NTSB final reports

[Tony]

Does anyone know how to determine when a final NSB report would be
issued. I'm interested in the findings for the Areostar crash at
Lakeway TX on Aug 04 (6 fatalities).

[Peter Duniho]

"Tony" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Does anyone know how to determine when a final NSB report would be
> issued. I'm interested in the findings for the Areostar crash at
> Lakeway TX on Aug 04 (6 fatalities).

I think you pretty much just have to keep checking periodically. Some
accidents get a final report relatively soon, while others can take years
and years to investigate.

As far as I know, if the final report is not available on their web site,
the NTSB has not published it at all.

Pete

[BTIZ]

Tony... some of the NTSB reports do not go final because of litigation..
although we all know that NTSB findings are "not to be used in court" (flame
suit on)

There are many factors in that accident.. I believe he had just refueled at
that airport (bad gas?), statements made about being overweight (over gross
or out of CG?), engine power problems?

what in particular are you looking for? (I knew the pilot)
BT

"Tony" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> Does anyone know how to determine when a final NSB report would be
> issued. I'm interested in the findings for the Areostar crash at
> Lakeway TX on Aug 04 (6 fatalities).
>

[Tony]

My friend, a non-pilot, lives in the Hills of Lakeway a few hundred
yards from the crash site.

I have read the early NTSB report as I expect you have. Density
altitude was less than 4,000, he had almost 4000 feet of runway and I
think after clearing the trees at the end the land tends to go
downward.

I think the only fuel at Lakeway is 100 Octane low lead. Most of the
time experienced pilots can make reasonable guesses as to what caused
the accident, but I'm puzzled by this one. Two of the 6 pax were
children, car seats were loaded aboad but they just aren't that heavy.
Some pilot observers suggested he was not getting full power.

I know the Ted Smith Aerostar has been said to be unforgiving, but have
no direct experience with it. Interesting too that some people who were
on the golf course claim the pilot tried to avoid them, but I
understand he went in inverted at a steep angle into a retaining wall:
it's likely the a/c was out of control.

The house that had been damaged is on the market for $1.2 million (I
think it was bought on speculation after the accident, repaired,
several $100K of upgrades were added). The house has great golf course
views, but I wonder how a realtor will answer questions if an airplane
takes off over it (it's not too far off the extended centerline). The
VFR SELs I saw last week seemed to turn base to final closer to the
airport than the house's location.

In any event, there hasn't been any final NTSB report issued: I'll keep
watching.

[Tony]

My friend, a non-pilot, lives in the Hills of Lakeway a few hundred
yards from the crash site.

I have read the early NTSB report as I expect you have. Density
altitude was less than 4,000, he had almost 4000 feet of runway and I
think after clearing the trees at the end the land tends to go
downward.

I think the only fuel at Lakeway is 100 Octane low lead. Most of the
time experienced pilots can make reasonable guesses as to what caused
the accident, but I'm puzzled by this one. Two of the 6 pax were
children, car seats were loaded aboad but they just aren't that heavy.
Some pilot observers suggested he was not getting full power.

I know the Ted Smith Aerostar has been said to be unforgiving, but have
no direct experience with it. Interesting too that some people who were
on the golf course claim the pilot tried to avoid them, but I
understand he went in inverted at a steep angle into a retaining wall:
it's likely the a/c was out of control.

The house that had been damaged is on the market for $1.2 million (I
think it was bought on speculation after the accident, repaired,
several $100K of upgrades were added). The house has great golf course
views, but I wonder how a realtor will answer questions if an airplane
takes off over it (it's not too far off the extended centerline). The
VFR SELs I saw last week seemed to turn base to final closer to the
airport than the house's location.

In any event, there hasn't been any final NTSB report issued: I'll keep
watching.

[BTIZ]

the aircraft is non forgiving
he was an experienced pilot with the Smith Aerostar
the aircraft uses 100LL for fuel
the engines are very fussy to spark plug fouling with any debris or
contamination in the fuel
or any fluctuations in the fuel pressure due to debris or contamination in
the fuel

turning base to final inside the location of the house.
is much different than taking off over it

"Tony" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> My friend, a non-pilot, lives in the Hills of Lakeway a few hundred
> yards from the crash site.
>
> I have read the early NTSB report as I expect you have. Density
> altitude was less than 4,000, he had almost 4000 feet of runway and I
> think after clearing the trees at the end the land tends to go
> downward.
>
> I think the only fuel at Lakeway is 100 Octane low lead. Most of the
> time experienced pilots can make reasonable guesses as to what caused
> the accident, but I'm puzzled by this one. Two of the 6 pax were
> children, car seats were loaded aboad but they just aren't that heavy.
> Some pilot observers suggested he was not getting full power.
>
> I know the Ted Smith Aerostar has been said to be unforgiving, but have
> no direct experience with it. Interesting too that some people who were
> on the golf course claim the pilot tried to avoid them, but I
> understand he went in inverted at a steep angle into a retaining wall:
> it's likely the a/c was out of control.
>
> The house that had been damaged is on the market for $1.2 million (I
> think it was bought on speculation after the accident, repaired,
> several $100K of upgrades were added). The house has great golf course
> views, but I wonder how a realtor will answer questions if an airplane
> takes off over it (it's not too far off the extended centerline). The
> VFR SELs I saw last week seemed to turn base to final closer to the
> airport than the house's location.
>
> In any event, there hasn't been any final NTSB report issued: I'll keep
> watching.
>

[Tony]

I knew the Aerostar was unforgiving, didn't know the engines were.

I mentioned airplanes turning final inside the crash site to give some
indication of its distance from the airport: the prelim report said it
was about 2 miles.

The PA 60 601P is pressurized/ turbocharged, isn't it? I know the IO
360 that pulled my Mooney around would have had to be leaned for max
power at a density altitude of 4000 feet: do the blown IO 540's need
the same treatment?

The press suggested the a/c was overloaded, but car seats are bulky,
not heavy, and the two kids were said to be in the back seats, so an
aft CG shouldn't have been an issue. Most qualified observers of the
crash suggested he wasn't getting full power, so your hint that
fuel/plugs or some other engine related issue seems on the money. If
the engines were not turbocharged I'd be betting improper leaning for
the density altitude would have a factor, but have no experience at all
with turbocharged engines.

FWIW, there's no evidence at the crash site that anything happened
there: no soot and the house had been repaired. Along the highways here
in the southeast, when there's a deadly accident someone often installs
some form of marker as a reminder: flowers, a cross, or some other
token. One must not compromise property values, I guess.

The next time I play the Hills of Lakeway golf course I'll start
erecting a small cairn: look for it, other aviator/golfers, and add a
stone. We'll be the only ones to know what it means.

[Peter R.]

Tony > wrote:

> If
> the engines were not turbocharged I'd be betting improper leaning for
> the density altitude would have a factor, but have no experience at all
> with turbocharged engines.

FWIW, the mixture of my turbo-normalized Bonanza is not leaned for a
high-density airport take off. Doing so results in higher than desired CHT
and turbo-inlet temperatures (TIT), which is not a healthy scenario for the
engine that is delivering full horsepower.

By no means am I a turbo expert, but had the Aerostar in this accident been
equipped with turbocharged engines, I would be surprised to learn that it
would need to be leaned for a density altitude take-off of only 4,000 feet.

--
Peter

[JJS]

"BTIZ" > wrote in message news:APptf.2718$V.2712@fed1read04...
> the aircraft is non forgiving
> he was an experienced pilot with the Smith Aerostar
> the aircraft uses 100LL for fuel
> the engines are very fussy to spark plug fouling with any debris or contamination in the fuel
> or any fluctuations in the fuel pressure due to debris or contamination in the fuel
>
> turning base to final inside the location of the house.
> is much different than taking off over it
>

The press here in Oklahoma wasn't very kind to the pilot. The news story ran in the paper for several days as the
family that perished was a young and upcoming and had a very successful business. IIRC, the pilot had been in
trouble with the FAA, for running a 135 operation illegally. I believe he operated out of Wiley Post, (PWA). He
also had some prior accidents. One in which the aircraft landed long and hot and ran through a chain link fence.
Another time he ran out of fuel. It seems he also scared some passengers by flying in the mountains in below vfr
conditions and nearly hitting terrain. I could be wrong about some of this.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

[BTIZ]

He was not operating a 135 operation illegally.. (as far as I know) .
He was operating a part 91 fractional ownership legally (as far as I know).
Many other 135 operators from OKC area complained to the Fed's which opened
up an investigation which I believe cleared that issue.

I only knew of his landing short with no fuel incident from a personal
conversation with him.. I do not know of the others.
BT

"JJS" <jschneider@remove socks cebridge.net> wrote in message
...
>
> "BTIZ" > wrote in message
> news:APptf.2718$V.2712@fed1read04...
>> the aircraft is non forgiving
>> he was an experienced pilot with the Smith Aerostar
>> the aircraft uses 100LL for fuel
>> the engines are very fussy to spark plug fouling with any debris or
>> contamination in the fuel
>> or any fluctuations in the fuel pressure due to debris or contamination
>> in the fuel
>>
>> turning base to final inside the location of the house.
>> is much different than taking off over it
>>
>
> The press here in Oklahoma wasn't very kind to the pilot. The news story
> ran in the paper for several days as the family that perished was a young
> and upcoming and had a very successful business. IIRC, the pilot had been
> in trouble with the FAA, for running a 135 operation illegally. I
> believe he operated out of Wiley Post, (PWA). He also had some prior
> accidents. One in which the aircraft landed long and hot and ran through
> a chain link fence. Another time he ran out of fuel. It seems he also
> scared some passengers by flying in the mountains in below vfr conditions
> and nearly hitting terrain. I could be wrong about some of this.
>
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
> News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
> Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
> =----

[Grumman-581]

"Tony" wrote in message
oups.com...
> The house has great golf course views, but I wonder
> how a realtor will answer questions if an airplane
> takes off over it (it's not too far off the extended
> centerline).

Well, the odds of a particular house being hit by an airplane is pretty damn
low... The odds of one being hit by TWO airplanes could be argued as being
astronomical...

[Montblack]

("Grumman-581" wrote)
> Well, the odds of a particular house being hit by an airplane is pretty
> damn low... The odds of one being hit by TWO airplanes could be argued as
> being astronomical...


Hehehe :-)

"Honey, the chances of another plane hitting this house are astronomical.
See? It's been pre-disastered. We're going to be safe here."

The World According to Garp (1982)


Montblack

[Peter Duniho]

"Grumman-581" > wrote in message
...
> Well, the odds of a particular house being hit by an airplane is pretty
> damn
> low... The odds of one being hit by TWO airplanes could be argued as being
> astronomical...

Only before the first accident. Once that happens, it's just as likely for
that house to be hit twice as it is for a comparable unmolested house to be
hit once.

I do still love the Garp line though. :)

Pete

[Tony]

There was also that old arguement favoring carrying a bomb onto an
airplane (before 9/11) because it was so unlikely there would be two
bombs on a given flight.

[Tony]

I'm not sure the odds are identical for a second hit after the first
one. The fact that it got hit may mean it's under a changed approach or
departure path, and so becomes more likely to suffer repeated impacts.

I note that you were careful to say

"Once that happens, it's just as likely for that house to be hit twice
as it is for a comparable unmolested house to be
hit once"

which takes that factor into account, but a fast reader may miss that
subtlety.

[Grumman-581]

"Peter Duniho" > wrote in message
...
> I do still love the Garp line though. :)

Damn, I thought I was being original...