Go Back   Airline Pilot Central Forums - Find your next job as a Pilot > >
In Memory Of Pay your respects to fallen aviators
 

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 01-22-2016, 01:03 PM   #81  
Airborne bus driver
 
RadialGal's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: sky gypsy
Posts: 198
Default

I just can't see any way the NTSB would risk God only knows what kind of wrath to cover up something as obvious as a Hot section turbine failure for a little company like Martinaire. Even P&W would be small potatoes to take a risk like that. A failed turbine blade is VERY obvious and I would imagine, impossible to cover up.

Some of what you say makes sense, other stuff does not. When you talk about the turbine failure, you keep talking about the wheel being being "inches away." Inches away form what?

A prop windmilling is different than a prop turning under power. They mean drastically different things.....you mention the prop "had" to be turning when it hit the ground. Do you believe it was powered at the time? I think some of us are unclear of your concerns. You keep mentioning a different borescope inspection. Did you have it performed, your lawyer?

We aren't saying that you are right or wrong in your beliefs. Just trying to figure out what HARD evidence you have, who provided it to you, and what the NTSB's response was.

Again, sorry for your loss.

RadialGal
RadialGal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-22-2016, 05:02 PM   #82  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

RadialGal,
The investigator from Aeroscope told me the damaged power turbine is inches away from the compressor section of the turbine wheel. Only the power turbine was damaged and not the compressor section. He said if the impact caused the damage to the turbine wheel, he would have expected the compressor turbine to also have damage. But this was not the case. It helps prove that the power turbine failed during the flight.

I believe the propeller was still turning under its own inertia after the engine failed. We are only talking about seconds at the end of this 58 second flight. So no, it was not under power at impact. The engine did not have the damage or torsional overload that would be seen when the prop suddenly is stopped while under power. The investigator mentioned this also to me.

My lawyer hired Aeroscope to investigate the wreckage. I personally talked to the investigator who said the findings were "turbine wheel failure 101" So yes, like you indicate, it should have been easy to tell what happened. I think Martinaire knew this from the beginning and tried to block our access to that engine. They were at the crash scene the next day. They would not allow us to inspect the wreckage without a court order. That is unheard of and very suspicious of their guilt. They also knew their mechanic had taken that turbine wheel out for inspection a couple of weeks before this crash.

As far as the NTSB response, my lawyer is going to write them to see if they would reopen the case. The problem is now that the statute of limitations is just passed on Jan 15th, the wreckage is going to be destroyed at the end of February. So, my wife and I know the truth, but we would like the government to correct their report. The way things have gone for us, I doubt that will happen.
Thanks for your time.
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2016, 12:42 PM   #83  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JamesNoBrakes's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: Volleyball Player
Posts: 3,309
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kepi View Post
RadialGal,
The investigator from Aeroscope told me
Did he share these pictures? When we investigate aviation accidents, we take hundreds, sometimes thousands, of pictures. If there is a component being looked at, like an engine and the turbine/compressor section, there will be many many pictures. When we tear down a component or sub-system, pictures are taken of each step to document. Did this investigator supply you with these photographs showing what is claimed? I'm absolutely not asking you to show the pictures, I'm just asking what actual "evidence" has been provided. Another troubling aspect is how the airplane aerodynamically got to a distance which required engine power. If the engine failed, how was it producing 93% power?
JamesNoBrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-24-2016, 07:02 AM   #84  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

I haven't seen pictures. I asked for a copy of the report. The investigator has his notes and photos. No actual report is printed until the case goes to trial. This is because my lawyer would have to share the evidence with the defense at some point in the case. This is standard procedure in these cases as there is no sense letting the defense know what we know.

The 93% power is a speculated average based on the GPS chip placed in a simulator. If he was continuing to accelerate throughout the flight, why would his rate of climb decay as mentioned in these sentences from the report?

"The airplane continued accelerating while climbing at about 500 to 700 fpm to an altitude of about 960 feet MSL (240 feet AGL). The rate of climb then decayed, and after reaching a peak altitude of about 980 feet MSL (260 feet AGL) at 19:57:45, the airplane started to descend, and ultimately impacted terrain about 1 mile west-southwest of the departure end of the runway."

He must have lost the engine during the acceleration at 93% power which would make sense since the engine was being put under maximum stress. Why else would he descend at that point? All he had to do was hold on to that setting and he would have continued to climb.

Also, since they are using the last GPS position (at the beginning of the descent) to speculate the time of impact, I don't believe they can say he was actually accelerating into the ground unless they had more GPS coordinates during the descent. The following is from their report:

"The exact time of the impact is not known, but the simulation model flight time from the last recorded GPS position to the location and elevation of the impact site was estimated at 15 seconds, putting the time of impact at 19:58:13. The simulation rate of descent from 19:57:52 to the time of impact is about 650 to 680 fpm. The elapsed time from when the airplane became airborne at 19:57:19 to impact is 54 seconds."

So the estimated descent is actually similar to the measured ascent. My lawyer and I believe he had control of the aircraft and was trying to make an emergency landing. He didn't lose control or get spatial disorientation and fly into the ground.

The 650 to 680 fpm rate of descent is velocity and says nothing about acceleration. They would have needed more coordinates to say he was accelerating on impact. So yes, at 650 fpm rate of descent and altitude of 240 feet AGL, it would be a matter of seconds to fall from the sky.

Correct me if anything doesn't make sense as I am not a pilot or crash investigator. My lawyer had been both a pilot and lawyer of over 30 years. He deals with many crash investigations and owned a aircraft with a PT6 engine. He doesn't believe my son just flew into the ground. If my lawyer believed there was a chance of that, he wouldn't have taken this case nor put thousands of dollars.
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2016, 04:19 AM   #85  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

I have emailed the investigator to see if he will send me some pictures which I will share.
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2016, 01:08 PM   #86  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

The investigator from Aeroscope sent me pictures of the power turbine wheel and the compressor turbine wheel for comparison. He also included the exhaust duct which was damaged from the broken blades as they exited. He is mailing me the disk with all of the pictures.
This picture shows the power turbine damage.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg power turbine.jpg (78.2 KB, 133 views)
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2016, 01:09 PM   #87  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

This picture shows the exhaust duct.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg exhaust.jpg (69.1 KB, 132 views)
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2016, 01:10 PM   #88  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

This picture is for comparison and shows the compressor turbine wheel which is right next to the power turbine wheel but is still intact proving that the damage did not occur on impact.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Compressor.jpg (71.1 KB, 134 views)
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2016, 01:19 PM   #89  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

The following is an explanation from the investigator when I asked him about the propeller damage with regard to it
being powered on impact and the discrepancy of his findings with the NTSB.

"The propeller did show some evidence of rotation but I would not categorize the damage as indicative of significant power. One blade is fairly straight, one is bent forward and the third was fractured. I would doubt that the engine would still run once the PT wheel fails. But the propeller could very well still rotate as it would “windmill” from the air flowing over it. So the damage that I see and the NTSB is commenting on is more likely from a windmilling propeller than from the engine operating at impact. The fact that we don’t have any turbine blades with the engine is telling. It is also telling that we don’t see any kind of torque wrinkle in the exhaust duct as is typical in a PT6 when the engine impacts terrain under power. We also don’t see any evidence of rotational contact of the axial impeller with the impeller shroud. When the engine is operating, those two components will show significant rub when the engine hits the ground under power.

Unfortunately, the NTSB just parrots whatever the manufacturer tells them. And the manufacturer does everything in its power to alleviate itself of all responsibility and tells the NTSB that every crash is all due to pilot error. It is a travesty that our government operates this way and we have tried very hard to reverse this process but so far to no avail."

This investigator's references showed he was trained at the NTSB Academy as I have included below:

NTSB Academy, Washington DC, Aircraft Accident Investigator Training
Program. Training included: Accident Investigation, Failure Analysis of
Airframes and Engines, Mid-air Collisions, In-flight Breakups, Fault Tree
Analysis, Piston and Turbine Engine Failures, Pre and Post impact Fire
Analysis, Metallurgy, Pathology, Biomedics, Crash Survivability, Aircraft
Performance, Impact Kinematics, Propeller Analysis, Aviation Weather,
Aircraft Maintenance, and many others.

I believe him and the pictures. Like I said, he is mailing me the disk with all of the pictures. Does anyone believe me now?
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-26-2016, 07:08 AM   #90  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 34
Default

Here is a link to a USA Today report on the "Lies and Coverups" with small plane accidents.

Safety last: Lies and coverups mask roots of small-plane carnage
Kepi is offline   Reply With Quote
 
 
 

 
Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Martinaire Caravan down DirectTo Safety 30 03-30-2017 02:24 PM
Caravan crash in Ohio fr8av8r_66 Part 135 44 03-14-2008 11:06 PM
MDW Crash Pad "POLICE" on the prowl! GravellyPointer Major 17 04-08-2007 07:05 AM
Martinaire Pilot Hiring Update HSLD Hiring News 1 02-08-2006 10:37 AM
Martinaire hiring Freight Dog Hiring News 0 10-12-2005 10:20 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:22 PM.


vBulletin® v3.9.3.5, Copyright ©2000-2019, MH Sub I, LLC dba vBulletin
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1