PA32 down out of PDK

[weirdjim]

Not sure about the holes but the 100ll in the lines may be enough to get you airborne. Happened to Bob Hoover.

Yes, Brown Field, San Diego. He put it down in the tomato patch on Otay Mesa.

HOWEVER, Brother Hoover was known to do an "abbreviated" runup on the go and then just cob it at the end of the runway.

If there was a normal mag/mixture/prop check that most of us do, then I'd suspect a lot of the 100LL would have been purged, especially in the first few hundred feet of the takeoff roll with that big old thirsty engine in the Lance running balls to the wall.

Jim

 

[N801BH]

I would have. As a matter of fact, I'd probably have put it in video mode. THere is no telling how much good pictures of the aircraft before it melted down will help the NTSB figure out what really happened.

The internals of the engine should provide at least a clue as to what was happening just prior to impact.

I do have a question ... for the fellow that said that if it had been misfueled with JetA there would be holes in the pistons. I'm sort of curious how that would happen since the octane of JetA is somewhere down in the 15-20 range? You would (or should) have gotten detonation and the engine shaking like a wet puppy before you ever rotated.

Just thinking out loud ...

Jim

Depends on the dilution rate... If he had 1/4 tank of 100LL and they topped it off with kerosene, then the effective octane would be in the low 50's.... The motor would run , but detonate itself to death while still making just enough power to stay aloft..... If he was # 1 for takeoff and did a quick run up, there would be enough straight 100LL in the fuel lines gascolator, fuel filters, fuel pump and other places to start the motor and get airborne.

The motor will still run but at reduced power which jives with the people at the airport saying he was struggling to get up in the air.. That runway was 6001 feet long and my guess is he needed 1600-1800 to get wheels up. That left 3/4 of a mile to set her back down.. Why he didn't ... We will never know..... Godspeed to those people..

I did see the OP post a minute or so after he posted and I went to the link for the TV station streaming it live... Over a 40 minute period after they put out the flames, there were numerous close up, live raw feeds that were unedited..

During the time the firemen were waiting for the foam to dissapate they were marking items and gouges with orange paint to document the scene. Once the foam cleared a little, they counted skulls and that is how they knew there was actually 4 victims and not just one, like they had originally thought...

Here is what I "thought" saw in all the videos..

Next to the firetruck that was parked diagonally at the rear of the plane was a big divit in the pavement, probably where the prop /crank broke off. Then more scars leading into the concrete center divider at about a 75 -80 degree angle...

The flaming and only big part that cleared the divider and hit the vehicles windshield that was traveling in the opposite direction was the left fuel tank... That should still have a decent sample of liquid in it to test..

What was remaining of left wing was folded back against the fuselage next to the barrier. The right wing was mostly still there including the main spar and ribs. The skin did get melted off though..

Motor looked in surprising decent shape , sitting upright but missing the front of the crank. Prop looked like it hit the center divider, richocheted off and the hub and two blades came to rest 30 or so feet ahead of the wreckage.. Both of those blades clearly showed it was rotating and making some power at impact..At that stage the cameraman kept zooming in on the wreckage and the charred remains of the poor people.... I quit watching and went to the airport for a quick flight in my plane to ease my mind...

Like the saying goes.... ya gotta get right back on the horse to overcome your fears..... At least that works for me..

I don't know if it was misfueled, but there is no doubt it was running fine before the fuel stop....

Whatever caused the reduced power is the smoking gun and my guess is the NTSB will figure it out...

 

[Fearless Tower]

If there was a normal mag/mixture/prop check that most of us do, then I'd suspect a lot of the 100LL would have been purged, especially in the first few hundred feet of the takeoff roll with that big old thirsty engine in the Lance running balls to the wall.

Jim

Doubtful. How are you going to 'purge' the 100LL? Overdrive's experiment (lined earlier in this thread) pretty much shows the JET-A mixes pretty thoroughly with the 100LL.

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

In order of most likely IHMO....given the descriptions of the poorly performing aircraft on take-off:

1. Over loaded or out of C.G.
2. Fuel selector selected low tank (wing tips)....and un-ported fuel at high power and attitude.
3. Mis-fueled with JP
4. failed fuel pump
5. failed magneto or other degraded engine failure

 

[Fearless Tower]

2. Fuel selector selected low tank (wing tips)....and un-ported fuel at high power and attitude

No. You can rule that one out.

This was a Lance, not a 1970's Cherokee 6. You don't have the 4 independently selectable tanks in the Lance. There are still 4 tanks (two per wing) but they are interconnected so the fuel selector is simply left/right or off and there is only one fill port on each side.

 

[johnxreid]

Doubtful. How are you going to 'purge' the 100LL? Overdrive's experiment (lined earlier in this thread) pretty much shows the JET-A mixes pretty thoroughly with the 100LL.

I think he was saying the run up would purge the noncontainmated 100LL left in the lines and sump prior to takeoff.

 

[johnxreid]

In order of most likely IHMO....given the descriptions of the poorly performing aircraft on take-off:

1. Over loaded or out of C.G.
2. Fuel selector selected low tank (wing tips)....and un-ported fuel at high power and attitude.
3. Mis-fueled with JP
4. failed fuel pump
5. failed magneto or other degraded engine failure

I'll add #6: partial but catastrophic engine failure before 400'. Keep in mind this plane left Ashville with a likely higher density altitude and to assumed to have only refueled at KPDK. If W&B was an issue, wouldn't it be apparent departing Ashville? Density altitude was 1600 vs 1000 airport elevation about an hour before he take off--not much of a factor.

Again, I flew right over the burning wreck departing same runway 5 mins later. Hits too close to home and been thinking about this a lot the past day.

 

[marcoseddi]

horrible rip to the family

 

[Checkout_my_Six]

I'll add #6: partial but catastrophic engine failure before 400'. Keep in mind this plane left Ashville with a likely higher density altitude and to assumed to have only refueled at KPDK. If W&B was an issue, wouldn't it be apparent departing Ashville? Density altitude was 1600 vs 1000 airport elevation about an hour before he take off--not much of a factor.

Again, I flew right over the burning wreck departing same runway 5 mins later. Hits too close to home and been thinking about this a lot the past day.

the one reason for W&B to be an issue is that he both fueled and picked up a passenger....so, the plane could perform differently than it was.

 

[ahkahn]

In order of most likely IHMO....given the descriptions of the poorly performing aircraft on take-off:

1. Over loaded or out of C.G.
2. Fuel selector selected low tank (wing tips)....and un-ported fuel at high power and attitude.
3. Mis-fueled with JP
4. failed fuel pump
5. failed magneto or other degraded engine failure

1. Very difficult in a Lance with 4 people. Nearly impossible to be back-heavy in a Lance... the plane is naturally very forward heavy due to the engine being so far forward. Full fuel leaves ~850# payload, so 4 people isn't really pushing it.

2. Like said above, a Lance only has a LEFT/RIGHT fuel tank selector.

3. That's what I'm thinking.

4. Standard Piper checklist states to have the electric fuel pump on during takeoff and landing... so you've got engine fuel pump + electric fuel pump. If he was flying by the book, this is highly unlikely.

5. I'm also thinking this.

 

[TEFLONSEAN]

Pretty sure we have an indication of jet fuel vs av gas by the color of smoke in some of the footage we have seen.

Sorry for the pun...but it's the smoking gun

 

[MooneyDriver78]

Pretty sure we have an indication of jet fuel vs av gas by the color of smoke in some of the footage we have seen.



Sorry for the pun...but it's the smoking gun

The smoke came from more than the fuel: seat cushions and leather, hoses, plastic interior panels, not to mention the engine oil.

 

[GLMS_NC]

I'll add #6: partial but catastrophic engine failure before 400'. Keep in mind this plane left Ashville with a likely higher density altitude and to assumed to have only refueled at KPDK. If W&B was an issue, wouldn't it be apparent departing Ashville? Density altitude was 1600 vs 1000 airport elevation about an hour before he take off--not much of a factor.

Again, I flew right over the burning wreck departing same runway 5 mins later. Hits too close to home and been thinking about this a lot the past day.

Pilot picked up two pax in PDK, therefore, TOW in AVL would have been less.

 

[FlyingTiger]

I know this series of aircraft usually requires an hour of training at/near max gross weight because there is a notable change in handling.

 

[ahkahn]

I know this series of aircraft usually requires an hour of training at/near max gross weight because there is a notable change in handling.

It actually handles much better at gross.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sourdough44]

There was the one report from an airport employee I think, who said the plane was trailing 'black smoke' on departure and climb out. I don't think it was a loading issue or CG. As crazy as it sounds I'm leaning fuel issues, mostly the misfuel.

 

[weirdjim]

Stupid question, but without going to the TDCS, is this engine turbocharged, and if so, did Piper paint "TURBO" on the aircraft anywhere?

Thanks,

Jim

 

[drotto]

Lance came in both turbo and normal version. Think this was normal. The turbo had the super ugly fish mouth opening on the bottom of the cowling made it easy to spot even without a model name painted on.

 

[overdrive148]

At this rate we're going to need to sticky the 100ll/JetA thread that's 3 planes since August of last year if it's the case. All aircraft that could be mistaken as turbo variants too.

 

[N801BH]

There was the one report from an airport employee I think, who said the plane was trailing 'black smoke' on departure and climb out. I don't think it was a loading issue or CG. As crazy as it sounds I'm leaning fuel issues, mostly the misfuel.

As the one who floated the idea of misfueling I can say black smoke can come from various problems...

If it is carbed, the float could have failed and sunk in the bowl..

The mixture device itself, or the cable operating it could have failed..

And , yes, Jet A in a piston engine will produce black smoke too...

I still have 99% confidence the NTSB will figure it out, whatever the cause, especially since it is a "high Profile" case with all the media attention.

 

[mikea]

If, indeed, the crash occurred without hitting any vehicles on the interstate, then kudos may be due to the pilot for that feat.
RIP, and condolences to the families of those who died.

CBS Evening News had a very fair report. They showed a trucker. The plane came "right at" him and left a dent and paint on the hood of the semi tractor. He got out and ran but the plane was a fireball and nobody could approach it.

 

[AKBill]

I am normally at the plane when fuel is added and view the fueling and ensue caps are correctly secured. This is a very sad accident. If it was fueled with Jet A the line man will have a heavy heart for the rest of his/her life knowing they make a mistake.

 

[drotto]

As the one who floated the idea of misfueling I can say black smoke can come from various problems...

If it is carbed, the float could have failed and sunk in the bowl..

The mixture device itself, or the cable operating it could have failed..

And , yes, Jet A in a piston engine will produce black smoke too...

I still have 99% confidence the NTSB will figure it out, whatever the cause, especially since it is a "high Profile" case with all the media attention.

Lance uses the IO-540 so no carburetor. Not sure what a fuel injector issue would look like.

 

[txflyer]

I would think that a mis-fuel could be known immediately by the FBO by looking back through their computer or tickets or whatever accounting system they have.

Of coarse I understand that information may be withheld for a time for legal reasons ...

IF that's the case. Just sayin' ..

 

[overdrive148]

IIRC the 421 last month had something about "distinct smell of jet fuel" in the news report. Then again it didn't burn...

 

[drotto]

If it is a mis-fuel, how liable is the fueling company or person. I would think anyone that deals with planes would have a good idea of what fuel goes in what types of planes.

 

[overdrive148]

If it is a mis-fuel, how liable is the fueling company or person. I would think anyone that deals with planes would have a good idea of what fuel goes in what types of planes.

The topic was shortly discussed in the thread I made concerning contamination of JetA in 100LL. Basically the PIC is the final responsibility for the flight and it could have been caught multiple times in the chain - signing the receipt, watching the fueling process, and sumping the tanks. The difficulty to detect contamination and the dogpiling on the guy for the assumption that he simply didn't sump was the reason I did the experiments and made the thread.

Some line guys aren't trained as well, I already knew the danger because I'm a pilot but some in the job might not. We don't get a huge number of turboprops through SNL but I do confirm the fuel type with the pilots I interact with if it's anything but a standard Cessna or Piper, etc.

 

[AKBill]

Fuel lineman at my airport are young and work for a low wage. The FAA a few years ago stopped by the FBO and found 3 lineman smoking pot in a storage van. The whole crew was fired.

 

[drotto]

Fuel lineman at my airport are young and work for a low wage. The FAA a few years ago stopped by the FBO and found 3 lineman smoking pot in a storage van. The whole crew was fired.

I know the reality, but the stupidity always amazes me. Re-fueling science is nothing like rocket science. Plus the fueling port is very clearly labeled on most planes. I own I diesel car, and I am moderately neurotic making sure I do not get regular gas when I fuel up. Especially when it comes from the same pump. Plus the fill has bright yellow levels all over it that screams diesel.

 

[AKBill]

I know the reality, but the stupidity always amazes me. Re-fueling science is nothing like rocket science. Plus the fueling port is very clearly labeled on most planes. I own I diesel car, and I am moderately neurotic making sure I do not get regular gas when I fuel up. Especially when it comes from the same pump. Plus the fill has bright yellow levels all over it that screams diesel.

Had the General Manager of the mine I work at several years ago fuel the company pick up with unleaded fuel instead of diesel...

 

[overdrive148]

Fuel lineman at my airport are young and work for a low wage. The FAA a few years ago stopped by the FBO and found 3 lineman smoking pot in a storage van. The whole crew was fired.

23 years old and ~11 an hour here for a data point. Defintely no drugs!

I know the reality, but the stupidity always amazes me. Re-fueling science is nothing like rocket science. Plus the fueling port is very clearly labeled on most planes. I own I diesel car, and I am moderately neurotic making sure I do not get regular gas when I fuel up. Especially when it comes from the same pump. Plus the fill has bright yellow levels all over it that screams diesel.

While it's true that there are usually clear signs on the aircraft (fueling port, signage/warnings, turboprop exhausts, aircraft size) and the fueling truck (nozzle shape/size, fuel color/smell, truck color/etc), people can make mistakes. Especially people who are just there for a job and a paycheck instead of wanting to make a career out of aviation. The 425 on the field here (IIRC) doesn't have signage on the ports. I had to search for them the first time I fueled it. I knew it was a turboprop, but some people might not. Haven't worked at more than 1 FBO so I can't say how good or bad training is. A lot of my knowledge applied to the job comes from having a PPL and an interest in aviation.

Honestly not sure how people can miss the big exhaust of the turboprop engines for starters, but I also know the difference between a 172 and 182 due to the cowl flaps. Might be a teeny bit biased

 

[drotto]

Simple solution is making it a requirement for all attendants to specifically ask the PIC what fuel they want than tell the PIC, "I will be filling with ______ fuel." The PIC must then read back the fuel request and type, just like you would read back taxi routes to ground control. Never would make it 100%, but would help.

 

[AKBill]

Every pane I work on has a placard (sticker by fuel cap) with quantity of usable fuel and fuel type. Always thought that was a FAA requirement.

 

[overdrive148]

Every pane I work on has a placard with quantity of usable fuel and fuel type. Always thought that was a FAA requirement.

Placard, that's the word. And I don't know, I am 90% sure I've seen aircraft without them. I'll go take a look.

 

[SixPapaCharlie]

I thought after the bob hoover deal they came out with the hoover ring and hoover nozzle.

I have never paid attn. to a jet A pump or inlet but is this hoover nozzle deal not a thing anymore. I thought it was designed to they would be incompatible.

anyone have details on that?

 

[AKBill]

I thought after the bob hoover deal they came out with the hoover ring and hoover nozzle.

I have never paid attn. to a jet A pump or inlet but is this hoover nozzle deal not a thing anymore. I thought it was designed to they would be incompatible.

anyone have details on that?

Never saw a difference at the local FBO regarding the fuel nozzle, but the jet A trucks are twice the size as the 100LL trucks

 

[hindsight2020]

23 years old and ~11 an hour here for a data point. Defintely no drugs!



While it's true that there are usually clear signs on the aircraft (fueling port, signage/warnings, turboprop exhausts, aircraft size) and the fueling truck (nozzle shape/size, fuel color/smell, truck color/etc), people can make mistakes. Especially people who are just there for a job and a paycheck instead of wanting to make a career out of aviation. The 425 on the field here (IIRC) doesn't have signage on the ports. I had to search for them the first time I fueled it. I knew it was a turboprop, but some others might. Haven't worked at more than 1 FBO so I can't say how good or bad training is. A lot of my knowledge applied to the job comes from having a PPL and an interest in aviation.

I know you're just the messenger, but I'm so sick and tired of that Bull---t line from the underemployed Great unwashed. Everything is fair game to the apathetic because the compensation is not median household sustaining, thus deemed deserving of unapologetic contempt towards the customer. GTFO town with that entitlement. This ain't the breakfast buffet at the golden corral; when it comes to flying the game is chess, it ain't checkers.

Look, I empathize with the erosion of the middle class from that of an attainable demographic outcome to that of a cruel myth perpetuated on the working poor and the W2 wage slaves (class of the proletariat of which most of us belong to), but I'm not going to engage in criminally negligent behavior against my neighbor just because I feel bait-n-switched by the political leadership who sold out the standard of living my parents enjoyed by the time it was my turn to enjoy it.

Nothing is owed to anyone by virtue of being a US citizen. This UK-style "yobism" dynamic has got to be stopped. An involuntary manslaughter charge would fix that right ricky tick....

 

[overdrive148]

I thought after the bob hoover deal they came out with the hoover ring and hoover nozzle.

I have never paid attn. to a jet A pump or inlet but is this hoover nozzle deal not a thing anymore. I thought it was designed to they would be incompatible.

anyone have details on that?

Never saw a difference at the local FBO regarding the fuel nozzle, but the jet A trucks are twice the size as the 100LL trucks

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=74702&page=2
Page 2 of the thread. Our trucks are the same size. The hoover nozzle is the flattened one for Jet-A. We also have a larger round one but it is non-standard from what I can tell. They were indeed designed to be incompatible, but some aircraft have bigger fueling ports than others, even some single engine pistons have huge ports (seen a few Bonanzas and the like) that I could definitely fit the hoover in if I wanted to.

After a stroll through the two bulk hangars, I realized I was wrong - the C425 does indeed have a placard. As does almost every other aircraft in the hangars.

 

[overdrive148]

I know you're just the messenger, but I'm so sick and tired of that Bull---t line from the underemployed Great unwashed. Everything is fair game to the apathetic because the compensation is not median household sustaining, thus deemed deserving of unapologetic contempt towards the customer. GTFO town with that entitlement. This ain't the breakfast buffet at the golden corral; when it comes to flying the game is chess, it ain't checkers.

Look, I empathize with the erosion of the middle class from that of an attainable demographic outcome to that of a cruel myth perpetuated on the working poor and the W2 wage slaves (class of the proletariat of which most of us belong to), but I'm not going to engage in criminally negligent behavior against my neighbor just because I feel bait-n-switched by the political leadership who sold out the standard of living my parents enjoyed by the time it was my turn to enjoy it.

Nothing is owed to anyone by virtue of being a US citizen. This UK-style "yobism" dynamic has got to be stopped. An involuntary manslaughter charge would fix that right ricky tick....

What I mostly meant by the "Especially people who are just there for a job and a paycheck" line is that, in my personal experience, the vast majority of people I have worked with in my age group have been less than interested in the job and more interested about the paycheck. Including showing up to work late, not completing tasks when requested, not paying attention during training, not pushing for more than good customer service, etc.

The comment about "instead of wanting to make a career out of aviation" was pointed directly from my opinion that people who fuel and service aircraft should be very interested and invested in the aviation industry. People who have the desire to learn everything they can about the aircraft they service and the customers they serve. There is a vastly greater responsibility and risk of inadvertently killing someone or damaging a very expensive aircraft than another job of the same pay grade, which is the same or less than a low level fast food store manager.

And speaking from experience, there were more than a few store managers I wouldn't ever want leaving their house much less being anywhere on an airport. Dunno if I hit your point or not but there's an attempt at explaining

 

[Graueradler]

The fuel specific nozzle (we call it the "duck bill") for jet will not fit into any piston engined fuel port that I am aware of. All jet trucks should be equipped with only duck bills. There are smaller round nozzles that will fit on the jet truck and they are necessary because there are planes that used to have piston engines that have been converted to turbines and the fuel tanks were not modified. There are also some older trubine powered helicopters that have small ports that the duck bill will not fit in. We keep the round nozzle elsewhere than on or in the jet truck and make it inconvenient to get it and change the nozzles out with the intent of making the lineman really think about. Also, every Shell lineman is required by the Shell supplier to have gone through training concerning misfueling, how to avoid it, and its consequences.