Parafield - Two killed in twin training aircraft 29/04/26

[Arron25]

Moderators Don't threaten 

PLEASE CAN THIS CRAP

Block the whole thread It is so far off track

Edited May 19 by Arron25

[onetrack]

The ATSB preliminary report is out in relation to this DA42 crash, and the investigators found a fractured rod end that was part of the nose leg retraction gear.

 

The ATSB says it needs more time to determine if the fractured rod end played any part in affecting flight controls that may have led to the crash. There have been reports from overseas of this happening. The rod end showed signs of cracking that had been there for some time. 

The NLG was reported as still being down when the aircraft was struggling to gain altitude, and the MLG was seen to be retracted.

 

The pilot and witnesses reported an engine failure, and the investigators found, that the LH engine was not producing power at the time of impact. No reason for that power failure has yet been found. The engines were Lycoming IO-360-M1A's.

 

The ATSB says that further investigation is needed to determine the sequence of events leading to the crash.

 

https://www.atsb.gov.au/investigations/ao-2026-074

 

Edited June 23 by onetrack

[Thruster88]

The possible sequence of events would be, at gear retraction broken nose gear hydraulic cylinder extending pushes nose wheel steering and rudder left. Pilots see, feel left yaw and  suspect left engine failure, left engine shut down and feathered compounding problem.

 

Hopefully all DA42 pilots will get to read the reports.

Edited June 23 by Thruster88

[Garfly]

The report suggests that dropping the gear again might clear the problem - given that it has worked in previous similar incidents.

 

But then, pilots would need to be super sure that it's not, in fact, a dud engine pulling them to one side.  If it was, then wheels on the way down, mid-EFATO, is probably the last thing they'd want.

 

But yes, this ATSB analysis should ensure that no DA42 pilots are burdened with yet another memory item to process in the few seconds they have to save themselves. 

 

 

 

[Jabiru7252]

would not a pilot look at the tachos to determine an engine was not running or is that a stupid question? 

[facthunter]

With a C/S prop the revs won't change at all. A torquemeter is a good indication. How the Plane is performing should be enough also. With a conventional twin there will be a lot of yaw. The rule is Push the Ball to the centre with the rudder Pedal. then dead foot, dead engine identifies and you fly above Vmc(a).. and feather it to achieve the Book Performance Nev

[Garfly]

2 hours ago, facthunter said:

With a C/S prop the revs won't change at all. A torquemeter is a good indication. How the Plane is performing should be enough also. With a conventional twin there will be a lot of yaw. The rule is Push the Ball to the centre with the rudder Pedal. then dead foot, dead engine identifies and you fly above Vmc(a).. and feather it to achieve the Book Performance Nev

Yes, and my point was that in the very few seconds a pilot has to act in an EFATO  - in a twin in this case, when just confirming which is the bad one has been shown to be problematic in a panic  -  the last thing needed is a dramatic yaw event with nothing at all to do with asymmetric thrust  (although all your multi-engine muscle memory must tell you that it must).  That this had happened before and was allowed to happen again is a bit shocking to me.

Edited June 30 by Garfly

[facthunter]

It's not problematical all with engine failures. unless you Jump the Gun  and react too quickly. If you are a positive rudder person you will be keeping the Plane straight and an engine Failure just adds another force to the equation, and the reaction to it is no different in Principle to a gust of wind .The quickest reaction time is Called for at a failure at V1 situation. . Engine (total) failure is a Big Imbalance requiring a lot of rudder to be applied, sometimes nearly all of it, at that stage of the flight. On a Largish Commercial Jet .the imbalance can be 60,000. Horsepower and the Planes Weight 250 tonnes. A control Malfunction us something else. If sensed before V1 abort the Take off.,. Nev

[Garfly]

 

Yet another fuel turned off at take-off event recorded and analysed for our instruction.

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjC0WoyDHvA

 

 

[These 'thumbnails' of key screenshots from the video need clicking to be clear. ]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[facthunter]

Not knowing which end is the Indicator has fooled a lot of People. The Pass mark in fuel management  is 100% for a good reason.. The wrong selection takes a while to register.  A short taxi

 time is a trap.. IF you DO  change it just prior to commencing take off. you are at risk of JUST getting into the Air. Perfectly good aeroplane jeopardised.    Selecting ALL with some systems can introduce Air into the System. IF a tank is Low. Nev

[Student Pilot]

Knowing your aircraft and it's systems is paramount to being endorsed on an aircraft.

[facthunter]

Both W&B and fuel Management were required 100% pass mark subjects for a good reason.  Planes don't allow you to get Much WRONG. Nev