything in the C208 POH to suggest engine failure due to fuel exhaustion would cause the propeller to feather. Loss of oil pressure or pilot action via the propeller control seem to be the only situations that will feather the propeller.

 

[Tools]

Nope, Marion County TN (KAPT). Near Chattanooga.

 

[Mikey52]

With a free spool engine, if it quits, you lose oil pressure.

 

[Clayzz]

Nope, Marion County TN (KAPT). Near Chattanooga.

In that picture was that a someone normal descent pitch angle and if so approximately what was the rate of descent and the airspeed?
Not knowing what I'm talking about it looks a little shallow which would say probably higher speed and less vertical descent rate.

 

[Clayzz]

In that picture was that a someone normal descent pitch angle and if so approximately what was the rate of descent and the airspeed?
Not knowing what I'm talking about it looks a little shallow which would say probably higher speed and less vertical descent rate.

Somewhat not someone. Voice typing on the phone

 

[Tools]

160kts (Vne), idle, prop 1800. Usually 45-60 deg angle of bank and about 2 gs. Would give me about 6k fpm.

 

[Clayzz]

160kts (Vne), idle, prop 1800. Usually 45-60 deg angle of bank and about 2 gs. Would give me about 6k fpm.

Thanks I appreciate the information you provide.
I'm not all hung up about the fuel issue other than the fact that the run out ofthe crash site is didn't have a visual of fuel fire that burned everything up more grass fire the way I saw it.
When we look at that kind of speed and the chart I had shown you about the maneuvering speed at any point in time it could be very close to a problem with a failure of engine power and having to trim out of nose down at $160knts how long would it take to get in the 200s like 3 seconds and if there's either a heavy hand or perhaps some turbulence and we could lose parts.
Also do we know if that caravan had a jump door on it? (The Niagara crash caravan)

 

[Clayzz]

It might help if you quit trying to throw your spaghetti at the greased stainless steel backsplash. I don't know enough about this accident to say the plane did not run out of fuel, but even if it did, that would not have caused the plane to behave as it did. It was most likely some sort of structural failure, whether pilot induced or wear induced. It is actually much, much easier and more likely for an overspeed event to happen while the engine is capable of - and currently is - producing full power. As far as the pictures go, I don't see an "obvious grass fire", as the plane looks like it was mostly burning in the cabin and inboard wing area, which would correspond with leaking wing tanks and fuel from said tanks being the main fuel of a fire, not an outside influence such as grass.. The sheriff also said that they had received multiple reports of an explosion in the area at the time the plane went down. Last time I checked, grass fires don't create explosions but planes crashing with even what may be only ten gallons of fuel left generally do create some sort of fireball.

This is what I suppose a grass fire looks like

 

[Clayzz]

It might help if you quit trying to throw your spaghetti at the greased stainless steel backsplash. I don't know enough about this accident to say the plane did not run out of fuel, but even if it did, that would not have caused the plane to behave as it did. It was most likely some sort of structural failure, whether pilot induced or wear induced. It is actually much, much easier and more likely for an overspeed event to happen while the engine is capable of - and currently is - producing full power. As far as the pictures go, I don't see an "obvious grass fire", as the plane looks like it was mostly burning in the cabin and inboard wing area, which would correspond with leaking wing tanks and fuel from said tanks being the main fuel of a fire, not an outside influence such as grass.. The sheriff also said that they had received multiple reports of an explosion in the area at the time the plane went down. Last time I checked, grass fires don't create explosions but planes crashing with even what may be only ten gallons of fuel left generally do create some sort of fireball.

This is what a fuel supported aviation fire looks like

 

[Clayzz]

I had posted a site that listed the NTSB preliminary report and it's been deleted so maybe I wasn't supposed to use that site I'm going to try again to provide the additional information of the preliminary investigation

https://data.ntsb.gov/carol-repgen/api/Aviation/ReportMain/GenerateNewestReport/194726/pdf