5 related adults dead in Cessna 340 crash

[Hank S]

If no one is immune, regardless of experience, how is it a “good” idea to enter Spatial D inducing conditions unnecessarily? That sounds like a roll of the dice.

Right, we should all avoid IMC conditions at all times because it can induce Spatial D. Got it! Should I hand in my Instrument Rating now?

 

[Zeldman]

If you look at the position of the elevator trim tab, it is full up. If it was in the position during the take-off, it would have been likely to cause the aircraft to slam back down shortly after lift off. The elevator trim tab is currently under a recent AD due to issues that cause full deflection/loss of control. It is an easy/cheap fix...if fixed properly. Mine has been done and I visually inspect it prior to every flight. Back in September a 402 crashed back down on the runway with this exact same issue.

Good catch. I had not noticed the trim tab until you brought it up.

I had a runaway trim on a 421 once. I did the arm strong correction until I found the circuit breaker.

 

[Cooter]

Right, we should all avoid IMC conditions at all times because it can induce Spatial D. Got it! Should I hand in my Instrument Rating now?

Please re-read what I was responding to and read my whole post. That is a challenge to his post, based on two conflicting ideas.

Edit to clarify:

He said the pilot's experience could have made this a "good decision" to launch regardless of the weather. He then said the experience doesn't matter anyway because experienced pilots fall prey to Spatial D, even in easier conditions. So my question is asking how the experience can remove the risk when he also states that experience doesn't matter when it comes to Spatial D. If the risk of Spatial D remains, how is it a "good idea" to launch?

 

[James331]

Do you get pulled over a lot or something?

No

Just have my 4th amendment rights crapped on with those nazi "saftey" and "DUI" checkpoints.

Had a few things stolen and the cops just give me a report that isn't even made of good enough paper to wipe myself with, and they put in ZERO effort at recovering said items.

Another time I just got my house, well my prior house, and the alarm went off (later replaced the thing), I hauled ass over to the house as I was calling the police, told them what happened, gave them a description of me (the home owner) and my car, got home, no cops, cleared the whole house, put my stuff away, sat down, about 5 minutes after THAT there was this little meak girly knock on the front door and there was this cop with his dog, I laughed a little I said I already did your job for you, your services are no longer required.

Point is, as a law abiding guy, 95% of the time cops only serve as an anoyance or being revenue generating meter maid/speeding ticket types, in my experience whenever some real police work comes along they scribble out a report and haul ass away as fast as they can to go write speeding tickets or whatever it is they actually do.


I wish I could say great things about them, I as a tax payer and home owner I pay a decent amount of money for them, nothing I love more than getting a good return on investment, sadly it's all red ink when it comes to that

Good catch. I had not noticed the trim tab until you brought it up.

I had a runaway trim on a 421 once. I did the arm strong correction until I found the circuit breaker.

^^that

I had one of the instructors at flight saftey jam my elevator right as I was lifting my nose up on take off, no matter how hard I pushed as I was rolling trim, at the altitude it occurred, red screen.

 

[Dave Theisen]

There wasn’t an airport within 100 miles that wasn’t fogged in.

Which still isnt an instant deal killer. Under Part 135, if we depart under our lower than standard takeoff mins, we need to file a takeoff alternate within an hours flight time.

 

[Dave Theisen]

[QUOTE="James331, post: 2428588, member:

I had one of the instructors at flight saftey jam my elevator right as I was lifting my nose up on take off, no matter how hard I pushed as I was rolling trim, at the altitude it occurred, red screen.[/QUOTE]

I think I had the same guy! . It was on my checkride and I successfully aborted.

 

[denverpilot]

^^that

I had one of the instructors at flight saftey jam my elevator right as I was lifting my nose up on take off, no matter how hard I pushed as I was rolling trim, at the altitude it occurred, red screen.

I think I had the same guy! . It was on my checkride and I successfully aborted.

I wanna fly with Dave! LOL!

 

[GRG55]

...In a twin, the most likely problem immediately after departure is the loss of an engine. If that happens and you want a chance of climbing out to a safe altitude you must have the gear up.

I agree with the points you are making. And I deal with the gear on departure the same way you do for the exact same reasons.

However, I'm not sure the loss of an engine immediately after departure is the most likely problem. Perhaps one of the worst problems I'll agree.

Our single engine cousins are fond of (correctly) pointing out how unlikely an engine failure is at any time in a flight as justification for only needing one. The probability of an engine failure during the comparatively short period of the take-off roll and climb to altitude phase of most flights is less. The probability of an engine failure at, or in the few moments immediately after lift-off and climb to say 500 ft AGL, is extremely small.

High consequence, but low probability.

 

[denverpilot]

Define my logic and I’ll be happy to answer.

Okay. Weak.

You asked.

 

[Velocity173]

I might as well add to my enemies list and keep the challenges coming.

I have a problem with this thinking. On one hand you are saying that his experience could have made this a good idea and negates the weather’s risk. But on the other hand, your saying that experience doesn’t really matter because no one (even experienced pilots) is immune from Spatial D.

If no one is immune, regardless of experience, how is it a “good” idea to enter Spatial D inducing conditions unnecessarily? That sounds like a roll of the dice.

Obviously experience helps but yeah, to some extent, you don’t know what you don’t know.

In the Army, I’ve had the controls relinquished to me on two separate occasions. Both were on instrument check rides and both were qualified instrument pilots. Our RA for the night indicated a low risk. There’s no check the box on an RA that says “pilot will become disoriented” with a resulting high risk value. There’s no reason to believe that either one would get spatial D but it happened and continues to happen in all branches and in the civilian community. Not that aviation accidents are just random events, but until the computer takes the human element completely out of the loop, you will always have accidents due to inherent human limitations (vestibular illusions).

I’ve taught ADM (military) and the RA process and there’s very little in the application that prevent accidents. They’re taught in a cookie cutter format that just doesn’t work well in the fluid dynamic of flight. Personally, I think the RA process is an absolute joke. You can never mitigate the unknown and you can never predict how a pilot will react during an unexpected event. I’ve seen pilots kill themselves and their passengers simply because they couldn’t adapt to deteriorating weather. The piece of paper they filled out prior to flight states low risk so how could this happen? That’s because a piece of paper won’t keep you from making a stupid decision due to overconfidence (invulnerability), and it sure won’t keep you from getting spatial D no matter what your experience is.

You could look at it this way, we have air show pilots that have thousands of hours and because of that, have mitagated their risks down to an acceptable level. They don’t go into the performance thinking they are doing something dangerous and they sure don’t go into it thinking it would be their last flight. They crash every year because of an error in judgment while doing a maneuver they’ve done a thousand times. A maneuver that they truly believe is safe. I don’t look at them as making a stupid decision, I just see it as an unexpected event that can’t be predicted. Only way to completely eliminate risk is to never leave the ground.

 

[Cooter]

Okay. Weak.

You asked.

That’s pretty disappointing Nate. You are unwilling to clarify your question but willing to insult.

See ya.

 

[Radar Contact]

I agree with the points you are making. And I deal with the gear on departure the same way you do for the exact same reasons.

However, I'm not sure the loss of an engine immediately after departure is the most likely problem. Perhaps one of the worst problems I'll agree.

Our single engine cousins are fond of (correctly) pointing out how unlikely an engine failure is at any time in a flight as justification for only needing one. The probability of an engine failure during the comparatively short period of the take-off roll and climb to altitude phase of most flights is less. The probability of an engine failure at, or in the few moments immediately after lift-off and climb to say 500 ft AGL, is extremely small.

High consequence, but low probability.

I agree with you. I should have said the worst case problem we are trying to prepare for is the loss.

 

[denverpilot]

That’s pretty disappointing Nate. You are unwilling to clarify your question but willing to insult.

See ya.

And you’re willing to play word games with five dead people and an accident on Christmas with zero information actually known about the incident.

I think I’m cool with my response.

Weak is an accurate assessment of the whole “Spatial D” argument so far.

If you’re “insulted” by it, not my problem. Has nothing to do with the accuracy of my statement.

The pilot took some risks I wouldn’t take. That said, lots of pilots have including the Wrights and Lindbergh so who cares? Their flights are their flights to command.

I take other risks daily that they probably wouldn’t take. Many pilots wouldn’t let a student take the controls of their airplane or fly a light twin on an 85F day in Denver. Or drive in snow. Whatever.

But saying “Spacial D” is a reason not to fly an instrument flight is, exactly what I said. Weak. It’s exactly what we train people to do.

 

[Lndwarrior]

Look, Cooter, you are making this far more complicated than it really is.

I'm all for reasoned discussion and debate, even speculation on accidents. But these kinds of comments are inappropriate, misguided, and simply offensive:









There is simply no defending that kind of commentary from pilots, about a pilot who just died two days ago with his daughters on board. I'm not going to get into a debate about that -- it's wrong and should be called out.

At this point in time we have no information to go by, with which we could judge a dead pilot in such a way. It utterly disgusts me to read those sorts of statements. They don't fall into the purview of reasoned debate and discussion. They are personal, they come from a totally uninformed position, and cast a poor light on the entire aviation community. I could see those comments from laypeople who don't know any better... but pilots?

So we'll have to just agree to be in violent disagreement, here. I don't think there's much wiggle room here; either you think those opinions have validity or you don't. I'm firmly of the opinion that when you have no information, casting stones on a dead pilot is revolting, and there's not much more to say if you think we should be giving voice to those opinions. That's something for you to decide about your own character, not mine.

Ryan, I for one, appreciate your insight and your effort to be non-judgemental.

The problem with this board is that if you post more than a short paragraph then someone is going to parse what you say into something that was clearly not intended.

I hate this B S because it discourages knowledgeable, experienced people like yourself from passing on your opinions.

These people just want to pick apart your words instead of adding anything constructive to the discussion. Small minds, IMO.

 

[Cooter]

Obviously experience helps but yeah, to some extent, you don’t know what you don’t know.

In the Army, I’ve had the controls relinquished to me on two separate occasions. Both were on instrument check rides and both were qualified instrument pilots. Our RA for the night indicated a low risk. There’s no check the box on an RA that says “pilot will become disoriented” with a resulting high risk value. There’s no reason to believe that either one would get spatial D but it happened and continues to happen in all branches and in the civilian community. Not that aviation accidents are just random events, but until the computer takes the human element completely out of the loop, you will always have accidents due to inherent human limitations (vestibular illusions).

I’ve taught ADM (military) and the RA process and there’s very little in the application that prevent accidents. They’re taught in a cookie cutter format that just doesn’t work well in the fluid dynamic of flight. Personally, I think the RA process is an absolute joke. You can never mitigate the unknown and you can never predict how a pilot will react during an unexpected event. I’ve seen pilots kill themselves and their passengers simply because they couldn’t adapt to deteriorating weather. The piece of paper they filled out prior to flight states low risk so how could this happen? That’s because a piece of paper won’t keep you from making a stupid decision due to overconfidence (invulnerability), and it sure won’t keep you from getting spatial D no matter what your experience is.

You could look at it this way, we have air show pilots that have thousands of hours and because of that, have mitagated their risks down to an acceptable level. They don’t go into the performance thinking they are doing something dangerous and they sure don’t go into it thinking it would be their last flight. They crash every year because of an error in judgment while doing a maneuver they’ve done a thousand times. A maneuver that they truly believe is safe. I don’t look at them as making a stupid decision, I just see it as an unexpected event that can’t be predicted. Only way to completely eliminate risk is to never leave the ground.

I see what your saying but I think it’s important to not take the “oh well” approach. I get tired of cookie cutter methods, and I’ve more than once grumbled about having to fill out an ORM worksheet before launching. But I think the FAA is on the right track with ADM. The older I get the more I am starting to “get” some of the very things I grumbled about. Working through the ORM to see that the flight is a 6 vs a 4 may seem insignificant, and most of the time it may be. But it may also push me into briefing a little more thoroughly or considering an option that I wouldn’t have otherwise. That might make a big difference.

The other tendency I see here is to imply that all risk can’t be eliminated and we always take risk, therefore highlighting the increased risk isn’t helpful. I’ve just tried to point out that low vis is an increased risk, and a significant one based on my experience. That shouldn’t be controversial. I’m also not defending personally insulting a guy who just died and spitting on his grave. But there is a difference in criticizing a pilot for his actions and insulting him personally. That line may have been crossed here, but there is a difference. I’m ok with one, and not the other. I haven’t read carefully through all the comments to see who said what, but I think it is ok to question this guy’s decision to launch and discuss it.

I appreciate the reply.

 

[Lance F]

I too saw the posted picture which seems to show the trim tab in the full pitch down position. (I know my plane has the elevator trim tab hardware covered in the AD installed.) There is still plenty of investigation to be done in this crash. However, (since this whole thread has been based on speculation) if this loss is ultimately determined to be caused by an incorrectly positioned trim tab for whatever reason then the pilot's decision to depart in LIFR conditions will at most be a "contributing factor." In my opinion a runaway or extremely misadjusted elevator trim tab is more dangerous than a LIRF departure in a capable twin with an experienced and current pilot.

 

[ChrisK]

Since the conversation is back on generic ADM (and this post has been stewing in draft for a day or so):

I don't consider myself weak in ADM although I'm sure I have some blindspots like everyone else.

I always start out my conversation with fellow pilots and instructors with a small statement that I do not consider myself a great pilot. I do not consider myself a wise pilot, a skilled pilot, or in any way talented. I struggle to assemble information and make decisions based on what is certainly incomplete data. When an emergency develops, it takes me agonizing seconds to even being to ponder reacting to something that may be wrong.

Recently, one instructor commented "aren't all pilots like that?"

You'd think so, but to hear some pilots talk about it, no, they aren't, at least in their own opinions. I think consistency is the hallmark of a great pilot, but invulnerability is the hobgoblin of pilots who lack humility. I can see myself taking off in low visibility after weighing the risk factors and understanding what mitigation I have put in place against those risk factors. It is important to see accidents like this and think "wow, this could have been me, and might be me someday". That bit is healthy, and hopefully keeps things like risk management and mitigation in the forefront of our minds for every operation.

 

[GRG55]

Just an aside here: I’ve noticed for whatever reason that a lot of retract guys are pulling up the gear the second the mains leave the pavement all of the sudden. I always thought you were supposed to wait until you could no longer land back on the remaining portion of the runway. If the 402 guy had done that he might still have a functioning aircraft...

That's what I was taught. But I don't do that very often any more. Once I have positive climb I will only delay raising the gear if it's good VMC and I happen to be on a very long runway. The reasoning is identical to @Radar Contact post #156.

Ending up with a functioning aircraft or "saving the props & engines" just does not (should not!) factor into any of my decision making. My attitude is the moment there's a problem that puts the aircraft at risk, the insurance company has made a binding offer to buy it. Saving the human contents is the only thing that counts. If the best choices to do that in a specific circumstance leave the airplane unscathed, so be it. I go through an audible exercise of talking myself through what I am going to do in the event of a, b or c just before taking the runway on every take-off; even when I am solo (yes, I talk to myself ) to reinforce that.

There are no end of examples of airplanes in difficulty, low to the ground that ended badly after stalling or similar. I've always suspected "trying to save the airplane" instead of putting it down wings level, under control, factored into some of those.

We had a double fatal at our airport in October. Not yet known exactly what happened but appears they had difficulty climbing out and instead of putting it down in the harvested field they were over, they appear to have stalled it at very low altitude and went nose down into it right in line with the departure runway instead.

 

[hindsight2020]

Is runaway trim a common design problem for Cessna twins?

 

[Cooter]

And you’re willing to play word games with five dead people and an accident on Christmas with zero information actually known about the incident.

I think I’m cool with my response.

Weak is an accurate assessment of the whole “Spatial D” argument so far.

If you’re “insulted” by it, not my problem. Has nothing to do with the accuracy of my statement.

The pilot took some risks I wouldn’t take. That said, lots of pilots have including the Wrights and Lindbergh so who cares? Their flights are their flights to command.

I take other risks daily that they probably wouldn’t take. Many pilots wouldn’t let a student take the controls of their airplane or fly a light twin on an 85F day in Denver. Or drive in snow. Whatever.

But saying “Spacial D” is a reason not to fly an instrument flight is, exactly what I said. Weak. It’s exactly what we train people to do.

If you want to interact you’ll have to do more than accuse and insult. I’m reminded of a quote, “ Rudeness is a weak man’s attempt at strength”. Elisabeth Eliot

1.Please take some time to understand what you are criticizing.
2.Show me where I’ve played word games with five dead people.
3.We have more than “zero” information about the accident.
4. Taking off into very low vis has an increased probability of “Spatial D”. That shouldn’t be ignored. Hopefully your instruction doesn’t ignore that. But that also isn’t the same as saying that this pilot died because of Spatial D. I haven’t suggested a reason for the accident yet and I don’t pretend to know. That doesn’t mean I should ignore the risks we do know, or that people shouldn’t be able to discuss them. Knowing the risks is not the same as knowing what measures may have addressed those risks.
5. I didn’t say that Spatial D is a reason not to fly IMC. That’s a straw man you’ve created, and absurd. I’m quite sure I have more instrument time than you will ever log. You seem eager to criticize but reluctant to understand. The statement you are referring to was directed at the idea that experience doesn’t matter, and in response to a specific post.

 

[455 Bravo Uniform]

Speaking for myself alone, if I was confronted with an airport socked in with fog with that lack of visibility, I don't care if I'm an IFR god, I'm not flying in that weather. That's a risk I am not willing to take. Period. Certainly not for a pleasure flight to get lunch. And I don't care if the FAA manual says it's ok for me to do so.. Just because I legally can do a thing, doesn't mean it's advisable or wise for me to do that thing.

I would only suggest that we don't know what we don't know...I am not an IFR pilot. I don't know how my risk management may change given education and experience. I do expect my own personal minimums to grow as I gain more flight hours. At some point I would expect my minimums to plateau. I just have no Idea what my minimum plateau will be 10 years and 1000 hrs from now. But for now given my experience, if I were an IFR pilot, I can only guess (with some certainty) that I too would not takeoff at 0/0.

 

[CJ Rader]

I would only suggest that we don't know what we don't know...I am not an IFR pilot. I don't know how my risk management may change given education and experience. I do expect my own personal minimums to grow as I gain more flight hours. At some point I would expect my minimums to plateau. I just have no Idea what my minimum plateau will be 10 years and 1000 hrs from now. But for now given my experience, if I were an IFR pilot, I can only guess (with some certainty) that I too would not takeoff at 0/0.

That's reasonable.

 

[James331]

I think I had the same guy! . It was on my checkride and I successfully aborted.

Was it Richard?

I don't think it was what he was trying to do, I got a "oops, that wasn't what I was trying to do, let me try to set that up again" or something along those lines.

I like to get weight off the nose wheel early on and I ride the mains a little more than some other guys, so with a little more back pressure than he was thinking he failed it, but I think he failed it a little later than he wanted lol

Got to admit, some of the situations that can out you in the sim are very rewarding and just things you wouldn't want to try to replicate in the actual plane.

 

[Cooter]

I think consistency is the hallmark of a great pilot, but invulnerability is the hobgoblin of pilots who lack humility. I can see myself taking off in low visibility after weighing the risk factors and understanding what mitigation I have put in place against those risk factors. It is important to see accidents like this and think "wow, this could have been me, and might be me someday". That bit is healthy, and hopefully keeps things like risk management and mitigation in the forefront of our minds for every operation.

I’m reminded of this quote, one of my favorites.

It isn't hard to be good from time to time. What's tough is being good every day.
- Willie Mays

I agree with the rest of your post.

 

[Lance F]

Is runaway trim a common design problem for Cessna twins?

No, but there is an AD to replace the hardware that connects the trim tab to the actuating rod. Cessna sells a little kit with the parts to do this. Compliance would be checked on every annual, so it would really surprise me if this plane had not had this done, but the investigators will have have to let us know. Runaway trim is a different matter and is something that a pilot flying a plane with electric trim needs to be on the alert for. Anyone who has done sim training has practiced what to do in the event of runaway trim because it can be a killer. Theoretically is could happen in any plane with electric trim.

 

[CJ Rader]

So much of this discussion is purely speculative. However, if it generates positive discussion of the inherent risks and our responses or proposed responses to said-risk, then some good can come of it. In any event, it has been interesting reading on a slow work day. Remarks have been made about the fog. Remarks have been made about the trim tab in the picture. The thought that occurs to me is that, generally speaking, we are trained to respond to specific incidents with specific actions. If your engine conks out on the takeoff roll, do this. If your engine conks out after takeoff, do that. If there's an electrical fire, do this or that.. There are rules/regs/checklists for IFR and takeoffs in fog. There are checklists for dealing with some sort of control surfaces failure as well, I'm sure. It's when these disparate potential incidents combine that, I think, things might get more dicey. An individual may feel reasonably comfortable launching into a fog bank and may be able to successfully execute that operation without a problem. That same individual may be able to sort out a trim tab problem if it occurs. But what if those incidents occur jointly? Suddenly there's a lot more information flying at a pilot's face that he has to decipher. Things just became more complicated. Will he separate the issues correctly, dealing with the zero visibility AND the malfunctioning control surface? How would the average, trained pilot react/respond? As Mr. Spock said: "Each according to his own gifts."

 

[denverpilot]

If you want to interact you’ll have to do more than accuse and insult. I’m reminded of a quote, “ Rudeness is a weak man’s attempt at strength”. Elisabeth Eliot

Who said I wanted to “interact”? I stated that your argument was weak without any malice. You’ve made a nice fictional story of “rudeness” as an emotional response.

We could start with describing the likely training someone would have had to have had to insure an aircraft of this type as a starting point for “interaction” if you’d like to start listing off those things. I’m not going to spoon feed you. Once you have that list built as homework, we’ll see how likely “Spacial D” was as the number one cause of the accident.

Weak. It’s an accurate assessment.

Probably have to wait until the details of the pilot’s logbook are revealed by actual investigators about a year from now to continue the conversation, you know, if you’re all about “interaction”. I won’t speculate on what’s in the dead guy’s logbook while the bodies are still warm and haven’t been buried yet.

 

[olasek]

But what if those incidents occur jointly?

Possible but highly unlikely, the odds are against any multiple failures like that, specially in a flight that lasts only seconds. A simple distraction so close to the ground - and you can be doomed. But like someone said above - there are overwhelming odds it was a case of somatogravic illusion, it can even get a professional pilot (Gulf Air 72). This illusion afflicted many GA pilots and caused many similar accidents.

 

[Cooter]

Who said I wanted to “interact”? I stated that your argument was weak without any malice.

So you don't want to interact, you just want to criticize from the gallery. When put on the spot to clarify what it is you are criticizing, you only insult. But somehow, I'm supposed to assume your calling my not-yet-defined argument weak, is not done in malice. (Constructive criticism was it?) But you can assume my response to your rudeness is emotional. Hypocrite much?

Why can't you point out the argument that you took issue with? Maybe because you misunderstood what was actually being discussed, and decided to attack a straw man instead. Either way, it is foolish to take a position of disagreement with a point you can't define. It would be even more foolish to continue the discussion without defining the point of argument.

Once you have that list built as homework, we’ll see how likely “Spacial D” was as the number one cause of the accident.

Can you show where I said that it was? No, you can't. I've said repeatedly that I have no idea what the cause is. Why are you ignoring that?

I won’t speculate on what’s in the dead guy’s logbook while the bodies are still warm and haven’t been buried yet.

Are you insinuating that I have? That is absolutely unwarranted. You certainly won't find evidence of it in any of my posts.

You have failed to back up your claims. You have no substance for your pathetic jabs.

 

[GLMS_NC]

Look beyond weather.

Useful load is 2,000 pounds if I recall. Holds 200 gallons. If plane was full, about 1,200 pounds of fuel. Six people and "stuff"? Wonder if we had an over-gross or CG issue?

Be curious what fuel records show and where pax were seated.

What a tragedy for three families, where Xmas is forever changed. One pax was a Mom with an 18-month old and a three year old? Neither will ever know their Mom. I can't imagine the suffering for all involved.

We all need to remember nothing more important than ADM.

 

[MauleSkinner]

Was it Richard?

I don't think it was what he was trying to do, I got a "oops, that wasn't what I was trying to do, let me try to set that up again" or something along those lines.

I like to get weight off the nose wheel early on and I ride the mains a little more than some other guys, so with a little more back pressure than he was thinking he failed it, but I think he failed it a little later than he wanted lol

Got to admit, some of the situations that can out you in the sim are very rewarding and just things you wouldn't want to try to replicate in the actual plane.

He didn't teach you how to fly out of it?

 

[James331]

He didn't teach you how to fly out of it?

In the position and altitude it got failed at there was no flying out of it. It was a damage reduction situation.

 

[MauleSkinner]

In the position and altitude it got failed at there was no flying out of it. It was a damage reduction situation.

If it could have been flown at a higher altitude, it can be flown on takeoff.

 

[James331]

If it could have been flown at a higher altitude, it can be flown on takeoff.

Not sure you're talking the same configuration my elevator was in, not sure we're talking the same thing, but what did FSI say to do?

 

[MauleSkinner]

Not sure you're talking the same configuration my elevator was in, not sure we're talking the same thing, but what did FSI say to do?

If I'm understanding correctly, you got a jammed elevator at a relatively high travel point on rotation...if it'll trim to level flight, possibly to include extending more flaps, you just need to buy time to get that done. You can buy the time with bank angle. I've seen 60 degrees of bank required to keep the nose down initially, with trim to spare once the flaps were extended.

The emphasis being that it's not a new technique you have to learn, just application of things you already know. In my airplanes, banking is part of the standard nose-high unusual attitude recovery. It's amazing how many people have to hear the words "close your eyes and put your head down" in order to identify something as an unusual attitude.

 

[James331]

Ahh, gotcha, yeah he hit the button or whatever right when I was lifting the nose up, it failed at to much deflection and even with trim running like a raped ape, with the altitude and jammed position it was no bueno, hence the "oops" from him lol

He didn't reset me and we did it again, basically like what you said, nursed it back down, the runway they do that on has plenty of real estate

 

[paflyer]

No

Just have my 4th amendment rights crapped on with those nazi "saftey" and "DUI" checkpoints.

Had a few things stolen and the cops just give me a report that isn't even made of good enough paper to wipe myself with, and they put in ZERO effort at recovering said items.

Another time I just got my house, well my prior house, and the alarm went off (later replaced the thing), I hauled ass over to the house as I was calling the police, told them what happened, gave them a description of me (the home owner) and my car, got home, no cops, cleared the whole house, put my stuff away, sat down, about 5 minutes after THAT there was this little meak girly knock on the front door and there was this cop with his dog, I laughed a little I said I already did your job for you, your services are no longer required.

Point is, as a law abiding guy, 95% of the time cops only serve as an anoyance or being revenue generating meter maid/speeding ticket types, in my experience whenever some real police work comes along they scribble out a report and haul ass away as fast as they can to go write speeding tickets or whatever it is they actually do.


I wish I could say great things about them, I as a tax payer and home owner I pay a decent amount of money for them, nothing I love more than getting a good return on investment, sadly it's all red ink when it comes to that




^^that

I had one of the instructors at flight saftey jam my elevator right as I was lifting my nose up on take off, no matter how hard I pushed as I was rolling trim, at the altitude it occurred, red screen.

Getting stopped for a "technical violation (e.g., headlight) is nothing more than a pretext to check out the car's occupants, and make a few bucks on the side for the municipality (along with state and county "surcharges."

 

[paflyer]

Look beyond weather.

Useful load is 2,000 pounds if I recall. Holds 200 gallons. If plane was full, about 1,200 pounds of fuel. Six people and "stuff"? Wonder if we had an over-gross or CG issue?

Be curious what fuel records show and where pax were seated.

What a tragedy for three families, where Xmas is forever changed. One pax was a Mom with an 18-month old and a three year old? Neither will ever know their Mom. I can't imagine the suffering for all involved.

We all need to remember nothing more important than ADM.

Overweight seems a lot more likely than spatial D. They came right back down, level more or less, from looking the photos. Which still is still poor judgement if that's true. A 340 isn't really a 6 place airplane unless pax are small.

Mechanical needs to be ruled out, but again that will only be a "contributing factor" in the NTSB report. PIC always get at least some blame.

 

[GRG55]

...A 340 isn't really a 6 place airplane unless pax are small...

2000 lb useful load is not a six place airplane? How so?

 

[Clark1961]

How many dead horses must be beaten before the gods of POA are satisfied? Maybe that would be a better question than pointless speculation on an accident with an open investigation.