OSU King Air Crash

[webmaster]

Some of you may already have heard of this on the news, or on CNN. A tragic crash, that I imagine will be probably attributed to pilot error. I just found it amazing that they are describing that the King Air has "extensive deicing" capablities. If anything throughout all of Advanced training, we were warned that those systems were anti ice in nature, and that if we were to encounter any icing situations (10 degrees IOAT and visible moisture) that we were to get our butts to a different altitude or find our way out of those icing conditions by doing a 180.

The King Air only has electrically heated anti ice devices on the prop blades and engine air inlet. The wings and empennage have a pnuematic air boots that expand to break ice off. On my cross country we actually encountered some icing conditions, and I was able to see all this first hand. We allowed the ice to build up on the wings (if you try to break it off too early you will make a false leading edge, and you won't be able to break it off at all), and then actuated the pneumatic deicing boots, and watched the ice crumble away. But the engine air scoop/inlet just couldn't keep up, and we saw ice gradually build up around there. Finally we broke out of the clouds, and the ice melted away, just as we were about to request a new altitude to get beneath the freezing layer.

I don't know what happened, but it just seems that people sometimes want to take equipment beyond its capabilities, or they are not familiar with it in the first place. I would be interested to find out what experience the pilot actually had. The King Air isn't called the "doctor's coffin" for nothing.

quote:Investigators eye weather as Oklahoma State mourns players, staff killed in crash

January 29, 2001
Web posted at: 11:42 a.m. EST (1642 GMT)
http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/01/29/osu.crash.01/index.html

BYERS, Colorado (CNN) -- Investigators on Monday examined what role weather may have played in the weekend crash of a twin-engine plane east of Denver that killed 10 people, most affiliated with Oklahoma State University's basketball program.

National Transportation Safety Board investigators got started Monday morning. But snow covered most of the debris, limiting investigators' ability to get a comprehensive aerial picture of the crash site.

"We have some very detailed and painstaking work ahead of us in what are not the best weather conditions," John Hammerschmidt, head of the NTSB's crash investigation team, said Sunday.

The chartered plane went down Saturday night in a field about 40 miles east of Denver after taking off from an airfield in the city's suburbs. The flight took off amid light snow with visibility about one mile and temperatures below freezing. The 25-year-old Beech King Air was bound for Stillwater, Oklahoma. Controllers lost radio and radar contact with the plane 17 minutes after takeoff.

Investigators planned to question workers at the Jefferson County airport on Monday about whether the aircraft was de-iced and what other pilots reported about conditions at the time the doomed plane prepared for takeoff.

The Beech King Air had extensive de-icing capability, including devices to reduce ice on the wings and propellers in flight.

The accident plunged the campus of Oklahoma State University into mourning. In addition to two players -- 20-year-old Nate Fleming, a freshman guard, and junior guard Dan Lawson, 21 -- the plane was carrying six other men affiliated with the basketball team, plus a pilot and a copilot.

The plane was one of three carrying the school's basketball team and associates back to Oklahoma after a game at the University of Colorado, in nearby Boulder. The other two arrived safely.

The aircraft was owned by an Oklahoma City businessman, OSU Sports Information Director Steve Buzzard said. Because of that, Hammerschmidt said, investigators do not believe it was equipped with a flight data recorder or cockpit voice recorder.

"We did not find one, and as far as we know, there was no requirement for this particular airplane to have one," he told reporters Sunday.

At Oklahoma State's campus in Stillwater, flags flew at half-staff but classes were kept in session Monday. A memorial service for those killed in the crash was scheduled for Wednesday.

"There's a lot of pain," Buzzard said. "You just pour your hearts and your prayers to those family members who have lost people who are so important to them and to us."

OSU canceled a men's basketball game that had been scheduled for Tuesday night against Texas Tech.

Hammerschmidt said no distress call was received from the plane.

Witnesses said the plane climbed, banked hard to the right and revved its engines several times before crashing.

The plane crashed in an open field east of Denver on Saturday evening. "It sounded like he was flying full power. Then I heard a thump and saw a low glow," said Jon Carrick, who lives about two miles southwest of the crash site.

Dairy farmer Larry Pearson, who heard the crash, said he heard a "real shrill sound" before impact and then saw a "big ball of fire."

The wreckage was scattered over a field of more than a mile, raising new questions about what happened in the final moments of the flight. Hammerschmidt did not offer any theories but said the pattern of debris "goes to the heart of analysis."

"There are pieces of the airplane towards the front of the debris field, scattered here and there, and then much further into the debris field, you get the first impact marks of the main fuselage," he said.

CNN national correspondents Tony Clark and Mike Boettcher and The Associated Press contributed to this report.

 

[Jason Williams]

John I agree holeheartedly with your take on the "de ice" features of the King air 200 series. The T44 is a King Air 90 series with smaller engines. "JUST FOR GP" The aircraft is certified for "known ice" and will fly for a while in these conditons but climbing to an ice free altitude would be my first choice. The aircraft also 11 pax on board ,this means it was full. The King Air is a good aircraft but full pax and whatever the fuel load was, combined with a snow storm (IE ice on wings= weight). The pilot should have used some discretion about taking of in a snowstorm but this goes on every day in the GA world. Boss says he needs to be somewhere and he has paid big bucks for the piece of equipment he is sitting in. End result, pilot is talked into something he doesnt want to do. With the airlines sucking up most of the experienced guys, people with less time are PIC in aircraft that they would not have been allowed to wash ten years ago. When i was gettig my ratings in the early 90's it took 2500hrs and 500 multi to get an interview with an airline. Today the standard is 1000hrs and 100 multi. The commuters are facing the same challenge as experiece leaves to make the big buck with the majors. Pilots with a year in the right seat and 2500 hrs are getting moved into the left seat early and it might cost some people . Hopefully these accidents dont become a trend and aviation continues to become safer.

 

[beau]

I was wondering about the icing problem. The thing I don't get is the fact that the King Air leveled off at 23,000 feet, above the cloud layer, before the crash. This would seem to me that they didn't have an icing problem. The report could be wrong but I don't know.
Also the pilot, from what I've read, was piloting OSU teams for at least five or ten years. I'm at OU right now and this the number one story in Oklahoma.
I would not trust to many news stories about this. I was on abc's website they said investigators were still looking for the "black box" even thought there is not a freekin black box on a King Air.


Finch

 

[webmaster]

Jason, I would have to agree, as more of the vietnam era pilots retire, plus the fact the military has not put out the same number of pilots over the intervening years, you end up with a shrinking pool of available people to pilot your planes. This with the increasing demand for air travel, finally something has to give, and unfortunately it is the basic requirements that you mentioned to get in the door.

I also understand what you are saying about a boss pushing a pilot to get the job/charter done. This even happens in the military, we can do it, the mission is important, I can use my special instrument rating and take it right on down to 0-0, blah blah blah. You get the picture, but all that just makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up when I hear things like that said, maybe a self preservation instinct or something, but I am definitely of the cautious and lets think things through before risking my butt type of mentality. There is a definite line for risk acceptance, but I just don't picture getting passengers to their destination as one where you should risk lives. We obviously don't know what actually happened yet, but probably a loss of lift situation with clear ice on his wings that had melted back and there was nothing he could do about it? Who knows, but usually in the end report it comes down to a string of decisions and human error that results in these mishaps.

Beau, you are right about the report, and what the heck does a reporter know about flying, they probably just picked up a brochure on the King Air, or talked to someone, and reported what they heard. You just don't know, and sometimes never do, until an investigation gets done. It is easy to sit here and second guess, but from my VERY limited experience, only 250 hours, that original comment (about the deicing capabilities of the King Air) kind of jumped right out at me as ludicrous. But as Jason said, different training requirements, experience levels, and less hours for PIC....

As for the King Air 200 (VT35 flies them for training as the C12, also used in Oceana? for ferrying around VIPs), I believe it is the exact same engine series as the King Air 90, but with suped up TIT and SHP ranges (duh, of course, great insight John). Also, all the Navy King Air 200 over at VT35 had the flight recorder (cockpit voice recorder) installed, I was under the impression because of the requirements for carrying passengers (FAR Part 64?) that because of its weight and class it was required to have one. Though I guess if the NTSB has yet to make a fuss about it then it wasn't really required. In the end, from a lessons learned standpoint, it should be interesting to hear about the final report.

 

[Steve Wilkins]

There is much speculation here going on that we can not prove yet and just plain do not know. First, we do not know for sure yet that the airplaine was in any visible moisture. Secondly, we do not know what type of weather (ie. warm front, cold front, occluded front) was nearby, and finally, we do not know where the iceing was forecast for that area.

As we know, there are essentially two requirements for icing to accumulate on the aircraft. First, there must be visible moisture in which the aircraft if flying through. Second, the temp of the the water OR the aircraft MUST be below the freezing temp (O degrees C). Most people do not realize that the aerodynamic cooling can lower the temp of the aircraft surface to below O degrees C even though the temp outside of the aircraft is above the freezing level. Hence, it is possible to get ice on your aircraft even though the OAT is 37 degrees and you are flying thru some clouds.

I should clear up some confusion that I see. When an aircraft takes off in a snow storm it should not be automatically assumed that it builds up ice on its structure. The snow could be very dry and the temp of the aircraft could be above freezing.

Also, the King Air is not called the "Doctor's Coffin." The Beech Bonanza is, however. The Beech Bonanza is a high performance single engine airplane that simply gets away from some pilots that fly it. The fact that many professionals including doctors fly it and have crashed it has given rise to its name..the "Doctor's Coffin."

The only parts that I know of that cover the requirements that govern carrying passengers are Parts, 91, 119, and 135. I don't think there is a Part 64.

Jason Williams: you mentioned that your first choice would be climb to an ice free alititude in such a situation. Remember that you may be able to DESCEND to an ice free altitude as well.

I, like most of you, look forward to hearing the final report that the NTSB submits. It will most probably ask that the FAA change something in particular in the way it does business and the FAA will most probably ignore the NTSB's findings as they usually do.

All the best to everyone, and Happy Landings,

--Steve

 

[webmaster]

This topic was started to generate some discussion on flying in icing conditions, and basically "what iffing" or "armchair quarterbacking" a given situation. You go through training and you will find that you talk about aircraft mishaps (military and civilian) and expound on a scenario. What you would do, what may have been done, done wrong or possibly right. Whether it is in class, a briefing or lecture, or down at the O'club with a cold frosty one and some friends talking shop. In all of those situations you have the luxury of time and a less stessful atmosphere to talk through a given scenario, and gain from the experience of others. All that becomes beneficial when you are zipping along in flight and you have to make an immediate decision based on little information, if you had already talked through a similar situation you are one step closer to handling it and recognizing it.

It is all fine and dandy to know the diffences between clear/rhyme, wet/dry ice, and how the temperature of my wing is going to effect whether or not I am going to ice in visible moisture. It's important, but honestly let's not nuke it out, the information that Weather, Flight Service or even a PIREP might not be as accurate or indicative of the conditions you will face. What's important is that you know your aircraft, and its limitations. Be able to identify icing building up on your aircraft (looking at the ice building up at the base of your windshield under your wipers is a great indication that is always in your scan) and understand when and how to use your equipment.

For example, you have ice build up on your engine inlet already, with no Engine Anti Ice on... hmmm... not the best time to turn it on (should have been on prior to entering those conditions), you turn it on now, and that ice departs into your number 2 engine inlet, and possibly flames or fods out your engine.

You are sitting at the hold short in icing conditions for 20 minutes, you had a glycol anti ice mixture sprayed on your aircraft, should you go back for more before taking off? Well, the book says it is good for 30-45 minutes, but how much is the airport cutting it, is it 100% or a 50-50 solution?

Jason and Steve were talking about either climbing or descending out of icing conditions, which is a great point. But like on my cross country, we were limited to FL230, our cabin altitude was at 9,500, and we literally couldn't fly any higher to get out of those conditions. Our only option was a descent.

All boils down to capabilities and the conditions you see, and hopefully you apply a correct course of action based on your own experiences and knowledge. That is why you have the procedures for each aircraft you fly, right now for the P3, mine are Ground: 8 degrees C and visible moisture and anti ice is coming on, In Flight: 10 degrees C and visible moisture. And when and where to employ, wing deice with 1/2 inch of structural icing, engine anti ice prior to entering icing conditions, you get the idea.

Though in my mind a 25 year old King Air probably has pretty weak pressurization in its pnumatic deicing boots, and maybe is not getting all the amps to each of the blades for prop deicing or the inlet or empennage. Who knows, that is where and when the ground tests become so important, for you to see what you have at your disposal.

Is the King Air the "Doctor's Coffin"? Well who knows, I have heard it referred that way many times, from both military and civilian airline pilots. Based on the history in the early 70s and 80s Doctors with little multi engine flight experience purchasing that plane and having mishaps based on their inability to control the airplane in single engine emergencies. Maybe the Bonanza is the 90s equivalent? I imagine that you can't categorically say it is or isn't. Granted, a King Air 90 isn't cheap at 1.2 million! In fact, I had made the mistake of mentioning that term in front of my mom during Advanced training (yeah yeah, don't know what I was thinking at the time). My mom brought the term up when our next door neighbor (a retired Air Froce and USAir pilot) asked where I was in training, how I was doing, and what plane was I flying now? Needless to say, he got a laugh out of hearing that term used by my mom to describe the plane I was flying.

I was mistakenly thinking of FAR PART 61, and the requirements for ATP certification, oh well, shoot me, I didn't take the time to pull out the AIM/FAR and look up the exact part, that is why I put the question mark next to it.

In training you don't really cover the AIM/FAR in classroom, though you will be expected to reference it for a deeper understanding (and end up with a dog eared highlighted copy during your Advanced RI stages). But when it comes time to take your Military Competency Exam, you will have to study the overall structure of the AIM/FAR and know what sections cover pilot certification, medical requirements... you get the idea. The next time you will care about that is when/if you ever go for your ATP.

In the end, talking through situations, mishaps, and what iffing, helps your expand your knowledge, and gets you thinking ahead. You definitely don't ever want to be behind the aircraft, always 5 minutes ahead!

 

[Steve Wilkins]

Well said. I agree completely.

--Steve