ERAU Arrow crash preliminary report
#1
ERAU Arrow crash preliminary report
As rumored, wing came off in flight, looks like metal fatigue:
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...=HTML&IType=FA
https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/Re...=HTML&IType=FA
#2
This airplane probably led a life of high-cycles, with plenty of low-altitude maneuver and cruise in air that tends to be bumpy and salty. This could be the canary for PA-28's of that generation. Wouldn't surprise me to see bulletins or AD's to follow.
Fair winds and following seas.
Fair winds and following seas.
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 548
You rarely see pictures in Prelim reports. My guess is the NTSB is going after an Emergency AD.
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
SB1006 is for corrosion behind the fuel tank mid spar.
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
SB1006 is for corrosion behind the fuel tank mid spar.
Last edited by Whale Driver; 04-17-2018 at 11:59 AM.
#6
In a land of unicorns
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Position: Whale FO
Posts: 6,406
You rarely see pictures in Prelim reports. My guess is the NTSB is going after an Emergency AD.
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
#7
#8
I'm *assuming* not a design flaw, since piston ASEL wing spars are pretty well-defined technology. Perhaps a material defect from the mfg... that might affect other hulls. Worst case they tried to use high-tech design tools to remove weight during a design update, and went too far.
Since both wings were affected, and the plane was so new, I suspect we're going to hear more on this one. If my kid went to school there, he'd be grounded until they checked the other planes, or determined that that the accident plane was over-stressed.
It's *possible* somebody over-stressed the plane at some point in the past and didn't report it, but frankly it would be hard to crack wing spars without bending anything first... I would think an event like that that would have left visible bent sheet metal and popped rivets. I've seen over-stressed planes that made it home and they were obviously jacked up.
#9
You rarely see pictures in Prelim reports. My guess is the NTSB is going after an Emergency AD.
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
SB1006 is for corrosion behind the fuel tank mid spar.
"None of the surfaces exhibited visible evidence of corrosion or other preexisting damage. The right wing also exhibited fatigue cracks in the lower spar cap at the same hole location extending up to 0.047-inch deep."
SB1006 is for corrosion behind the fuel tank mid spar.
.........
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post