Curiously intriguing.
We are obliged to accept the ‘tracking’ data as accurate; the yellow line. There are a couple of points of interest – not evidence or even testable, but before the time line starts @ 0858:43 (assumed rotation point) the aircraft appears to be to left of the runway centre line. By 0858:46 past the intersection, track diverges further from the centreline. Note the ‘scalloped’ shape of the tracking; at the next ‘peg’ in the track line, there appears to be a correction to the right, which decays by 0858:47 ; then another apparent ‘correction’ to the right at the ‘peg’ between :47 and :49. It probably ain’t significant and there is no guarantee of ‘precision’ in the tracking depicted, but it raises some interesting possibilities as does the ‘track’. Hypothesis beckons and I am tempted; I shall you tell you a tale instead. Once upon a time, not too many moons ago; I was doing a check ride with a ‘young fellah’, nice day all relaxed as I flew regularly with him; so briefing over breakfast – and off we went. Simulated the engine failure at a sensible height and almost went back to sleep until the aircraft started following an almost identical track to the one depicted today in the ATSB puff piece. Little corrections followed by deviation from heading; a failed check right there, but as we were in no danger whatsoever, I let the young spark run on for while: long story short we described a perfect half a figure of eight to arrive on a right base for the runway we’d departed from – a left circuit to a right base. “Very artistic sunshine; but we need to talk – taking over”.
Remember, we worked together, often as an operational crew which involves a certain amount of socialising etc. But there is a limit; so my very first question was the only one I wanted answered – “why were your feet not on the rudders?” I had to know. His next words said it all for me; “That’s how we do it in the sim”. Enough said. Retraining was swift, ruthless and highly effective. ‘The point’ they shout, ‘get to the bloody point’. Well, for my sins I was forced to endure a session in the same sim; the ‘instructor’ demonstrated an EFATO; it went like this – and I solemnly swear the following is true. “Failure #1” ‘Bang’ - full travel rudder swiftly applied: “whizzz” the trim wheel spins rapidly to full correction. ‘Plonk’ the ‘live’ foot is neatly tucked in behind the ‘dead’ foot, under the seat and there it stayed as with finger tip control the aircraft was brought to an almost stop, almost on the runway. ”Piece of cake” was the declaration as the ‘instructor’ swaggered back to the control panel.
The ‘flight path’ depicted bothers me as does the speed schedule; when I am certain of the Mark and model of both airframe and power units, I will examine the matter closely. There is probably not too much difference between the -41 and -42 ‘critical’ speeds, but I need to be certain. The reason being that after the ‘Mt Hotham’ debacle, there was period of ‘CASA’ inspired ‘checking and training’. I need to know if this was done ‘for real’ or at a simulator facility; if so which one? No doubt I’ll have the answers soon. Then we shall see.
More questions than answers at the moment; like was there a gear box failure? Over speed governor failure? Rudder boost failure? But no matter, we do know the engines were just fine, turning and burning. So WTD happened then? Was one of the props feathered? Was the fuel condition lever at ICO? Where was the gear handle? Where were the power levers? -
“Assisting the ATSB in its investigation are US regulatory bodies the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration, as well as engine manufacturer Pratt and Whitney Canada.”
Why have the ATSB got the bloody brakes on – yet again? It’s bollocks Hoody, get your finger out and get a wriggle on. FDS:
Toot (slightly exasperated) toot.
We are obliged to accept the ‘tracking’ data as accurate; the yellow line. There are a couple of points of interest – not evidence or even testable, but before the time line starts @ 0858:43 (assumed rotation point) the aircraft appears to be to left of the runway centre line. By 0858:46 past the intersection, track diverges further from the centreline. Note the ‘scalloped’ shape of the tracking; at the next ‘peg’ in the track line, there appears to be a correction to the right, which decays by 0858:47 ; then another apparent ‘correction’ to the right at the ‘peg’ between :47 and :49. It probably ain’t significant and there is no guarantee of ‘precision’ in the tracking depicted, but it raises some interesting possibilities as does the ‘track’. Hypothesis beckons and I am tempted; I shall you tell you a tale instead. Once upon a time, not too many moons ago; I was doing a check ride with a ‘young fellah’, nice day all relaxed as I flew regularly with him; so briefing over breakfast – and off we went. Simulated the engine failure at a sensible height and almost went back to sleep until the aircraft started following an almost identical track to the one depicted today in the ATSB puff piece. Little corrections followed by deviation from heading; a failed check right there, but as we were in no danger whatsoever, I let the young spark run on for while: long story short we described a perfect half a figure of eight to arrive on a right base for the runway we’d departed from – a left circuit to a right base. “Very artistic sunshine; but we need to talk – taking over”.
Remember, we worked together, often as an operational crew which involves a certain amount of socialising etc. But there is a limit; so my very first question was the only one I wanted answered – “why were your feet not on the rudders?” I had to know. His next words said it all for me; “That’s how we do it in the sim”. Enough said. Retraining was swift, ruthless and highly effective. ‘The point’ they shout, ‘get to the bloody point’. Well, for my sins I was forced to endure a session in the same sim; the ‘instructor’ demonstrated an EFATO; it went like this – and I solemnly swear the following is true. “Failure #1” ‘Bang’ - full travel rudder swiftly applied: “whizzz” the trim wheel spins rapidly to full correction. ‘Plonk’ the ‘live’ foot is neatly tucked in behind the ‘dead’ foot, under the seat and there it stayed as with finger tip control the aircraft was brought to an almost stop, almost on the runway. ”Piece of cake” was the declaration as the ‘instructor’ swaggered back to the control panel.
The ‘flight path’ depicted bothers me as does the speed schedule; when I am certain of the Mark and model of both airframe and power units, I will examine the matter closely. There is probably not too much difference between the -41 and -42 ‘critical’ speeds, but I need to be certain. The reason being that after the ‘Mt Hotham’ debacle, there was period of ‘CASA’ inspired ‘checking and training’. I need to know if this was done ‘for real’ or at a simulator facility; if so which one? No doubt I’ll have the answers soon. Then we shall see.
More questions than answers at the moment; like was there a gear box failure? Over speed governor failure? Rudder boost failure? But no matter, we do know the engines were just fine, turning and burning. So WTD happened then? Was one of the props feathered? Was the fuel condition lever at ICO? Where was the gear handle? Where were the power levers? -
“Assisting the ATSB in its investigation are US regulatory bodies the National Transportation Safety Board and the Federal Aviation Administration, as well as engine manufacturer Pratt and Whitney Canada.”
Why have the ATSB got the bloody brakes on – yet again? It’s bollocks Hoody, get your finger out and get a wriggle on. FDS:
Toot (slightly exasperated) toot.