Montana PC12 crash

I fly a PC12 for a charter company, and ours has the 8 seat executive
seating. There is a 9 seat airline config for the plane available -
add in the two crew seats and you're still short three seats for the
14 people that were lost in the crash. Did they have kids sitting on
the floor in the aisle? From what I've read so far it sounds like a
low altitude stall/spin scenario. And eyewitness said the plane was
turning then wobbled and nosed in. Wonder where the cg was with all
those people aboard?

On Mar 23, 8:36*am, Kingfish wrote:
I fly a PC12 for a charter company, and ours has the 8 seat executive
seating. There is a 9 seat airline config for the plane available -
add in the two crew seats and you're still short three seats for the
14 people that were lost in the crash. Did they have kids sitting on
the floor in the aisle? From what I've read so far it sounds like a
low altitude stall/spin scenario. And eyewitness said the plane was
turning then wobbled and nosed in. Wonder where the cg was with all
those people aboard?

No need to put them on the floor. The FAA allows us to allow
passengers to carry small children on the lap of an adult care taker
(parent, etc). It seems to me that if there was a W&B issue it would
have been more likely to have been an problem on take off. Does the
CG shift rearward much on the P-12 as fuel is burned?

-Robert

On Mar 23, 4:15*pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
No need to put them on the floor. The FAA allows us to allow
passengers to carry small children on the lap of an adult care taker
(parent, etc). It seems to me that if there was a W&B issue it would
have been more likely to have been an problem on take off. *Does the
CG shift rearward much on the P-12 as fuel is burned?


Part 135 regs don't allow us to seat anybody on the floor. Children
under two years can sit in an adult's lap. 7 of the 14 aboard were
kids but only one was under 2 according to the MSN update. IIRC the CG
does shift to the rear as fuel is burned. (been doing more Caravan
flying lately) This does sound more like a textbook stall/spin with
aft CG scenario. I have to wonder what the hell the pilot was thinking
putting all those aboard his airplane. We've flown right at max weight
and at the edge of the CG envelope, but we were always legal & safe.
This was a completely avoidable tragedy IMHO.

"Will" wrote in message
...
On Mar 23, 4:15 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:
No need to put them on the floor. The FAA allows us to allow
passengers to carry small children on the lap of an adult care taker
(parent, etc). It seems to me that if there was a W&B issue it would
have been more likely to have been an problem on take off. Does the
CG shift rearward much on the P-12 as fuel is burned?


Part 135 regs don't allow us to seat anybody on the floor. Children
under two years can sit in an adult's lap. 7 of the 14 aboard were
kids but only one was under 2 according to the MSN update. IIRC the CG
does shift to the rear as fuel is burned. (been doing more Caravan
flying lately) This does sound more like a textbook stall/spin with
aft CG scenario. I have to wonder what the hell the pilot was thinking
putting all those aboard his airplane. We've flown right at max weight
and at the edge of the CG envelope, but we were always legal & safe.
This was a completely avoidable tragedy IMHO.


From what I have read, they had landed a couple times along the way,
apparently without incident.

On Mar 24, 6:42*pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Will" wrote in message

...
On Mar 23, 4:15 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:





No need to put them on the floor. The FAA allows us to allow
passengers to carry small children on the lap of an adult care taker
(parent, etc). It seems to me that if there was a W&B issue it would
have been more likely to have been an problem on take off. Does the
CG shift rearward much on the P-12 as fuel is burned?

Part 135 regs don't allow us to seat anybody on the floor. Children
under two years can sit in an adult's lap. 7 of the 14 aboard were
kids but only one was under 2 according to the MSN update. IIRC the CG
does shift to the rear as fuel is burned. (been doing more Caravan
flying lately) This does sound more like a textbook stall/spin with
aft CG scenario. I have to wonder what the hell the pilot was thinking
putting all those aboard his airplane. We've flown right at max weight
and at the edge of the CG envelope, but we were always legal & safe.
This was a completely avoidable tragedy IMHO.

From what I have read, they had landed a couple times along the way,
apparently without incident.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So what was the reason for the diversionary landing?

Falling short of the runway, maybe it was wind shear.

---
Mark

"Mark" wrote in

So what was the reason for the diversionary landing?

Falling short of the runway, maybe it was wind shear.

*******************************
Tailplane stall?
--
Jim in NC

"Clark" wrote in message
...

If the crash occurred in Holy Cross Cemetery as reported then the aircraft
was not "short of the runway." The cemetery is about mid-field.


Perhaps climbing from a missed approach.

On Mar 25, 9:04*am, Clark wrote:
Mark wrote in news:e05a5ae6-d896-4cd7-a654-
:



On Mar 24, 6:42*pm, "Darkwing" theducksmail"AT"yahoo.com wrote:
"Will" wrote in message

....
On Mar 23, 4:15 pm, "Robert M. Gary" wrote:

No need to put them on the floor. The FAA allows us to allow
passengers to carry small children on the lap of an adult care taker
(parent, etc). It seems to me that if there was a W&B issue it would
have been more likely to have been an problem on take off. Does the
CG shift rearward much on the P-12 as fuel is burned?

Part 135 regs don't allow us to seat anybody on the floor. Children
under two years can sit in an adult's lap. 7 of the 14 aboard were
kids but only one was under 2 according to the MSN update. IIRC the CG
does shift to the rear as fuel is burned. (been doing more Caravan
flying lately) This does sound more like a textbook stall/spin with
aft CG scenario. I have to wonder what the hell the pilot was thinking
putting all those aboard his airplane. We've flown right at max weight
and at the edge of the CG envelope, but we were always legal & safe.
This was a completely avoidable tragedy IMHO.

From what I have read, they had landed a couple times along the way,
apparently without incident.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

So what was the reason for the diversionary landing?

Falling short of the runway, maybe it was wind shear.

If the crash occurred in Holy Cross Cemetery as reported then the aircraft
was not "short of the runway." The cemetery is about mid-field.

--
---
there should be a "sig" here

If it did crashed into the cemetery maybe there's more occupants to be
found? lol j/k with reference to an old joke.

Monk