Plane crash in UAE

Fearless Tower

Touchdown! Greaser!
Joined
Jan 1, 2010
Messages
16,473
Location
Norfolk, VA
Display Name

Display name:
Fearless Tower
Apparently a plane with 4 Americans crashed this morning on takeoff in the UAE - all were killed, RIP.

The aircraft was described as a Grumman 21T. A Turbo Prop Goose???

I've seen turbo prop Mallards, but never a Goose. Was this a misprint, or did someone actually put turbo-props on a Goose?
 
So, if I am reading everything correctly, it was not an original Goose, but a new build based on the original type certificate?
 
It was a Goose originally built for and used by the Navy in the 40's. The wildlife department got it after the war and eventually wanted to use it for studying whale migration among other things. A 44" plug was inserted in the fuselage (cockpit had four seats) 450 gal of extra fuel capacity was added, special photo-quality glass was installed in the cabin windows.

Three special-purpose Garrett engines were built (two were on this plane, one is now installed on a turbo beaver in AK.) The emer door was enlarged to accomodate a 55 gal. drum, aft fuse was reinforced to carry the load, etc. Recent improvements included new panel, autopilot and A/C.

The aircraft records included a normal category AW certificate. I had the opportunity to see the aircraft and records during the most-recent renovation.
 
I didn't know about his comments at the time, but due to the extent of the modifications I wondered about that issue when I worked on the assignment. I've seen first-hand what's in the aircraft records, included the information in my report, and would testify thereto. He can think whatever he wants to think.

Wayne,

What did you think of this? http://www.warbirdinformationexchange.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=32157&start=30

Someone is quite sure that the aircraft doesn't have the proper paperwork, as it doesn't conform to the original or the MacKinnon certificates and has no STC's or 337's for the Garretts. :dunno:
 
I knew Tyler Orsow who was on that plane. Local aerobatic guy and a frequent visitor. Blue skies all....
 
I didn't know about his comments at the time, but due to the extent of the modifications I wondered about that issue when I worked on the assignment. I've seen first-hand what's in the aircraft records, included the information in my report, and would testify thereto. He can think whatever he wants to think.

Assignment? Report? Testify? Sounds official. What exactly was the extent of your involvement with the aircraft or its owner?

It's been slightly more than a year now since it crashed and killed all four onboard. I still haven't heard any news about the official investigation determining a cause. I did notice however that the preliminary accident report released by the UAE GCAA contained some spurious information - they identified the engines as "Pratt & Whitney" TPE331 series for example. Of course, the TPE331 series was originally built by Garrett AiResearch and it was later taken over by Honeywell.

The also seemed to go back and forth on calling it a "Grumman" and a "McKinnon" but surely it can't be both at the same time. I've always heard that it was actually built in Alaska by the Fish & Wildlife Service - per FAR 45.13(a) that would make it a "Fish & Wildlife Service" G-21, right?
 
Last edited:
Apparently a plane with 4 Americans crashed this morning on takeoff in the UAE - all were killed, RIP.

The aircraft was described as a Grumman 21T. A Turbo Prop Goose???

I've seen turbo prop Mallards, but never a Goose. Was this a misprint, or did someone actually put turbo-props on a Goose?

New production brother. Lots of rich yachts and toys over there these days.
 
New production brother. Lots of rich yachts and toys over there these days.
True about the rich toys over there....but as far as the new production, you might want to read Wayne's comments about the airplane in question above.
 
True about the rich toys over there....but as far as the new production, you might want to read Wayne's comments about the airplane in question above.


Oh crap, I thought it was some sheiks new toy. If I had the $$$ a new PT-6 powered Goose would be in my hangar.
 
The guy who flying the airplane when it crashed (the owner) had been going around telling everyone that it was both a new-built aircraft and that he was going to build and sell more copies of it - at least according to his own sales brochure. They apparently still haven't taken it down from his Web site:

http://www.triplesaviation.com/_media/pdf/G-21G-Grumman-Aleutian-Goose.pdf

The thing is, he did not own a type certificate for that particular "design" (there actually isn't one for that "G-21F" configuration.) He also didn't have a production certificate or even a complete engineering data package for the design. The STC that was supposedly used to install the TPE331 engines, the 40-inch fuselage extension, and many other structural mods was a one-time only STC and it's no good any more (if it ever was.) Even the FAA can't find their own copies of that paperwork any more from what I've heard.
 
True about the rich toys over there....but as far as the new production, you might want to read Wayne's comments about the airplane in question above.
The guy who was flying the Aleutian Goose when it crashed (the owner) had been going around telling everyone that it was both a “new build” and that he was going to "build" and sell more examples of it – at least according to the brochure that he posted on his Web site. I heard that he also gave interviews to that effect while at the Farnborough airshow in July 2010.

If you look up one of the several stories about the crash posted by WFAA in Dallas, you can also find the link to open or download a copy of that brochure in the “Related” items sidebar.

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/Texans-killed-in--117118243.html for example.

The thing is that the guy (and Triple S Aviation) didn’t own the type certificate for the “design” of that aircraft (there actually isn’t one for the TPE331-powered “G-21F”) Frakes now owns the original Grumman TC (654) for the G-21A and Atlantic Coast Seaplanes owns the TC (4A24) for all of the McKinnon versions. He also didn’t have a production certificate or even a complete engineering data package for it. It was nominally (literally in name only) a “McKinnon G-21G” that was modified by a couple of STCs but they were approved for one-time use only.

In order to build new copies of it, he’d either have to start with an existing McKinnon G-21G (there are only two still in existence – and they are also the only two that were ever “real” - i.e. converted and re-certified actually by McKinnon) and then modify them in the same manner. The original STC is no good for that; he’d have to get a whole new STC approved. OR, in order to convert them directly from existing Grumman G-21A airframes or build them new from scratch, he’d have to get his own whole new type certificate for the model G-21F – and getting a whole new TC approved would have taken a very long time and probably many millions of dollars.
 
Last edited:
I didn't know about his comments at the time, but due to the extent of the modifications I wondered about that issue when I worked on the assignment. I've seen first-hand what's in the aircraft records, included the information in my report, and would testify thereto. He can think whatever he wants to think.
The official "final" report on the crash investigation is finally out and published on the UAE GCAA Web site here:

http://www.gcaa.gov.ae/en/epublication/pages/investigationreport.aspx

From what I was able to cull from the report and contrary to Wayne's previous assertions above, the GCAA investigators and whomever it was at the FAA and NTSB who collaborated on the crash investigation all seem to have agreed with the guy over on the WIX forum - that there were serious problems and/or issues with the conversion and certification history of the accident airplane.

The fact of the matter seems to be that it actually was NOT built or certified by McKinnon and never properly conformed as a model "G-21G" aircraft - and therefore was not actually a "McKinnon" G-21G - this time contrary to its supposedly "official" registration and airworthiness certification. Look up photos online of N77AQ (s/n 1205) and N70AL (s/n 1226) for comparison; they were the only 2 model G-21G aircraft ever built and certified as such actually by McKinnon Enterprises, in 1969 and 1970 respectively.

Anything else that has ever claimed to be a "McKinnon G-21G" (supposedly modified like the Aleutian Goose or otherwise) was and/or is really only at best an amateur-built copy of McKinnon's design and as such really eligible only for Experimental category certification.

That wasn't even the case with the so-called "Aleutian Goose." It was instead actually designed and built by the Fish & Wildlife Service in Anchorage as their own model "G-21F" design which was never certified or approved by the FAA in its own right (albeit according to the report, without sufficient or proper oversight by the FAA.) They apparently pulled a fast one with the certification, airworthiness, and registration paperwork for N221AG (originally registered as N780) because they wanted to make it appear to be a fully certified Standard category aircraft when in fact it was not. That was doubly stupid because as a Federal Government agency operating a "public-use" aircraft, they were not actually bound by or required to operate in accordance with the FAR's.

Not, however that those certification and conformity issues had any direct causal relationship to the crash according to the report, which seems to put the blame squarely on the shoulders of the pilot/owner. They say that:

He was not current in the aircraft and in fact had not flown it in almost 6 months, yet he was flying it for the first time in a long time at night with 3 passengers on board.

Because of several recent delays in their planned schedule, they seem to have had a bad case of "get-home-itis" which caused them to rush and almost literally cut corners.

They were most likely considerably overweight with just the fuel that was uploaded prior to the flight - even before the crew, passengers, and cargo were loaded. According to the numbers provided, the aircraft had an Empty Weight of 7,980.64 lbs and the line guys at Al Ain were unable to load as much fuel as was requested; that suggests that there was still some fuel in the airplane and that they topped it off.

It normally* held a total 708 gallons of Jet-A (@ 6.7 lbs./gallon = 4,743.6 lbs. - *not including a ferry bladder tank that they were trying to install, although there was no evidence that it was connected to the fuel system or held any additional fuel at the time of the crash.) That means that with just full tanks and no crew, passengers, or cargo on board (all of which were loaded later) the airplane grossed out at 12,724.24 lbs. - some 224.24 lbs. over its certified maximum gross weight of 12,500 lbs.

With 4 people on board (average 170 lbs./ea. = 680 lbs. but that official average may be out-of-date and too little for typical Americans...) plus baggage & cargo (tools, the empty and at that point not-yet-used ferry bladder tank, etc.) they could have easily been 1,000 lbs. over gross.

I came away from reading the report wanting to ask "what didn't they do wrong?"
 
wow, the last half of your post just makes someone shake their head and wonder "what were they thinking?"
 
I'm going to ask for some compassion and respect for the dead. The mother of one of the pilots is local. She is an A&P, CFII and DPE. She's a very nice and very competent lady and was devastated by the crash and her loss.

Thanks in advance.
 
I read the report...the pilot intended to make a pattern circuit to verify the aircraft was operating properly (after maintenance) and then he was supposed to activate an IFR flight plan while airborne and fly to Dubai.

It concludes the pilot made an immediate steep bank turn after takeoff to initiate the pattern circuit, lost control, and stalled the aircraft. It crashed on a taxiway.

This conclusion was odd to me for a few reasons. If the pilot had succeeded in performing the 90 degree turn he would have been flying directly at the tower. It doesn't make sense that he purposely initiated the turn at this point. It doesn't make sense that he would horse the aircraft into a violent maneuver right after takeoff.

The aircraft had been fueled with somewhere around 600 gallons of fuel, and therefore the post crash fire was intense. It was apparently difficult to properly reconstruct the position of crew, passengers, and load.

The report did not delve into the possibility that the equipment, tools, and loose bladder tank might have shifted during takeoff, and I thought this might have been the reason for the sudden turn and subsequent stall.

I got the impression the investigation focused on things that perhaps weren't that critical. Yeah, he wasn't current. He hadn't much recent time in type. Perhaps the aircraft was over gross, but it's hard to say if it was significantly over. The investigators made much of their conclusion, saying the pilot was hasty and under time constraint pressure. But it didn't seem that way to me. I dunno.

The reconstructed flight profile reminded me of Air Midwest Flight 5481, the Beech 1900 that had misrigged elevator control cables, was overweight and out of CG. That flight lasted 38 seconds.

The manner in which the aircraft went down...pitch up, immediate steep bank angle and stall...suggests a rigging problem or load shift, not an intentional maneuver.

But obviously I'm speculating. I read the report late last night when I should have been sleeping, so I may have some of the facts wrong.

The loss of life is sad. RIP
 
Back
Top