Citation 550 down at SVH

[bonefishpete]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

 

[tobnpr]

Hoover lays out the ADSB data. Definitely some odd variations in airspeed, vertical speed and direction.

 

[bonefishpete]

Hoover lays out the ADSB data. Definitely some odd variations in airspeed, vertical speed and direction.

Looks to me some kind of instrument failure or control failure.

 

[RyanB]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

Hard to imagine they’d not abort during normal callouts during the takeoff roll.

 

[Lowflynjack]

Are you certain of that?

Every single tally I’ve seen shows 7, and Jack Dutton(one of the 7 listed) has a CE500 type rating.

It was 7. I'm hearing Dennis was the pilot.

 

[eman1200]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

To be clear, Juan posted an old picture of when the plane was for sale sitting in someone else’s hanger with the pitot covers on and says I wonder if they left them on. So, a possibility? Sure. Completely friggin random? Yup.

 

[Lowflynjack]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

Juan is just like the other keyboard investigators out there... he throws out a stupid guess and tries to beat the others and get the most likes. I used to think he and Hoover were better than DG, but not anymore.

 

[fiveoboy01]

It was 7. I'm hearing Dennis was the pilot.

Thanks, I meant Dennis. Got the names backwards.

 

[Todd82]

In the morning it was likely freezing rain.....
View attachment 148244

SVH obs were all over 40 after daybreak so there's no chance it was iced up before takeoff. They seemingly had the problem almost immediately after takeoff and at a low enough level that I doubt they even had time or altitude to experience icing.

 

[bonefishpete]

Juan is just like the other keyboard investigators out there... he throws out a stupid guess and tries to beat the others and get the most likes. I used to think he and Hoover were better than DG, but not anymore.

That's all we have right now. Does anyone think NTSB can find the cause from the airframe considering what's left of it?

 

[Lowflynjack]

That's all we have right now. Does anyone think NTSB can find the cause from the airframe considering what's left of it?

The difference is, the NTSB will investigate. These guys guess.

 

[flyersfan31]

My $0.05? Looks like a stall/spin base-to-final. Low and slow and distracted and lousy wx.

 

[Hugh Despenser]

Most c550 owners are not piloting it themselves.

lol

There are plenty of folks who own business jets who also act as crew members of their airplane.

 

[Hugh Despenser]

My $0.05? Looks like a stall/spin base-to-final. Low and slow and distracted and lousy wx.

Not a chance.

The weather was such that an instrument approach would have been required.
In other words, no base-to-final turn.

This would have been a long straight-in.

 

[fiveoboy01]

Not a chance.

The weather was such that an instrument approach would have been required.
In other words, no base-to-final turn.

This would have been a long straight-in.

ADSB track doesn't show a long straight-in though. It shows a downwind/base/final to runway 28.

 

[Bell206]

Does anyone think NTSB can find the cause from the airframe considering what's left of it?

Yes. I've seen them determine accurate probable causes from aircraft whose remains were shoveled into a number of 55 gallon drums.

 

[Daleandee]

Wonder if the plane had a CVR or FDR on board. This story indicates that's what the NTSB will be looking for but isn't clear whether they were installed on this plane ...

All on Board Killed After Plane Registered to NASCAR Driver Greg Biffle Crashes in Statesville - NEWS SPEEDRISE

STATESVILLE, N.C. — A devastating aviation tragedy has struck Iredell County, leaving a community in shock and the NASCAR world holding its breath. Reports confirm that All on board killed after plane crashes in Statesville late this morning, involving a private jet linked to one of racing's...

news.speedriseproject.com

Edit: (a closer look shows this particular reporting leaves a bit or two to be desired)

 

[bmackinnon]

Someone on BT posted a pic of the panel from the fairly recent for sale ad with the comment “it has a CVR”. I’m not knowledgeable enough to know from the panel pic.

 

[StraightnLevel]

My $0.05? Looks like a stall/spin base-to-final. Low and slow and distracted and lousy wx.

OK, but why were they returning to KSVH? Stall may have been the final outcome, but there's more to this story.

 

[MountainDude]

My guess:
- They did not get IFR clearance, so they took off VFR
- Cloud bases kept them low
- For some reason, they did not get IFR clearance or they needed to return for some other reason (they forgot something)
- They returned, but the pilot could not fly a stabilized approach
- He stalled on base to final, or during final

 

[David Loftus]

My guess:
- They did not get IFR clearance, so they took off VFR
- Cloud bases kept them low
- For some reason, they did not get IFR clearance or they needed to return for some other reason (they forgot something)
- They returned, but the pilot could not fly a stabilized approach
- He stalled on base to final, or during final

Doubtful. A Citation would almost always fly above 18,000 MSL, almost inconceivable they would have taken off VFR.

 

[3393RP]

My $0.05? Looks like a stall/spin base-to-final. Low and slow and distracted and lousy wx.

Not a stall and spin. The aircraft hit the ground at a shallow angle with significant forward momentum. I don't like posting this, all it does is add to speculation and it's pretty damned awful.

RIP to those lost.

https://twitter.com/x/status/2001779728223785462

 

[eman1200]

My guess:
- They did not get IFR clearance, so they took off VFR
- Cloud bases kept them low
- For some reason, they did not get IFR clearance or they needed to return for some other reason (they forgot something)
- They returned, but the pilot could not fly a stabilized approach
- He stalled on base to final, or during final

Flight aware has this so I’m pretty sure they filed


GENOD KYYUU LUBBR3

 

[RyanB]

Flight aware has this so I’m pretty sure they filed


GENOD KYYUU LUBBR3

Yup, and given the weather at the time, not sure how they could’ve taken off VFR (and picked their clearance up in the air) for that matter.

 

[mryan75]

Not a chance.

The weather was such that an instrument approach would have been required.
In other words, no base-to-final turn.

This would have been a long straight-in.

Except it wasn’t a long straight in, it was a very short… base-to-final.

 

[tobnpr]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

Are the pitot covers some sort of porous cloth that would allow sufficient airflow so that it wouldn't have been obvious to the pilot monitoring that IAS was not correct?

Don't understand how a blocked/covered pitot tube wouldn't have been glaringly obvious shortly after takeoff roll was started, long before V1...

 

[mryan75]

Hard to imagine they’d not abort during normal callouts during the takeoff roll.

How about the multiple times crewed aircraft have tried to take off with the parking brake set?
https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news...atal-plane-crash-in-farmington/2591922/?amp=1

People do all kinds of amazing “stuff”.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Juan thinks it may of simply left the pitot covers on.
I doubt engine problems because at one point they
had a climb rate of 1900 FPM.
I count 7 people on board.

Yeah, the pitot thing struck me, as well. But I keep telling myself that could never happen to a jet crew.

 

[ColinD]

Yup, and given the weather at the time, not sure how they could’ve taken off VFR (and picked their clearance up in the air) for that matter.

ADSBExchange.com shows them squawking 1200 for the duration of the flight.

 

[Darryl Snover]

I really hope that it's not something like a pitot cover......

 

[bonefishpete]

FWIW

NASCAR champion Greg Biffle's wife Cristina sent a harrowing message moments before the fatal plane crash that killed the couple, their family
and three others, Cristina's mother tells PEOPLE. Just before her death on Thursday, Dec. 18, Cristina Grossu Biffle texted her
mother Cathy Grossu, writing, "We're in trouble," Cathy tells PEOPLE. "She texted me from the plane and she said, 'We're in trouble.' And that
was it," Cathy says, crying. "So we're devastated. We're brokenhearted."

 

[Rein Hart]

Possible trim issues then unstable approach with full fuel resulting in crash?

 

[Doc Holliday]

Yeah, the pitot thing struck me, as well. But I keep telling myself that could never happen to a jet crew.

I've watched part 91 "jet crews" taxi out with pitot covers on, nose wheel steering disconnected, baggage door open, gear pins installed, etc. I've also known a few that have never touched a checklist or even look at charts.

 

[AV8R_87]

Here are my thoughts/observations, looking at the adsb exchange track:

- Not IFR, squawk never changed from 1200.

- Something decidedly fishy happens here (see image below), altitude jumps from 1800 to 3800 in the span of 10 seconds. That's 12 thousand feet per minute. Yes, that doesn't pass the sniff test. That altitude stays (relatively) constant for another minute and 20 seconds, then it gradually drips to about 2200 by the time they complete their 180 back to the airport. That's not an ADS-B glitch. The air data computers were coming up with that altitude value, something was off with the air data system.


- Based on the altitude reported for the first point on the track (925) and the field elevation (968), reported altitudes are pretty close to what should be MSL. If those are real MSL altitudes, they were flying at 2-300 ft AGL on downwind. That also doesn't pass the sniff test.


- If something is that wrong with the indicated altitude, indicated airspeed is also in the weeds. Gives credence to this being a stall on final.

- After they get established on final (so this is not a base to final stall/spin), their altitude jumps form 1050 ft (pretty much clipping treetops, if real, which I doubt) to 1500 ft in the span of 7 seconds. That's >4000 fpm on final. Also doesn't pass the sniff test.

- They start slowing down on final. Last reported ground speed is 95 kts. They are landing on 28, METAR reports winds from 280 at 13G24 (pulled METAR from SHV, d'oh) calm. They should be somewhat safe if they are in the landing configuration, 9 kts over stall speed. But are they?

- All this smells (to me) of a rushed take-off in questionable conditions. Did they have an airborne time they were trying to meet before they would have to re-file? I can definitely see this as pitot covers left on, especially if the text from the wife is legit.

 

[Bacho]

Juan is just like the other keyboard investigators out there... he throws out a stupid guess and tries to beat the others and get the most likes. I used to think he and Hoover were better than DG, but not anymore.

All anybody has is speculation at this point. Loss of airspeed data does seem like one of the more simple reasons this could’ve happened.

 

[eman1200]

.... I can definitely see this as pitot covers left on, especially if the text from the wife is legit.

I'm sorry, what's the correlation between the text message and pitot covers? I'm not discounting that as a possibility, I'm just trying to piece together these bizarre relationships between a text message, a picture from years ago, and pitot covers being left on.

 

[Kenny Phillips]

Here are my thoughts/observations, looking at the adsb exchange track:

- Not IFR, squawk never changed from 1200.

- Something decidedly fishy happens here (see image below), altitude jumps from 1800 to 3800 in the span of 10 seconds. That's 12 thousand feet per minute. Yes, that doesn't pass the sniff test. That altitude stays (relatively) constant for another minute and 20 seconds, then it gradually drips to about 2200 by the time they complete their 180 back to the airport. That's not an ADS-B glitch. The air data computers were coming up with that altitude value, something was off with the air data system.
View attachment 148250

- Based on the altitude reported for the first point on the track (925) and the field elevation (968), reported altitudes are pretty close to what should be MSL. If those are real MSL altitudes, they were flying at 2-300 ft AGL on downwind. That also doesn't pass the sniff test.
View attachment 148252

- If something is that wrong with the indicated altitude, indicated airspeed is also in the weeds. Gives credence to this being a stall on final.

- After they get established on final (so this is not a base to final stall/spin), their altitude jumps form 1050 ft (pretty much clipping treetops, if real, which I doubt) to 1500 ft in the span of 7 seconds. That's >4000 fpm on final. Also doesn't pass the sniff test.

- They start slowing down on final. Last reported ground speed is 95 kts. They are landing on 28, METAR reports winds from 280 at 13G24. Interesting that they took of with a pretty stiff tailwind. More on that later. They should be safe if they are in the landing configuration. But are they?

- I'm assuming they taxied from the area circled in red. Why would they take off on 10 with a tailwind? It can't be an intersection departure, that would only give them 2000 feet. So at the minimum, they went through the trouble of backtaxiing on 10 for some extra distance, or they taxied all the way to the threshold of 10 to take off with a tailwind. Why not use 28? Less to taxi. Especially as it seems their intended direction of flight was west anyway. (edit - I think Garrett Mitchell lives in Florida, so that would make it a south departure. Makes even less sense to depart on 10.)

View attachment 148253


- All this smells (to me) of a rushed take-off in questionable conditions. Did they have an airborne time they were trying to meet before they would have to re-file? I can definitely see this as pitot covers left on, especially if the text from the wife is legit.

There is also rising terrain as you approach the threshold, so every bit of altitude counts. Can't do the NOE thing and stay clear of the ground in foggy conditions, for example.

 

[AV8R_87]

I'm sorry, what's the correlation between the text message and pitot covers?

My logic:
Wife is able to text, so the plane isn't going through a ride wild enough to prevent her from using the phone. That significantly reduces the likelihood of a control failure that would cause pitch oscillations matching the observed altitude data. Which in turn points to a dual air data issue, which is most likely to be caused by pitot covers left on (if they were iced-up, I'd expect very little change).

 

[bonefishpete]

Loss of airspeed indicator shouldn’t cause a loss of aircraft I would think?

 

[Todd82]

Here are my thoughts/observations, looking at the adsb exchange track:

- Not IFR, squawk never changed from 1200.

- Something decidedly fishy happens here (see image below), altitude jumps from 1800 to 3800 in the span of 10 seconds. That's 12 thousand feet per minute. Yes, that doesn't pass the sniff test. That altitude stays (relatively) constant for another minute and 20 seconds, then it gradually drips to about 2200 by the time they complete their 180 back to the airport. That's not an ADS-B glitch. The air data computers were coming up with that altitude value, something was off with the air data system.
View attachment 148250

- Based on the altitude reported for the first point on the track (925) and the field elevation (968), reported altitudes are pretty close to what should be MSL. If those are real MSL altitudes, they were flying at 2-300 ft AGL on downwind. That also doesn't pass the sniff test.
View attachment 148252

- If something is that wrong with the indicated altitude, indicated airspeed is also in the weeds. Gives credence to this being a stall on final.

- After they get established on final (so this is not a base to final stall/spin), their altitude jumps form 1050 ft (pretty much clipping treetops, if real, which I doubt) to 1500 ft in the span of 7 seconds. That's >4000 fpm on final. Also doesn't pass the sniff test.

- They start slowing down on final. Last reported ground speed is 95 kts. They are landing on 28, METAR reports winds from 280 at 13G24. Interesting that they took of with a pretty stiff tailwind. More on that later. They should be safe if they are in the landing configuration. But are they?

- I'm assuming they taxied from the area circled in red. Why would they take off on 10 with a tailwind? It can't be an intersection departure, that would only give them 2000 feet. So at the minimum, they went through the trouble of backtaxiing on 10 for some extra distance, or they taxied all the way to the threshold of 10 to take off with a tailwind. Why not use 28? Less to taxi. Especially as it seems their intended direction of flight was west anyway. (edit - I think Garrett Mitchell lives in Florida, so that would make it a south departure. Makes even less sense to depart on 10.)

View attachment 148253


- All this smells (to me) of a rushed take-off in questionable conditions. Did they have an airborne time they were trying to meet before they would have to re-file? I can definitely see this as pitot covers left on, especially if the text from the wife is legit.

Surface winds at the time were effectively negligible. Varied from calm to 3kt at a generally northerly direction so 10 vs 28 is a moot point, especially if you just need to get her on the ground ASAP.