Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

What your instructor never taught you. Continuing your education and learning from others. Flight safety topics and accident/incident discussions.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
HJK 414
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5109
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:34 pm
Closest Airfield: EHTW
Location: wandering ...
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 131 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by HJK 414 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:12 am

jimdavis wrote:
Mon Apr 22, 2019 10:21 pm

…...
It happens unbelievably quickly. The only thing you can do about it, if you realise you are running out of airspeed and rudder authority is to reduce power on the good engine - but no one wants to do that when you are battling to remain airborne. It is actually the best option, because at least you hit the ground right side - instead of going in inverted, like this poor guy.

jim

Jim,

People often do not grasp the speed in which it happens.
I often asked low time twin pilots to go to altitude - slow down / flaps down - nose up - and then pull the critical engine.
They usually loose it - simply because they do not expect the suddenness with which you loose control and input effectiveness.

I looked at this video a couple of times and think that he may have had an engine giving him warning signals just as he rotated - and he pulled that nose up to get to altitude (trading speed) and options (probably not expecting it to quit on him a few seconds later).
Once that engine quit - at that altitude and airspeed - the ONLY option is to pull the other engine and find a flat spot - but you have to very - very quick. If you think about it for 2 or 3 seconds - you are dead.
(if you do not have your hand on those throttles - you will be too late)

Flying twins - I see a lot of people commenting on it on Avcom - often wonder how many actually are current with procedures such as this - and keep current - and practise these events.

JK
These users liked the author HJK 414 for the post:
Fransw
The wisest mind has something yet to learn. ...
User avatar
HJK 414
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5109
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:34 pm
Closest Airfield: EHTW
Location: wandering ...
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 131 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by HJK 414 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:30 am

The aircraft in question was a Duke - B series
N65MY.jpg

Pilots was a dentist that used the aircraft to commute to his work ….
RIP.

JK
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
The wisest mind has something yet to learn. ...
Chuck
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 737
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:08 pm
Closest Airfield: FLKK
Location: Lusaka, Zambia
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 14 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by Chuck » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:53 am

HJK 414 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:30 am
The aircraft in question was a Duke - B series

N65MY.jpg


Pilots was a dentist that used the aircraft to commute to his work ….
RIP.

JK

Gut wrenching and shocking footage, but I'm also shocked that pulling teeth buys you an aircraft like that in the US.
'What we find on internet, we readily believe, and what we ourselves find, we imagine others find also.'
Julius Ceasar, 44 BC

Your warning level: [1]

http://www.chickenwingscomics.com/comic ... cw0466.jpg
User avatar
HJK 414
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5109
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:34 pm
Closest Airfield: EHTW
Location: wandering ...
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 131 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by HJK 414 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:59 am

Chuck wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:53 am
HJK 414 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:30 am
The aircraft in question was a Duke - B series

N65MY.jpg


Pilots was a dentist that used the aircraft to commute to his work ….
RIP.

JK

.........but I'm also shocked that pulling teeth buys you an aircraft like that in the US.

Not that unusual....
A 4000 hr TTAF with mid life engines will cost around 200 K.USD
Great value.

The fuel bill is another story.... :wink:

JK
The wisest mind has something yet to learn. ...
Chuck
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 737
Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:08 pm
Closest Airfield: FLKK
Location: Lusaka, Zambia
Has liked: 24 times
Been liked: 14 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by Chuck » Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:17 pm

HJK 414 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:59 am
Chuck wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:53 am
HJK 414 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 11:30 am
The aircraft in question was a Duke - B series

N65MY.jpg


Pilots was a dentist that used the aircraft to commute to his work ….
RIP.

JK

.........but I'm also shocked that pulling teeth buys you an aircraft like that in the US.

Not that unusual....
A 4000 hr TTAF with mid life engines will cost around 200 K.USD
Great value.

The fuel bill is another story.... :wink:

JK

A fantastic tax-deductible no doubt.

OT: No one care to comment on the helo making a quick exit ? The Duke crashes what 75~100m behind ? With the fireball spreading the pilot quickly decides to go park somewhere else !? He must have been getting hammered by the debris from the crash.
'What we find on internet, we readily believe, and what we ourselves find, we imagine others find also.'
Julius Ceasar, 44 BC

Your warning level: [1]

http://www.chickenwingscomics.com/comic ... cw0466.jpg
User avatar
Mrb13676
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 593
Joined: Mon Jun 05, 2017 3:20 pm
Closest Airfield: FASY
Location: Zone outbound
Has liked: 50 times
Been liked: 23 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by Mrb13676 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:40 pm

So I’m going to spitball a bit here (being a low time single engine bugsmasher driver... But hey, it’s the internet!)

Given how dangerous an engine failure at/after rotation is in a twin (OK - maybe there are hundreds of failures yearly that don’t crash?) - should the standard teaching be not to try and achieve blue line while farting around with the dead-leg, identify verify shutdown palaver but rather to immediately pull BOTH engines to idle and LAND STRAIGHT AHEAD as we are taught in singles?

It seems to me that twins offer fantastic safety and redundancy unless you lose an engine in the takeoff segment where it seems the good engine is actually going to try and kill you - especially when it’s a 380 horse monster. Can you imagine how much fun those engines were on the Baron TC???

From scuttlebutt on other forums it seems that the aircraft may have been fully fueled and the runway used at KFUL *may* have been marginal for the Duke on a good day which *may* be why the pilot tried to pull back so aggressively?

As I say, merely poking around here - perhaps I’m speaking from my exhaust pipe?

Mike
Mike Blackburn
ZU-IBM - Sling4 Turbo
User avatar
richard C
8000 Tousand
8000 Tousand
Posts: 8597
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 4:02 pm
Closest Airfield: FAGM
Location: Joeys
Has liked: 75 times
Been liked: 59 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by richard C » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:07 pm

Kind of get the feeling he never survived the 'startle factor'. Maybe the engine quit abruptly a second after the wheels left the tarmac. Two seconds later he had already lost the battle.
These users liked the author richard C for the post (total 3):
Ray WJohan SwakopmundChristopher
Grant all equity and dignity.
Monzeglio Cook + Gibson Architects
User avatar
jimdavis
10000 and still climbing
10000 and still climbing
Posts: 15690
Joined: Thu Jun 19, 2008 7:46 am
Closest Airfield: FAGG
Location: Wilderness
Has liked: 217 times
Been liked: 213 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by jimdavis » Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:17 pm

Mrb13676 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:40 pm
So I’m going to spitball a bit here (being a low time single engine bugsmasher driver... But hey, it’s the internet!)

Given how dangerous an engine failure at/after rotation is in a twin (OK - maybe there are hundreds of failures yearly that don’t crash?) - should the standard teaching be not to try and achieve blue line while farting around with the dead-leg, identify verify shutdown palaver but rather to immediately pull BOTH engines to idle and LAND STRAIGHT AHEAD as we are taught in singles?

It seems to me that twins offer fantastic safety and redundancy unless you lose an engine in the takeoff segment where it seems the good engine is actually going to try and kill you - especially when it’s a 380 horse monster. Can you imagine how much fun those engines were on the Baron TC???

From scuttlebutt on other forums it seems that the aircraft may have been fully fueled and the runway used at KFUL *may* have been marginal for the Duke on a good day which *may* be why the pilot tried to pull back so aggressively?

As I say, merely poking around here - perhaps I’m speaking from my exhaust pipe?

Mike
Mike, a light twin, properly flown, is a very safe piece of equipment, but those two words "properly flown", are the key. If the pilot is mentally prepared for all eventualities, before opening the throttles, there is absolutely no need to go inverted, or even to land straight ahead, if the critical engine fails.

The "straight ahead" plan is a back door for improper planning or piloting.

jim
These users liked the author jimdavis for the post (total 2):
Johan SwakopmundChristopher
"PPL Manual"
"Flight Tests"
"So Others May Live"
"Flying in Africa" Vol 1
"Flying in Africa" Vol 2
Look inside these books, or buy them at: www.jimdavis.co.za.
User avatar
heinrich
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:17 pm
Closest Airfield: EGSX
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 2 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by heinrich » Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:31 pm

jimdavis wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:17 pm
Mrb13676 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:40 pm
So I’m going to spitball a bit here (being a low time single engine bugsmasher driver... But hey, it’s the internet!)

Given how dangerous an engine failure at/after rotation is in a twin (OK - maybe there are hundreds of failures yearly that don’t crash?) - should the standard teaching be not to try and achieve blue line while farting around with the dead-leg, identify verify shutdown palaver but rather to immediately pull BOTH engines to idle and LAND STRAIGHT AHEAD as we are taught in singles?

It seems to me that twins offer fantastic safety and redundancy unless you lose an engine in the takeoff segment where it seems the good engine is actually going to try and kill you - especially when it’s a 380 horse monster. Can you imagine how much fun those engines were on the Baron TC???

From scuttlebutt on other forums it seems that the aircraft may have been fully fueled and the runway used at KFUL *may* have been marginal for the Duke on a good day which *may* be why the pilot tried to pull back so aggressively?

As I say, merely poking around here - perhaps I’m speaking from my exhaust pipe?

Mike
Mike, a light twin, properly flown, is a very safe piece of equipment, but those two words "properly flown", are the key. If the pilot is mentally prepared for all eventualities, before opening the throttles, there is absolutely no need to go inverted, or even to land straight ahead, if the critical engine fails.

The "straight ahead" plan is a back door for improper planning or piloting.

jim
Hmm, not too sure I agree with the underlined Jim. We get taught as part of our pre-takeoff checks that "if anything goes wrong with enough runway ahead, aim to land". "if not enough runway, 30° within field of view etc etc.". We take a few things from different instructors we fly with over the years, and 2 "key learnings" for me have been:
1. Always, as you line up to take off, ask yourself what you'll do if the engine quits right at or after takeoff, and be mentally prepared for that. I guess that is what you mean by properly flown.
2.(in whatever phase of flight) if that engine quits, that airplane now belongs to the insurance co., so do whatever you need to do to land and walk away from it. Don't try and save the airplane.

None of that is new of course.

Have to agree though that the only realistic outcome would have been to try and land straight ahead, right side up, no matter how ugly. :(
Airwayfreak
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:56 am
Closest Airfield: FAJS
Location: Johannesburg
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 20 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by Airwayfreak » Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:50 pm

heinrich wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 2:31 pm
jimdavis wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 1:17 pm
Mrb13676 wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 12:40 pm
So I’m going to spitball a bit here (being a low time single engine bugsmasher driver... But hey, it’s the internet!)

Given how dangerous an engine failure at/after rotation is in a twin (OK - maybe there are hundreds of failures yearly that don’t crash?) - should the standard teaching be not to try and achieve blue line while farting around with the dead-leg, identify verify shutdown palaver but rather to immediately pull BOTH engines to idle and LAND STRAIGHT AHEAD as we are taught in singles?

It seems to me that twins offer fantastic safety and redundancy unless you lose an engine in the takeoff segment where it seems the good engine is actually going to try and kill you - especially when it’s a 380 horse monster. Can you imagine how much fun those engines were on the Baron TC???

From scuttlebutt on other forums it seems that the aircraft may have been fully fueled and the runway used at KFUL *may* have been marginal for the Duke on a good day which *may* be why the pilot tried to pull back so aggressively?

As I say, merely poking around here - perhaps I’m speaking from my exhaust pipe?

Mike
Mike, a light twin, properly flown, is a very safe piece of equipment, but those two words "properly flown", are the key. If the pilot is mentally prepared for all eventualities, before opening the throttles, there is absolutely no need to go inverted, or even to land straight ahead, if the critical engine fails.

The "straight ahead" plan is a back door for improper planning or piloting.

jim
Hmm, not too sure I agree with the underlined Jim. We get taught as part of our pre-takeoff checks that "if anything goes wrong with enough runway ahead, aim to land". "if not enough runway, 30° within field of view etc etc.". We take a few things from different instructors we fly with over the years, and 2 "key learnings" for me have been:
1. Always, as you line up to take off, ask yourself what you'll do if the engine quits right at or after takeoff, and be mentally prepared for that. I guess that is what you mean by properly flown.
2.(in whatever phase of flight) if that engine quits, that airplane now belongs to the insurance co., so do whatever you need to do to land and walk away from it. Don't try and save the airplane.

None of that is new of course.

Have to agree though that the only realistic outcome would have been to try and land straight ahead, right side up, no matter how ugly. :(
Not quite applicable to multi-engine ops
User avatar
heinrich
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:17 pm
Closest Airfield: EGSX
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 2 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by heinrich » Tue Apr 23, 2019 3:42 pm

ok cool, I'd have thought that would also apply to twins. (landing ahead)

Is there really so little room for error in a light twin at this phase of flight, or is it just my own SEP ignorance showing?
User avatar
HJK 414
Fife Thousand feet
Fife Thousand feet
Posts: 5109
Joined: Fri Oct 10, 2014 4:34 pm
Closest Airfield: EHTW
Location: wandering ...
Has liked: 19 times
Been liked: 131 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by HJK 414 » Tue Apr 23, 2019 4:39 pm

heinrich wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 3:42 pm

………..
Is there really so little room for error in a light twin at this phase of flight, or is it just my own SEP ignorance showing?
Heinrich,

As Jim stated - as long as the Pilot flies the aircraft properly - and recognizes what is happening - there is no big drama.
In this case we have to add a few variables though.

1) Fullerton Municipal is one of those "built in" airports - surrounded by housing and industrial estates.
Once he was off the ground - there was no way he was landing anywhere - and he knew this airfield well.
The "out" is altitude - and a single engine fly away …… or you are ending in the buildings or residential homes ….. simply no option.

(once you are airborne off RWY 24 - Long Beach airport and the Military strip (22) Los Alamitos are literally in front of you )

2) The only reason a Duke takes off is the curvature of the earth - it loves runway.
He was on 24 - and by the time he rotated - he would have had very little room in front of the aircraft - and stopping or putting it down would have taken quite a bit of guts - he certainly would have ended up crashing into in a mall / store or house somewhere.

So - if he had an engine protesting or failing at rotation - unless he had "practised" in his mind - had foreseen his reactions and had his hand on the throttles - he had no chance of getting away with it. The steep climb - to me suggests he was trying to get "above the built up area to create an out" - but trading his airspeed and control surface effectivity for it was fatal.

JK
These users liked the author HJK 414 for the post (total 3):
ChuckUgly DucklingMrb13676
The wisest mind has something yet to learn. ...
User avatar
heinrich
1k poster
1k poster
Posts: 1594
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:17 pm
Closest Airfield: EGSX
Has liked: 7 times
Been liked: 2 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by heinrich » Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:26 pm

Thanks JK.
Airwayfreak
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:56 am
Closest Airfield: FAJS
Location: Johannesburg
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 20 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by Airwayfreak » Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:28 pm

heinrich wrote:
Tue Apr 23, 2019 3:42 pm
ok cool, I'd have thought that would also apply to twins. (landing ahead)

Is there really so little room for error in a light twin at this phase of flight, or is it just my own SEP ignorance showing?
It's generally accepted, in ME operations, that after V1 the T/O will commence even in the event of an engine failure. This is what Jim is alluding to when he says the aircraft must be flown properly because things can go horribly wrong as they appear to have in this instance. We don't know if it was an engine failure. Light twins are not any safer than a single. They are twice as complex and require twice more attention when things go wrong. Just my take on it.
User avatar
beckers
Frequent AvComer
Posts: 996
Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 4:23 pm
Closest Airfield: Republic of Lanseria
Location: Gauteng
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 3 times

Re: Beech Duke crash - Fullerton

Unread post by beckers » Tue Apr 23, 2019 5:35 pm

I will put my money on nothing to do with an engine failure but possibly more to do with control locks.
These users liked the author beckers for the post (total 2):
Dragonjimdavis

Return to “Academy & Flight Safety”