[quote]Any chance Conrad H was flying this 421?[/quote]
Jesus, I hope not. I always thought Conrad was a great
guy. I remember when his hair was long, all those decades
ago. I have no idea how he remained employed at TC for
so long. I am sure not everyone there loved him - the daggers
would be out for a guy like him.
[quote]the 421 could be expensive to look after[/quote]
Yeah, I know, I lived with a couple for maybe 10 years.
Me, probably violating CARs:
[img width=500 height=339][/img]
Most of the really expensive maintenance on the 421 on
the engines could be avoid by good pilot technique, and
some AME smarts could help, too.
For example, the fairing around the tip (main) tuna tanks
on the 421. I remember removing it and finding out that
the previous AME had re-installed the fairing with screws
much too long and punched holes in the tank. A self-inflicted
wound. Thanks so much.
A friend of mine down here had a 421 with the turbine
engine conversion, always had very expensive maintenance
done. Lost control on landing, turns out the cotter pin
was missing on the nut for the landing gear linkage, the
nut backed off, the bolt fell off, and into the ditch he went,
wrecking his very expensive turbine 421 because of a missing
10 cent cotter pin.
Between pilots and AME's it's amazing there are any aircraft
left still flying.
Cessna 421 crashes short of runway at YSN
-
pdw
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:00 am
We're at a mile final down there for 24 at CYSN and our mechanic's shop owner (right on rwy centreline) across the street saw it come in super low and real real slow after hearing sirens of the units called out as precaution. Says kinda freaky to watch going by at snailpace right overhead and only one prop spinning away ... with the one standing still (starboard feathered ).
Had to shut one down over Lake Ontario halfway back from YGK (15mi SE of cobourg .. flightaware shows some evidence) ... heard something about screwy manifold pressure at first. The TSB came yesterday .. you think they'll tell us eventually ?
I'd thought maybe impact ice ? Who would think that's possible ... until I checked into what type wx conditions you need for that.
Anyway, the engines are overhauled since I flew in it last about 6 years ago. What else could mess with the manifold pressure like that ?
Had to shut one down over Lake Ontario halfway back from YGK (15mi SE of cobourg .. flightaware shows some evidence) ... heard something about screwy manifold pressure at first. The TSB came yesterday .. you think they'll tell us eventually ?
I'd thought maybe impact ice ? Who would think that's possible ... until I checked into what type wx conditions you need for that.
Anyway, the engines are overhauled since I flew in it last about 6 years ago. What else could mess with the manifold pressure like that ?
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
It is a common error for people to get too much drag
on, too soon, during a real single engine approach.
When you realize you've fucked up, it takes guts to
raise the flaps on short final. Note that the 421 has
lots of split flaps which create enormous drag.
on, too soon, during a real single engine approach.
When you realize you've fucked up, it takes guts to
raise the flaps on short final. Note that the 421 has
lots of split flaps which create enormous drag.
-
pdw
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:00 am
Should be easy to double check for any melt/moisture in the air-filter or in intake walls .. if simply caught some ice-forming in there at 8k/-4C in/near cloud at north side of Lake O (in case ... if simply alternate air failed to open on that engine).
Was straight in approach over Niagara on the Lake On (from flightaware-graph track/co-ordinates CG JKL) 1000ft agl at ~7 miles ... over Virgil 400 agl / 3miles final ... ~ 150ftagl (witness estimate) at one mile final 24.
~ 300meters short (google maps reference), after appears to have barely stretched it to get over the tall perimeter fence and manages to avoid the approach lights (slightly left).
-
Slick Goodlin
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:46 pm
Armchair quarterbacking I know, but how bad was the weather in YHM/YKF/YXU to make YSN the choice to land at?
-
Slick Goodlin
- Posts: 721
- Joined: Thu Jun 11, 2015 6:46 pm
Never having flown a 421 I assumed it could hold its own on one engine in Ontario's winter density altitudes.
-
pdw
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2016 10:00 am
That's worth considering, ... that there was the cold&colder retreating air Northward on the Lake, esp to the NE.
Wintry density altitudes ? OK .. so lets hold that thought for a sec ... and remember YSN weather was fine except for being suddenly a bit stormy compared to what we're used to here; substantial intermittent gusts just at/before the time of alighting on airport property .. so likely there wasn't a [i] reference yet for those stronger components down low in the basin .. until they actually registered ..ie the ATIS didn't have that yet either.[/i]
Niagara/YSN area surface wx-hist is showing there was a peak temp of 12C air ahead-of this approach with arrival of the strong SSW/SW flows above the Niagara Escarpment (to the left of the flightpath) where some 30kts were showing up at some private area stations during late approach, which so nicely carries any warm condensing moisture when rising up over the still-very-chilly Lake Ontario (via a system moving North that is centred somewhere up west-of Wiarton/Gorebay at the time .. a few hundred miles northwest of CYSN).
The flight path comes from NE, out of the colder-air/high pressure, where higher airspeed could speak greater progress on an inbound track while losing some altitude on the one engine. ie 105kt GS in powered descent from 1300-1400ftmsl & 8 miles out / flightaware ... could have been 130-140ktsIAS. Yet once in the warmer component at limited altitude a lower density alt might not have immediately been of concern if not known. A warm air "density altitude", right when descent rate/speed was already reducing at 3miles final (last hit 380agl) comes as the higher headwind also vanishes (which it typically can) once below 500ft agl / below the Escarpment heights. As earlier healthy groundspeed fades fast at low altitude, it also forces flattening of the glidepath while still 2 - 2 1/2 miles to go. The power of altitude is gone, 2 minutes from destination.
[And still considering until ruled out: [b]if a[/b][b] remaining Engine was operating on the alternate air source[/b] (spring loaded / automatic & [i]without even knowing it[/i]), gradually beginning to ingest some melted impact ice once at the lower/warmer altitudes ... whether that can affect a power curve at all.]
Wintry density altitudes ? OK .. so lets hold that thought for a sec ... and remember YSN weather was fine except for being suddenly a bit stormy compared to what we're used to here; substantial intermittent gusts just at/before the time of alighting on airport property .. so likely there wasn't a [i] reference yet for those stronger components down low in the basin .. until they actually registered ..ie the ATIS didn't have that yet either.[/i]
Niagara/YSN area surface wx-hist is showing there was a peak temp of 12C air ahead-of this approach with arrival of the strong SSW/SW flows above the Niagara Escarpment (to the left of the flightpath) where some 30kts were showing up at some private area stations during late approach, which so nicely carries any warm condensing moisture when rising up over the still-very-chilly Lake Ontario (via a system moving North that is centred somewhere up west-of Wiarton/Gorebay at the time .. a few hundred miles northwest of CYSN).
The flight path comes from NE, out of the colder-air/high pressure, where higher airspeed could speak greater progress on an inbound track while losing some altitude on the one engine. ie 105kt GS in powered descent from 1300-1400ftmsl & 8 miles out / flightaware ... could have been 130-140ktsIAS. Yet once in the warmer component at limited altitude a lower density alt might not have immediately been of concern if not known. A warm air "density altitude", right when descent rate/speed was already reducing at 3miles final (last hit 380agl) comes as the higher headwind also vanishes (which it typically can) once below 500ft agl / below the Escarpment heights. As earlier healthy groundspeed fades fast at low altitude, it also forces flattening of the glidepath while still 2 - 2 1/2 miles to go. The power of altitude is gone, 2 minutes from destination.
[And still considering until ruled out: [b]if a[/b][b] remaining Engine was operating on the alternate air source[/b] (spring loaded / automatic & [i]without even knowing it[/i]), gradually beginning to ingest some melted impact ice once at the lower/warmer altitudes ... whether that can affect a power curve at all.]
-
goldeneagle
- Posts: 15
- Joined: Thu May 05, 2016 10:40 pm
[quote author=Slick Goodlin link=topic=8196.msg22724#msg22724 date=1523029991]
Never having flown a 421 I assumed it could hold its own on one engine in Ontario's winter density altitudes.
[/quote]
C-421B will hold 14,000 with half tanks and full seats, one engine caged. I dont have firsthand experience, but, have a close friend that does. C model may do a bit better, not sure the difference will be anything significant. book says single engine service ceiling is 14,900, sounds about right to me.
I've done the FlightSafety course for the airplane, a lot of that course involves simulator scenarios on one engine. I have a pretty good handle on what that simulator can, and can not do with only one fan running. I now understand why simulators are so much cheaper than airplanes to run, they spend 75% of the time with one engine shut down.
Flying the airplane on one engine, it's a pussy cat, as long as you dont let it get slow. If you let it get slow, it becomes a handful, which can very quickly turn into a nightmare. The folks at the simulator are very good at ratcheting up a heavy workload, then taking advantage of mistakes. If you do an approach in the sim, get sidetracked on some issues and let speed fall off to under 100, almost certainly you will hear 'pull up and go around' on short final, and when you push the throttles ahead, only one of them works. It's absolutely amazing how fast speed can bleed off in that situation, then you get to watch a vmc rollover from inside the cockpit. Trust me, after you do that exercise once, you will NEVER again let it get slow on the approach.
Some numbers burned into my noggin during that course. All up gross weight, supposed to be able to climb at about 350 fpm on one engine. That will be more like 600 if you are at landing weight. Penalty for gear down is 200 fpm, penalty for gear in transit is 400, for flaps approach about 250, and for full flap about 600. Do the math, single engine overshoot is emmintly do-able if you dont have flaps down, not likely if they are down. If you have flaps hanging out, passing 150 feet, highly unlikely to prevent ground contact. With flaps safely tucked in the stowed position, and a few knots over blue line on the dial, you can push the throttle ahead and poke the nose up to blue line crossing the threshold and easily fly away. that extra few knots gives you the energy cushion required to get thru 'gear in transit' without losing any altitude. for this reason, when I taught on the airplane, for a single engine approach, flaps up and 120 on the dial until you cross the threshold. I cant think of a good reason to use flaps at all for a single engine approach on this airplane. They provide only drag, no lift, slow down your touchdown somewhat, but, not enough to make a difference. We would never flight plan to a runway that doesn't give Accel/Stop distance, which is around 3000 feet. If you come over the numbers on a 3000 foot runway clean at 120 knots, plenty of room to float, touch down and get stopped.
On one engine, as long as you dont let the speed get down, airplane is a pussy cat, easy to fly. If you let the speed get below blue line, it rapidly turns into a handful.
As for the before mentioned possiblity of ice in the intakes etc, not possible with this airplane, at least not on the B model I was flying. On the side of the cowl is a little flapper valve held closed by a magnet. If the intake or filter get plugged up, engine suction will open the flapper and the engine gets all the air it needs, unfiltered coming in thru that valve. I've seen the flapper valve open twice in my time on the airplane, once coming down thru a fairly significant layer of ice over the Georgia Strait, another time on final when the intake suddenly became plugged with a 'now deceased' seagull. Engine never missed a beat either time, but it was a mess to clean up after the seagull. yes, there is another alternate air handle, it causes air to come from inside the cowlings. The only performance issue mentioned in the manuals for that, you gotta turn off pressurization air from that engine when you select alternate air intake as the air from inside the cowlings is not necessarily suitable for breathing in the cabin.
As far as this particular incident is concerned, all I can say is OMFG, a landing accident on a windy day in PDW's back yard. This will surely generate thousands of pages of unintelligible gibberish.....
Never having flown a 421 I assumed it could hold its own on one engine in Ontario's winter density altitudes.
[/quote]
C-421B will hold 14,000 with half tanks and full seats, one engine caged. I dont have firsthand experience, but, have a close friend that does. C model may do a bit better, not sure the difference will be anything significant. book says single engine service ceiling is 14,900, sounds about right to me.
I've done the FlightSafety course for the airplane, a lot of that course involves simulator scenarios on one engine. I have a pretty good handle on what that simulator can, and can not do with only one fan running. I now understand why simulators are so much cheaper than airplanes to run, they spend 75% of the time with one engine shut down.
Flying the airplane on one engine, it's a pussy cat, as long as you dont let it get slow. If you let it get slow, it becomes a handful, which can very quickly turn into a nightmare. The folks at the simulator are very good at ratcheting up a heavy workload, then taking advantage of mistakes. If you do an approach in the sim, get sidetracked on some issues and let speed fall off to under 100, almost certainly you will hear 'pull up and go around' on short final, and when you push the throttles ahead, only one of them works. It's absolutely amazing how fast speed can bleed off in that situation, then you get to watch a vmc rollover from inside the cockpit. Trust me, after you do that exercise once, you will NEVER again let it get slow on the approach.
Some numbers burned into my noggin during that course. All up gross weight, supposed to be able to climb at about 350 fpm on one engine. That will be more like 600 if you are at landing weight. Penalty for gear down is 200 fpm, penalty for gear in transit is 400, for flaps approach about 250, and for full flap about 600. Do the math, single engine overshoot is emmintly do-able if you dont have flaps down, not likely if they are down. If you have flaps hanging out, passing 150 feet, highly unlikely to prevent ground contact. With flaps safely tucked in the stowed position, and a few knots over blue line on the dial, you can push the throttle ahead and poke the nose up to blue line crossing the threshold and easily fly away. that extra few knots gives you the energy cushion required to get thru 'gear in transit' without losing any altitude. for this reason, when I taught on the airplane, for a single engine approach, flaps up and 120 on the dial until you cross the threshold. I cant think of a good reason to use flaps at all for a single engine approach on this airplane. They provide only drag, no lift, slow down your touchdown somewhat, but, not enough to make a difference. We would never flight plan to a runway that doesn't give Accel/Stop distance, which is around 3000 feet. If you come over the numbers on a 3000 foot runway clean at 120 knots, plenty of room to float, touch down and get stopped.
On one engine, as long as you dont let the speed get down, airplane is a pussy cat, easy to fly. If you let the speed get below blue line, it rapidly turns into a handful.
As for the before mentioned possiblity of ice in the intakes etc, not possible with this airplane, at least not on the B model I was flying. On the side of the cowl is a little flapper valve held closed by a magnet. If the intake or filter get plugged up, engine suction will open the flapper and the engine gets all the air it needs, unfiltered coming in thru that valve. I've seen the flapper valve open twice in my time on the airplane, once coming down thru a fairly significant layer of ice over the Georgia Strait, another time on final when the intake suddenly became plugged with a 'now deceased' seagull. Engine never missed a beat either time, but it was a mess to clean up after the seagull. yes, there is another alternate air handle, it causes air to come from inside the cowlings. The only performance issue mentioned in the manuals for that, you gotta turn off pressurization air from that engine when you select alternate air intake as the air from inside the cowlings is not necessarily suitable for breathing in the cabin.
As far as this particular incident is concerned, all I can say is OMFG, a landing accident on a windy day in PDW's back yard. This will surely generate thousands of pages of unintelligible gibberish.....
-
Colonel
- Posts: 3450
- Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2015 10:31 am
Clearly there were variable tailwinds on final :o
I suspect he let it get too slow. Too much drag, too soon,
too low. Not a great combination, and easy to do.
The important thing is that [b]no one got hurt[/b], which is
pretty incredible for an accident involving a twin. Let's not
forget that.
And remember, this is an old airplane, and the wing spar AD
was probably going to cause it to be melted down into a canoe
in the near future anyways. It's hard to get upset when an
aircraft on the way to the junkyard get dented.
I suspect he let it get too slow. Too much drag, too soon,
too low. Not a great combination, and easy to do.
The important thing is that [b]no one got hurt[/b], which is
pretty incredible for an accident involving a twin. Let's not
forget that.
And remember, this is an old airplane, and the wing spar AD
was probably going to cause it to be melted down into a canoe
in the near future anyways. It's hard to get upset when an
aircraft on the way to the junkyard get dented.
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 5 Replies
- 1763 Views
-
Last post by Colonel
-
- 6 Replies
- 7024 Views
-
Last post by Scudrunner
-
- 9 Replies
- 4313 Views
-
Last post by Liquid_Charlie
