T-45 fatal in Tellico Plains, Tennessee
10-20-2017, 08:13 AM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Recovering OBOGS addict
Posts: 385
Originally Posted by F4E Mx
I am sorry if you don't like my comments. Actually, hold that, I don't really care if you like my comments or not.
The suggestion to close your pie hole was based on the reality that you in fact know nothing about the facts of the matter. Zero. The your internet search mojo does not make you an expert on this mishap, nor any other. Please stop acting like you know something more than you do. If not for your own credibility, then at least out of respect for those who are actually working to find the truth.
10-20-2017, 11:34 AM
#52
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2017
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by F4E Mx
How about something constructive, like Magee-Tyson 30 miles away to the north was reporting overcast skies when the accident was first reported before four-o'clock - making the pilots squinting into the setting sun while flying a perfectly good aircraft into the ground not too plausible.
I don't think there is any indication it was the pilots' fault and every other avenue needs to be exhausted before going there. I am sorry if you don't like my comments. Actually, hold that, I don't really care if you like my comments or not.
I don't think there is any indication it was the pilots' fault and every other avenue needs to be exhausted before going there. I am sorry if you don't like my comments. Actually, hold that, I don't really care if you like my comments or not.
10-20-2017, 01:05 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2014
Posts: 281
Originally Posted by RhinoBallAuto
It's not about liking your comments or not. The sort of speculation that you are throwing around is irresponsible and quite frankly disrespectful. Not only for the fallen, but also for the integrity of the processes that are in place to determine causal factors. Nothing you write is helpful -- in fact, uninformed rambling only undermines the investigators' efforts. Your rush to be the smartest guy on an internet forum only circulates rumor, innuendo, and being that you are privy to no facts just makes you a gossip merchant, and nothing more.
The suggestion to close your pie hole was based on the reality that you in fact know nothing about the facts of the matter. Zero. The your internet search mojo does not make you an expert on this mishap, nor any other. Please stop acting like you know something more than you do. If not for your own credibility, then at least out of respect for those who are actually working to find the truth.
The suggestion to close your pie hole was based on the reality that you in fact know nothing about the facts of the matter. Zero. The your internet search mojo does not make you an expert on this mishap, nor any other. Please stop acting like you know something more than you do. If not for your own credibility, then at least out of respect for those who are actually working to find the truth.
I am not the one who came up with the suggestion that the pilots flew into the ground because they were looking at the setting sun. I pointed out that the time of day of the accident and the reported cloud ceiling at a nearby airport made that not very likely after the suggestion was made.
There is no evidence this accident was pilot error and I have never implied that. Why that offends you I don't have a clue.
I have flown an MU-2 into the nearby Andrews-Murphy airport several times. There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude. It is in the Nantahala National Forest and very close to a wilderness area as well. Was it an engine problem? I don't know. It may be possible to isolate a fatigue failure in an engine component that was pre-existing before impact. I hope a definite cause can be found.
The whole OBOGS/bleed air can of worms is another issue.
I don't see how discussing possible mechanical issues to a serious accident impedes any investigation or is in anyway disrespectful to the pilots. Just the opposite, in fact.
10-20-2017, 01:30 PM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by F4E Mx
There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude.
"no place to go"??As in an off-field landing?
One of the Navy guys here can correct me if necessary, but I seriously doubt that would be a normal option considered by T-45 aviators who lose their engine. I doubt it's trained for or discussed beyond a "hail Mary" option if they try the Martin-Baker escape plan and still find themselves sitting in the jet.
10-20-2017, 01:37 PM
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2017
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
"no place to go"??As in an off-field landing?
One of the Navy guys here can correct me if necessary, but I seriously doubt that would be a normal option considered by T-45 aviators who lose their engine. I doubt it's trained for or discussed beyond a "hail Mary" option if they try the Martin-Baker escape plan and still find themselves sitting in the jet.
10-20-2017, 01:39 PM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2009
Posts: 5,193
Originally Posted by F4E Mx
I am not the one who came up with the suggestion that the pilots flew into the ground because they were looking at the setting sun. I pointed out that the time of day of the accident and the reported cloud ceiling at a nearby airport made that not very likely after the suggestion was made.
There is no evidence this accident was pilot error and I have never implied that. Why that offends you I don't have a clue.
I have flown an MU-2 into the nearby Andrews-Murphy airport several times. There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude. It is in the Nantahala National Forest and very close to a wilderness area as well. Was it an engine problem? I don't know. It may be possible to isolate a fatigue failure in an engine component that was pre-existing before impact. I hope a definite cause can be found.
The whole OBOGS/bleed air can of worms is another issue.
I don't see how discussing possible mechanical issues to a serious accident impedes any investigation or is in anyway disrespectful to the pilots. Just the opposite, in fact.
There is no evidence this accident was pilot error and I have never implied that. Why that offends you I don't have a clue.
I have flown an MU-2 into the nearby Andrews-Murphy airport several times. There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude. It is in the Nantahala National Forest and very close to a wilderness area as well. Was it an engine problem? I don't know. It may be possible to isolate a fatigue failure in an engine component that was pre-existing before impact. I hope a definite cause can be found.
The whole OBOGS/bleed air can of worms is another issue.
I don't see how discussing possible mechanical issues to a serious accident impedes any investigation or is in anyway disrespectful to the pilots. Just the opposite, in fact.
Just stop....
10-20-2017, 06:32 PM
#57
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: Recovering OBOGS addict
Posts: 385
Originally Posted by F4E Mx
I am not the one who came up with the suggestion that the pilots flew into the ground because they were looking at the setting sun. I pointed out that the time of day of the accident and the reported cloud ceiling at a nearby airport made that not very likely after the suggestion was made.
There is no evidence this accident was pilot error and I have never implied that. Why that offends you I don't have a clue.
I have flown an MU-2 into the nearby Andrews-Murphy airport several times. There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude. It is in the Nantahala National Forest and very close to a wilderness area as well. Was it an engine problem? I don't know. It may be possible to isolate a fatigue failure in an engine component that was pre-existing before impact. I hope a definite cause can be found.
The whole OBOGS/bleed air can of worms is another issue.
I don't see how discussing possible mechanical issues to a serious accident impedes any investigation or is in anyway disrespectful to the pilots. Just the opposite, in fact.
There is no evidence this accident was pilot error and I have never implied that. Why that offends you I don't have a clue.
I have flown an MU-2 into the nearby Andrews-Murphy airport several times. There is no place for a single-engine airplane to go in the crash area if the engine is lost at low altitude. It is in the Nantahala National Forest and very close to a wilderness area as well. Was it an engine problem? I don't know. It may be possible to isolate a fatigue failure in an engine component that was pre-existing before impact. I hope a definite cause can be found.
The whole OBOGS/bleed air can of worms is another issue.
I don't see how discussing possible mechanical issues to a serious accident impedes any investigation or is in anyway disrespectful to the pilots. Just the opposite, in fact.
So to risk repeating what others have said, please stop.
10-21-2017, 03:32 AM
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 19,273
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
"no place to go"??As in an off-field landing?
One of the Navy guys here can correct me if necessary, but I seriously doubt that would be a normal option considered by T-45 aviators who lose their engine. I doubt it's trained for or discussed beyond a "hail Mary" option if they try the Martin-Baker escape plan and still find themselves sitting in the jet.
10-21-2017, 05:24 AM
#59
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by sailingfun
Low levels are flown at fairly high speeds. The procedure in the event of a engine failure would be to zoom climb and attempt a restart if applicable and altitude dependent. If no restart attempt or failed attempt a ejection would follow. There would be no attempt at a off or on field landing. Off field landings are almost never survivable in a tactical jet.
?? This is directed at me because...........Somehow my post left you with the impression that I thought anything other than ejection was a serious option?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
