Fascinating analysis of a Titan T-51 Crash

[Rokke214]

Just watched this video in the course of researching aircraft build options. I thought it was a fascinating look at some of the complexities involved in the care and feeding of an experimental aircraft. It’s almost an hour long, but I think it is time well spent for a variety of reasons, to include learning about basic airmanship.

 

[dtuuri]

...I think it is time well spent for a variety of reasons, to include learning about basic airmanship.

I watched it all. Basic airmanship would be to maneuver into the key position at normal pattern altitude for a touchdown 1/3 the way down the runway. Then you wouldn't wind up like he did—almost not making it back to the airport. Btw, didn't he say he "feathered the prop"? That prop's not feathered. Thanks for posting. Titan Aircraft is not far from my house and I've flown once with John Williams in a Tornado, so I was interested in this.

 

[Rokke214]

I thought that too with the prop. Just as a guess, I wonder if the blades aren’t geared in such a way that when the first blade dug into the runway it “unfeathered” and forced the other three blades to rotate to match.
With regard to the key position, I’ll give him a pass there. In a previous life I flew a single engine aircraft we’d take to a high key position before we started trouble shooting a problem. That would give us 360 degrees of turn during the descent in the event we lost our engine. That gives you a little more wiggle room to work a problem and not have to focus on maintaining the perfect position for an engine out approach. I think in this case he didn’t necessarily trust his engine, but it was still given him power and so his first priority was working the gear problem. Climb up high over the runway and try to fix the gear. If the engine quits, higher is better. He bled off the extra energy with some S turns, but as often happens, that last effort to sweeten your position can turn it sour if you’re a little too aggressive. I used to tell my students I’d rather slide off the far end of the runway at 15 knots than land short at 140 knots (it was a really fast single engine airplane).
My current single engine airplane has a parachute, and I notice people who fly them get very lazy about practicing losing an engine in the traffic pattern. “I’ll just pull the chute” is a bad option if downwind and base is over Compton CA.

 

[TonyG]

I watched it all. Basic airmanship would be to maneuver into the key position at normal pattern altitude for a touchdown 1/3 the way down the runway. Then you wouldn't wind up like he did—almost not making it back to the airport. Btw, didn't he say he "feathered the prop"? That prop's not feathered. Thanks for posting. Titan Aircraft is not far from my house and I've flown once with John Williams in a Tornado, so I was interested in this.

An excellent video, and the guy's pretty honest about his mistakes.

Even so, there's LOTS of engineering and "customer service" going on while airborne - which are huge distractions. With all that in-cockpit engineering, looks like he never cycled the master or checked if that breaker had thrown. (maybe I misunderstood that).

 

[Velocity173]

Yeah I watched a few weeks ago. Great analysis on what went wrong. Pretty good ADM on his part. He’s pretty familiar with forced landings though. If you’ve watched his little modified jet Quickie vid at Mojave, you’d see the guy’s lucky to be alive.

 

[Rokke214]

Even so, there's LOTS of engineering and "customer service" going on while airborne - which are huge distractions.

I thought that too. The airplane owner didn’t even stick around the airport to watch the test flights. Yeah. I get it was his airplane, but if it’s my butt strapped in it, I’m the boss until I’m on the ground and hand him the keys. And I think the plan was for the owner to learn how to fly in that T-51. That seems like a bad idea no matter how you look at it. I didn’t teach my kids how to drive in an Indy car.
Having said that…the pilot has been around the block a few times for sure. And like you said, he owns his errors. To include agreeing to do test flights in a historically unreliable airplane at an airport that offered no room for error. I don’t like flying in LA airspace on a great day in a perfect airplane. There’s a reason why Edwards is on a dry lake bed.

 

[donjohnston]

There's a lot of good information is the guy's videos. I just can't watch when he's at his desk waving his hands around in front of the camera.

 

[kell490]

Why would they wire the same fuse from the electric hydraulic pump that works the gear, and the engine management system. The pump failed and engine died is that something Titan designed seem like a really dumb idea.

 

[OkieAviator]

Just watched this video in the course of researching aircraft build options. I thought it was a fascinating look at some of the complexities involved in the care and feeding of an experimental aircraft.

Lesson learned is more that decisions you make in your build can have unintended consequences.

 

[FrostyA4M]

Just watched this video in the course of researching aircraft build options. I thought it was a fascinating look at some of the complexities involved in the care and feeding of an experimental aircraft. It’s almost an hour long, but I think it is time well spent for a variety of reasons, to include learning about basic airmanship.

I am a former Marine and Navy pilot. I believe a washer problem has caused the gear to malfunction since the research was done post-crash. I have been interested in the T-51 but have reservations about its history of problems with the PRCU and many others that lack a history (hours before failures) of engineering problems but expose short-term serious problems. It appears there is not enough time, and engineers have not reviewed the systems for reliability. Standardizations are nonexistent in manufacturing, which leaves each aircraft a new unknown in the way experimental ACs are built by amateurs rather than commercial professionals. The shortness of the aircraft in 3/4 configuration with added engine weight is going to change the flight characteristics. What do the Honda folks say about the existing T-51s out there? How are they performing long-term in terms of reliability and safety? The test pilot did fine and was not obligated to contact the owner. I do not believe complicated aircraft or even experimental aircraft are prohibited from learning as a new pilot. I flew the T-28B in training, and my father-in-law quickly went into the Avenger in WWII, but both had been highly researched and engineered. Preflight knowledge and time in AC and flight are the personal safety parameters.

 

[Mikey52]

The B-29 was researched, designed, and built by professionals. As was the Wright 3350. That didn't preclude many crashes and deaths before they entered service for defects.

 

[FrostyA4M]

Any insights to the T 51 Honda 6 engine reliability?

 

[kell490]

Honda not going to say a word about using their engines in an airplane due to the liability. Experimental means you take all the responsibility for the airplane since you are the builder. I have always wondered if the original builder could be held responsible in a civil lawsuit for a fatal accident of a 2nd owner If you really want a T-51 go with the Rotax engine it's a proven aviation engine I have watched several videos of the owner of Titan he says it flies great on the Rotax. If you look at the landing, and stall speeds lot less with the Rotex compared to the Chevy LS engine.

 

[FrostyA4M]

The B-29 was researched, designed, and built by professionals. As was the Wright 3350. That didn't preclude many crashes and deaths before they entered service for defects.

Exactly, they were built by one entity that allowed constant feed back to correct the mistakes. In experimental that entity is on a new learning curve every time for that personally built AC.

 

[pfarber]

Exactly, they were built by one entity that allowed constant feed back to correct the mistakes. In experimental that entity is on a new learning curve every time for that personally built AC.

not really, if a builder joins a type club or even the EAA and actually gets a tech counseling I'm sure many accidents could be avoided.
problem is that the EAA isn't the mythical fountain of builder knowledge it once was and everyone seems to be building an RV lol

 

[wanttaja]

The B-29 was researched, designed, and built by professionals. As was the Wright 3350. That didn't preclude many crashes and deaths before they entered service for defects.

And it was wartime, when safety might be overlooked in favor of getting the planes into combat. No such excuse in the civilian world.

Ron Wanttaja