DC3 crash in Alaska, video in link

[Colonel]

I am suspicious that they could not run the MP on 100LL that they originally could have on 115/145 - remember that evil purple stuff?

I know I'm a BAD PERSON™ but with the airspeed and altitude decaying, I would have overboosted the left engine to get to the runway at Merrill. It's not like you were going to need it after another minute or two anyways.

See, that's why I would have been a horrible four bar. A good little four bar would have observed the limits on the left engine so that it could have made TBO after it was destroyed on the runway at Merrill. Or more likely, in the fatal crash into the city before reaching the airport.

I would have happily used up that left engine to make it to the runway but I know that's unfashionable in the 21st century.

[David MacRay]

When I watched the first video, I had not realized the engine stopped on climb out. I was wondering why they had not come in slightly higher and lowered the gear.

[Colonel]

Look at the ADS-B data. They were hurting for altitude and airspeed.

Learn from the Collins B-17, which used to regularly fly over my house out of Moffett:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Boei ... ress_crash

The final NTSB report was released on April 13, 2021, and cited pilot error as the likely cause—noting in particular,

"The B-17 could likely have overflown the approach lights and landed on the runway had the pilot kept the landing gear retracted

There will be no new causes of aviation accidents this year. Or next. Learn the lessons of history.

The guy in the left seat of this DC-3 did everything right.

Watch the landing video, where he just clears the runway threshold.

[Slick Goodlin]

Learn from the Collins B-17:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2019_Boei ... ress_crash

The final NTSB report was released on April 13, 2021, and cited pilot error as the likely cause—noting in particular,

"The B-17 could likely have overflown the approach lights and landed on the runway had the pilot kept the landing gear retracted

There will be no new causes of aviation accidents this year. Or next. Learn the lessons of history.

I kind of wonder if the sentiment of ‘save the plane’ goes up in proportion with the age and/or museum status of the plane. It’s not right or anything, I just think it’s worth my while to try and understand what these guys are thinking sometimes. Personally, as one of them jerk commercial pilots, my attitude is screw the plane. There’s someone who probably won’t be super friendly to me thanks to that sentiment for a while but at least nobody had to attend a funeral (or four).

[Colonel]

screw the plane

Planes are like dogs. They're different. You can't treat them all alike.
If a dog behaves, treat it nicely. If a dog tries to kill you, well, you may
need to treat it differently than a nice dog. Closed loop control.

When an airplane tries to kill you, your relationship with it changes.

Anyone remember the Alaska jackscrew failure? Those guys were upside
down, trying to fly the fucking thing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alaska_Ai ... Flight_261

During the attempt to regain control, the pilots inverted the plane and were able to level it for a short while.

Another crew, killed by maintenance:

failure was caused by excessive wear resulting from Alaska Airlines' insufficient lubrication of the jackscrew assembly

Awesome crew. At that point, don't worry about the effects of inverting the engine systems and maybe not
making TBO. Worry about making it to the ground - alive.

Not everyone is as good as Carlos Dardano. That's reality.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

Was chief pilot for a company that had four c117 R4D-8"s.

It has been a long time since I flew one and I can't remember the single engine service celling on them.

I still have the POH for the C117 somewhere in my collection of stuff.

I will dig it out and look up the S.E. service celling unless someone here knows it, and posts it.

[Colonel]

Chuck: what gas were you using? Was there a reduction in allowed MP when you
were using 100/130 (green) instead of 115/145 (purple)? Did anyone use methanol
injection to avoid detonation on that airplane?

[Chuck Ellsworth]

We used 100/130 , and I don't remember if we used water meth.

Hell it was so long ago I don't even remember the year.

The company I worked for bought the four that Carl Millard used to operate.

I do remember going to Toronto to get checked out on it.

Iw was a lovely machine and the cockpit was higher off the ground than the DC3.

The only negative about it for me was the rudder was not as effective as the DC3 which limited the crosswind ability on landing somewhat.

[Jamesel]

The R-1820-80 has the same limit of 54.5” x 2800 RPM using either 100/130 or 115/145. The Compression Ratio is only 6.8:1, so lotsa room for detonation avoidance there.

Water-Meth was available on some R-1820s - good for another 100 hp, don’t think (but certainly don’t know) it was ever used on the R4D-8/C-117s.

When that machine was in Canada, it’s Gross Weight was 29,325#- giving a Single Engine Service Ceiling of about 9,000’. With Auto-feathering, it could be legal to 31,900# and the Single Engine Service Ceiling sags to 7300’.

[Chuck Ellsworth]

I was sure someone would answer those questions so I didn't have to find that manual.