KSNA C-310 Down

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shawn

Shawn

En-Route
Joined
May 6, 2013
Messages
4,347
Location
Santa Cruz, CA
Display Name
Display name:
Shawn
Last edited:
The news, *if* accurate, said both pilot and pax survived.
 
Kritchlow said:
The news, *if* accurate, said both pilot and pax survived.
Click to expand...

Fire captain confirmed both occupants conscious but critical when transported. No one on ground directly injured but did cause some accidents.
 
N87297 Is the tail number
 
They gave him right traffic. I'm assuming he did. He then says lost right engine. C310 flyers??? Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
 
New registered owner as of two days ago (6/28/17). I could see the smoke from my office in Newport Beach. Yesterday's flight on flightaware departed SNA, headed out east, and then back to SNA - training? Bummer situation.
 
Kritchlow said:
I'm a bit surprised. The 310 flys fairly well on one engine, especially with only two people.
Click to expand...

Exactly right -- it's called proficiency which based on the result just might have been lacking in the cockpit.

(Posted this before learning a new owner was flying.)
 
Wonder if he actually lost the engine or simulated and wrong levers were pulled? New owner - how much time in type? Need more facts.
 
luvflyin said:
Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
Click to expand...
Can't speak specifically for the 310, but generally speaking there is nothing inherently wrong with turning into the dead engine. You do need to be more careful since the airplane will naturally turn quicker that way. In other words, if you were rushing, the airplane could start to overbank and the pilot might be tempted to pull back on the elevator to maintain altitude which would result in getting too slow (not good on a single engine).

That could explain what happened. The video looks like he was slow and starting to lose control and then he drops down as if he pulled the power back and tried to make a forced landing rather than roll it.

But that is pure speculation on my part.
 
old cfi said:
Wonder if he actually lost the engine or simulated and wrong levers were pulled? New owner - how much time in type? Need more facts.
Click to expand...

He had just taken off. He said he "lost" the right engine. Listen to the ATC archive.
 
Fearless Tower said:
The video looks like he was slow and starting to lose control and then he drops down as if he pulled the power back and tried to make a forced landing rather than roll it.
Click to expand...
That's what it looked like to me too... he felt he was losing it then leveled off..
 
Reportedly husband and wife in 50's/60's headed back to Palm Springs...not a training flight.

If you watch the crash video you can see he was too low for his base to final turn, possibly in a stall then levels it off to put down on freeway rather than get into a stall/spin...now why he didn't aim for the giant open field just on the other side of the fence...who knowns.

I have asked this question many times any time there is a crash...even though we are trained to handle a variety of emergency situations...I always wonder how many accidents are a result of the pilot's inability to make a rational and sound decisions as a result of being crippled by fear and panic?...I know people that have driven their car into a wall cuz they hit the gas instead of a brake and froze...I had a friend's girlfriend hit the gas of a jet ski, panic and almost drive herself full throttle into the rocks in a panic.

We all hope we can maintain composure in an emergency and that is hard to quantify as a factor in a crash...but ya gotta wonder.

I have been following this one all AM and while I was not in the cockpit, it is hard to come up with why this one went down like it did based on the facts that are known so far.
 
Last edited:
luvflyin said:
They gave him right traffic. I'm assuming he did. He then says lost right engine. C310 flyers??? Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
Click to expand...

The 310R is fine on one especially with only two aboard. If he had VG's there is a huge delta between red and blue line. If you are in a climb regime you should be above blue line, but if one quits you need to get the nose down pronto.

There are some quirks of the 310 fuel system and with a new owner....?
 
Shawn said:
I have been following this one all AM and while I was not in the cockpit, it is hard to come up with why this one went down like it did based on the facts that are known so far.
Click to expand...
You hit on one big ticket item - first and foremost you have to fly the airplane. I think a lot of folks either don't understand 'aviate, navigate or communicate' or misapply it. To mean survival in a stressful/overwhelming situation is about being able to mentally load shed. You need to be able to mentally cutoff the less critical stuff to focus the brain power on the most critical. Some people do it more naturally than others, but I do believe you can train yourself to function properly.

Sometimes people get so focused on other aspects of dealing with the emergency that they miss the most critical part like maintaining sufficient airspeed.

At least this pilot was able to keep the blue side up which is a whole lot more than many light twin OEI accidents.
 
Fearless Tower said:
Sometimes people get so focused on other aspects of dealing with the emergency that they miss the most critical part like maintaining sufficient airspeed.
Click to expand...

Agree and I can relate. My one and only "panic" moment so far was a partial power loss and sputtering on takeoff in a single. Once I determined I still had enough power to not have to put it down straight ahead, panic was telling me to land on the crosswind runway and get on the ground IMMEDIATELY...but at my position at that time it would have been a dangerous approach...then it hit me...I am still flying...albeit not full power, the fan is still spinning...bring it around for a stable approach on the bigger runway. Had I followed my gut instinct and not taken a breath to assess the situation to allow the panic to subside I very well may have wound up in the same situation as this guy.
 
3 in the green said:
He had just taken off. He said he "lost" the right engine. Listen to the ATC archive.
Click to expand...

As a MEI instructor I would kill an engine on takeoff and my student would tell ATC he/she had lost an engine. Different strokes for different folks!
 
Nose down.

Maintain flying speed.

Accelerate to climb speed.

Troubleshoot the problem. If you have time.

put in the damn bay if you have to - losing a motor on a 310R is not [should not] 'that' big a deal, Even the critical one.
 
Last edited:
comanchepilot said:
Nose down.

Maintain flying speed.

Accelerate to climb speed.

Troubleshoot the problem. If you have time.

put in the damn bay if you have to - losing a motor on a 310R is not [should not] 'that' big a deal, Even the critical one.
Click to expand...
Don't forget identify, feather, secure....
 
luvflyin said:
They gave him right traffic. I'm assuming he did. He then says lost right engine. C310 flyers??? Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
Click to expand...
I wouldn't make it a habit but if he was already on right crosswind or something it may have made sense to maintain right traffic. Hard to know, really. But 310's do fine on one engine, especially with only two on board.
James_Dean said:
The 310R is fine on one especially with only two aboard. If he had VG's there is a huge delta between red and blue line. If you are in a climb regime you should be above blue line, but if one quits you need to get the nose down pronto.

There are some quirks of the 310 fuel system and with a new owner....?
Click to expand...
The fuel system is more complicated than some but not overly so, IMO. Take off on the mains so that you don't have fuel spewing out of them when you switch to the aux's. Judging by the amount of fire, he had fuel. And you're right on the VGs... I wonder if maybe he didn't have them. I'm sooooo glad my 310R has them.


It just makes you wonder why a high performance twin engine airplane ended up on a highway instead of the airport. Kudos to the guy for not stall/spinning or VMCing it in, but it's just... odd. I hope that they make a good accident report out of this so we can learn something from it.
 
Z06_Mir said:
Kudos to the guy for not stall/spinning or VMCing it in.
Click to expand...

Did not spin it but am not so sure that he was not in a stall...if you watch the impact video there is a lot more falling than flying of the aircraft happening in that short clip.
 
Did he just get so far behind the Vmc 8-ball that his only remaining choices were (a) ride it down -- right-side-up -- with the good engine at idle; or (b) apply power to the good engine and whip it over? If so, he picked the better of the two.
 
old cfi said:
As a MEI instructor I would kill an engine on takeoff and my student would tell ATC he/she had lost an engine. Different strokes for different folks!
Click to expand...

Did your students also make panicked mayday calls while doing so?
 
Shawn said:
Did not spin it but am not so sure that he was not in a stall...if you watch the impact video there is a lot more falling than flying of the aircraft happening in that short clip.
Click to expand...

I haven't watched the video yet but still.. at least he didn't spin it!
 
Z06_Mir said:
I wouldn't make it a habit but if he was already on right crosswind or something it may have made sense to maintain right traffic. Hard to know, really. But 310's do fine on one engine, especially with only two on board.

The fuel system is more complicated than some but not overly so, IMO. Take off on the mains so that you don't have fuel spewing out of them when you switch to the aux's. Judging by the amount of fire, he had fuel. And you're right on the VGs... I wonder if maybe he didn't have them. I'm sooooo glad my 310R has them.


It just makes you wonder why a high performance twin engine airplane ended up on a highway instead of the airport. Kudos to the guy for not stall/spinning or VMCing it in, but it's just... odd. I hope that they make a good accident report out of this so we can learn something from it.
Click to expand...

Partial fuel in the mains and no boost pumps can be an issue as can taking off on the aux.
 
3 in the green said:
Did your students also make panicked mayday calls while doing so?
Click to expand...

Aviate first. Had he flown the plane, maybe he would have made the airport on one engine. As others have said, the 310 will fly on one engine in this instance (2 people) just fine. But the pilot has to do his job, too. Think he was distracted with the lost engine and engine-out procedures were not his first priority.

Not trying to run this guy down. He had a bad enough day. But have to wonder how proficient he is on emergency procedures. Another accident where the best we can do is learn from it, put ourselves in his position and chair fly a bit.

Hope they recover quickly and fully.
 
old cfi said:
Aviate first. Had he flown the plane, maybe he would have made the airport on one engine. As others have said, the 310 will fly on one engine in this instance (2 people) just fine. But the pilot has to do his job, too. Think he was distracted with the lost engine and engine-out procedures were not his first priority.

Not trying to run this guy down. He had a bad enough day. But have to wonder how proficient he is on emergency procedures. Another accident where the best we can do is learn from it, put ourselves in his position and chair fly a bit.

Hope they recover quickly and fully.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. I was only asking that question because you were initially also wondering if it was a training flight gone bad, and that you had your students also tell ATC they lost an engine. But by listening to the ATC audio in this case, it doesn't seem to support that this was an intentional training exercise gone bad.
 
luvflyin said:
They gave him right traffic. I'm assuming he did. He then says lost right engine. C310 flyers??? Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
Click to expand...
It'll bank quicker and you have to watch the over-bank. Shouldn't be a problem properly executed. That said, I wouldn't have turned into the dead engine just because a controller said to. Terrain or severe wx sure. I'd have said, or not said and just done a nice controlled left turn. During this, providing they aren't overloaded with heavy cargo, they have the gear and flaps up, they feathered the dead engine, the remaining engine is healthy and providing rated power, they have obtained a zero side-slip, and have 100LL in the tanks, I would think they would be climbing around 400 FPM to a safer altitude.

Hopefully we can eventually find out exactly what happened but that doesn't always happen in these cases.
 
James_Dean said:
Partial fuel in the mains and no boost pumps can be an issue as can taking off on the aux.
Click to expand...

I'm not sitting in the airplane at the moment obviously but don't you need the boost pumps to start it? I am a fairly new 310 owner so I don't have the start checklist committed to memory so I could be wrong.

That being said, even though we are getting training in the aircraft (I need 15 hours for insurance), both my husband and I are signing up for Simcom's Twin Cessna course.

We have been going back and forth on it since it isn't cheap (and buying, fueling, maintaining, insuring the 310 isn't either) but this solidified it for us needing more practice with true emergencies that you can't practice for close to the ground.
 
Z06_Mir said:
I'm not sitting in the airplane at the moment obviously but don't you need the boost pumps to start it? I am a fairly new 310 owner so I don't have the start checklist committed to memory so I could be wrong.

That being said, even though we are getting training in the aircraft (I need 15 hours for insurance), both my husband and I are signing up for Simcom's Twin Cessna course.

We have been going back and forth on it since it isn't cheap (and buying, fueling, maintaining, insuring the 310 isn't either) but this solidified it for us needing more practice with true emergencies that you can't practice for close to the ground.
Click to expand...

Nope. It will start just fine without the boost pump. They were part of my "lights, camera, action" sequence before taking the active as they upped the fuel flow considerably during taxi and you didn't want that. In fact, I usually turned them off immediately post landing as they would cause tend to cause the engines to quit while taxiing in. I did have the flows turned up to the max allowed by conti to help cooling though.

Both electric fuel pumps are in the mains. When you turn on your master you should hear both main transfer pumps come on. The aux pump is separate and controlled by the rocker switch. The control of which depends upon if your bird has had MEB88-3 done or not. You will want to know this.


IMG_0401.JPG
 
Last edited:
Z06_Mir said:
I'm not sitting in the airplane at the moment obviously but don't you need the boost pumps to start it?
Click to expand...
No. The boost pumps should be off to start toggling the primer after the starter is engaged. Then pumps to low for takeoff/landing/high altitude. High should only be used for a mechanical pump failure.

Disclaimer: May not be true for all 310 models.
 
old cfi said:
As a MEI instructor I would kill an engine on takeoff and my student would tell ATC he/she had lost an engine. Different strokes for different folks!
Click to expand...
I must say that's an odd practice if they didn't bother to say it was simulated..
 
luvflyin said:
They gave him right traffic. I'm assuming he did. He then says lost right engine. C310 flyers??? Is turns into the bad engine at landing pattern speeds a little on the "iffy" side?
Click to expand...

My C-310R experience is 2400 hours, 25 years ago as a night freight dog, but I still remember...

I once lost the right engine on takeoff, airborne with the gear coming up (was actually prop failure but took the engine with it); it was just me onboard, full tip tanks, 100 lbs freight in the back. It climbed out fine at maybe 500 fpm. I couldn't make a left pattern (buildings in the way), so flew a right hand pattern into the dead engine. Was a non-event really, just gotta stay cool and fly the plane... once I was back at the hangar in once piece and able to survey the damage, then the adrenaline rush kicked in.

It's funny how people claim that the 310 has a complicated fuel system, but it's really not if you study and understand it; two main tips tanks, 50 gal each. Two aux wing tanks, 30 each. All you gotta do is burn the mains down a bit to make room for vapor return. Switch to auxes, run them down, then back to main tanks. Always takeoff/land on the mains. Easy.
 
James_Dean said:
Nope. It will start just fine without the boost pump. They were part of my "lights, camera, action" sequence before taking the active as they upped the fuel flow considerably during taxi and you didn't want that. In fact, I usually turned them off immediately post landing as they would cause tend to cause the engines to quit while taxiing in. I did have the flows turned up to the max allowed by conti to help cooling though.

Both electric fuel pumps are in the mains. When you turn on your master you should hear both main transfer pumps come on. The aux pump is separate and controlled by the rocker switch. The control of which depends upon if your bird has had MEB88-3 done or not. You will want to know this.


View attachment 54542
Click to expand...

Thanks! Like I said, I am a new owner/flyer and don't have it committed to memory. I always enjoy new info and refresher info :) - Another valuable reason to use a checklist though :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top