NTSB releases probable cause for Steve Fossett crash

In article ,
Gezellig wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:01:43 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Gezellig wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:44:28 -0500, Jim Logajan wrote:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...07X17184&key=1

How long after first impact should it take for the ELT to kick out a
call on frequency?

I assume pretty quickly, but if you're referring to the Fossett crash,
note that the NTSB report says the ELT was destroyed on impact.

I didn't catch the "on impact" only that it was destroyed. I guess they
judged that no signal meant destroyed on strike, must have been a hell
of a crash reading through the report.

Oops, you're right, I must have subconsciously assumed the "on impact".
Seems probable that the impact is what destroyed it, but it doesn't say
that, and it certainly could have happened later (e.g. in the fire). My
apologies.

--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:40:06 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Gezellig wrote:

On Fri, 10 Jul 2009 09:01:43 -0400, Mike Ash wrote:

In article ,
Gezellig wrote:

On Thu, 09 Jul 2009 17:44:28 -0500, Jim Logajan wrote:

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?e...07X17184&key=1

How long after first impact should it take for the ELT to kick out a
call on frequency?

I assume pretty quickly, but if you're referring to the Fossett crash,
note that the NTSB report says the ELT was destroyed on impact.

I didn't catch the "on impact" only that it was destroyed. I guess they
judged that no signal meant destroyed on strike, must have been a hell
of a crash reading through the report.

Oops, you're right, I must have subconsciously assumed the "on impact".
Seems probable that the impact is what destroyed it, but it doesn't say
that, and it certainly could have happened later (e.g. in the fire). My
apologies.

That's what led to my question. I've never had the "opportunity" to set
off an ELT but I thought they were required to have a gyro or gravity or
some kind of ability to detect crash instantaneously and play out to
406.

CAP was combing the area by the NTSB with no report of transmission so I
suppose we can extrapolate that a severe enough impact can render the
ELT useless. I am guessing where the AC took the initial hit would be
important too in relation ot the positioning of the ELT in the AC.

On Jul 10, 6:48*am, Gezellig wrote:

CAP was combing the area by the NTSB with no report of transmission so I
suppose we can extrapolate that a severe enough impact can render the
ELT useless. I am guessing where the AC took the initial hit would be
important too in relation ot the positioning of the ELT in the AC.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

....i think we can infer from the following description of damage, from
the information found on the NTSB Summary's "Full Narrative" link,
that listening for an ELT signal, regardless of where it was installed
in the aircraft, was moot:

"The airplane was severely fragmented and a severe post crash fire
burned most of the structure and surrounding vegetation. The first
evidence of ground contact was a boulder with paint transfers on it
consistent with the left main wheel and the belly of the airplane. "

"All of the cockpit instruments and avionics were destroyed. Pieces of
instruments were found scattered throughout the debris field. The
airplane's ELT was destroyed; numerous pieces of its orange plastic
case and internal circuit board components were found scattered in the
debris field."

....and this:

"The engine sustained severe impact damage. The crankshaft was broken
off about 3.5 inches inside the nose case, a piece of the nose case
was broken out, and the front thrust bearing was partially extruded,
bent and deformed. All accessories and the oil sump were stripped from
the engine. The cylinder heads of the right side cylinders (#1 and #3)
were destroyed; the impact crush angle measured at the lower #1
cylinder barrel was 39 degrees."

....and finally:

"The front seat frame was bent, deformed and crushed to a size about
one third of its original dimension."

S McF

"Mike Ash" wrote in message
...
Oops, you're right, I must have subconsciously assumed the "on impact".
Seems probable that the impact is what destroyed it, but it doesn't say
that, and it certainly could have happened later (e.g. in the fire). My
apologies.

If it were the fire, then the ELT would be history within 2 or three minutes
of the crash. It would be long-gone hours before anyone was listening for
it.

Depending on the type of installation, another possibility is that an ELT
can simply get separated from its external antenna. That would greatly
reduce its range (from a matter of miles to a matter of feet). From the
choice of words "destroyed" that was apparently not the case in this crash.

Vaughn