Hawker 900XP on departure from Grand Junction, CO

[Kenny Phillips]

The video details how shocking intentional disregard of the flight conditions required for the test led to the fatal outcome. It's that cut and dried.

I would swap "led" to "contributed", because that's what the NTSB does.

 

[flyingcheesehead]

Hoover did a video on this:

FWIW, at the point they were talking about anti-ice, that would be the engine anti-ice, which they didn't need for takeoff. The wing/tail TKS panels should have been at least primed already, but if they never talked about it again, they probably didn't turn it on.

Also, in older Hawkers, anti-ice would have specifically been off on takeoff because it did take a little bit of available power away. The XPs have better engines so this isn't really an issue if both of them are turning, but since the captain had more Hawker time he may have originally trained on one of the older ones and thus been used to keeping anti-ice off.

And again - "anti-ice" in this case is specifically just the engine nacelle heat. Nothing else. It likely had no bearing on the outcome.

FWIW, I think my company hires the guy he was talking about to do our stall tests. I've heard glowing praise of his knowledge.