 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Peter Bichier
Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 103
Location: Toledo, Ohio
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 3:44 pm Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
 |
|
I know you guys mentioned this accident before, here is the NTSB preliminary report. What could have caused a section of the wing to break apart? is that a case where the pilot was trying to control too much the plane? ie too much "hard hand" on the yoke? Is that a case where avoiding some storms is a must even in a Commander?
http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20100811X32223&key=1
NTSB Identification: WPR10FA397
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Wednesday, August 11, 2010 in Burns, OR
Aircraft: AERO COMMANDER 500-B, registration: N500FV
Injuries: 2 Fatal.
This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed.
On August 11, 2010, about 0855 Pacific daylight time, an Aero Commander 500B, N500FV, impacted the terrain about 80 miles south of Burns, Oregon. The private pilot and his passenger were killed, and the airplane sustained substantial damage. The 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 visual flight rules (VFR) flight, which departed Redding Municipal Airport, Redding California, at an as of yet undetermined time, was en route to Pocatello, Idaho. The accident took place in a area where thunderstorms, lightning, and rain were reported. No flight plan had been filed, but the pilot was receiving radar flight following from Air Route Traffic Control (ARTC).
According to witnesses in the area, the airplane could be heard overhead, but could not be seen because of the solid overcast and the rain that was falling. The witnesses reported that the airplane sounded normal at first, but then the sounds coming from the engines became similar to those that they had heard from an "airplane doing aerobatics." Soon thereafter, the airplane was seen descending steeply out of the clouds with about one-third of the left wing missing. The airplane impacted the terrain in a near vertical attitude.
The portion of the left wing that had separated was located about one-half mile from the rest of the wreckage. The airplane has been recovered, and will undergo further inspection and analysis.
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
_________________
560 Dreamer |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest
|
| Posted: Fri Dec 10, 2010 4:53 am Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
Hi Peter,
I'm not an accident investigator, so cannot comment in a definitive manner,
of course!
On the face of it, this seems to be a classic case of the aircraft exceeding
the design stress limits.
This could be because of excessive use of the controls, but other factors
could be brought into play.
The link you provided is "preliminary information, subject to change, and
may contain errors".
Therefore, it's best to wait for the definitive Report to be published by
the NTSB.
In the past, a 'big thing' has been made of such accidents in the press and
led to the Commanders getting a bad reputation for in-flight breakups.
However, virtually all the accident reports that I've seen end up with the
expression "exceeded the design stress limits of the aircraft" or similar.
Best Regards,
Barry
--
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yourtcfg(at)aol.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 6:42 am Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
HI PETER...The airplane was being flown, in instrument conditions, by a pair (father & son) of non instrument rated pilots, without a flight plan. They had been in instrument condition for at least an hour. There was ice a strong possibility of ice and thunder storms in the vicinity. There was also evidence of a possible lighting strike. In any case, it appears the the pilot simply lost control and exceeded any reasonable design limits. Sad. jb
--
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
fritsabbing(at)yahoo.com
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 7:36 am Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
Hi Barry,
Excellent comment on this pre report.
However what are the design limits on the AC's. How many G's + or - with speeds?
regards,
Frits
From: Barry Collman <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk>
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, December 10, 2010 1:51:02 PM
Subject: RE: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk (barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk)>
Hi Peter,
I'm not an accident investigator, so cannot comment in a definitive manner,
of course!
On the face of it, this seems to be a classic case of the aircraft exceeding
the design stress limits.
This could be because of excessive use of the controls, but other factors
could be brought into play.
The link you provided is "preliminary information, subject to change, and
may contain errors".
Therefore, it's best to wait for the definitive Report to be published by
the NTSB.
In the past, a 'big thing' has been made of such accidents in the press and
led to the Commanders getting a bad reputation for in-flight breakups.
However, virtually all the accident reports that I've seen end up with the
expression "exceeded the design stress limits of the aircraft" or similar.
Best Regards,
Barry
--
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 8:00 am Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
Hi Fritz,
N500FV was a Model 500A, but was converted to a 500B in December 1964.
Both the 500A and 500B have a Flight Load Factor of 3.80 G’s positive, but I’ve not found a Negative G figure published anywhere.
For the 500A, those converted to a Colemill “Super 300”, the figure is slightly reduced, to 3.60 G.
For the other “Speedline” nacelle Models, the Flight Load Factor figures are:
500U & 500S: 4.40 G positive, 1.76 G negative
560F: 3.47 G positive, 1.76 G negative
680F & 680F(P): 3.43 G positive, no negative figure known
680FL: 3.40 G positive, 1.36 G negative
680FLP: 3.40 G positive, no negative figure known
The 685 is slightly different, with figures of 3.36 & 1.35 with flaps up and 2.00 and 0.00 with flaps down.
Best Regards,
Barry
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frits Abbing
Sent: 11 December 2010 15:31
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
Hi Barry,
Excellent comment on this pre report.
However what are the design limits on the AC's. How many G's + or - with speeds?
regards,
Frits
From: Barry Collman <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk>
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, December 10, 2010 1:51:02 PM
Subject: RE: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk (barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk)>
Hi Peter,
I'm not an accident investigator, so cannot comment in a definitive manner,
of course!
On the face of it, this seems to be a classic case of the aircraft exceeding
the design stress limits.
This could be because of excessive use of the controls, but other factors
could be brought into play.
The link you provided is "preliminary information, subject to change, and
may contain errors".
Therefore, it's best to wait for the definitive Report to be published by
the NTSB.
In the past, a 'big thing' has been made of such accidents in the press and
led to the Commanders getting a bad reputation for in-flight breakups.
However, virtually all the accident reports that I've seen end up with the
expression "exceeded the design stress limits of the aircraft" or similar.
Best Regards,
Barry
--
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 12:44 pm Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
Hello All,
Out of interest, does anybody have the Flight Load Factor figures for comparable aircraft, or competitors, of these Commander Models?
Best Regards,
Barry
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Barry Collman
Sent: 11 December 2010 15:57
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: RE: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
Hi Fritz,
N500FV was a Model 500A, but was converted to a 500B in December 1964.
Both the 500A and 500B have a Flight Load Factor of 3.80 G’s positive, but I’ve not found a Negative G figure published anywhere.
For the 500A, those converted to a Colemill “Super 300”, the figure is slightly reduced, to 3.60 G.
For the other “Speedline” nacelle Models, the Flight Load Factor figures are:
500U & 500S: 4.40 G positive, 1.76 G negative
560F: 3.47 G positive, 1.76 G negative
680F & 680F(P): 3.43 G positive, no negative figure known
680FL: 3.40 G positive, 1.36 G negative
680FLP: 3.40 G positive, no negative figure known
The 685 is slightly different, with figures of 3.36 & 1.35 with flaps up and 2.00 and 0.00 with flaps down.
Best Regards,
Barry
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Frits Abbing
Sent: 11 December 2010 15:31
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
Hi Barry,
Excellent comment on this pre report.
However what are the design limits on the AC's. How many G's + or - with speeds?
regards,
Frits
From: Barry Collman <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk>
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Sent: Fri, December 10, 2010 1:51:02 PM
Subject: RE: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
--> Commander-List message posted by: "Barry Collman" <barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk (barry.collman(at)air-britain.co.uk)>
Hi Peter,
I'm not an accident investigator, so cannot comment in a definitive manner,
of course!
On the face of it, this seems to be a classic case of the aircraft exceeding
the design stress limits.
This could be because of excessive use of the controls, but other factors
could be brought into play.
The link you provided is "preliminary information, subject to change, and
may contain errors".
Therefore, it's best to wait for the definitive Report to be published by
the NTSB.
In the past, a 'big thing' has been made of such accidents in the press and
led to the Commanders getting a bad reputation for in-flight breakups.
However, virtually all the accident reports that I've seen end up with the
expression "exceeded the design stress limits of the aircraft" or similar.
Best Regards,
Barry
--
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
cloudcraft(at)aol.com
Guest
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
barry.collman(at)air-brit
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 11, 2010 3:23 pm Post subject: N500FV NTSB preliminary report |
|
|
Hi Keith,
I looked at the FAA TCDS earlier on, but the Flight Load Factor figures aren’t shown.
If I remember correctly, the figures I have probably came from the Flight Manual for each Model.
Very Best Regards,
Barry
From: owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com [mailto:owner-commander-list-server(at)matronics.com] On Behalf Of Keith S. Gordon
Sent: 11 December 2010 23:05
To: commander-list(at)matronics.com
Subject: Re: N500FV NTSB preliminary report
Sir Barry,
Try the Type Certificate Data Sheets:
http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgMakeModel.nsf/Frameset?OpenPageAZSi
[quote][b]
| | - The Matronics Commander-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?Commander-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
