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

[JettBoii]

Engine fail?

 

[momalley81]

Engine fail?

In a 60?!? It ain't exactly a Seminole. Maybe if they both quit; a heavy 60 on one will still outclimb a CRJ. :laugh:

 

[LRvsH25B]

In a 60?!? It ain't exactly a Seminole. Maybe if they both quit; a heavy 60 on one will still outclimb a CRJ. :laugh:

Exactly, but I think he was going in the other direction of your statement. Because of that raw power, and make no mistake, the 60 has its fair share, if you come to fly without your "A" game and one rolls back on you (before V1 or Just After), you will in fact have your hands full; a 60 can get away from you with minimal ease.

Within the same situation, some people get in trouble with the auto re-light; the plane snaps to the L or R, the pilot stuffs the appropriate rudder input, and about the time the pilot gets it headed back twards the centerline, the auto-relight lights off the engine that rolled back (Power levers are still in the T/O detent so power will come right back), and now that rudder input you have in, just snapped you back past the centerline, and here we go again.

Granted that's not the norm, but in the 60, you'll see that in the sim more often than you'd think because it is so overpowered.

I remember climbing at Vmo/Mmo well into the 30s could be done with no effort at all; Only time I have ever climbed @ 12K FPM (lasted less than 20 seconds) was in a 60; only time I have ever gotten an overspeed warning on 1 engine in the sim on a hot/high day was in the 60; only time I've ever seen a sim partner Vmc an airplane in the sim was in the 60, and the only time I've ever really scared the SH!!T out of myself, was as a new captain (from DA50s) in the 60. Power Power Power

 

[BoilerUP]

Can any airplane really be overpowered?

If the LR60 is known to be overpowered, wouldn't the proper description be under-winged?

 

[mx284]

Sounds like a wheel assembly failure?? Have to see what the federales come up with. RIP those who didn't make it.

 

[Hung Start]

Can any airplane really be overpowered?

If the LR60 is known to be overpowered, wouldn't the proper description be under-winged?

Well, it is that. Would cruise right past .92 if it wasn't for the wing buzz.

Oh yeah,, and that silly mach horn.

Hung

 

[LR60BOY]

I've been told that............ if you position the rotary test switch to the "mach trim" position and push the test button, it will silence the horn. So I've heard.

I flew 60's for about 10 years. Completely agree with what was said earlier about the T/R and FADEC relationship! If I want full reverse, give me full reverse. Real curious as to what happened on this one.

RIP and Godspeed to everyone involved.

 

[LJ45]

A few years back I was a copilot on a Lear 31 and we had all four tires blow on takeoff.. about 10 Kts shy of V1 which resulted in a loss of directional control.. Once the tires blew, the wheel assembly hit the runway and shattered.. of course we didn't know at the time... had we not been on a 13,000ft rwy I don't think we would have survived. The wheels on the 60 are similar to the 31 ( if not the same). Just a Thought...

My thoughts are with the families... RIP

not to hijack the thread...but how did you blow all 4 tires?

 

[NYG-Flyer]

Feds determined FOD blew Right side Mains.. Then the Left Mains went about 2000 feet into the attempted stop. None of the Plugs blew... all the tires blew out the side wall. The initial Right side when it blew, dropped the wheel assembly onto the rwy.. and shattered.. No Brakes.. No Wheels... " D.O. Kept asking us.. the Acc. Stop..Acc.GO shows 4,300ft why did it take you 10,600 to stop..Duh.. No brakes or wheels.. No Directional Control..!!"

 

[Hung Start]

I've been told that............ if you position the rotary test switch to the "mach trim" position and push the test button, it will silence the horn. So I've heard.

I flew 60's for about 10 years. Completely agree with what was said earlier about the T/R and FADEC relationship! If I want full reverse, give me full reverse. Real curious as to what happened on this one.

RIP and Godspeed to everyone involved.

True about the test switch. But, whoever gets the horn has to buy that night. Gets expensive quickly!

Hung

 

[LJ45]

Feds determined FOD blew Right side Mains.. Then the Left Mains went about 2000 feet into the attempted stop. None of the Plugs blew... all the tires blew out the side wall. The initial Right side when it blew, dropped the wheel assembly onto the rwy.. and shattered.. No Brakes.. No Wheels... " D.O. Kept asking us.. the Acc. Stop..Acc.GO shows 4,300ft why did it take you 10,600 to stop..Duh.. No brakes or wheels.. No Directional Control..!!"

WOW !! glad you had the extra runway.

 

[momalley81]

Exactly, but I think he was going in the other direction of your statement. Because of that raw power, and make no mistake, the 60 has its fair share, if you come to fly without your "A" game and one rolls back on you (before V1 or Just After), you will in fact have your hands full; a 60 can get away from you with minimal ease.

Within the same situation, some people get in trouble with the auto re-light; the plane snaps to the L or R, the pilot stuffs the appropriate rudder input, and about the time the pilot gets it headed back twards the centerline, the auto-relight lights off the engine that rolled back (Power levers are still in the T/O detent so power will come right back), and now that rudder input you have in, just snapped you back past the centerline, and here we go again.

Granted that's not the norm, but in the 60, you'll see that in the sim more often than you'd think because it is so overpowered.

I remember climbing at Vmo/Mmo well into the 30s could be done with no effort at all; Only time I have ever climbed @ 12K FPM (lasted less than 20 seconds) was in a 60; only time I have ever gotten an overspeed warning on 1 engine in the sim on a hot/high day was in the 60; only time I've ever seen a sim partner Vmc an airplane in the sim was in the 60, and the only time I've ever really scared the SH!!T out of myself, was as a new captain (from DA50s) in the 60. Power Power Power

All good points, I've got my share of time in the beast, both AMS-850 and UNS birds. It will be interesting to find out what happened here, since it looks like they went off the end close to centerline at a very high rate of speed, and may have been on fire before the final impact (one of the first responders claims to have seen a "fireball streak across the road") And since it was a fairly new, low time bird.

And nothing like setting off TA's on airliners 8000' above you coming out of TEB, or doing 2600fpm out of FL360 with the overspeed horn going off...

 

[momalley81]

Can any airplane really be overpowered?

If the LR60 is known to be overpowered, wouldn't the proper description be under-winged?

Its not overpowered; the engineers just figured the solution to the tiny wheels and crap brakes and short wing was put big freakin motors out there...

 

[LJ45]

pure speculation at this point... but they could have hit something (animal etc.) or had a tire come apart that caused failure of the squat switch. This could put the plane in the "air mode" which would cause normal brakes to lock out and TR's to be inop, then you are on emergency brakes only. This happen when the Dallas Cowboys LR60 hit a dear and this looks like a similar crash.

 

[AviateYou]

Very unfortunate. My condolences.

From those numbers it looks as though we have Balanced field length and then some for the Lear 60 if it was configured correctly and 8500 feet of runway for RWY 11. FYI Phase 1A 3 Caliper brakes for the 60 and 55 do work okay from personal experience. But if some of the tires blew - forget it. Look at the photos does it seem as if the flaps were retracted? Hard to tell.

 

[AviateYou]

"And nothing like setting off TA's on airliners 8000' above you coming out of TEB, or doing 2600fpm out of FL360 with the overspeed horn going off..."

Thousand feet per minute in RVSM airspace is normally recommended and required.

 

[BE90flyer]

Thousand feet per minute in RVSM airspace is normally recommended and required.

So what is it? Recommended or required?

 

[AviateYou]

Required when not recommended & Recommended when not required. Beavis.

 

[filejw]

I lost the link but the crew told atc tires blown and aborting.

 

[LRvsH25B]

"And nothing like setting off TA's on airliners 8000' above you coming out of TEB, or doing 2600fpm out of FL360 with the overspeed horn going off..."

Thousand feet per minute in RVSM airspace is normally recommended and required.

That's an old wives tale/aviation myth. 1000 FPM is reccommened during the last 1000 feet of level off and/or in the vicinity of other aircraft. This is simply to reduce the TA/RA alerts.

It is by no means required under any FAR or guidance that you have seen. IT may or may not be required in your RVMS manual; it is only because whoever wrote the manual put it in there and the FEDs signed off on it. Delete that statement and the manual would still get approved.

 

[AviateYou]

That's an old wives tale/aviation myth. 1000 FPM is reccommened during the last 1000 feet of level off and/or in the vicinity of other aircraft. This is simply to reduce the TA/RA alerts.

It is by no means required under any FAR or guidance that you have seen. IT may or may not be required in your RVMS manual; it is only because whoever wrote the manual put it in there and the FEDs signed off on it. Delete that statement and the manual would still get approved.

Okay, ever notice how a know-it-all usually doesn't? Like they say on the McLaughlin Hour "WRONG" Sorry to rain on your parade, I even supplied you with the link below. It's a recommendation by the FAA. BTW, I wrote several Aircraft RVSM Operation and Maintenance Manuals that were all FAA approved it's changing all the time. I'll tell you what, let's change it to "IT SHOULD BE " did you read the original quote? Now go crack that RVSM manual in your bird and study up. Look it up: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ice_units/enroute/RVSM/documents/chng7mod.doc

 

[Oakum_Boy]

Woah. Abort for a blown tire. Better to go into the air. Damn.

 

[AirMugsy]

Looks like the tire theory might be correct:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080921/ap_en_mu/learjet_crash

WEST COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — Federal officials say the doomed crew of a Learjet that crashed in South Carolina thought a tire on the plane blew as they started down the runway.

National Transportation Safety Board member Debbie Hersman said Sunday that crew members told air traffic controllers they heard a tire burst and tried to abort the takeoff Friday night.

Former Blink-182 drummer Travis Barker and celebrity disc jockey DJ AM were injured in the crash that killed four other people on board.

Hersman says the conversation between the plane's crew and the air traffic controllers is captured on a cockpit voice recorder that was recovered from the wreckage. She says the cause of the crash is being investigated.

The Learjet crashed through a fence and shot over a highway before stopping on an embankment.

 

[Club ORD FO]

more pictures on tmz.com. looks like the landing gear is nowhere near the main wreckage

 

[SLUF4]

It will be interesting to see what the air return on the 12th was for. From flightaware it looked as if they were heading to TUL and turned back then did 2 maint. test flights before heading to CAE. Of course none of this may be related. I took off over the crash site this morning and it was a little odd feeling.


http://www.thestate.com/local/story/530614.html

this says they radioed that they had a blowout but could not stop.

 

[AviateYou]

http://photos.tmz.com/galleries/the_crash_site

 

[LJ45]

Okay, ever notice how a know-it-all usually doesn't? Like they say on the McLaughlin Hour "WRONG" Sorry to rain on your parade, I even supplied you with the link below. It's a recommendation by the FAA. BTW, I wrote several Aircraft RVSM Operation and Maintenance Manuals that were all FAA approved it's changing all the time. I'll tell you what, let's change it to "IT SHOULD BE " did you read the original quote? Now go crack that RVSM manual in your bird and study up. Look it up: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ice_units/enroute/RVSM/documents/chng7mod.doc

And the notice you linked to talks about when climbing or decending near another aircraft...not for ALL climbs or decents.

 

[LJ45]

It will be interesting to see what the air return on the 12th was for. From flightaware it looked as if they were heading to TUL and turned back then did 2 maint. test flights before heading to CAE. Of course none of this may be related. I took off over the crash site this morning and it was a little odd feeling.


http://www.thestate.com/local/story/530614.html

this says they radioed that they had a blowout but could not stop.

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?

 

[LRvsH25B]

Okay, ever notice how a know-it-all usually doesn't? Like they say on the McLaughlin Hour "WRONG" Sorry to rain on your parade, I even supplied you with the link below. It's a recommendation by the FAA. BTW, I wrote several Aircraft RVSM Operation and Maintenance Manuals that were all FAA approved it's changing all the time. I'll tell you what, let's change it to "IT SHOULD BE " did you read the original quote? Now go crack that RVSM manual in your bird and study up. Look it up: http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org...ice_units/enroute/RVSM/documents/chng7mod.doc

Now you wait just minute. I was not rude to you, short or curt with you, why have you choosen to respond in such a manner? I'll not have you speaking to me like that.

You clearly stated that 1000 FPM is 'normally recommended and required' and I disagreed and said it was not required anywhere in RVSM airspace, as are the facts,

Let's break this down:

You wrote:

Thousand feet per minute in RVSM airspace is normally recommended and required.

My exact response to you was as follows:

That's an old wives tale/aviation myth. 1000 FPM is reccommened during the last 1000 feet of level off and/or in the vicinity of other aircraft. This is simply to reduce the TA/RA alerts.

It is by no means required under any FAR or guidance that you have seen. IT may or may not be required in your RVMS manual; it is only because whoever wrote the manual put it in there and the FEDs signed off on it. Delete that statement and the manual would still get approved.

The 2nd sentence of my 1st paragraph clearly states IT IS RECOMMENED. The 1st sentence of my 2nd Paragraph goes on to say it is NOT REQUIRED ANYWHERE!

Your link states under RECOMMENDED OPERATING PARCTICES (part b.)

"b. Climb and descent rates in RVSM airspace and Transition areas should be limited to 1,000 fpm when operating within five (5) nm and 2,000 ft of other aircraft to minimize the generation of TAs and RAs." Is that not exactly what I wrote as referenced above? Exactly?

Nobody disagreed with you about it being a recommendation; and that is all it is, a recommendation that nobody is required to follow, not a requirement. Where we differed was you said it was a requirement, and it clearly is not and never has been. NEVER. You still have not shown where it is a requirement, as you say it is. Where is that guidance? Where does it say RVSM airspace requires operators to climb and descend at all times at 1000 FPM? Please point that out so I can apoligize.

I don't care how many manuals you ahve written; if you think a recommendation is the same thing as a requirement, then you have no business in the manual business and there are King Air operators out there with bad manuals. It's just that simple.

Look HS125 F/O, I am not about to get into some arguemnt with you about all of this. Just show what I have asked for, so we can prove me wrong and I can go on about my business.

This is a great example of what happens when children are allowed on sites the professionals use.

 

[AviateYou]

And the notice you linked to talks about when climbing or decending near another aircraft...not for ALL climbs or decents.

If you can keep track of when you are 5nm Horiz and 2000 ft vert of of the other aircraft then you are my hero. Go and write a few operating manuals yourself and don't make it personal. If two pilots have an incident or accident the one who was following the recommended procedure gets the vote. Here it is:

RECOMMENDED OPERATING PRACTICES. The following aircraft operating practices recommended for RVSM operations with Version 6.04 should be continued when operating with Change 7:

a. TCAS should be operated in the TA/RA mode during all operations in RVSM airspace and Transition Areas.

b. Climb and descent rates in RVSM airspace and Transition areas should be limited to 1,000 fpm when operating within five (5) nm and 2,000 ft of other aircraft to minimize the generation of TAs and RAs.