air now down in een

[S2R]

N49BA

 

[Diesel]

just heard from a friend that one engine was feathered. Anybody hear that?

 

[S2R]

Yea, I heard that one engine was secured and he had full flaps. They said from the way the airplane impacted it looked like he may have been trying to go missed and got the airplane too slow. As far as I know that is still just speculation, but the engine was secured and the rudder trim was cranked pretty far one way.

 

[Airpiraterob]

man. i hate hearing these things.....
never got to meet him. he started after i left. but there's alot of quality guys there.
it hits home to anyone who ever worked there.

 

[freaky]

NTSB Identification: NYC05FA042
Nonscheduled 14 CFR Part 135: Air Taxi & Commuter
Accident occurred Thursday, January 13, 2005 in Swanzey, NH
Aircraft: Embraer EMB-110-P1, registration: N49BA
Injuries: 1 Fatal.

Thisis preliminary information, subject to change, and may containerrors.Any errors in this report will be corrected when the finalreport hasbeen completed.
On January 13, 2005, about 2215 easternstandard time, an EmbraerEMB-110-P1, N49BA, operated by AirNow, Inc.,was destroyed during alanding to the Dillant Hopkins Airport (EEN),Swanzey, New Hampshire.The certificated airline transport pilot wasfatally injured. Nightinstrument meteorological conditions prevailed,and an instrument flightrules (IFR) flight plan was filed for theflight that departed from theBangor International Airport (BGR),Bangor, Maine. The on-demand cargoflight was conducted under 14 CFRPart 135.

According to a representative of the operator, at 1831the pilotchecked-in with company dispatch from BGR, and conversed withthedispatcher about weather at the Manchester Airport (MHT),Manchester,New Hampshire, the pilot's destination. At 2018, the flightdeparted andproceeded towards MHT. Due to low instrument metrologicalconditions(IMC), the pilot was unable to land at MHT, and wasinstructed by airtraffic control (ATC) to hold north of the airport.The pilot thenrequested to proceed to his alternate destination,Burlington, Vermont.During the flight to Burlington, the pilot wascontacted by companydispatch and it was agreed that Bennington,Vermont would be a betterdestination because it was 45 miles closerthan Burlington. The pilotsubsequently changed his destination withATC to Bennington. As theflight progressed towards Bennington, thepilot contacted ATC andrequested to change his destination to EEN, andstated "if possible keepit tight."

The pilot was cleared for the ILS Runway 02 approach at EEN, and instructed to contact the common traffic advisory frequency.

No further transmissions were received from the flight.

Awitness stated that she had pulled off the road adjacent toapproachend of runway 02, to make a cell phone call, and observed theapproachlights illuminate. The witness then observed an airplane, withitslanding lights illuminated, appear from the clouds. The wingswererocking up and down so far that the witness thought a wing wouldstrikethe ground, once the airplane landed. As the airplane continuedtowardsthe airport, it flew in and out of low-lying clouds. Thewitness'attention became diverted momentarily, until she heard theengine noisefrom the airplane increase "to very loud." The witnesslooked backtowards the airport, and observed a large fireball. Thewitness addedthat the weather at the time of the accident was "foggy".

A lawenforcement officer, who responded to the accident within 3minutes,stated that the weather at the airport was "so foggy that Icould notsee the flashing blue lights from my patrol car which wasparked 15feet from the accident site."

The airplane came to rest inverted on runway 02, about 90 feet from the approach end of the runway.

Thewreckage was examined on January 14, 2005, at the accident site.Themain fuselage was oriented on an approximate heading of 060degrees.All major components of the airplane were accounted for at theaccidentsite.

A post crash fire consumed the main cabin and a majorityof the cockpitarea. Both the left and right wings were oriented at a90-degree angleto the ground, with the leading edges resting on therunway surface.

The outboard section of the left wing leadingedge was crushed rearwardabout 16 inches, with the damage becomingprogressively less on theinboard section of the wing. The left wingfuel tank was ruptured. Theleft wing landing gear assembly wasobserved in the extended position,and the flap position was verifiedin the "full flap" position. The leftengine came to rest under itsrespective wing, and was separated fromits mounts.

The rightwing leading edge sustained inward crushing along the lengthof thewing. The right wing landing gear assembly was observed in theextendedposition, and the flap position was verified in the "fullflap"position. The right engine came to rest under its respective wing,andwas separated from its mounts.

The vertical stabilizer wascrushed downward and embedded asphalt wasobserved in the crushingfolds. The upper portion of the rudder wasseparated at its upperattach point, and bent outward to the right. Thelower portion of therudder remained attached to the verticalstabilizer. The rudder trimtab was deflected to the right of therudder, approximately 45 degrees.

The left engine propeller blade assembly was located about 10feet tothe right of the main wreckage. The first blade was twistedanddisplayed chord-wise scoring completely across the upper bladesurfaceand leading edge nicks. The second blade was twisted anddisplayedchord-wise scoring approximately two-thirds across the upperbladesurface and leading edge nicks. The third blade was bent rearwardabout4 inches and displayed slight leading edge nicks. The spinner capwascrushed inward.

The right engine propeller blade assembly waslocated under the rightwing, and was separated from the engine. Allthree blades displayedleading edge nicks, with embedded asphalt mediain the nicks. Thespinner cap was crushed inward.

Examination ofthe runway surface revealed a set of impressions and aset of scars inthe asphalt from the left and right engine propellerblades andspinners. The distance between the impressions and scars wasabout 16feet 2 inches. The three impressions on the left, as observedlookingnorth, were of the same length and position of the propellerbladeassembly on the airplane engines. The impressions were consistentwitha feathered propeller assembly. The two scars on the right were ofalength and separation consistent with a non-featheredpropellerassembly developing thrust.

The wreckage was recovered andtransported to a recovery facility inBiddeford, Maine. Furtherexamination of the wreckage on January 16,2005, revealed that theremaining fuel in the right wing was dark yellowin color. A sample ofthe fuel was retained for further analysis.

Examination of thecockpit area "engine control box" revealed that theleft power leverwas in the "MAX" position, and the right power leverwas in the "MIN"position. The left propeller speed control lever was inthe "MAX RPM"position, and the right propeller speed control lever wasin the"FEATHER" position. The left fuel condition lever was in the"HI-IDLE"position, and the right fuel condition lever was in the"LO-IDLE"position.

Examination of the engine fire detection panelrevealed it had sustainedextensive post crash fire damage; however,the left firewall shut-offvalve was observed in the "OPEN" position,and the right firewallshut-off valve was observed in the "CLOSED"position.

The engine instrument cluster also sustained extensivepost crash firedamage; however, the dual oil pressure indicator gaugeneedles remainedintact. The left engine needle was in the approximate110-psi position,and the right engine needle was in the approximate20-psi position.

Examination of the right engine revealed thatit displayed contactsignatures between the static and rotatingcomponents, which werecharacteristic of the gas generator sectionbeing unpowered and rotatingunder airloads the time of impact. Thepower section displayed verylight circumferential rubbing, withconcurrent static imprint marks,characteristic of the propeller beingfeathered at the time of impact.There were no any indications of anyoperational distress or mechanicalanomalies to any of the enginecomponents examined.

Examination of the left engine displayedcontact signatures between thestatic and rotating componentscharacteristic of the engine developingpower in a high range at thetime of impact.

The pilot held an airline transport certificatewith ratings formulti-engine land and a commercial pilot certificatefor single-engineland and sea airplanes. His most recent applicationfor a FAAsecond-class medical certificate was dated January 31, 2004.

Accordingto the pilot's logbook, he had accumulated about 2,292 hoursof totalflight experience, with about 338 hours in make and model. Thepilothad also accumulated about 360 hours of multi-engine flightexperience,520 hours of night flying experience, and 160 hours ofactualinstrument flight experience.

Review of the approach plate forthe ILS Runway 2 approach at EENrevealed that the minimums for thestraight in approach were 1 statutemile of visibility, and a minimumdecision altitude of 823 feet msl (335feet agl). The missed approachprocedure was to climb to 1,600 feet, viaa heading of 006 degrees,then a climbing left turn to 3,000 feet,direct to the EEN VOR, andhold. The EEN VOR was located about 5.7 milessouth of the airport.

The airport elevation at EEN was 488 feet msl.

Accordingto an FAA inspector, the runway 2 ILS system was "groundchecked" theday after the accident, and no abnormalities were noted.

Theweather reported at EEN, at 2215, included winds from 350 degrees at3knots; 1 statute mile of visibility; an overcast cloud layer at100feet agl; temperature of 35 degrees Fahrenheit; dew point of 34degreesFahrenheit; and an altimeter setting of 29.91 inches of mercury.

The airplane was last refueled on January 13, 2005, with 60 gallons of Jet A fuel.

Theright wing fuel sample and a reference sample of Jet A wereforwardedto a chemical analysis laboratory in Somersworth, NewHampshire forexamination and comparison. According to a representativeof thelaboratory, both samples were injected into a Hewlett Packardmodel5890 Gas Chromatograph equipped with a mass spectrometer detectorand aRestek RTX-5 MS column. The enclosed chromatograms of the twosampleswere closely compared to one another and were found to beessentiallyidentical, with no obvious differenced detected.