17 Dead in Montanta

[IFLYHI]

Are your panties neatly packed and separated by color in your draw too?

Why yes they are!

 

[Amish RakeFight]

Why yes they are!

Sad to say... but I've got the time to fold my boxers and place them into neat little bundles too. Folding can be your best friend when no one else is around to talk to. You should see my button down shirts and wooden hangers. Yikes. Order staves off insanity... or wait, does it actually foster it?

 

[Papa Woody]

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200990329005

A good friend of mine landed this aztec off of a circling approach in -1/4 mile viz with an engine shutdown yesterday. He's feeling pretty lucky to be alive right now. A week to the day after the PC-12 accident at the same field.

Not too bad...as long as the other 3 engines were making some power...

 

[TheInsider]

My two cents: Pilot was very low on fuel and Butte was slightly closer (6 minutes or so). He asked for VFR hoping to avoid shooting an approach. The issue of not responding to ATC calls can be due to task saturation resulting in channelized attention. He "buys the farm" due to flying outside the "envelope" since the aircraft may have been improperly loaded. The issue of being high and off centerline can be due to airport unafamiliarity or that he simply wanted to stay as high as possible for as long as possible, resulting in less fuel burn and a longer glide should the engine cease. He didn't declare an emergency because he didn't want to draw attention to himself since the flight was operated illegally (too many pax). I doubt he had any incapacitating medical issues.

 

[imissvfr]

http://www.mtstandard.com/articles/2009/03/28/area/hjjajghbjjfbif.txt

Way down at the bottom of the article talks about a pretty large layer of soil replacement, and granted even low fuel would still be a lot when its on the ground.

As far as the likelyhood of being unfamiliar, I would say absolutely. But, the airport isn't tricky, and not something that would chew up an 8K hr pilot.

I think that something is behind why the airplane was zero flaps on approach. A possible but unlikely situation might be an inadvertant flap extention at altitude followed immediately by a flap failure. This would be a good reason to divert, due to not wanting to shoot an approach in Bozeman no flaps, and Butte would have been a conservative descision in case they do not reset. The flap reset is behind the FO seat and is not fun to have to get to, but not a major deal either. With his having 2k hrs in that airplane, I guarantee he was familiar with it, but also something that could be very occupying - experienced or not.

As far as outside the envelope, I don't think so. As long as there was an adult in the FO seat and adults in the first two seats in the cabin, I think that CG would not have been a huge issue.

 

[NotFurloughed]

First, I don't buy the "overloaded/overwieght on landing" argument in this case....maybe on takeoff, but not after a flight of that duration.

Second, very few have made an issue of the oxygen requirements for this flight. Aside from the fact that a belted seat is needed, the pax must have a source of supplemental oxygen - this being a pressurized aircraft....and I doubt they did the flight at 10,000'. The PC-12 has 6 - or in some cases 8 - masks in the back plus one in the lav. Even if there was additional masks installed they were still short.

The flap reset is behind the FO seat and is not fun to have to get to, but not a major deal either. With his having 2k hrs in that airplane, I guarantee he was familiar with it, but also something that could be very occupying - experienced or not.

I may be rusty on my PC-12 systems, but if I remember correctly the series 9 planes had a cannon plug that could be plugged into the panel behind the copilot seat to reset the flap system in flight or on the ground. The series 10 planes (the accident aircraft was a series 10) had the plug replaced with a push-button which required a weight-on-wheels signal, meaning the flaps could only be reset on the ground. Maybe the AF guys could jump in and verify or debunk this.

 

[imissvfr]

NotFurloughed, you're right on with the reset requiring wow.

 

[NotFurloughed]

Sweet...then I'm not going crazy........yet.......

 

[100-1/2]

http://www.greatfallstribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=200990329005

A good friend of mine landed this aztec off of a circling approach in -1/4 mile viz with an engine shutdown yesterday. He's feeling pretty lucky to be alive right now. A week to the day after the PC-12 accident at the same field.

I smell manure.

1/4 vis?

FAR 135?

In an Azwreck?

How do you stay close enough to the runway to keep it insight? underneath that giant boheamouth of a wing and engine? While using normal maneuvers at all times? for approach and landing?

Most Circling approaches require more than 1SM vis due to the nature of the procedure (1.3Vs approach category @ 1.x SM from any runway, etc.)

100-1/2

 

[X-rated]

I smell manure.

1/4 vis?

FAR 135?

In an Azwreck?

How do you stay close enough to the runway to keep it insight? underneath that giant boheamouth of a wing and engine? While using normal maneuvers at all times? for approach and landing?

Most Circling approaches require more than 1SM vis due to the nature of the procedure (1.3Vs approach category @ 1.x SM from any runway, etc.)

100-1/2

Engine failure in a light twin, in low IMC is an Emergency. Normal maneuvers do not apply, and the PIC can deviate from any rule to meet the emergency.

Having no information about the incident, I'm not inclined to second guess anything the PIC did considering the result. If a circling approach below minimums was his best option, he was indeed having a bad day, but so be it. What specifically is your issue?