Sonic Blue report out.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Just heard a news report about some recommendations coming out of the Sonic Blue report, anyone read the newspaper story on this yet and know what the recommendations were?

[Widow]

Coroner's report on fatal plane crash calls for tougher safety standards
Tim Lai, Vancouver Sun
Published: Thursday, November 06, 2008

Single-engine planes flying under instrument flight rules should be required to have terrain awareness and warning systems aboard, says a coroner's report into a three-fatality crash near Port Alberni in January 2006.

The report mirrors many recommendations made by the Transportation and Safety Board earlier this year into the crash.

White Rock pilot Ed Huggett died when his plane carrying seven passengers crashed. An Alberta man and a three-year-old boy from Tofino also died.

The report concluded that Huggett, who was 25 at the time, died of multiple blunt force trauma when the Sonicblue Airways single-engine Cessna 208B Caravan crashed into trees, short of a logging road, near Port Alberni on a flight between Tofino and Vancouver. Toxicology tests on Huggett were negative.

Coroner Willem Van Herk's report echoed earlier transportation safety board recommendations that urged Transport Canada to adopt tougher safety standards for single-engine aircraft flying on instrument flight rules over mountainous terrain.

Instrument flight rules mean pilots rely on instruments to fly in clouds, whereas visual flight rules require pilots to see where they are going. Single-engine aircraft are at extra risk on instrument flight rules over mountains because they cannot rely on a second engine to stay airborne.

Van Herk wrote that in Transport Canada's current review of single-engine instrument flight rules, it consider "an engine reliability measure that takes into account basic and non-basic in-flight shut down incidents."

The TSB report determined that a "fatigue-generated crack" in the compressor turbine blade led to the destruction of all 58 blades and the plane's loss of power.

The coroner recommended the most current databases for global-positioning systems should be installed. Van Herk suggested that regulations be changed so that such flights are required to develop contingency plans for their routes to minimize the risks if emergency landings are necessary, especially in mountainous regions.

For pilots training under instrument flight rules, Van Herk wrote that it must be ensured that there is adequate and practical training on engine-failure procedures. This training should emphasize pilot decision making during emergency procedures.

Van Herk recommended that when certifying the Cessna Caravan 208B, Transport Canada require that the fuel shut-off valves remain closed following impact.

He also recommended that regulations for child-restraints in vehicles be applied to children who fly on aircraft. In a similar crash in 2007, a three-year-old who was restrained in a approved car seat survived the the crash when the two adults on board died.

Jonathan Huggett, the dead pilot's father, said lawsuits in the matter have recently been settled out of court by all parties.

Vancouver Sun

[Doc]

Widow! Where ya been?

[Hedley]

So during the three years of investigation since the crash,
it never occurred to anyone that flying single-engine IFR
over the rocks for hire might not a good idea after all?

[Widow]

Widow! Where ya been?

Hehe. Waiting for eggs to hatch, collecting fuel for the fire ...

[iflyforpie]

So during the three years of investigation since the crash,
it never occurred to anyone that flying single-engine IFR
over the rocks for hire might not a good idea after all?

Single engine turbine IFR is waaaay more reliable IMHO than multi-piston IFR (piston engine reliability is less than half the MTBF of a turbine and you have two that can fail). I still can't believe it wasn't Sonic Blue's shoddy maintenance that brought it down.

[Axial Flow]

With all the technology available and for the small cost for moving maps, EGPWS...etc (compared to the total cost of doing business) the least Transport should do is make the rule in the CARS stating a GPS is needed for single engine IFR; to make it a moving map display with topography and terrain mapping as suggested by the TSB.

If you aren't going to ban it all together then at least make it as safe as you possibly can and make the operators not cheap out with a KLN 89B and the pilot having to get bearing and distance info to find out where the hell he is in an emergency if not on an airway.

Knowing that I can descend out over a lake in IMC conditions and aim for the shore line at least assures me I am not going to be suddenly stopped by a big piece of Canada with no chance of survival.

It's like sex, if you aren't going to abstain at least use protection !

[Fatass]

Here is a question. In a C208 with TAWS installed, is the TAWS system wired to the battery bus or a generator or main bus? Forgive my lack of 208 electrical knowledge, but I want to know if the TAWS would still operate when you lose generator power (as you would when the engine fails). Talking to one 208 pilot, he says the TAWS would lose power with an engine failure. Any thoughts?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Single engine turbine IFR is waaaay more reliable IMHO than multi-piston IFR

This forum is just fu.kin great for getting knowledgeable information.

Now let me get this right here so I can better understand this subject.

I have had engines fail far, far from an airport flying piston engine airplanes on several memorable occasions, for example once 275 KM north west of Resolute bay in a DC3, the other was over Lake Superior in a PBY and the closest airport that I could find with weather that allowed me to land was Winnipeg.

So help me out here, if I had been flying a single engine airplane and the engine failed would I be here now?

Oh by the way I have had " TWO" PT6's fail in Twin Otters and made to a safe landing area.

[Widow]

the least Transport should do is make the rule in the CARS stating a GPS is needed for single engine IFR

Why limit this to IFR? Shouldn't VFR pilots have the same protection???

[iflyforpie]

This forum is just fu.kin great for getting knowledgeable information.

Glad I could help.

Now let me get this right here so I can better understand this subject.

I have had engines fail far, far from an airport flying piston engine airplanes on several memorable occasions, for example once 275 KM north west of Resolute bay in a DC3, the other was over Lake Superior in a PBY and the closest airport that I could find with weather that allowed me to land was Winnipeg.

So help me out here, if I had been flying a single engine airplane and the engine failed would I be here now?

Well I'm sure the PBY would have made it to the surface of Superior and landed fine and bobbed around a bit with no power. I hope you wouldn't have done like my Lake friend did and land on the beach beside a perfectly good ocean.

If you are flying a twin in the rocks and your single engine ceiling is below the MEA in IMC and icing, you are just as likely to die.

Oh by the way I have had " TWO" PT6's fail in Twin Otters and made to a safe landing area.

Did they fail because they were PT6s or because of something that would have easily brought down a piston plane too (bad maintenance, contaminated fuel, etc)?

So if you disagree with what I say why are all these operators switching to single turbine then? Why are PT6's TBOs and hot sections scheduled for larger intervals than any piston engine? Are not two engines twice as likely to fail than one? Enlighten me.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Enlighten me.

The task would not be worth the time it would take because you already know everything.....by the way here is an example of your lack of understanding of the subjects you have all the answers for......

Well I'm sure the PBY would have made it to the surface of Superior and landed fine and bobbed around a bit with no power.

How much experience do you have flying sea planes to come up with that amazing statement? none?

[iflyforpie]

You amaze me .. I make a simple statement,

In My Humble Opinion

that is supported by industry and statistics and you get all in a huff because someone who less knowledge and experience actually said something constructive.

Then you dodge my question saying that I claim to know it all?

How much experience do you have flying sea planes to come up with that amazing statement? none?

It's a fucking flying boat .. There's probably all kinds of veterans that owe their lives to the seaworthiness of that aircraft and the fact that I've never even seen a PBY doesn't change that. And don't give me some BS that you have to have power to land because any plane from a J3 to an A330 can land without power and produce a survivable result.

[Ralliart]

Fatass,

The C208B that I fly is equipped with a standby power system, using an alternator, set to automatically come on in the event of a voltage drop if the generator fails for whatever reason.

[Fatass]

Ralliart,

Thanks for the response. I assume the alternator is engine driven. I guess the question would be better phrased, would the TAWS still be powered after an engine failure? TAWS seems to be the recommended solution to S/E IFR engine failures. I just trying to figure out if it would still be available in its time of need.

Cheers

[Doc]

Wow, single engine vs. twin engine.



I've had one or two quit on me as well. Believe me when I say, there is nothing quite like having a second engine to continue the journey with.

The moving map display on the GPS will do nothing to prevent a fatigue crack in a turbine blade. It will add necessary expense to some operators who can not afford such an item. And (pay attention here) WILL put some pilots in the position of being "pushed" into weather they should not be flying in. Yes, it will. "You've got all these fancy instruments that tell you where all the mountains is at...now go fly!"

Having all the "bells and whistles" can kill you just a surly as not having them. Unless you KNOW how to use all the fancy shit...it can jump up and bite your ass.

[Doc]

[quote="iflyforpie"]
Single engine turbine IFR is waaaay more reliable IMHO than multi-piston IFR (piston engine reliability is less than half the MTBF of a turbine and you have two that can fail).

You're frikken RETARDED!!

[iflyforpie]

You're frikken RETARDED!!

Doc I'm not talking single turbine vs multi turbine, I'm talking single turbine vs multi piston.

Why are the Caravan, PC12, Meridian, and TBM Socata so popular then? Companies like Air Sprint are basing a good deal of their IFR ops on the PC12. The RCMP has switched to the PC12.

Less engines means less to go wrong. Look at ETOPS. Where are all the new four engine planes? The A340 is still twitching but everything else is twin.

[Doc]

I've had piston engines go "south" on me. Theo other one has always taken me home.
I've had turbine engines go "south" as well. It CAN and does happen. Thankfully, I've always had a second engine along for the ride.

I'm pretty sure ETOPS involves a second engine. It only exists because of the astronomically high odds against two jet engines calling it a day on the same flight. That's jet engines son. You don't see any turbo props with an ETOPS certification, now do you? And, guess what? It just adds more credence to the "two engines are better than one" argument. You don't see many airliners out there running around on ONE engine, now do you?

If you fly long enough, the chances of having an engine fail are pretty good. I've had a PT6, a DART and a Garrett let me down. Correct me if I'm wrong here....they are turbines, no?

I still think you're frikken retarded!

[Carrier]

Quote: "The RCMP has switched to the PC12"

Interesting example! What did the RCMP switch from? I seem to recall that they used to operate Twin Otters. The answer is that they have switched from a twin to a single TO SAVE MONEY and damn the increased risks to the occupants! Others have switched to single turbines from twin turbines such as the DHC6, BE10, BE20 BE99, etc, all for the same reason - to save money.

There have been several threads on this board and on PPRuNe about the increased risk of flying a single turboprop in IMC, at night or over hostile terrain. Shenzi Rubani did a quick world survey and came up with numerous cases of single turboprops crashing due to engine failure. He was unable to find corresponding figures for twins such as the BE20 (which with two engines should logically suffer twice as many engine failures) because the existence of a second engine enabled the pilot(s) to reach a suitable airfield. Engine failures on the twins thus did not show up in the crash and incident statistics but instead were limited to being just a big expense for their owners.

[tailgunner]

Add me to the list of 'two engines are better than one'.... I've had 2 failures...one piston, and one Garrett. The other engine did just fine, and there was no write-off, off - field landing, or forced approach... 2 are always better than 1.

[Ralliart]

Fatass,

Yes the standby power system is belt-driven as an accesory on the rear of the engine. It's meant for a backup in the event of a generator failure. The standby power system is an optional system and not installed in every Caravan.

In the event of an engine failure, the checklist calls for the standby power switch to be placed in the off position.

The checklist for the 208 equipped with Bendix/King 560 EGPWS (includes TAWS) states in the event of an emergency landing due to engine failure: EGPWS INHIBIT Switch -- CONSIDER pressing.

If the did engine fail, you'd still have the battery for limited electrical power.

For what it's worth, from now onwards until the days start to get longer again, the only scheduled flying I have is all single-pilot IFR at night in the Caravan.

[iflyforpie]

Yes two turbines are better than one turbine. Two pistons are better than one piston.

But are two piston better than one turbine?

If they are, then why have pretty much all the major manufacturers stopped making twin piston aircraft that can carry more than seven people? You don't see any new Navajos, 402s, or AeroCommanders. Yet you see all kinds of single turbines. Caravan, Kodiak, PC12, Meridian, TBM Socata.

Yeah if I was flying I would take a King Air over a PC12, a Twin Otter over a Caravan. But take some greasy old Navajo flying over the rocks in the crud and ice compared to a PC12 flying above it?

Pilot error brings down more planes than engine failures do.

PS: Doc, I usually respect you but name calling is a pretty cheap comeback. As a moderator I would have expected better.

[Hedley]

the only scheduled flying I have is all single-pilot IFR at night in the Caravan

That's ok if you only fly over cornfields. You fly over
rocks or water ....

[Doc]

PS: Doc, I usually respect you but name calling is a pretty cheap comeback. As a moderator I would have expected better.[/quote](iflyforpie)

You have heard the term, "tongue in cheek"? I suspect you're not "really" retarded...but on this subject....sorry, I calls 'em as I sees 'em.

As long as you operated that "greasy old Navajo" within it's envelope of limitations, I can't see your concern...