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

Let's discuss the APA MU2 accident here, but constructively

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


What's it doing now?
Feb 24, 2004
I figured to start a new thread to discuss the MU2 accident at APA last week.

So, I invite current and former Deuce pilots, mechanics, and anyone else who would like to post intelligent, as well as relevant information.

For you people with a beef against the airplane, GO AWAY. Please let's keep the morons of this thread.
Visit the thread in the General section if you want to whine, or post idiotic comments or ground the whole fleet of MU2s!



A good idea, but I'll bet the thread gets hi-jacked anyway.

I have a fiduciary interest in the accident. Can you tell me, did the accident airplane have Collins VIR-30 navigation receivers? The VIR-30 is a combination VHF NAV/LOC receiver, a UHF GS receiver and a MF MB receiver.

Also, did the accident occur on the localizer course, or was the airplane significantly offcourse?

If the answer to the above is YES, then this could be the 4th in a similar series of accidents.

I'd sure like to hear from some Epps guys. They seem to be the most experienced group and have a great safety record. Yeah, I know they lost one last year, but if you think of the years and hours, as well as cycles per night, they have to be the champs.

Am also curious about the VIR 30. Flew 1 plane excusively with dual units for over 3,000 hours. Only issue I had was sometimes you could turn the unit off and not realize it was off, of course if you listened for the ID you knew it. Didn't always get flags, but I think it had more to due to the switching setup for the Nav and GPS.
Never did figure it out, but the VIR 30 box itself never seemed to fail.
Lets get the facts the flight was in a bad weather, montaineous area, summer time. If it was early models like F or before and he was heavy probably if he got below any altitude and he was unable to recover due lack of power. If it was a P model or later maybe was something else.
Oh yeah,

just this Saturday, I was holding for release to depart APA Rwy.35, when tower (stoutly, I guess would be the word) advised an inbound Bonanza, of a low altitude alert. He stated he was at 7500ft, but when he popped out of the clouds, it looked way below glideslope.

Wx was crappy, low ceiling (~400 ovc), light drizzle.

??? !!!
Lawmakers urge FAA to ground MU-2Bs
By William Glanz
August 11, 2005

Lawmakers from Colorado have asked federal aviation officials to ground a Mitsubishi-made aircraft involved in two fatal crashes in the state in nine months.
Three persons died in incidents in the state on Aug. 4 and Dec. 10 involving the Mitsubishi MU-2B-60.
"I am requesting that you immediately issue a directive to ground all [Mitsubishi MU-2B-60] aircraft until a thorough and complete investigation into its air worthiness can be determined," Rep. Tom Tancredo, Colorado Republican, wrote Aug. 4 to the Federal Aviation Administration.
The plane's manufacturer, Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America Inc., disputes claims that the aircraft is unsafe.
Sen. Ken Salazar, a Democrat, Rep. Bob Beauprez, a Republican, Rep. Diana DeGette, a Democrat, and Rep. Mark Udall, a Democrat, all from Colorado, also wrote FAA Administrator Marion C. Blakey and asked her to consider grounding the aircraft.
The FAA yesterday said it will re-evaluate the plane. As part of its inquiry, the FAA will examine the aircraft, operational procedures for the plane and pilot training.
An agency spokeswoman said it is too early to determine whether the FAA should ground the plane.
"We won't hesitate to do that if we have the data to support it," FAA spokeswoman Alison Duquette said.
The FAA re-evaluated Mitsubishi's MU-2B series of planes after 12 crashes and 16 fatalities in 1983 and 1984, but found no major problems with the aircraft. The agency re-evaluated the plane in 1996, after two more crashes, to investigate its performance in icy conditions and required changes in pilot training and a modification to the plane to improve safety.
It could take the FAA two months to complete its latest re-evaluation, Ms. Duquette said.
Mitsubishi made more than 700 of the twin-engine turboprop aircraft from 1966 to 1986, and 400 are still in use by carriers that use them to haul cargo, shuttle passengers and transport medical patients.
Despite the crashes, the planes are safe, said Ralph Sorrells, deputy general manager for the aircraft product support division of Addison, Texas-based Mitsubishi Heavy Industries America.
"I don't see any reason why the FAA would ever ground the plane," he said.
Instead, he suggested that the FAA require pilots flying the aircraft to undergo more training.
"We've long advocated that pilots get more simulator training," he said. "We'd like to have zero accidents. That's what we strive for. When some of these things happen caused by inadequate training, it makes me sick. We need to make sure training is adequate."
Earle Martin, the owner of Houston-based carrier Mid-Coast Air Charter, thinks the plane is safe but endorses more training.
"I don't think the [Mitsubishi MU-2B-60] requires the same commitment that a nun would make to Jesus, but it requires a commitment," said Mr. Martin, who has flown the plane since 1989 to haul people and cargo.
The MU-2B-60 aircraft has been involved in 20 fatal crashes since 1983 that killed 70 persons, National Transportation Safety Board records show.
That is a high accident rate, said Mike Miller, a partner at Velocity Group, an aviation consulting firm in the District.
"It warrants further investigation," Mr. Miller said.
Compared with similar planes, the Mitsubishi MU-2B-60 has crashed more often. The Cessna 441, also a twin-engine turboprop, has been involved in 13 fatal wrecks that killed 38 persons since 1983, the NTSB reported. The twin-engine turboprop Cessna 425 has been involved in eight fatal wrecks that killed 23 persons during the same period.
"The [Mitsubishi MU-2B-60] has had a reputation problem for a long time," Mr. Martin said. "There are some positive reasons why this airplane compares favorably to other airplanes like it that I could buy. It's built like a tank."
Accident investigators haven't determined the cause of either crash in Colorado that involved the Mitsubishi planes.
In the Dec. 10 accident, pilot Paul Krysiak and co-pilot James Presba had engine problems during takeoff and attempted to return to Centennial Airport south of Denver for an emergency landing when they crashed and died.

We should urge the president to exclude the state of Colorado from the Union, pending further investigation!
These Lawmakers are Idiots, there is nothing wrong with the A/C. Pilots who fly them YES!!! Most of the accidents in the last 3 years has been pilot error, except the DEC. ACT crash which they had an engine out. Others were from, load shift, falling asleep, show boating, ect.

What run are u on? Air 1st covered MKC

If your in the MDW hub, it was quite commical. No one except us had a clue about what to do there were planes going every which way. Ask the ramp guys how fun the first night was.

Is it true the Reese Howell came to APA to train u all?

Good Luck to u all,

Latest resources