Cessna 337 crash claims 5 in NJ

[krlang]

This is not good news with the talk of an SID coming out on these things.
The word on the street is the SID will cost more to accomplish than the value of the airplanes.

[DSmith]

This is not good news with the talk of an SID coming out on these things.
The word on the street is the SID will cost more to accomplish than the value of the airplanes.

Don't you mean a AD?

[oscardeuce]

This is not good news with the talk of an SID coming out on these things.
The word on the street is the SID will cost more to accomplish than the value of the airplanes.

I'm sure something expensive will come out of this.

RIP to those who lost their lives, and the rest of us will wait to see what the investigation has to say.

[John Dupre]

This is not good news with the talk of an SID coming out on these things.
The word on the street is the SID will cost more to accomplish than the value of the airplanes.

Don't you mean a AD?

An SID is something new, a Supplementary Inspection Document. Cessna has been developing them for its older out of production aircraft. It is a series of extra more detailed inspections and some component replacement, mostly for corrosion. For most operators it will not be mandatory. For commercial operators and most foreign operators it will be. They were effective in discovering spar issues on the 400 series twins.

[flyboyj]

This is not good news with the talk of an SID coming out on these things.
The word on the street is the SID will cost more to accomplish than the value of the airplanes.

Don't you mean a AD?

An SID is something new, a Supplementary Inspection Document. Cessna has been developing them for its older out of production aircraft. It is a series of extra more detailed inspections and some component replacement, mostly for corrosion. For most operators it will not be mandatory. For commercial operators and most foreign operators it will be. They were effective in discovering spar issues on the 400 series twins.

The SID can only be "technically" mandatory if that type of supplemental maintenance instruction is made part of the Type Certificate Data Sheet (or is already there and I know it isn't on older Cessna models). To do that the manufacturer will have to implement a revision to the TCDS. There's been a huge argument for years whether a manufacturer can make a service bulletin (or a SID type document) mandatory. A former DC based FAA PMI named Bill O'Brien championed this in favor of the owner/ mechanic stating that if there is a condition that warrants a mandatory service bulletin (or SID) the FAA should be contacted and an Airworthiness Directive issued. Bill passed away a few years ago, many of his articles could be found in AMT magazine.

Here's a link: http://www.amtonline.com/publication/ar ... =1&id=4602

With all that said, thoughts and prayers go out to the family and friends of these folks!

[jtramo]

The flight crew of a helicopter flying in the area heard an unknown person onboard N12NA announcing over the common traffic advisory frequency (CTAF) that the airplane was to depart from runway 32. A few minutes later one of the crew members of the helicopter and the pilot of another airplane in the area heard an announcement over the CTAF that the N12NA was intending to do a low pass over runway 32.

The last contact was at 15:47:00, the airplane was at 600 ft msl, on a heading of 062 degrees at a ground speed of 171 knots.

A 6 foot section of the outboard right wing was located on runway 32 near runway 14/32 and 03/21 intersection, along with small debris from the right wing. A section of the right aileron, from the separated 6 foot wing section, was located in the snow off to the left of runway 32 and parallel to the separated right wing section. The separated wing section exhibited a round indentation impact mark similar to the rear engine nacelle/fuselage structure of the airplane at the center leading edge area. The trailing edge of the wing section, at the STC’d wingtip tank, exhibited two cuts similar to propeller slashes.

Examination of the right wing revealed that the outboard right wing section separated at approximately wing station 177. The horizontal flange of the forward spar upper cap exhibited downward bending at station 177. The bend was approximately 60 degrees downwards. The horizontal flange of the forward spar lower cap was fractured 6 inches outboard of station 177. The lower cap at the fracture surface did not exhibit any bending. The front spar lower cap exhibited downward bending along its length from station 177 inboard with a portion of the vertical flange separating from the horizontal flange of the spar cap.

Im guessing that this isn't the corrosion issue as discussed, I just can't figure out the cause of a "60 degree downward" bend. Did it smack the runway so hard as to bend the spar downward and send parts of the rear prop into the trailing edge of the right wing? Im not trying to place blame or jump to conclusions, but something like this could very well affect the 337 warbird/civil flying operations.

[51fixer]

It appears they were low and fast.
Could be too fast of a rolling input or too quick of a stop to the roll input. Don't know what fuel was in the tip tanks or if that was a factor.
Did the pilot have a medical issue at that point or did a passenger panic and grab the controls and push.
Something was exceeded in the structure. Why or how should come out in the investigation.
If corrosion was involved it would probably been mentioned in this preliminary report and all sorts of AD action would be going out already.
Remember it will take time for actual reports of exact cause.
Were discussing possibilities and don't take these for facts.
I wonder what airframe G limits are on the modified 337 like this one.
Rich

[mustanglover]

WOW, interesting write up. On some of those wingtip extension with aux fuel, they cannot land with fuel in the aux. tip tanks. He could have bumped the ground and caused a wingtip extension failure. Or he could have exceeded Vne and full fuel in the tip along with some strange force developed by the winglet caused the failure OR he simply could have rolled wing down into the snow bank and ripped the tip off.

Lot's of things to think about. But wings usually don't fail downwards, especially that low to the ground.

[Kyleb]

Im guessing that this isn't the corrosion issue as discussed, I just can't figure out the cause of a "60 degree downward" bend. Did it smack the runway so hard as to bend the spar downward and send parts of the rear prop into the trailing edge of the right wing? Im not trying to place blame or jump to conclusions, but something like this could very well affect the 337 warbird/civil flying operations.

How about a hard landing, causing the wing to fail downward (fuel in the tip tank), then the residual lift caused the wing to flop back across the fuselage and prop?

[flyboyj]

Im guessing that this isn't the corrosion issue as discussed, I just can't figure out the cause of a "60 degree downward" bend. Did it smack the runway so hard as to bend the spar downward and send parts of the rear prop into the trailing edge of the right wing? Im not trying to place blame or jump to conclusions, but something like this could very well affect the 337 warbird/civil flying operations.

Because of the STC and the reported events leading up to this, I don't think the 337 warbird or civilian community has anything to worry about.

I wonder what airframe G limits are on the modified 337 like this one.
Rich

I believe the G limits would have to be no less than +3.8, -1.5 for the aircraft to maintain it's "normal category" certification under part 23.

[skymstr02]

I believe the G limits would have to be no less than +3.8, -1.5 for the aircraft to maintain it's "normal category" certification under part 23.

The 337 series is certified under CAR 3.

[flyboyj]

I believe the G limits would have to be no less than +3.8, -1.5 for the aircraft to maintain it's "normal category" certification under part 23.

The 337 series is certified under CAR 3.

Only models Models 337, 337A and M337B. The rest are Part 23 airplanes.

http://www.airweb.faa.gov/Regulatory_an ... E/A6CE.pdf

Page 25

BTW - Look at the maneuvering speeds posted in the TCDS and the speeds reported in the accident.

[John Dupre]

I work on a 337H that carries about 75 gallons a side with factory installed tanks. How much extra fuel does the tip tank mods carry? I know they took on 90 gallons before the flight but were they at full fuel?

Regarding the downward bending indicated on some of the right wing spar caps would the bending moment change at the moment of pull up or shortly after?

[Rajay]

I just read the preliminary NTSB posting, too and it doesn't sound to me like the wingtip hit the ground. If it did, it probably would have been bent UP, not down 60 degrees. The NTSB report also said that while the upper cap of the front spar was bent down at about Wing Station 177, the lower cap was not bent at all - it seemed to be cracked. I'm wondering if a pre-existing defect caused the whole wing panel to simply let go under the extreme stress of a the high speed pass and the abrupt pull-up at a seemingly high weight, all exacerbated by the weight of the aux fuel tanks and lift/leverage of the aftermarket winglet on the wingtip.

Given that his speed was so high, when the wing panel let go, it seems logical that it bent inward and flipped back in the slip stream close enough to the rear prop that the prop cut the two notches out of the trailing edge that were mentioned. The loss of that much right wing explains why it rolled so violently to the right. The report also mentioned a dent in the leading edge of the separated right wing panel that they attributed to contact with the rear engine cowling/rear fuselage. Seems to me that if it hit the rear engine cowling/rear fuselage, the prop would have chewed it up worse than just two little notches in the trailing edge. Maybe it just hit the right boom and damaged or bent it too.

I suppose that we'll just have to wait 9 - 12 months for the full NTSB report to come out and assign the blame. No matter what else they find, it's likely that they will not be gentle on the two pilots.

In the meantime, my heart goes out to the families left behind, especially the ones that witnessed the whole thing.

[mustanglover]

I work on a 337H that carries about 75 gallons a side with factory installed tanks. How much extra fuel does the tip tank mods carry? I know they took on 90 gallons before the flight but were they at full fuel?

Regarding the downward bending indicated on some of the right wing spar caps would the bending moment change at the moment of pull up or shortly after?

Downward failures of wings or pretty rare unless there is some type of failure in the tail causing a pitch over type action.