NTSB B roll from the accident scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...6f4&feature=youtu.be

I'm glad I got to see Nine O Nine in person when I did.

quote:

Originally posted by M1Garandy:
NTSB B roll from the accident scene: https://www.youtube.com/watch?...6f4&feature=youtu.be

I'm glad I got to see Nine O Nine in person when I did.

I'm so sorry for everyone.

My Grandfather was so proud of being in the Marines Aviation service during WW2.

A different time.

Such a terrible accident. Very sad for the passengers and families. I just flew in 909 3 months ago at Boeing Field. What a loss.

https://imgur.com/a/GdBsSlS

https://imgur.com/a/dY4yiTg

Oh man! That overhead drone footage is just HORRIBLE!!!

I'm sure that the real experts here will have noticed that the engine buried in the building appears to have been feathered.

There's reports that some kind of engine issue was addressed just before take-off.

quote:

“Once they start the engine, it’ll be fine.”

Law enforcement sources told The Courant that Collings Foundation officials were aware of a problem with at least one engine before it took off and Debra Riddell, the wife of Rob Riddell, said she witnessed those issues first hand. Debra Riddell said once the 10 passengers had entered the plane, the pilots were having trouble starting one of the engines. She said they brought out a black cylinder and started spraying the engine “to blow out the moisture” in it.

She said her husband texted her from the plane that “it didn’t bode well” that the pilot had turned off the other engines, left his seat and walked out to check the engine. She said the mechanic told her, “Once they start the engine it will be fine.”

Hartford Courant

I wonder what kind of "moisture" problem it was, and how it could relate to an engine fire.

quote:

She said they brought out a black cylinder and started spraying the engine “to blow out the moisture” in it.

This kind of matches my take on the pilot's comments about the #4 engine after takeoff...

"...is on No. 4 engine. We'd like to return and blow it out."

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:
I'm sure that the real experts here will have noticed that the engine buried in the building appears to have been feathered.

The blades aren't turned far enough to be fully feathered, but the lack of bending on the blades indicates no rotation at impact, or very low rotation. Whether that was crew action prior to impact isn't known.

Feathering action takes time and isn't part of a normal shutdown on the ground (eg, shutting off mixture/fuel), so there isn't time to manage a feathering operation (or reason to do so) during a roll-out or landing mishap: it would have to have been feathered in flight, or an attempt made to do so. It's hard to say much from the limited view in the video, or whether any burning took place in the air or ground, from the images given.

quote:

Originally posted by kkina:
There's reports that some kind of engine issue was addressed just before take-off.

quote:

“Once they start the engine, it’ll be fine.”

Law enforcement sources told The Courant that Collings Foundation officials were aware of a problem with at least one engine before it took off and Debra Riddell, the wife of Rob Riddell, said she witnessed those issues first hand. Debra Riddell said once the 10 passengers had entered the plane, the pilots were having trouble starting one of the engines. She said they brought out a black cylinder and started spraying the engine “to blow out the moisture” in it.

She said her husband texted her from the plane that “it didn’t bode well” that the pilot had turned off the other engines, left his seat and walked out to check the engine. She said the mechanic told her, “Once they start the engine it will be fine.”

Hartford Courant

I wonder what kind of "moisture" problem it was, and how it could relate to an engine fire.

Witness statements are the least reliable information in an investigation, so far as consistence or knowledge of the event; they're invariably incorrect. However, they can have some use, even if pointing in a different direction to explore.

There's no "moisture" to blow out," and there's no "blowing out" done in a radial engine. During engine start, one of the most critical things to look for is hydraulic lock, in which oil has pooled in the lower cylinders. This oil can cause bending of connecting rods if enough force is placed on the engine to turn the crankshaft, either externally by moving the propeller, or in some engines, with the starter.

Part of every preflight is to pull the blades through by hand, which means grabbing the propeller and muscling it through rotation a little at a time. One of the purposes of doing this is to check for hydraulic lock. If resistance is felt, beyond normal, then one stops, and removes the lower spark plugs to allow oil to drain.

During an engine start, if the propeller rotates slightly and stops, and then rocks back to its starting place when the starter is released, it's quite possibly hydraulic locked. The crew may make a few attempts (but shouldn't), especially if others are turning, but eventually will need to shut down and attend to that engine, as it's not safe to go pull lower spark plugs when adjacent engines are turning.

The front of the engine has a sealed ignition harness in the shape of a large collar or horseshoe. Radial ignition systems use two types: high tension and low tension, depending on where the ignition pulse is boosted. For high altitude systems, a low voltage value is sent to the cylinder and it's increased there (think of having a coil at every cylinder). Others it's not. Moisture in the system can have an effect, but that really shouldn't have been an issue there. It's the only "blow it out" I can think of, but would be irrelevant here, especially if the engine was running for takeoff.

Radial engines pop and bang. Fuel/air mixture at each cylinder is not consistent, and there are enough cylinders, all air cooled, that there are a lot of stories going on around the engine; they're all different. During taxi, radials snort and pop and bang, and at idle they tend to do so, too. It's very common to develop spark plug problems on the ground and in flight, producing a range of problems. Wet plugs, usually oil fouled, can cause roughness, incomplete ignition, burning in the exhaust collector, etc.

"Blow it out" may also refer to a desire to remove a spark plug and clean it with a little avgas, which is typically how the oil is washed off, to get the plug to run.

Aviation gasoline today is 100LL, meaning 100 octane, "low-lead." The name is misleading, as "LL is actually a high lead content, and results in frequent fouling of spark plugs, leading to rough engine operation. Leaning of the fuel-air mixture manually is very important. Carburetors of this era use position settings for the cockpit controls called "auto rich" and "auto lean," which don't work worth crap, and while needed for takeoff to avoid detonation, must be manually run most of the rest fo the time. There are a number of pilots who aren't mechanics, who run it like the manual tells them to, without any understanding of why they're doing it, and consequently end up fouling a lot more spark plugs. On some flight, especially shorter ones, it's easier to do that than to spend a lot of time playing with the mixture settings.

If a pilot has experienced a number of fouled plugs and knows the routine, and has seen the mechanic pull the plug and spray it or rinse it in fuel to wash off oil (or use a pick to remove the carbon/lead deposits, then wash and spray it out), he might refer to it as "blow it out." It may also appear that way to someone who is watching, and doesn't know what's going on.

A common method of determining which cylinder has a bad plug in engines that lack an oscilliscope and ignition analyzer in the cockpit (B-17, for example) is to use the traditional radial engine mechanic's engine analyzer: a spray bottle with water. When the engine runs rough, it's put on the magneto that features the roughest operation, after landing or during landing, with the power at idle, and allowed to run that way. When the engine is shut down, the mechanic uses the spray bottle to squirt each cylinder in turn; the one that doesn't "sizzle" is the "dead" cylinder, and that's the spark plug that gets pulled for cleaning. It's a frequent, common action on large radials. That may also appear as blowing moisture, though really it's the opposite.

On the ground prior to takeoff, radial engines run rough until all the cylinders "wake up" and start firing. It's the origin of the saying that someone "isn't firing on all cylinders." The engines will run rough and pop and bang, especially warming up, but nearly always on the ground anyway.

This is very sad to me as I just saw this aircraft a couple months ago in Pasco, WA

I wonder if these planes fly "too much". I'm not trying to start any argument, and I'm not an aviation expert, just a fan.

Like other locations, these planes come to the NJ shore location near me every Labor Day for as long as I can remember. They get booked with passengers for the three day holiday weekend.

They're all continuously taking off, and landing every hour or so from sunrise to sunset. To me, it seems like a lot of stress to put these old planes under, despite how good the mechanics might be.

I also wonder if overuse is an issue here. I would imagine the maintenance and other costs on an aircraft of this type and age would make the owners want to generate as much cash as they can.
Of course, the passengers are lighter that the bomb load and the normal crew, IIRC, was ten. So I dont think the load was a factor.

quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:
I wonder if these planes fly "too much". I'm not trying to start any argument, and I'm not an aviation expert, just a fan.

Like other locations, these planes come to the NJ shore location near me every Labor Day for as long as I can remember. They get booked with passengers for the three day holiday weekend.

They're all continuously taking off, and landing every hour or so from sunrise to sunset. To me, it seems like a lot of stress to put these old planes under, despite how good the mechanics might be.

All planes are required to undergo periodic inspections and maintenance, dependent on the category they are registered in. The type of inspection and maintenance required is specified under the regulations the a/c operates under. Those a/c operated for Commercial purposes, especially those used for transporting passengers, are required to undergo more frequent inspections.

Anytime humans are involved it is always possible that mistakes are made...this is true for anything that man makes or operates. Although it's possible, perhaps even likely, that the maintenance and inspections were assisted by unlicensed volunteers, there are always licensed mechanics and inspectors involved in this required maintenance and inspections.

Could they miss something, some sign of trouble? Yes, it's possible...but this is just as true for any a/c and not just vintage warbirds. These A&P mechanics and IA inspectors are licensed and professional. They bear professional responsibility for the work done, their professional credibility is on the line...and they are keenly aware of the safety aspects involved whenever work and inspections are performed. In many cases they also fly or are a passenger on the a/c they maintain.

Nine-O-Nine's maintenance records will be reviewed, those responsible for maintaining and inspecting it will be interviewed. The evidence from the crash will be compared to the maintenance records. Witnesses will be interviewed, recorded evidence analyzed.

Whatever caused this tragedy will be determined by the end of the investigation.

There are far too many possibilities and too many questions unanswered to know with any certainty what happened yet.

quote:

Originally posted by Modern Day Savage:

quote:

Originally posted by RAMIUS:
I wonder if these planes fly "too much". I'm not trying to start any argument, and I'm not an aviation expert, just a fan.

Like other locations, these planes come to the NJ shore location near me every Labor Day for as long as I can remember. They get booked with passengers for the three day holiday weekend.

They're all continuously taking off, and landing every hour or so from sunrise to sunset. To me, it seems like a lot of stress to put these old planes under, despite how good the mechanics might be.

All planes are required to undergo periodic inspections and maintenance, dependent on the category they are registered in. The type of inspection and maintenance required is specified under the regulations the a/c operates under. Those a/c operated for Commercial purposes, especially those used for transporting passengers, are required to undergo more frequent inspections.



Nine-O-Nine's maintenance records will be reviewed, those responsible for maintaining and inspecting it will be interviewed. The evidence from the crash will be compared to the maintenance records. Witnesses will be interviewed, recorded evidence analyzed.

Whatever caused this tragedy will be determined by the end of the investigation.

Having been personally involved in 2 FAA, 1 NTSB and 1 NASA accident investigations, I wholeheartedly agree that the cause(s) of the tragic B17 crash will be determined. The people that do this work professionally are really, really thorough and good at what they do - but it takes time.

Very sad; I know and have flown with one of the pilots, Mac McCauley. RIP and tailwinds.

The conversation here on this crash has stopped. Have there been any updates in the flying community, FAA, DOT?

This is the last update I heard from 4-NOV...

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
This is the last update I heard from 4-NOV...

[FLASH_VIDEO]<iframe frameborder="0" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/KmnNO9dVGjg" width="560"></iframe>[/FLASH_VIDEO]

Thank you for posting that. He is obviously an expert. I remain very sad about this event in every respect.

Juan Browne is a retired Air Force pilot. Check some of his other videos.

https://www.youtube.com/channe...qjYZxxzjNbONVmY-0J7Q

Juan Brown does a good job wading past the media bs. He calls out the CA loonies for not maintaining power lines, etc. good videos - except YouTube demonetized him as too technical so now he has a patreon channel for the technical content.

quote:

Originally posted by FlyingScot:
Juan Brown does a good job wading past the media bs. He calls out the CA loonies for not maintaining power lines, etc. good videos - except YouTube demonetized him as too technical so now he has a patreon channel for the technical content.

\


Any opinions on what might have caused the crash? At first there were posts about the wrong fuel, but that idea seems to be debunked? We wonder why 2-3 engines would fail? I am not trying to further any theory. Just very interested, as I flew on 909 just a few months ago.

NTSB Preliminary Report is out: https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenera...Type=Prelim&IType=MA