Home

Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC

Posted By: George Bynum

Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 12:41 AM

Is anyone following this? 27-September

2 pilots dead, 2 passengers seriously injured. Local television said tonight that:

Pilot's certification only as SIC; earlier reports were that he had over 10,000 hours

Right seat "person" only had a private SEL license, not even IFR. Said to have over 5,000 hours. Those hours without IFR rating is puzzling.

Runway was marginal length (5393 ft per AirNav) for the aircraft.

I wonder how much faith to put in the media?
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 12:58 AM

You can expect the first report in the media to have about 50% accuracy.

Reporters have told us that the "Flux Capacitor" failed, or that the pilot's names were "Sum Ting Wong,' 'Wi Tu Lo,' 'Ho Lee Fuk,' and 'Bang Ding Ow".

Having met a reporter recently, she was aghast at the idea that she KNOW anything about the news...it's just her job to "report" it...meaning read the copy placed in front of her.
Posted By: Garak

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 01:36 AM

I'd agree with Astro. You get it anything even slightly technical, particularly from a mechanical, technological, scientific/mathematical, or legal perspective, and the journalists are hopelessly lost. You read them off one of Mr. Scott's Star Trek technobabble speeches about why the Enterprise can't move, they'll reprint it verbatim as fact.
Posted By: MCompact

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 02:16 AM

Originally Posted by Garak
I'd agree with Astro. You get it anything even slightly technical, particularly from a mechanical, technological, scientific/mathematical, or legal perspective, and the journalists are hopelessly lost. You read them off one of Mr. Scott's Star Trek technobabble speeches about why the Enterprise can't move, they'll reprint it verbatim as fact.


I can personally confirm the average reporter's lack of legal knowledge- and their overriding mantra is: " Never let the facts get in the way of a good story."
Posted By: Garak

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 03:04 AM

Some of the things I see printed on local news just makes me shake my head. OT, but there was a time when a crime reporter had to attend court every day and pay attention to the docket and sit in docket court here.
Posted By: edwardh1

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 10:48 AM

Originally Posted by George Bynum
Is anyone following this? 27-September

2 pilots dead, 2 passengers seriously injured. Local television said tonight that:

Pilot's certification only as SIC; earlier reports were that he had over 10,000 hours

Right seat "person" only had a private SEL license, not even IFR. Said to have over 5,000 hours. Those hours without IFR rating is puzzling.

Runway was marginal length (5393 ft per AirNav) for the aircraft.

I wonder how much faith to put in the media?



people dont know what sic and sel are or how close marginal was
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 11:33 AM

For those who don’t know, the Falcon 50 is a very nice airplane to fly. It has effective leading edge devices, and a single (center engine only) “thrust reverser” . It also has a variable flight control “feel” system known as “Arthur Q”

This leads to an airplane that is pleasingly responsive at both high and low speeds, so it’s both fun and easy to maneuver. It’s approach speeds are reasonable (low) due to the effective leading edge devices and good flaps.

I’m not here to claim the Falcon 50 is easy to operate, as it’s a complex jet. But it is easier to manage on takeoff and landing, due to very reasonable and comfortable speeds and handling, than nearly all of it’s competition due to the above mentioned systems.

There have been center engine TR failures, where the TR “buckets” failed to deploy and the engine spools up, leading to the center engine pushing the plane off the end of the runway. I don’t have any idea if that happened here.

Despite the center engine only TR, the Falcon 50 can get into and out of short runways that other jets can’t.
Posted By: fdcg27

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 01:10 PM

So, neither of these guys were legally or practically qualified to operate the aircraft, much less type-rated in it?
This begs the question of how this duo got their hands on this aircraft to begin with.
This wasn't exactly grandma's Apache after all.
Would love to hear the laughter when the owners try to submit the insurance claim.
Posted By: spackard

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 02:05 PM

Not trying to derail this thread, but it's unusual for two planes to crash, from the same airport (Brackett Field), about 100 yards from each other, in two days.
https://abc7.com/plane-crashes-near-brackett-field-airport-in-la-verne;-1-killed/4384834/
https://www.sgvtribune.com/2018/10/...ne-crash-second-fatal-crash-in-two-days/

Sunday before 6p: Cessna 177RG, practicing approaches, engine problem
Monday 11:50a: Bonanza V35, during approach, possibly clipped a tree
Posted By: Win

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 04:04 PM

Quote
..... This begs the question of how this duo got their hands on this aircraft to begin with.
This wasn't exactly grandma's Apache after all. .......


"FAA records show that the plane is owned by Global Aircraft Acquisitions LLC of Delaware."

Wild guess is they were leasing it and running a charter company with it.

There may ( or may not ) be multiple layers of insurance with different conditions of coverage. If a lease or mortgage, it's hard to believe a lease company or note holder would accept hull insurance that had any coverage restrictions that might prevent payout on a hull loss.

Insurance covering the pilots, passengers, airport damage, etc., might be a problem.

Some people are scrupulous about things. Some people aren't. I've known quite a few people over the years that I suspect would not consider certs to be a deal breaker to fly something if they felt otherwise competent to fly it. That's why I suspect basic hull coverage would not be highly conditioned. But that's just a guess, no experience in this industry ....

Quote
....There have been center engine TR failures, where the TR “buckets” failed to deploy and the engine spools up, leading to the center engine pushing the plane off the end of the runway. I don’t have any idea if that happened here.


..... "Frasher said one of the pilots was unconscious, lying on the throttle after the jet crashed. He said a window had to be broken to throttle back the jet." .....
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Win
[quote] I've known quite a few people over the years that I suspect would not consider certs to be a deal breaker to fly something if they felt otherwise competent to fly it.


I've seen that too. Interestingly, that's exactly when problems occur. I avoid such people. Not because I'm "anti freedom" or some such nonsense, but because there is a direct relationship between those types of risk takers and trouble.
Posted By: fdcg27

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/02/18 10:43 PM

I dunno.
I kind of doubt that there'd be any hull loss coverage in the event of the aircraft being leased to some guys who claimed they could fly it even though they didn't posses the required certs.
Aircraft do overrun runways from time to time, even airliners operated by fully qualified crews working for well known first world airlines.
Still, leasing an aircraft to be operated by a crew not legally qualified to operate it and then expecting hull loss compensation is going to be a hard sell.
I really doubt that any layer of whatever coverage the leasing company may have has anything in their contract of coverage saying "Sure, just flip the keys to anyone who claims to be a jet jock and we're okay with it. You're covered."
You can't even rent a few hours in a C172 that's had the wings flown off of it as a trainer for the past decade or two without showing your license, ratings and log book and may even be required to take some dual with an instructor as a check ride. No FBO wants to see any pilot wreck their airplane and kill themselves in the process.
I'd expect that the requirements to lease a high zoot bizjet would be a little more stringent, with maybe some sim time required for the prospective pilots and this process will be at least partly ruled by the insurers.
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/03/18 06:59 PM

Good god, there is a video of it at the overrun. It was really moving (before the very sudden stop) and it sure looked like the gear was up.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/vi...-greenville-downtown-airport/1502776002/
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 02:38 AM

Originally Posted by Cujet
Good god, there is a video of it at the overrun. It was really moving (before the very sudden stop) and it sure looked like the gear was up.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/vi...-greenville-downtown-airport/1502776002/


That's a frightening video...it's got to be doing 80 knots as it leaves the runway.

As if the spoilers and reversers weren't used on landing...
Posted By: edhackett

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 03:08 AM

Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by Cujet
Good god, there is a video of it at the overrun. It was really moving (before the very sudden stop) and it sure looked like the gear was up.

https://www.greenvilleonline.com/vi...-greenville-downtown-airport/1502776002/


That's a frightening video...it's got to be doing 80 knots as it leaves the runway.

As if the spoilers and reversers weren't used on landing...


There's a flash at the rear of the plane about a quarter to a third of the way in. Just the sun flashing off the horizontal stabilizer or maybe and engine problem?

Ed
Posted By: cjcride

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 02:22 PM

The flash looks like the port wing scraping the runway.
It's hard to tell if the gear is down or not. I would expect more sparks if it weren't though.

Thanks for the link Cu.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 03:49 PM

When airliners (or any other high performance jet) run off the end of the runway, it's generally one of two things: landing long or spoilers didn't deploy. Hydroplaning or icy runway can be a cause of runway excursions, but far less than folks think and anyway, clearly not the case here.

Greenville is 7,000' long.

If you're used to flying a GA airplane (and it sounds like the pilots of this Falcon were primarily GA experienced) then that's several times the landing distance of a GA airplane. Super long runway. Or so you get used to thinking.

But for an airplane like this one, it's quite short. You have to get the airplane down, on the runway, weight on wheels/strut switch activated, so that the spoilers deploy and take the airplane's weight off the wings, only then do the brakes become effective. Reversers are an aid, but it's the brakes that stop the airplane. And they have to be in firm contact with the pavement.

You learn to fly on little airplanes, and then look at this "long" runway and think you've got room - but you don't. Very easy to make a critical mistake - float the landing (so the struts don't compress), land long, carry too much speed, or bounce the landing, and you're in deep trouble because effective braking doesn't begin until the landing gear are compressed and spoilers deploy.

I should add that a stabilized approach (on glideslope, on centerline, proper airspeed, proper sinkrate, proper configuration) helps with a good, on target, landing. It's a focus area for my industry, my company, and the FAA. Unstabilized approaches have been a factor in the preponderance of runway excursions - too fast, too high, etc. on approach, and you touchdown too long, especially if you're trying to "grease" it on...

From the speed with which the airplane left the runway - it either touched down way past the "touchdown zone*" or the spoilers weren't armed/deployed. It had far too much speed at the end. The gear were down, the optical illusion of the camera angle makes it look like the airplane is too close to the ground, but that's because the camera is looking up at a hilltop.

I used to land the 757 and the A-320 in Orange County/John Wayne all the time. 5,700' You HAD to be on the ground in the first thousand feet or you were at risk of not stopping. We did it all the time, but we knew exactly what we were up against. I used to fly out of LGA nearly every flight, in the 757 and A-320, only 7,000 with highways at one end and water at the other. Same deal: on the ground in the first 1,500' or we go around. Period. We had a rigorous touchdown zone defined and we put the airplane in that zone.

Never a problem stopping in either place, including when it was wet and/or snowy in LGA, because the airplane was landed properly, in the proper place on the runway. That made stopping uneventful. I am always happy when things are uneventful in my line of work.



* which we define as the first 1/3 of the runway or first 3,000 feet, whichever is shorter. But none of us would use 1,900 feet (the first 1/3) in SNA...that's too far down...
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 05:04 PM

The latest reports say that it ran off the side of the runway before overshooting it. Not simply a matter of distance, but also one of direction as well.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/04/18 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
The latest reports say that it ran off the side of the runway before overshooting it. Not simply a matter of distance, but also one of direction as well.


Hm... Any mention of the winds at the time?
Posted By: CincyDavid

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 04:17 PM

So, what kind of establishment is the Trophy Club, where the video of the crash came from?!?
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 05:41 PM

None of the articles I read were incredibly detailed. Seems most of them I read are responsible enough to take no position, make no assumptions, and simply state the obvious details, while stating one can read the finer details when the government reports come out.

Whatever happened, it's just sad. Not much forgiveness in flight.
Posted By: George Bynum

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 06:25 PM

Originally Posted by Astro14
Greenville is 7,000' long.
Official records show 5,393' but I dug into the tech specs on the plane; it can land in less than 2000'. Takeoff would be a little tighter if fully loaded.

Originally Posted by Astro14
From the speed with which the airplane left the runway - it either touched down way past the "touchdown zone*" or the spoilers weren't armed/deployed.
The airport manager was interviewed and said he saw it land out of his window; all looked normal.

I've a friend who has some right seat experience in an Eclipse and Citation. He discussed the different systems of spoiler deployment and use and WONDERS it the wrong thing was done. NON-PROFESSIONAL REPORTS say the plane sounded at full throttle as it exited the runway. Perhaps he thought the clamshell (my term, I don't know the right one) was deployed and throttle had to be advanced to brake? Perhaps something else was wrong and he didn't reach liftoff velocity for a go-around?

I understand that the aircraft was equipped with a flight data recorder. The NTSB should give us a prelim report in a week or 2, I understand.

(My interest; I live just a few miles from the runway and drive the road on which it stopped occasionally. I've friends with light singles and small twins based there with whom I've flown.)
Posted By: Win

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 06:53 PM

Quote
Hm... Any mention of the winds at the time?


https://www.flyingmag.com/dassault-falcon-50-accident-greenville

"Historical weather data gathered from around the time of the accident included light winds from the northeast, overcast skies at 300 feet and visibility of 3 miles in light rain."

Following the link, 050 at 5. They landed RWY 19.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 07:53 PM

Originally Posted by George Bynum
Originally Posted by Astro14
Greenville is 7,000' long.
Official records show 5,393' but I dug into the tech specs on the plane; it can land in less than 2000'. Takeoff would be a little tighter if fully loaded.

Originally Posted by Astro14
From the speed with which the airplane left the runway - it either touched down way past the "touchdown zone*" or the spoilers weren't armed/deployed.
The airport manager was interviewed and said he saw it land out of his window; all looked normal.

I've a friend who has some right seat experience in an Eclipse and Citation. He discussed the different systems of spoiler deployment and use and WONDERS it the wrong thing was done. NON-PROFESSIONAL REPORTS say the plane sounded at full throttle as it exited the runway. Perhaps he thought the clamshell (my term, I don't know the right one) was deployed and throttle had to be advanced to brake? Perhaps something else was wrong and he didn't reach liftoff velocity for a go-around?

I understand that the aircraft was equipped with a flight data recorder. The NTSB should give us a prelim report in a week or 2, I understand.

(My interest; I live just a few miles from the runway and drive the road on which it stopped occasionally. I've friends with light singles and small twins based there with whom I've flown.)



Thank you George - I was clearly looking at the wrong airport!

At 5,393 - take everything I said and make it more emphatic. That's not long for a runway operating a jet airplane.

The NTSB will probably give us an update in a few weeks. Full report typically takes a year or so.

The 2,000 foot distance is likely the stopping distance, not the same as landing distance. All landing distance calculations for us are predicated on crossing the threshold at 50 feet, touching down at 1,000 feet down the runway, then a 15% margin on that.

I pulled up the data for Boston runway 27 last night on my way into Boston. All the assumptions are there. Wind, weight, elevation, temp, altimeter, runway slope, flap setting, brake setting.

Using those planning assumptions, and the following conditions: 8KT Headwind, 179,700 lbs weight, temp 19C, Altimeter 29.97, 18 foot landing elevation, flaps 30, with maximum braking and reverse, we could stop a 757 in 3,192 feet. But that is standing on the brakes, with full reverse.

A more normal landing, same conditions, with autobrakes 2, would be a distance of 6,245. So, yes, after careful analysis of conditions and performance, I would've accepted runway 27 if that's what ATC requested.

But I don't know if these pilots performed that kind of analysis...I do...every time...


Tailwind doesn't help...neither does rain...
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/05/18 07:54 PM

Let me add that we also consider the runway condition, braking action, visibility and type of approach, and ability of the airplane to go around in our performance analysis. Only after all that do I consider the landing to be safe.

Flying isn't as simple as folks would like to think, sometimes...

Here, clipped to my yoke, as we're at FL390 approaching Albany, is the Boston Runway 27 analysis from last night. Lots of it is hard to read, but you can see some of the assumptions that go into the analysis...sorry that BITOG rotated the upload...

Cheers,
Astro

Attached picture IMG_0278[1108].jpg
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/06/18 12:50 AM

Every time you explain flying, I feel like maybe nuclear physics would be an easier hobby take up.

When I was a kid, and my elders would talk about it, I assumed it sounded complex because I was a kid. As I got older, it was just, "Nope. It's just really really complicated."
Posted By: fdcg27

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/08/18 12:37 PM

Where did this flight originate? Europe?
Also, am I reading this correctly in that stopping distances are actually shorter with autobrake off?
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/08/18 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by fdcg27
Where did this flight originate? Europe?
Also, am I reading this correctly in that stopping distances are actually shorter with autobrake off?


That flight originated in SFO. UAL 242.

You are reading the performance analysis correctly. Autobrakes command a programmed deceleration rate. 1 is pretty mild, and in fact, with reverse engaged, the airplane slows more quickly than the programmed rate, so no actual braking is applied when using reverse and 1.

While you might think that "Max" autobrakes is maximum braking, it isn't. "Max" is the maximum deceleration rate that the autobrakes are programmed to produce.

Maximum manual braking (standing on the pedals, which is limited only by anti-lock) on a dry runway exceeds that programmed deceleration rate of autobrakes.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/10/18 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Every time you explain flying, I feel like maybe nuclear physics would be an easier hobby take up.

When I was a kid, and my elders would talk about it, I assumed it sounded complex because I was a kid. As I got older, it was just, "Nope. It's just really really complicated."



I think that flying big airplanes, or fighters, is complicated because you’re extracting very high performance out of the machines while maintaining good safety. You’re taking off, or landing, at close to the limits of what the machine can do.

That’s not a simple matter.

It’s my hope that explaining flying here on BITOG makes it more accessible- easier to understand.

If I’m failing in that, please ask questions, I’ll be glad to clear up anything that I’ve left lingering.

Cheers,
Astro
Posted By: cjcride

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/10/18 03:50 PM

Astro you are a champ.
I did some single engine piston time years ago. Always liked and followed aviation stuff. You make it so clear and 'right down the center line' (no bull).

Thank You
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/10/18 05:54 PM

Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Every time you explain flying, I feel like maybe nuclear physics would be an easier hobby take up.

When I was a kid, and my elders would talk about it, I assumed it sounded complex because I was a kid. As I got older, it was just, "Nope. It's just really really complicated."



I think that flying big airplanes, or fighters, is complicated because you’re extracting very high performance out of the machines while maintaining good safety. You’re taking off, or landing, at close to the limits of what the machine can do.

That’s not a simple matter.

It’s my hope that explaining flying here on BITOG makes it more accessible- easier to understand.

If I’m failing in that, please ask questions, I’ll be glad to clear up anything that I’ve left lingering.

Cheers,
Astro



Please don't mistake my statement to mean that I'm not understanding what you're saying. I definitely am. I'm just left with my mind a little blown how much data and information one must know and process in order to perform the tasks of flying.

My grandfather and my great-uncles passed away when I was young. My father when I still a teenager. They never really talked directly to me as far as the specific operations of flight. I've learned that a big part of that was because they were all military pilots in war and really didn't like to go back there unless it was between other veterans. My father was the most silent of all them because it was Vietnam, and I've learned people just don't like talking about 'Nam.

I have heard a lot of war stories, especially from the air war over Europe, but I've always wondered what it was really like for them in those cockpits. The things you post, especially your experiences in military service really help in imagining that. It definitely reinforces my perspective that they, and all warriors of the sky are really something else entirely.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/10/18 07:41 PM

You know, I wonder what it was like for them, too...

In World War II, bomber crews in the 8th AF generally didn’t live for 25 missions, when they could rotate home.

I think flying was far simpler then. You had standard numbers for various speeds in an airplane like a B-17 or B-24: stall, liftoff, max, landing, etc. Several reasons, I think, for that...the bomb load was a smaller percentage of the airplane weight, the field was quite long in relation to the aircraft landing performance, and safety of operations wasn’t really as important is it is now...

The manuals for the WW II fighters (I have a couple, including a personal favorite, the F-4U Corsair) were so simple. My F-14 Manual is (yes, I still have it) three inches thick...and it doesn’t include the inch thick set of performance charts...or the two inch thick classified weapon system manual... the 757/767 manual that I use every day is 2,673 pages long...

Those guys in WW II had a fatality every 20 or so missions.

Vietnam wasn’t a whole lot better, at least, from what I’ve read about it, perhaps one in a hundred.

The USN now flies fighters with a mishap rate of less than 1 in 100,000 hours.

Airlines operate with a mishap rate of less than 1 in 10,000,000.

Through engineering improvements, complexity and risk analysis, we’ve gotten better. But we sure have made flying harder.

I hope to build an RV-8 one day, and look forward to the simplicity of flying an airplane like that...one where control feel is mechanical, and I can tell what the airplane is doing... where I feel like I’m flying, not managing risk through decision-making, analysis, and balancing the use of automation.
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/11/18 12:37 AM

So I have heard. I believe the exact statistic was that 6 out of 10 RAF airmen never came back. Better chance of dying than coming home.

For the US airmen it was a lot better as the war went on, but it was more frequent for my grandfather to have his plane shot than not. More like an aerial fistfight than modern warfare.

I've wanted to build an RV-8 since I was 15. Don't know what powerplant I would want today, but I was very impressed with the rotary engined RV-8's. Either way, it would be the pleasure of flying and being able to say, "Yup. I built it myself.". Yeah, I could do that.
Posted By: Cujet

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/19/18 12:31 PM

The NTSB preliminary report:

https://app.ntsb.gov/pdfgenerator/R...5&AKey=1&RType=HTML&IType=FA
Posted By: john_pifer

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/19/18 03:05 PM

I think it's nuts that they thought it was an acceptable risk to take a Falcon flying when the guy in the left seat didn't even have the right endorsement to be PIC in that A/C, and the guy in the right seat didn't have an endorsement AT ALL to fly that A/C type. I'd be afraid to lose my license and never get to fly an airplane again, at minimum.

And carrying passengers, risking their lives, too? Just crazy.
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/20/18 08:25 AM

All three engines at full power, but reverser only on center engine? Does that mean center was braking, but outboards were forcing the plane ahead?
Posted By: john_pifer

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/20/18 04:37 PM

Also weird that no. 2 & 3 fire handles were pulled.
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/20/18 06:02 PM

Attempt to quench those engines?
Posted By: john_pifer

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/21/18 12:34 AM

And how were #2 & 3 still running with the fire handles pulled? I thought it was a standard design function across OEMs for the fire handle being pulled to close the fuel & hydraulic SOVs.
Posted By: George Bynum

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/21/18 12:40 AM

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
All three engines at full power, but reverser only on center engine? Does that mean center was braking, but outboards were forcing the plane ahead?
That's my take. Your question doesn't make it obvious, but only the center has thrust reversing equipment.

Considering the lack of qualification by the pilot on this aircraft, and friends who tell me some planes have reversing capability on all engines, my guess is that he assumed all 3 engines were used to slow ... and 2 in normal mode WAY overcame 1 trying to slow.

It is too bad that we'll never know why he did what he did.
Posted By: DoubleWasp

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/21/18 03:43 AM

Yeah, that's what I was getting at.

Ok, so allow me to make an uneducated guess here:

They stick the landing real nice. Pilot goes for reverser, deploys it. He immediately does what he would on a traditional jet, and nails all 3 engines to full thrust. Plane rockets on. Maybe he flips out and thinks engines are out of control? Panics and tries throwing fire handles to stop the "runaway" engines? Maybe mistakes the fire handles for being reverser handles in the melee?

Heck. No way to even guess it.
Posted By: Astro14

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 10/25/18 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by DoubleWasp
Yeah, that's what I was getting at.

Ok, so allow me to make an uneducated guess here:

They stick the landing real nice. Pilot goes for reverser, deploys it. He immediately does what he would on a traditional jet, and nails all 3 engines to full thrust. Plane rockets on. Maybe he flips out and thinks engines are out of control? Panics and tries throwing fire handles to stop the "runaway" engines? Maybe mistakes the fire handles for being reverser handles in the melee?

Heck. No way to even guess it.


Sounds plausible...

But hard to know at this point - I am willing to bet that the NTSB will look at everything and be able to tell. You would be amazed at what clues exist in a crash.
Posted By: CT8

Re: Dassault Falcon 50 crash in Greenville SC - 11/05/18 02:11 PM

Planes are complicated. They don't seem like something to toy with.
© 2019 Bob Is The Oil Guy