|
|
|||||||
| Register | FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
 |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
One VERY good reason for owning a 337!
Imagine yourself flying along in CAVU skies at FL190 above IMC conditions below you at 10,000' when all of a sudden one of your 337's engines develops a problem necessitating shutting it down, feathering and securing it. Not too much of a problem. You'd inform ATC of the 'problem' and seek the nearest airport, hopefully in VFR conditions and land. Now imagine yourself in a single-engine P210 at the same altitude and your engine has a catastrophic failure. This happened in November, and it's a chilling accident report to read, seeing that the pilot did everything pretty much right... up to the end.
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...24X01867&key=1 If that link is confusing, or doesn't work right, just go to the NTSB site and look up the following: NTSB Identification: IAD05FA012 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Friday, November 12, 2004 in Paint Lick, KY Aircraft: Cessna P210, registration: N6539P Injuries: 1 Fatal. File this one in the "I'm glad I've got TWO" file. SkyKing 
|
|
#2
12-09-04, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
That is a very sad transcript....
The guy had plenty of altitude, but no vac for his instruments in IMC. Since he was circling down from 7000 to the 1000 ft field elevation, with a 600' AGL ceiling, he was in the absolute worst possible situation - IMC, turning, no vac instruments... with a breakout at the very very last second. The probability of maintaining directional control under those conditions had to be almost impossible. A perfect case for a BRS Chute... or a second engine. Had he had a GPS, (it did not say) he might have been able to maintain control by watching altitude, and maintaining a GPS based heading/decent..... but if not lined up nearly perfect at breakout - still facing a crash landing..... If all else failed, in the absense of any other possible solution, except CERTAIN death, I have heard of pilots using a deliberate stall/spin, to keep the airplane over the airport until breakout, then quickly attempted to stop the spin, and land....although the success of that manuever is one of great controversy, and very, very risky. Apparently, in the old old days, some pilots would use a diliberate stall/spin to descend through the clouds, break the spin upon cloud breakout and land... In theory, it would keep the plane from overspeeding, and coming apart, as well as provide a somewhat predictable recovery once ground was spotted... There were several articles about this published this past summer in the flying rags.... I think Flying and/or Plane&Pilot... Definitely worth the read.. I don't recall the typical altitude to recover from this maneuver, but it is certainly WAY more than 600' AGL... Probably more like 2500' AGL. If the airframe survives. Anyone else have any thoughts on this situation?? Last edited by Pat Schmitz : 12-09-04 at 01:36 AM.
|
|
#3
12-09-04, 03:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I don't know how he was equipped, but it does seem like a good moving map would have done a lot to keep him oriented with respect to the airport. Interpretting the controllers location reports would have been much simpler. Just seems like circling down over an airport on a moving map would lower the workload somewhat. Of course, if you can't control the airplane (loss of vacuum?), none of this matters.
|
|
#4
12-09-04, 06:54 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It's difficult to second-guess this 'preliminary' NTSB report, and not knowing all the factors. But since the pilot elected to follow east-west course lines in an oval through the descent over the airport, I'm suspecting he was down to needle, ball and airspeed. However, at one point he states he's over the airport... at a time when it appears he's IMC, so maybe he did have a GPS/moving map. In any event, the freeway was right off his right wing - and that would seem to have been his best bet without too much maneuvering: basically a straight-in shot with minimal forward glidespeed. Then, on the other hand, there was probably a 400B autopilot on board this P210, or an equivalent, so there was another opportunity to control the plane, as it appears he still had sufficient reserve electrical power from the battery after the engine quit.
SkyKing
|
|
#5
12-10-04, 03:33 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
re: the autopilot ... I wonder if it could have been used. Doesn't the 400B use the attitude indicator for pitch & bank info? Also, heading would come from the DG (or HSI) - either the needle or heading bug. If these were conventional vacuum driven instruments I think the autopilot might not have been able to help him.
|
|
#6
12-10-04, 04:21 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think the cheapest, best alternative is to have a Plan 'C'.....
For $2000 - I have considered placing a Dynon EFIS (www.dynonavionics.com) in the panel (placarded for reference ONLY!) It uses a battery backed up display, and Solid State Sensor based AI.... You could ignore the Pitot/Static capabilities, as they would not be certified to attach to your system....and symply have the AI for a Total Failure backup system only... When the panel goes dead like it did for this guy, and you have no other options.... I would be more than happy to rely on a non-certified EFIS for another chance to walk away...
|
|
#8
12-11-04, 02:53 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Did you do a form 337 on it, or are you just 'trying it out...'
If you did, is there any way I can get you to send me a copy for my avionics tech? I spent considerable time looking at it, and similar system while at OSH this year... it was sitting on the table running on battery... when you picked it up and moved it, the AI was incredibly responsive to my every move... It may not be certified, *and we all know why* but it was darn sure a great backup (ahem..) to the certified equipment on board. In the case of this P-210 incident... it would have saved his life for a miniscule $2000 How many people have lost their lives because companies like this cannot/won't certify their products over fears of lawsuits from crash liability concerns?? We can all afford $2000 - but we all probably think twice about $25,000-$30,000 for a certified system.. If you don't think so, take a look at the Garmin 296.... more capable than a lot of indash systems - but portable and uncertified... The price difference from portable to in-dash is all to cover anticipated liability from future claims.
|
|
#9
12-11-04, 03:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Is it true you can install a Dynon EFIS permanently in the panel by simply marking it "reference only?" I find that kind of hard to believe. If something's permanently connected to the bus, I'm pretty sure you're going to have to get an approval (at least a 337, if not a DER report).
If you want to use this EFIS, I think you're going to have to make it a "portable" installation to keep it legal. An avionics shop should be able to answer this question easily (vs. my guess). Richard, were you successful in getting the FAA to approve this?
|
|
#10
12-11-04, 04:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Still working on an approval. I don't think most avionics shops will tell you that a referance only will work. I've done it a few ways. Just know what you are doing before you venture into installing instruments that are "unapproved". If you do install one for referance only.... I can tell you. You won't use if for referance after the first 30min. Your originals will fade in the background. The Dynon EFIS has made managing the flight so easy, and so much more enjoyable..... Here's a picture of the new panel as soon as I couple the autopilot to the EFIS.
|
|
#11
12-11-04, 09:38 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Nice panel Richard!, there is a very nice and cheap EFIS from Blue mountain avionics, that cost about $2400 and is battery backup. Here is attach a picture from a friend of mine's Seneca II, from the Blue mountain webpage.http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/elitesupport.php
|
|
#12
12-11-04, 11:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Wow
Last edited by Keven : 04-23-11 at 06:08 PM.
|
|
#14
12-11-04, 01:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Wow, is right! Incredible instruments -- the performance and the price. The FAA should change its ways and REQUIRE a product like this one in all IFR aircraft as a backup, rather than retain the barriers which currently prohibit its use in certified aircraft.
I went to both websites and wanted to share a couple of observations. The Blue Mountain unit is now packaged in a standard 3 1/8" round package, not the square package seen in the link above. Its price is $2,795 (not $2,400), which is a steal considering that it also has a GPS/moving map (there's a cool show at http://www.bluemountainavionics.com/...slideshow.html showing possible displays). The Dynon unit is $500 less, without the GPS/moving map. Thanks to Pat, Richard and Jose for reminding us of these units. And to Skyking for bringing this incident to our attention. Ernie
|
|
#15
12-12-04, 12:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
what is really amazing is the pricing.
I looked at replacing my old HSI, earlier this year, and the price for the unit, installed was over $15K. That's no GPS, just a slaved HSI. These things, when you look at the picture of the Seneca, are more useful, and substantially cheaper. I wonder what installation costs were for the Seneca. Was it done under a 337?? Must have been, because these are not certified units. No STC's. Wow. I really like the little unit in the Seneca. I could use that.
|
Linear Mode
