Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Travis Barker - 4 killed, 2 hurt as rock star's jet crashes

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
tathepilot

tathepilot

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 5, 2003
Posts
884
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26803108/

COLUMBIA, S.C. - A Learjet has crashed while departing from a South Carolina airport, killing four people and critically injuring two others including a former member of rock band Blink 182.NBC News reported that Travis Barker, an ex-drummer with the band who also starred in MTV reality show "Meet the Barkers", was among those hurt. He was transported to a burn center in Augusta, Georgia, where he was listed in critical condition on Saturday morning.
Barker had performed Friday night at an event alongside Perry Farrell, the former Jane's Addiction singer, as well as Gavin DeGraw and DJ AM.

Hospital officials later confirmed that DJ AM, whose real name is Adam Michael Goldstein, had also been admitted to the burn unit in critical condition. It was not clear whether Farrell and DeGraw were also traveling with Barker.
Federal Aviation Administration spokeswoman Kathleen Bergen said the plane carrying six people was departing shortly before midnight Friday from Columbia when air traffic controllers reporting seeing sparks. She said the plane went off the runway and crashed on a nearby road.
Bergen said the Lear 60 was headed to Van Nuys, California. She was unable to confirm the names of who was on board.

http://www.wltx.com/news/story.aspx?storyid=66332&catid=2

http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=9043949
 
Last edited:
I assume 2 of the 4 dead are the pilots...here's to them today since they will likely be forgotten in the news coverage.

As of the latest ATC Planning Advisory and the NOTAMS...looks like CAE is still closed. Rwy 5/23 was already closed for PAEW...11/29 now closed for cleanup and investigation.
 
We were on downwind for 11 from LGA when it happened right around midnight. We were hurriedly told to hold at CAE for a "Lear that just skidded off the runway". I heard them tell a Mesa crew that they had to check the integrity of the runway and there were sparks seen. After we entered the hold at CAE I looked down and could see the ARFF vehicles and some smoke coming up off the end of rwy 11 by the highway. Approach came back and told us it was pretty bad and it would be a while so we promptly diverted to ATL. Pretty tragic!

Here's a news page with pics
http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=9043949&nav=menu36_2
 
Another news story reported that the airplane had a diversion back to TEB a few days ago, followed by a pattern flight at TEB. Maintenance test flight maybe?
 
Flight Aware shows a previous flight from TEB to Tulsa that returned to TEB. Then, what looks like 2 maintenance flights, one the day of the accident.

Everybody be careful out there!

RIP

Hung
 
Bucket on the left engine appears stowed...
 
icefr8dawg said:
Anyone know the operator, plane seems based in Irvine, CA?
Click to expand...


"...The plane was headed for Van Nuys, Calif. It is owned by Global Exec Aviation, a California-based charter company, and was certified to operate last year, Hersman said. The company said it had no immediate comment..."
 
Oh man - in some of those photos you can see the cockpit completely burned - but the instrument panel somehow looks quite intact. But everything around it burned. RIP.
 
A few years back I was a copilot on a Lear 31 and we had all four tires blow on takeoff.. about 10 Kts shy of V1 which resulted in a loss of directional control.. Once the tires blew, the wheel assembly hit the runway and shattered.. of course we didn't know at the time... had we not been on a 13,000ft rwy I don't think we would have survived. The wheels on the 60 are similar to the 31 ( if not the same). Just a Thought...

My thoughts are with the families... RIP
 
NYG-Flyer said:
A few years back I was a copilot on a Lear 31 and we had all four tires blow on takeoff.. about 10 Kts shy of V1 which resulted in a loss of directional control.. Once the tires blew, the wheel assembly hit the runway and shattered.. of course we didn't know at the time... had we not been on a 13,000ft rwy I don't think we would have survived. The wheels on the 60 are similar to the 31 ( if not the same). Just a Thought...

My thoughts are with the families... RIP
Click to expand...

I think its the same gear assembly. it looks small on a lear 60. I think the lear 45 was the first real redesign.

RIP to those that didn't make it and best wishes to those that did.
 
T-prop said:
Bucket on the left engine appears stowed...
Click to expand...
The reverse thrust system on the 60, which incorperates the FADEC, is one of the few things I HATED about the aircraft. The nit-wit(s) who designed it, thought they were really doing something when they made it so the amount of thrust you received was predicated on your forward speed. As the 60 slows, the FADEC automatically reduces the amount of thrust on its own, no matter where the piggy-backs are. If your brakes failed and you were about to roll off the end of the runway, putting the piggy-backs to the aft stops will just ease the airplane off the end instead of reverse the trend and stop your forward movement. Makes no sense to me at all. It's been 10 years since I have flown the 60, so maybe that has been changed, but I don't think it has.

Well Done Sarah and James; I'm sorry that it had to come down to this. I suspect we're going to find that you were doomed the second you gave it 3 clicks and let 'er go.

RIP for the crew and Barker's staff members. No doubt, their family's have a tough road in front of them, and we, as professional flight crews, all have some learning to do as the details come out; I am quite certain though, that the information exchange will not be worth its cost.
 
I always thought lear missed the Boat on that Airplane. I always thought they should pul a Cessna and slide the 45's Wing complete with gear and brakes under that set up. That would be one Bad Bird.

Shocked to hear T/R's are limited on an aircraft with that poor of a break system.

I know VREF is normally around 140, What Ball park would V1 be in that situation?
 
400A said:
I always thought lear missed the Boat on that Airplane. I always thought they should pul a Cessna and slide the 45's Wing complete with gear and brakes under that set up. That would be one Bad Bird.
Click to expand...
Funny how a couple of blue collars like you and I can see that, but the "brains" over at Bombardier have let that fly right over their heads. I sure it is one of those situations where it's not a good idea because they didn't think of it!
 
LRvsH25B said:
Funny how a couple of blue collars like you and I can see that, but the "brains" over at Bombardier have let that fly right over their heads. I sure it is one of those situations where it's not a good idea because they didn't think of it!
Click to expand...

Even their salesmen think that.
 
It's all about who is the lowest bidder on each design/component or what can be recycled from past models instead of paying for a re-engineer. The inertia of a jet that size, with those engines and V1 speeds for the weight....being stopped by piddly LR35 spec'd brakes and a "smart" FADEC T/R system...doesn't seem real smart to me, but what do I know.

All I know was that with the 55/60 this subject of successfully stopping the aircraft in various conditions and situations was always a hot topic at recurrent.

Sincere condolences to the family and friends of all those involved. RIP Sarah and James...
 
Last edited:
400A said:
I always thought lear missed the Boat on that Airplane. I always thought they should pul a Cessna and slide the 45's Wing complete with gear and brakes under that set up. That would be one Bad Bird.

Shocked to hear T/R's are limited on an aircraft with that poor of a break system.

I know VREF is normally around 140, What Ball park would V1 be in that situation?
Click to expand...

Since you asked,

Assuming they were pretty much close to gross weight, and a temp around +20, speeds are:

V1 132
VR 140
V2 147

Runway required 5590 ft

Thats with everything (T/R's, Antiskid, etc.) working.

Hung
 
400A said:
I know VREF is normally around 140, What Ball park would V1 be in that situation?
Click to expand...

Using the WX at the time of the accident...

23500 lbs (MTOW)

Flaps 8
V1 136
VR 145
V2 153
BFL 5882'

Flaps 20
V1 133
VR 140
V2 147
BFL 5492'

The AFM does NOT take T/Rs into consideration for performance computations (Wet/Contaminated Data does, however).
 
Last edited:
LRvsH25B said:
The reverse thrust system on the 60, which incorperates the FADEC, is one of the few things I HATED about the aircraft. The nit-wit(s) who designed it, thought they were really doing something when they made it so the amount of thrust you received was predicated on your forward speed. As the 60 slows, the FADEC automatically reduces the amount of thrust on its own, no matter where the piggy-backs are. If your brakes failed and you were about to roll off the end of the runway, putting the piggy-backs to the aft stops will just ease the airplane off the end instead of reverse the trend and stop your forward movement. Makes no sense to me at all. It's been 10 years since I have flown the 60, so maybe that has been changed, but I don't think it has. /quote]


Correct.

The FADEC's are scheduled to go from 85% N1 above 100 Knots sliding down to 50% N1 at 60 knots with TR's deployed.

The brakes and tires are the weak link. Our later 60XR's are equipt with 3 disc rotors rather than the standard 2 disc. Makes a noticable difference. Dumb thing is Bombardier will not publish new data, so we have to go with the original distances.

Hung
Click to expand...
 
Hung Start said:
LRvsH25B said:
The reverse thrust system on the 60, which incorperates the FADEC, is one of the few things I HATED about the aircraft. The nit-wit(s) who designed it, thought they were really doing something when they made it so the amount of thrust you received was predicated on your forward speed. As the 60 slows, the FADEC automatically reduces the amount of thrust on its own, no matter where the piggy-backs are. If your brakes failed and you were about to roll off the end of the runway, putting the piggy-backs to the aft stops will just ease the airplane off the end instead of reverse the trend and stop your forward movement. Makes no sense to me at all. It's been 10 years since I have flown the 60, so maybe that has been changed, but I don't think it has. /quote]


Correct.

The FADEC's are scheduled to go from 85% N1 above 100 Knots sliding down to 50% N1 at 60 knots with TR's deployed.

The brakes and tires are the weak link. Our later 60XR's are equipt with 3 disc rotors rather than the standard 2 disc. Makes a noticable difference. Dumb thing is Bombardier will not publish new data, so we have to go with the original distances.

Hung
Click to expand...

Yeah, it may hurt the utility, but I'll take that little extra buffer in there, thank-you very much. Bombardier installed them in our non-XR a few months ago...
Click to expand...
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom