X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 11:28:58 -0400 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from omr-m07.mx.aol.com ([64.12.143.81] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 6.0.9e) with ESMTPS id 6803927 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:30:01 -0400 Received-SPF: pass receiver=logan.com; client-ip=64.12.143.81; envelope-from=vtailjeff@aol.com Received: from mtaomg-maa01.mx.aol.com (mtaomg-maa01.mx.aol.com [172.26.222.143]) by omr-m07.mx.aol.com (Outbound Mail Relay) with ESMTP id A1E7E700354AF for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:29:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: from core-mnd001c.r1000.mail.aol.com (core-mnd001.r1000.mail.aol.com [172.29.107.1]) by mtaomg-maa01.mx.aol.com (OMAG/Core Interface) with ESMTP id 3145038000087 for ; Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:29:25 -0400 (EDT) References: X-Original-To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Lancair IV-PT Accident Report In-Reply-To: X-MB-Message-Source: WebUI MIME-Version: 1.0 From: vtailjeff@aol.com X-MB-Message-Type: User Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="--------MB_8D118A94094F43F_227C_3CC2_webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com" X-Mailer: AOL Webmail 38466-STANDARD Received: from 12.110.229.82 by webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com (149.174.190.114) with HTTP (WebMailUI); Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:29:24 -0400 X-Original-Message-Id: <8D118A9400FA6CF-227C-1034@webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com> X-Originating-IP: [12.110.229.82] X-Original-Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 10:29:25 -0400 (EDT) x-aol-global-disposition: G x-aol-sid: 3039ac1ade8f533587452c93 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ----------MB_8D118A94094F43F_227C_3CC2_webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Todd, I presume you are asking if someone could make a gear up landing on one and= not compromise the tank?=20 Jeff -----Original Message----- From: Robert R Pastusek To: Lancair Mailing List Sent: Fri, Mar 28, 2014 9:25 am Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair IV-PT Accident Report Todd, Belly tanks to support the higher fuel consumption of the turbines, were a = builder add-on, and are all different. Some were better-engineered than oth= ers, but there is no standard for them. This, and the associated fuel syste= m plumbing for the turbine, are truly =E2=80=9Cbuilder option.=E2=80=9D Bob =20 From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancaironline.net] On Behalf Of Todd= Long Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 9:52 AM To: lml@lancaironline.net Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair IV-PT Accident Report =20 Since I am unfamiliar, what is the structural integrity of the belly tank d= uring a belly landing? The jets I fly all have structural keels to protect = it during an incident.=20 Sent from my iPhone On Mar 28, 2014, at 7:28, Jeff Edwards wrote: Wow!=20 Sent from my iPad On Mar 27, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Robert R Pastusek wrote: Please note the following preliminary accident report for an IV-PT loss on = 8 March, 2014. Although we did not know any details of the accident at the = time, I was asked to write the attached paper discussing the operating prin= ciples of the Lancair IV landing gear system. Please find this paper attach= ed for your information. =20 Bob =20 =20 NTSB Identification:ERA14FA144 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation Accident occurred Saturday, March 08, 2014 in Hartsville, SC Aircraft: ROGERS GEORGE T LANCAIR IVP, registration: N724HP Injuries: 3 Fatal. This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors.= Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been= completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investiga= tion or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any tr= avel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft = accident report. On March 8, 2014, about 1858 eastern standard time, an experimental amateur= built Lancair IVP, N724HP, was substantially damaged after a loss of contr= ol in Hartsville, South Carolina. The private pilot, and the two pilot rate= d passengers were fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevail= ed, and no flight plan was filed for the local personal flight conducted un= der Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91, which departed Darlington= County Jetport (UDG), Darlington, South Carolina. According to witnesses, the private pilot had been having problems with the= airplane's landing gear system and had been receiving a "Gear Unsafe" indi= cation. Earlier on the day of the accident he was observed working on the a= irplane and when queried by one of the witnesses, the pilot advised him tha= t he was troubleshooting an electrical problem. Later that day, the private pilot and one of the pilot rated passengers, de= parted UDG, flew around the local area "for some time," and then landed at = Hartsville Regional Airport (HVS), Hartsville, South Carolina. At 1510 the = private pilot refueled the airplane with 50 gallons of fuel and then at app= roximately 1610 took off alone and returned to UDG. Sometime after returnin= g to UDG, the private pilot took off again, this time not only with the pil= ot rated passenger he had been flying with earlier that day but, also with = an additional pilot rated passenger. At approximately 1819, a relative of the private pilot received a text mess= age asking him to come to HVS, as the landing gear would not come down. The= n at 1836 he received a second message to "Call 911." Around the time that = the private pilot sent the text, a witness observed the airplane pass by hi= m numerous times during an approximately 15 minute long period. The airplan= e was "low" to the ground. On the last pass, he could hear the airplane's e= ngine running, and observed the airplane fly across HVS about midfield at 6= 00 to 700 feet above ground level, bank sharply to the left, pitch up to ab= out 25 degrees nose up, then descend rapidly in a nose high attitude until = he lost sight of the airplane. Moments later, he heard the sound of impact,= and observed a large fire ball and smoke. Examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane had struck two = trees before making ground contact, and coming to rest next to a row of tre= es. Multiple pieces of wood were present on the ground which exhibited evid= ence of propeller strike marks. Examination of the wreckage revealed that it had been exposed to a postcras= h fire and that there was no evidence of any preimpact structural failure. = The wing flaps were in the up position, and flight control continuity was e= stablished from the cockpit flight controls, to the breaks in the system wh= ich showed evidence of tensile overload and from the breaks in the system, = to the mounting locations of the flight control surfaces. Examination of the propeller revealed evidence of S-bending, leading edge g= ouging, and chordwise scratching. Examination of the engine's single stage = axial flow propulsor utilizing a borescope revealed evidence of rotational = scoring and reverse bending on multiple turbine blades. Examination of the landing gear system revealed that the landing gear handl= e was in the down position however, the nose landing gear was in the "up" p= osition. The left and right main landing gear were partially extended, and = the left main landing gear leg was fractured into two pieces. Examination o= f the main landing gear doors indicated that the right main landing gear do= or was closed during the impact sequence and the left main landing gear doo= r was open during the impact sequence. Examination of the hydraulic reservo= ir revealed it was not full, and only contained about 10 tablespoons of hyd= raulic fluid. During the examination, no leaks were discovered in the reser= voir. Further examination of the wreckage also revealed that the seat cushion for= the right rear seat was displaced from its normal mounting position and an= access panel which was located beneath that mounting location, and which w= ould allow access to the main landing gear actuators, had been removed. Exa= mination of the panel revealed scratch and pry marks on its topside, near o= ne edge, and an open jackknife was discovered on the floor in close proximi= ty to the panel. Index for Mar2014 |Index of months=20 =20 -- For archives and unsub http://mail.lancaironline.net:81/lists/lml/List.html ----------MB_8D118A94094F43F_227C_3CC2_webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Todd,
 
I presume you are asking if someone could make a gear up lan= ding on one and not compromise the tank?
 
Jeff
-----Original Message-----
From: Robert R Pastusek <rpastusek@htii.com>
To: Lancair Mailing List <lml@lancaironline.net>
Sent: Fri, Mar 28, 2014 9:25 am
Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair IV-PT Accident Report

Tod= d,
Bel= ly tanks to support the higher fuel consumption of the turbines, were a bui= lder add-on, and are all different. Some were better-engineered than others, but there = is no standard for them. This, and the associated fuel system plumbing for = the turbine, are truly =E2=80=9Cbuilder option.=E2=80=9D
Bob
&nb= sp;
= From: Lancair Mailing List [mailto:lml@lancair= online.net] On Behalf Of Todd Long
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2014 9:52 AM
To: lml@lancaironline.net
Subject: [LML] Re: Lancair IV-PT Accident Report
 
Since I am unfamiliar, what is the structura= l integrity of the belly tank during a belly landing? The jets I fly all ha= ve structural keels to protect it during an incident. 

Sent from my iPhone
Wow! 

Sent from my iPad

On Mar 27, 2014, at 2:21 PM, Robert R Pastusek <rpastusek@htii.com> wrote:
Please note the following preliminary accident rep= ort for an IV-PT loss on 8 March, 2014. Although we did not know any detail= s of the accident at the time, I was asked to write the attached paper disc= ussing the operating principles of the Lancair IV landing gear system. Please find this paper attached for your i= nformation.
 
Bob
 
 
NTS= B Identification: ERA14FA144
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Saturday, March 08, 2014 in Hartsville, SC
Aircraft: ROGERS GEORGE T LANCAIR IVP, registration: N724HP
Injuries: 3 Fatal.
Thi= s is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. An= y errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been co= mpleted. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of inve= stigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sour= ces to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On March 8, 2014, about 1858 eastern standard time, an experimental amateur= built Lancair IVP, N724HP, was substantially damaged after a loss of contr= ol in Hartsville, South Carolina. The private pilot, and the two pilot rate= d passengers were fatally injured. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed, and no flight plan was filed f= or the local personal flight conducted under Title 14 Code of Federal Regul= ations Part 91, which departed Darlington County Jetport (UDG), Darlington,= South Carolina.

According to witnesses, the private pilot had been having problems with the= airplane's landing gear system and had been receiving a "Gear Unsafe" indi= cation. Earlier on the day of the accident he was observed working on the a= irplane and when queried by one of the witnesses, the pilot advised him that he was troubleshooting an ele= ctrical problem.

Later that day, the private pilot and one of the pilot rated passengers, de= parted UDG, flew around the local area "for some time," and then landed at = Hartsville Regional Airport (HVS), Hartsville, South Carolina. At 1510 the = private pilot refueled the airplane with 50 gallons of fuel and then at approximately 1610 took off alone and = returned to UDG. Sometime after returning to UDG, the private pilot took of= f again, this time not only with the pilot rated passenger he had been flyi= ng with earlier that day but, also with an additional pilot rated passenger.

At approximately 1819, a relative of the private pilot received a text mess= age asking him to come to HVS, as the landing gear would not come down. The= n at 1836 he received a second message to "Call 911." Around the time that = the private pilot sent the text, a witness observed the airplane pass by him numerous times during an appro= ximately 15 minute long period. The airplane was "low" to the ground. On th= e last pass, he could hear the airplane's engine running, and observed the = airplane fly across HVS about midfield at 600 to 700 feet above ground level, bank sharply to the left, pitch up = to about 25 degrees nose up, then descend rapidly in a nose high attitude u= ntil he lost sight of the airplane. Moments later, he heard the sound of im= pact, and observed a large fire ball and smoke.

Examination of the accident site revealed that the airplane had struck two = trees before making ground contact, and coming to rest next to a row of tre= es. Multiple pieces of wood were present on the ground which exhibited evid= ence of propeller strike marks.

Examination of the wreckage revealed that it had been exposed to a postcras= h fire and that there was no evidence of any preimpact structural failure. = The wing flaps were in the up position, and flight control continuity was e= stablished from the cockpit flight controls, to the breaks in the system which showed evidence of tensile ove= rload and from the breaks in the system, to the mounting locations of the f= light control surfaces.

Examination of the propeller revealed evidence of S-bending, leading edge g= ouging, and chordwise scratching. Examination of the engine's single stage = axial flow propulsor utilizing a borescope revealed evidence of rotational = scoring and reverse bending on multiple turbine blades.

Examination of the landing gear system revealed that the landing gear handl= e was in the down position however, the nose landing gear was in the "up" p= osition. The left and right main landing gear were partially extended, and = the left main landing gear leg was fractured into two pieces. Examination of the main landing gear doors indi= cated that the right main landing gear door was closed during the impact se= quence and the left main landing gear door was open during the impact seque= nce. Examination of the hydraulic reservoir revealed it was not full, and only contained about 10 tablespoon= s of hydraulic fluid. During the examination, no leaks were discovered in t= he reservoir.

Further examination of the wreckage also revealed that the seat cushion for= the right rear seat was displaced from its normal mounting position and an= access panel which was located beneath that mounting location, and which w= ould allow access to the main landing gear actuators, had been removed. Examination of the panel revealed scratc= h and pry marks on its topside, near one edge, and an open jackknife was di= scovered on the floor in close proximity to the panel.
 
<Lancair IV Landing Gear Operation 3-2014= .docx>
 ----------MB_8D118A94094F43F_227C_3CC2_webmailstg-vd10.sysops.aol.com--