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

[PC12Cowboy]

Hmmm..now maybe CAE will fill in that D*MN hole off the end of the runway..

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Didn't a witness report sparks going down the runway? Would both tires on one side have to blow to get this? Wouldn't one carry the load without dropping the wheel? Looking at the tmz pics, #5 specifically, it looks like they split the localizer (4 L and 6 R) -- if only one side failed, wouldn't it pull hard left or right (the loss of directional control)?

The controllers supposedly reported sparks, but not "lots of sparks" or "sparks for a long time" so who knows?

 

[NYG-Flyer]

The anti-skid/brakes should work on either the inboards or outboards as long as one squat switch is in ground mode. Of course your sim scenario just sucks... I hope it didn't happen to these guys.

If you have an explosive tire blow.. it will most probably take out the wiring to the anti-skid... Loss of one side takes the anti-skid out completely.. if that happens and you are trying to stop the airplane the remaining tires will most certainly blow.. Here is the question? What constitutes a loss of directional control? When we blew our tire the airplane moved off to the left side of the runway.. since that wasn't what we wanted recovering seemed logical ..and since the airplane didn't respond properly and we were below v1 you abort.. without Anti-skid and all that friction you end up with blown tires on all sides not brakes and essentially no steering. you are unfortunately along for the ride at that point. I have argued with the FAA and at Recurrent about this and I still think no abort for blown tires above 80 kts on short runways especially... Problem is ( as what happened to us) you have to decide instantly and if the airplane does not seem to respond to your inputs you react.

 

[satpak77]

additional...

Just a side-note that they planned on a 10:30 PM departure and got airborne at 11 PM. I believe they were headed to Van Nuys, an o-dark thirty trip.

Don't know if night conditions, runway glare, etc contributed. Also as most know, Hollywood VIP's are high maintenance pax.

I will defer to NTSB for the official report, but I do wonder how many "side issues" were in play besides a pure blown tire.

 

[AviateYou]

You obviously care what I think, otherwise you wouldn't have written such a thoughtful response...

But you're right, what do I know...my wife is just a legal professional who specializes in FAA enforcement actions. I guess I foolishly let her professional experience help form my judgement on the legal differences between a recommendation and a requirement, or "should be" and "must be".

That's great - good for her, great accomplishment. You know what? "Must be" was never used in any of my replies. I believe I used "required", "should be", and "recommended" as words. If it is something the FAA recommends than it could be considered a requirement I mean it will honestly be considered in an enforcement action as I am sure your Wife can tell you. The definition of requirement does not use "must be" anywhere in it's definition. You do what ever you or your wife choose, for all intensive purposes I would treat an FAA recommendation like a requirement when operating just like holding pattern entries and the VFR traffic pattern. Why are they treated like requirements from the beginning of Private and Instrument training but are just recommended?

 

[TOOL CRIB]

All I know is Debbie Hersman is hot. She can brief me any day.

 

[captainv]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]It will be interesting to see at what speed the abort was initiated. I said a prayer thanking the aviation gods the last time I flew a Westwind (a single tire on each main), a blown tire on that airplane would make for a bad day at any speed.[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]From what I remember of Boeing's study on RTOs, most fatal RTOs occur during a high-speed abort for a problem that would've been better handled in the air. (I'll let the NTSB make the conclusions on the CAE crash.) But here's a snippet:
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]A takeoff may be rejected for a variety of reasons, including engine failure, activation of the takeoff warning horn, direction from air traffic control (ATC), blown tires, or system warnings. In contrast, the large number of takeoffs that continue successfully with indications of airplane system problems, such as master caution lights or blown tires, are rarely reported outside the airline’s own information system. These takeoffs may result in diversions or delays, but the landings are usually uneventful. In fact, in about 55 percent of RTOs the result might have been an uneventful landing if the take-off had been continued, as stated in the Takeoff Safety Training Aid published in 1992 with the endorsement of the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Some of the lessons learned from studying RTO accidents and incidents include the following: [/FONT]

• [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]More than half the RTO accidents and incidents reported in the past 30 years were initiated from a speed in excess of V[SIZE=-2]1[/SIZE]. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]About one-third were reported as occurring on runways that were wet or contaminated with snow or ice. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Only slightly more than one-fourth of the accidents and incidents actually involved any loss of engine thrust. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Nearly one-fourth of the accidents and incidents were the result of wheel or tire failures. [/FONT]
• [FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Approximately 80 percent of the overrun events were potentially avoidable by following appropriate operational practices.[/FONT]

 

[WTF]

blown tire

I too had a blown tire twice with the same airplane, same side, 6 legs apart. Found to be a wiring/ohm level issue. It would lock one tire up and flat spot and blow on takeoff. The airplane both times pulled to the affected tires(outside left main). At 100 knots. It felt like a sudden crosswind pushing the airplane. The left wing dipped low so I applied right yoke pressure to raise the left, sliding slightly to the left as we lifted off, and talked about what happened in the air. Landing was uneventfull until reaching about 70-80 knots when the airplane began to shake violently as the tire was now slapping the flat spot over and over again as we continued to roll to a stop and got tugged in.
Not sure what happened here so I am not saying its the same situation, but I agree with the previous posts that an abort for what 'FELT' like a blown tire after 90 knots is not something I would abort for unless it is catastrophic resulting in total loss of control. Taking it up and having an chance to get your wits is a better plan even if you cross grass/taxi ways... if your that close to getting the aircraft to fly it would have to be a MAJOR event to stop. In the military they say an abort after 100 kts usually results in bent metal.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,425710,00.html

 

[ultrarunner]

How close to max landing weight would or could they have been when landing back at TEB? any 60 drivers care to figure out the fuel required for TEB-TUL minus time in air and landing weight back at TEB? Could it have stressed the little tires?

Just ran the profile with todays winds.

Burn shows 4200 and 2+49

Plus 1600 for rerserve

Plus a couple hundred for ATC/TEB delays, etc

And I have taxied out with 5,000 minimum for that trip.

Plus 15,200 gives a ramp wt of 20,200 before pax and bags.

They mileage may vary....

 

[Fly91]

I have flown the Lear 60 for a few years and blown tires have never been said to cause a directional control problem. I had a tire blow in a 60 on takeoff at 105-110 KIAS. We continued the takeoff with no issues or directional control problems. We also landed 2 hours later without incident.

Blown tires in the 60, or any aircraft, are known to severaly impede brake effectiveness. Other possibilities in the 60 after a blown tire are flap damage, hydraulic brake line rupture, squat switch damage (causing spoiler, T/R, and anti-skid braking problems). Any number of things could happen.

After my blown tire incident, I concluded aborting after 80 KIAS for a blown tire is a bad idea in almost every case. Everything I have read that has data on the matter would agree.

(I'm assuming you flew 2 hours to your destination of course.)

But only thing I certainly would NOT have done was retract the gear and gone on a 2 hour flight. It may not have come back down depending on what could have gotten damaged on the gear or any rubber jammed in there somewhere. Like they did a few weeks ago at LAX, just burned fuel and landed.

Pilots call I guess on that though.