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

Pity. Analysis.

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

jetbluedog

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Posts
176
Pity. There doesn't seem to be any reason why this SOB couldn't make the airport on one engine. What do you think? 99 times out of 100, I bet I would have made it on the ground in one piece.
NTSB Identification: FTW04FA243
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Thursday, September 23, 2004 in Bee Caves, TX
Aircraft: Cessna 421C, registration: N729DM
Injuries: 2 Fatal, 1 Serious.

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 September 23, 2004, approximately 1619 central daylight time, a Cessna 421C twin-engine airplane, N729DM, was destroyed when it impacted terrain near Bee Caves, Texas. The airline transport pilot and a passenger were fatally injured, and the other passenger was seriously injured. The airplane was registered to and operated by N729DM LLC of Ingram, Texas. An instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed for the cross-country flight that originated at the Angel Fire Airport (AXX) near Angel Fire, New Mexico, at 1304, and was destined for the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (AUS) near Austin, Texas. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the personal flight conducted under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

A preliminary review of air traffic control (ATC) communications revealed that the pilot made initial contact with Austin Approach Control at 2108:09 and reported that he was descending from an altitude of 10,000 feet to 6,000 feet and had the current airport information "Charles." Between 2108:20 and 2112:29, the pilot communicated with ATC regarding instructions for an approach to runway 35R at AUS. During this time, the pilot complied with all ATC instructions, had descended to 4,000 feet, and was on a heading of 155 degrees. At 2116:08, the pilot reported to ATC, "And delta mike, I'm having a rough running engine, I'd like to declare an emergency." An air traffic controller replied, "Okay nine delta mike, uh, roger, you also have Lakeway Airport just off to your right there if you want to." A few seconds later, the pilot responded, "No sir, I want to go in to Austin, just help me out."

At 2116:24, and air traffic controller instructed the pilot to turn 10 degrees to the left, maintain 3,000 feet, and report the airport in sight. The controller then asked the pilot for the number of souls on board and the amount of fuel remaining. The pilot replied, "Okay, I've got three people on board and I've got plenty of fuel. I've got two hours of fuel left." The controller then instructed the pilot to report when the airport was in sight and informed him that he would be number one for a visual approach to runway 35L. The pilot acknowledged. Four seconds later, the pilot said, "May have to go to Lakeway," and a controller responded that the airport was four miles west of his position.

At 2117:50, the pilot contacted ATC and stated, "Sir, I'm gonna keep trying to come to Austin, my, ruh, engines cutting in and out." A controller acknowledged. Eight seconds later the pilot stated, "No sir, I guess I have to go to Lakeway, give me a vector." A controller responded, "Okay, turn right heading, uh, two eight zero," and the pilot acknowledged. At 2118:33, the pilot declared, "Not gonna make it." A controller responded and said, "Nine delta mike, the airport one o'clock and four miles." The pilot did not respond, and there were no further communications with him.

A witness, who was practicing football at a near-by middle school, stated that he observed the white, twin-engine airplane pass from his left to right in a fast, descending, right-hand turn. He noticed that one of the engines (he could not recall which) was sputtering, and he could see smoke coming from the back of that engine.

A second witness, who worked at an office near the site of the accident, heard a sputtering noise and saw the airplane directly above him. He reported that one of the engines was going "off and on" and the airplane was "losing altitude fast."

The wreckage was examined at the accident site on September 24-25, 2004. All major components of the airplane were accounted for at the scene. The airplane impacted wooded terrain and came to rest upright at an elevation of approximately 780 feet mean sea level (msl) on a magnetic heading of 260 degrees. The point of initial impact appeared to be along a line of several trees that ran parallel to the wreckage path. The tops of the tree limbs were severed and impact marks were evident at points progressively closer to the ground along the wreckage path prior to the airplane's first contact with the ground. The first ground impact mark was noted approximately 50 feet beyond initial impact with the trees, and the main wreckage came to rest approximately 50 feet beyond the first ground impact mark. The main wreckage included the cockpit, fuselage, empennage, tail section, inboard section of the right wing and the right engine. The cockpit, fuselage, empennage, and inboard section of the right wing were consumed by post-impact fire. The right engine sustained fire and impact damage. The propeller remained attached to the engine.

Scattered along the wreckage path were the left wing and engine. The engine had separated from the nacelle and was found forward of the left wing and was embedded in trees. The propeller remained attached to the engine. Both the wing and the engine sustained impact damage and were not damaged by fire. The left wing came to rest adjacent to a large cedar tree that exhibited an impact mark near the base of the trunk. Examination of the wing revealed that the flap and aileron sustained impact damage, but remained attached to the wing. The fuel tank was breached, and there was no evidence of fuel in the tank. There was also no evidence of a fuel spill and vegetation around the wing was not discolored. The wing locker fuel tank was intact, and approximately one cup of fuel was observed in the tank.

Also found along the wreckage path was the outboard section of the right wing, which was located at the base of a small tree. This section of wing was consumed by fire.

Prior to departure from Angel Fire Airport, the pilot purchased 94 gallons of 100 LL aviation gasoline which filled the main tanks.

The pilot held an airline transport pilot (ATP) certificate with a rating for airplane multi-engine land. The pilot also held a commercial certificate with ratings for airplane single-engine land, airplane single-engine sea, and rotorcraft-helicopter. His most recent Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) first class medical certificate was issued on December 9, 2003. At that time he reported a total of 14,000 hours of flight time.

Weather reported at Austin-Bergstrom International Airport (AUS), approximately 13 nautical miles east of the accident site, at 1353, reported wind from 010 degrees at 7 knots, scattered clouds at 6,000 feet and 20,000 feet, temperature 91 degrees Fahrenheit, dew point 66 degrees Fahrenheit, and a barometric pressure setting of 29.97 inches of Mercury.
 
jetbluedog said:
Pity. There doesn't seem to be any reason why this SOB couldn't make the airport on one engine. What do you think? 99 times out of 100, I bet I would have made it on the ground in one piece.
I'm glad that you have confidence in your ability to have survived this situation. I don't see enough info in the report upon which to base a decision. We don't know what was going on and therefore can't conclude anything, at least not in my opinion.

How long should the fuel load have allowed the airplane to fly? Should the fuel load have been reasonable expected to last for the planned flight? Was the aircraft under control, or out of control, when the ground arose to smite it? Why was the left wing empty if both wing/main tanks were topped off at Angel Fire? Why was an engine trailing smoke before impact?, engines that have no fuel usually don't run, and therefore they produce no smoke.

Too many questions up in the air before I'm willing to hang the pilot.

If it turns out that the poor barstard killed himself by running out of gas in an airplane that required single engine operational techniques beyond his abilities, then I'll be the first to say that it was pilot error. Until then, let's, let the NTSB make that decision.

regards,
enigma
 
Pity. There doesn't seem to be any reason why this SOB couldn't make the airport on one engine. What do you think? 99 times out of 100, I bet I would have made it on the ground in one piece.
I never thought I would ever be in agreement with Mr. Enigma until now. I think his response pretty much sums up what I am thinking. It is easy to second guess someone but too many questions remain up in the air in my opinion to place blame on this pilot right now. If he indeed ran the tanks dry then yes I agree "pilot error". Isn't it somewhat harsh given the tragic circumstances and loss of human life to lable this guy a "SOB"?.

3 5 0

ps> The C421 is not the greatest airplane in the world to be flying single engine under some circumstances and it will bite you rather quickly under unfavorable circumstances.
 
1) Feather the prop.

2) Secure the engine.

3) Go land somewhere.

It wasn't like the SOB was overweight.
 
JetBlueDog,

Are you sure that the prop feathered as it supposed to? I believe it was very close to 100 degrees in Austin that day...certainly hurting his performance.

Are you sure that the tanks actually held the fuel the pilot expected and that there was no fuel leak from NM to AUS?

Do you know if the pilot was familiar with Lakeway airport and the area surrounding it? Lakeway is a difficult (and relatively short with terrain) airport to find if you don't know where to look. An Aerostar also went down out there within the last 2 months with takeoff performance issues and possibly a failed engine.

When you answer these questions and others like them with some facts, I will give a crap about your opinion.

- Checknsix
 
Never judge a dead man

You were not there and hopefully never will be. You do not know what was going on. It is act of bad faith amongst pilots to make a judgement on a guy who rode one in. The sky like the sea is extremely unforgiving on human error and will rise up and smack those who think they are above making errors.
 
Last edited:
jetbluedog said:
1) Feather the prop.

2) Secure the engine.

3) Go land somewhere.

It wasn't like the SOB was overweight.
At 2117:50, the pilot contacted ATC and stated, "Sir, I'm gonna keep trying to come to Austin, my, ruh, engines cutting in and out."
Notice he said "engines". This could mean that he either misspoke or there was some kind of problem with the other engine.

You're being too presumptuous. You don't know what exactly happened so you're not qualified to make the comments that you've made.
 
Last edited:
Jetbluedog...

Me thinks your getting a little ahead of yourself. I agree with the others, there's really not enough info given to come to any firm conclusion other than there was a fatal accident and two people died. I've got a couple thousand hours in 421s and they are no screamers on a single engine under any circumstances; in fact, like every ither piston twin ever built they're marginal at best.

Someone mentioned that they thought the pilot was a MD-11 pilot. If so, that could easily have worked against him - the loss of an engine in a transport category jet, especially one with 3 engines is no big deal. In a light twin (any light twin), if you want to keep the thing under control you basically have to do every right and do it right now. When it comes to turbines, about the only mistake you can make is to get in a rush to do something.

It's a shame when stuff like this happens, but let's wait for the report then learn from what happened.

'Sled
 

Latest resources

Back
Top