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

[Club ORD FO]

Thats scary stuff. You pull on the reversers and get forward thrust instead? Something wrong with the design there

 

[FlyingPieceOfSt]

Yep

Thats scary stuff. You pull on the reversers and get forward thrust instead? Something wrong with the design there

...

And if you dont know how to finess the TR's to the stowed position after landing the passengers will sure know it by the forward surge of the aircraft as you taxi off the runway.

 

[Hung Start]

Thats scary stuff. You pull on the reversers and get forward thrust instead? Something wrong with the design there

I agree. Ray and I are going to have a big chat on this one!

Hung

 

[uscpilot]

Notapilots post was from the NTSB report for the Jerry Jones Lear 60 crash.
I believe that there was a mod put on later aircraft (there is a list of S-B's available, ask at recurrent) that allows both TR's to deploy with only one squat switch in ground mode. Ill see if I can find it. Nevertheless if they stowed uncommanded the FADEC should roll them back to idle and making the piggybacks useless.
Also keep in mind ground idle is 52% N2 which is not bad but air idle is 65% which gives you quite a push.
The standard brakes steel two rotor assemblies(later models including the one in question should have had the three rotor brakes).
It would have been possible to have brakes on only one wheel if a tire blew and caused a sq sw to fail to air. If the left inboard tire blew and failed the left squat switch to air then both out board brakes would be useless and the crew would only have normal brakes on the right inboard. The only way (other than emer handle) to regain toe brakes would be to turn the antiskid off. This would close the solonoid shutoff valves and allow brake pressure to the remaining three wheels, with out antiskid protection mind you. You have to be pretty on the ball to think of it though.
Concerning the earlier discussion of high/low speed aborts (this is only what I have seen and I am in no way being critical of these crew members) everyone always gives the "standard" brief. Nevertheless the vast majority will abort for AHS,ADC,PFD failures and so forth. Secondly you dont always know its a tire failure (no annunciator for it). What if it was a flight control issue. They had only seconds to decide. While most people would be ok taking off after 80/90 kts with a blown tire they would not with a flight controll malf. Going back to what I said earlier most people abort for anything and the whole "band,swerve,or bell" goes out the window as soon as something abnormal happens. Ultimatly the PIC's decision if the safety of the flight is in queston.
I am not second guessing the crew nor am a suggesting that anyone here is. We will never have all the facts. The best we can do is learn from this tragedy.
Some of the earlier posts were extreamly critical of the 60. To me its like an excentric uncle. I can make fun of him but if anyone else says anything they better watch their a$$. The 60 (as a lot of other planes I would assume) is a mix recent and ancient technology. Lets not forget that the basis for the lear came from that old fighter (what was it swiss or spanish I think) that Bill Lear got a hold of. Among other things the 60 had the old brakes (including antiskid), a modified verison of the wing, and a plug stuck in a 55 fuselage to make it longer. But up front it had fairly recent (in the case of the XR very recent) avionics, and in the back it of course had those wonderful PW305A'a with FADEC. No it would pass cert if it was put up for it today but that does not mean that it is unsafe. On the contrary it has been a very safe airplane. Like most aircraft it has its own idiosyncrasies that you have to nake yourself aware. While there have been accidents this was the first to include fatalities.
Fly Safe and RIP to the fallen crew.

 

[filejw]

You guys sure you aren't flying an Airbus???

 

[AirplanesSuck]

Some of the earlier posts were extreamly critical of the 60. To me its like an excentric uncle. I can make fun of him but if anyone else says anything they better watch their a$$.

Some of the critics of the 60 (like me) are also "nephews" and your "cousins" to use your parlance. The only reason I don't tell passengers not to buy/fly on the plane is that it's my moneymaker. It's a blast to fly, but when you have to put it to work out of short runways, reasonable amount of bags, high elevation... it doesn't make the cut IMO.

 

[Basil]

LJ25. Right. I'd like to know what is taught to corp types as far as a reason for a high speed abort.

I think that this may be quite an under-standardized area, especially in corporate aviation. Here's some good reading and food for thought:

http://www.faa.gov/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/training/media/takeoff_safety.pdf

 

[Quimby]

were they taking off on 29?

 

[SLUF4]

were they taking off on 29?

No, 11

 

[SLUF4]

New article in The State newspaper says TR's were not operating at the time of accident