Skymaster Forum  

Go Back   Skymaster Forum > Messages
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1  
Unread 02-16-10, 12:50 PM
wfreestone wfreestone is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Saint Louis (Saint Peters) MO
Posts: 24
wfreestone is on a distinguished road
It appears that it probably was N12NA. The Fox NY web site's TV reporter broadcast says that: all five victims have been recovered, that the FAA said it was a 1973 T337 registered to Jack Air LLC, Wilmington, Delaware (which matches N12NA's FAA Registration info), and that an eyewitness saw the aircraft with the gear retracted approach the runway, hit the runway with the gear retracted, and pull up after hitting the runway.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Unread 02-18-10, 02:08 PM
hharney's Avatar
hharney hharney is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Michigan (8D4)
Posts: 2,255
hharney is on a distinguished road
I keep wondering if they were just doing a low approach fly-by, like many of us do. If that was the intent, what went wrong? The right wing tip was not damaged from hitting the runway but appears to have just broke off at the extended fuel cell attach point. If the fuel cell broke off while performing a fly-by at high speed this could roll the aircraft clockwise very quickly. One would expect that it may look similar to the reports that witness's described. If this is the case why did the fuel cell separate? High speed? Structural? We may never know.


Interesting story relating to the crash:

http://www.examiner.com/x-35334-Newa...illfated-plane
__________________
Herb R Harney
1968 337C

Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Unread 02-18-10, 09:20 PM
jack374dn jack374dn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Alabama
Posts: 8
jack374dn is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by hharney View Post
I keep wondering if they were just doing a low approach fly-by, like many of us do. If that was the intent, what went wrong? The right wing tip was not damaged from hitting the runway but appears to have just broke off at the extended fuel cell attach point. If the fuel cell broke off while performing a fly-by at high speed this could roll the aircraft clockwise very quickly. One would expect that it may look similar to the reports that witness's described. If this is the case why did the fuel cell separate? High speed? Structural? We may never know.


Interesting story relating to the crash:

http://www.examiner.com/x-35334-Newa...illfated-plane

Did this aircraft have the extended wing mod. to increase gross take-off weight ?

Jack
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Unread 02-18-10, 09:34 PM
hharney's Avatar
hharney hharney is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Michigan (8D4)
Posts: 2,255
hharney is on a distinguished road
I don't know which optional tanks it had. Given the winglets are Aviation Enterprises maybe the fuel cells are also. I know that some of the optional tip tanks do have a jetison system so that if you have to land before exhausting the fuel the fuel can be dumped so that the gross weight is legal for landing. The increased gross weight is for T/O and flight only and not landing.

Here is the info on the Flint extended tip tanks. It increases the Gross Wgt to 4,630 except where the GW is already 4,700 from Cessna. No dump system on the Flint Kit.

http://www.flintaero.com/337.htm
__________________
Herb R Harney
1968 337C

Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years

Last edited by hharney : 02-19-10 at 12:42 PM. Reason: Added info on Flint
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Unread 02-18-10, 09:53 PM
jack374dn jack374dn is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Alabama
Posts: 8
jack374dn is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Originally Posted by hharney View Post
I don't know which optional tanks it had. Given the winglets are Aviation Enterprises maybe the fuel cells are also. I know that some of the optional tip tanks do have a jetison system so that if you have to land before exhausting the fuel the fuel can be dumped so that the gross weight is legal for landing. The increased gross weight is for T/O and flight only and not landing.

Thanks Herb ....

Jack
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Unread 02-21-10, 08:54 PM
birddog birddog is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Texas
Posts: 39
birddog is an unknown quantity at this point
Has there been a report released on the may 2008 skymaster that went down in Millville, Cumberland County, with Stephen Claussen on board?
________
RED HEAD GIRL LIVE

Last edited by birddog : 04-09-11 at 05:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Unread 02-21-10, 09:29 PM
hharney's Avatar
hharney hharney is offline
Forum Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Michigan (8D4)
Posts: 2,255
hharney is on a distinguished road
Millville/Eagle Nest Accident

If I remember reading this incident it had something to do with fuel management. Here is the dialog findings about the fuel system.

The main tanks contained either trace amounts, or were completely devoid, of fuel. The right auxiliary tank contained approximately 11 gallons, and the left auxiliary tank contained approximately 2 gallons. The recovered fuel was clear and bright, with no visible contaminants. Tests with water-detection paste were negative, which indicated that no water was present in the fuel.

The fuel selector valve handle for the front engine was found in the "Left Aux" position, and the corresponding fuel selector valve was found set to the port from the left auxiliary tank. The fuel selector valve handle for the rear engine was found in the "Right Main" position, and the corresponding fuel selector valve was found set to an unused port, which was the "off" position.


Here's the full report

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?...08FA184&akey=1

Weight and Balance Report
http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation...184/424353.pdf
__________________
Herb R Harney
1968 337C

Flying the same Skymaster for 47 years

Last edited by hharney : 02-21-10 at 09:58 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.