California Pilot to NTSB: We were just hanging 10 when I set up for some chill time with the terra firma. Then I slid the jet juice to Bravo and was like WOAH!, and my chill pal was like WOOOOOAAAHHH, and the plane was like WOAH, and the ground kinda like reached up and just crushed our groove and harshed our mellow.
Er…ATC? oh what a bummer dude, It’s like…and I was like…. And he was all…I mean, seriously dude. Hello? Hello sir? Are you on edibles and in charge of an aircraft?
Juan, have been a Patreon patron, am a patron, and will continue to support such great reporting. Love your details and intuition. Hope you continue your great reporting for a very long time.
Juan I was bitching about the patron but this was an amazing video I might have to get on board Great video Juan !! I don’t always agree with some of Juan’s regulatory stances but I can’t argue with the facts again great video
I’ve got about 10 years of skydiving ops experience, roughly 1300 in these Garrett vans. This airplane is the easier than a 182 to fly in my opinion, really stable and a nice platform. With that said, if you get slow enough with no power, you can and will see the beta light illuminate and you need to be ready to stand on the prop if you will to keep the airspeed. I saw this accident and immediately thought of a trainee pilot getting slow and/or catching an ill timed downdraft. The story you referenced about the guy saying he was going to put it into beta to beat the divers down, that’s the same condition I’m referencing here. They don’t go over the gate per say, but when the prop fines out to match rpm at low airspeeds, she drops like a homesick bowling ball. You can turn 4 loads an hour like clock work on 66 gallons or so an hour, these planes are a great investment with the right training. There’s no reason ever to skimp on fuel in this ship, they never stop climbing. Rest In Peace!
Finally a smart post. Winds and terrian are a little tricky at this airport from what I was told. When the correct infomation comes out I think you will be spot on, pun intended. I know the pilot that survived, but I do not know the pilot that passed. RIP.
I always called flight idle the “now mode” for putting the aircraft on the ground if you carried a little too much speed onto short runway. Rarely ever used it but it was there if we needed it and boy did it work! That plane would sit down like an arthritic elephant.
Part of the scene at Oceanside is that the Jump plane has to go over to Palomar Airport to refuel. At least that was it when I was jumping there a few years ago. So there would be an incentive to keep flying jumpers as long as possible before taking the plane off line for refueling. Especially with a one plane operation like Go Jump Oceanside on a busy day. Same reason for getting back asap for another load. $$$$. Seems a bit crazy with only 20 gal. onboard.
@@terrysullivan1992 From what I was told it is a tandem factory now.........I do not know about the black Caravan but the SDS Caravan had plenty of fuel.
@@terrysullivan1992 That’s interesting, I would understand a new guy feeling pressure in a stock caravan but I’ve run 140 tandems plus fun jumpers in that grand van fueling at an auxiliary airport and I’m done by 5-6 in a SuperVan. That’s why I said there’s no reason ever to skimp on fuel on this platform. My loads were 13/18k turns as well. No reason to push it, ever.
I have flown parachute jumpers with a Cessna 206. The club had very strict operational procedures, which included power settings for climb and descent. We never used idle power during descent because we wanted to preserve the engine. With turbine engines, you can be more "reckless". But beta mode is absolute off limit. As far as I know, only the PC-6 Turbo Porter is certified for beta mode in flight. Its engine is modified for that purpose.
Juan Brown does another very detailed and interesting analysis. I appreciate them all. As a former US Navy aviator and survivor of 3 A/C accidents, I live by the motto that "whatever can go wrong, will go wrong!" Looks like in this case, the going wrong had a lot of help from the pilot.
Actually, this is the worst analysis I have yet to see from Juan and after talking to the owner of the plane I wish Juan would stop commenting on jump planes accidents completely.
@AlanMydland-fq2vs I know the owner, I know the pilot in the right seat, but I didn't know the female PIC who passed away. I know more than Juan concerning this accident, and his report was not on point. He has an unjust POV concerning skydiving operations, which is ridiculous. As you mocking the dead, hopefully you'll find yourself in a plane that didn't crash them.
RIP to the jumpmaster, and prayers for his family and friends for strength. Excellent details on that turbine, Juan! Those engines are fascinating. Amazing how they work. Mind-boggling costs involved with those! Just amazing engineering.
Juan, thanks for covering this. I worked with and knew the person who passed away. I’ve been in aviation since 1991, and I’ve lost a number of friends in accidents. It never gets easier, but hopefully we can all learn something.
Hey Juan, quick correction. Both Caravans were Supervans with Garrett Conversions from Texas Turbine. It’s common for FAA registration not to update STC’s for the engine. Beta is also a no go in the Garrett’s. Texas Turbines are extremely nose heavy and lose elevator authority when slow. Additionally once slow, the prop will flatten out to its finest pitch resulting in a huge drag increase exacerbating your already slow airspeed.
I can see an aircraft designed to have a large load in the back having a very heavy nose when nothing is in the back. I've flown several aircraft like that. You had to carry power into the flare to keep the elevator effective or hit nose-wheel first.
I started following you during the Orville days and I’m continually impressed with your sincerity and ability to convey what is actually going on or has happened in such instances as this.
Timothy Skattum Juan is a blessing for us pilots who come to him when there is an accident. It's sad that we have to learn from the misfortune of others, but there it is.
We were watching a 208 at our airport decend to land and someone brought up beta lock. I could see that being the only thing to slow this plane that much.
Always appreciate your expert and ongoing investigative reporting. Small note: the highway near the Oceanside airport is not a Freeway. It has cross streets and traffic lights and a 45 mph. speed limit. It is called Hwy. 76 but really isn't even that near the airport.
Tow pilots for sailplanes often have a similar practice, where they will dive back after you get off tow, sometimes executing a Split-S to get turned around and down. In their case they do have a legitimate incentive to get hooked up to the next sailplane as quickly as possible. However, when I was a fairly new student, I got sucked up into a real trash-mover thermal and was too inexperienced to pull the release and turn into it. Because I was high and no longer in his mirror, he thought I had gotten off tow and started his dive back, pulling me along. He then realized I was still on and pulled up, at which point I overshot him and the rope was in danger of wrapping over my wing. He dived again and we were able to finally adjust speeds and get off tow. That was a real pucker moment if I say so myself. Learned my lesson that day.😉
Having participated in some glider towing myself, and having closely observed a number of skydiving operations, it has struck me that both communities have a tendency to do things with tow planes and jump planes that are unsafe in my view. The steep descents that I have seen conducted with these aircraft are accidents waiting to happen. The aircraft are subjected to maneuvering that pushes the certification (structural) limits, and they risk mid-air collisions with transient air traffic in the area, which are not expecting airplanes to be literally falling out the sky in front of them. As much as I have enjoyed towing gliders for a non-profit organization, I would never do it for a commercial operation, because I feel there would be substantial pressure to operate in an unsafe manner. Long story short.....some people in the glider and skydive business are doing stuff that gives general aviation a bad name, and it never surprises me that when we hear "THE REST OF THE STORY", we hear something like the story Juan just told here.
I tow a lot and won't change anything until I see the glider turned 90 degrees away from me and obviously disconnected, or hear the radio call "off tow".
Thank you for covering these crashes. My house and office are very near this airport and I have watched thousands of takeoffs and landings here, especially the frequent daily skydiving flights. Since I moved here 4 years ago, I can't tell you how many times I've been out walking my dog and yelled up at the pilot of the skydiving plane, "you're coming in too fast and too high!" My family all calls that pilot "the hot-dogger" because of all the times we were sure he'd crash. It's really shocking to hear that our suspicions were right -- he was racing the skydivers to the ground (referring to the crash in February). The crash sites are only a few yards apart and that location is where they've just prepared the land to build 700 new homes and a surf park. You can imagine that now the locals are questioning the wisdom of building anything there. We're all following along to find out the cause of the crash on Friday. RIP to the Jumpmaster who died in the accident.
@@jeffreythompson9549 I'm a huge supporter of the airport, so I'd be more inclined to say that the City shouldn't allow houses or a water park to be built so close to the runway.
@@jeffreythompson9549 I don’t understand why cities crowd airports with homes. The airport was there decades before oceanside built up. The city of oceanside should have zoned differently around the airport.
I grew up in Oceanside. KOKB was my home airport. Crazy these 2 crashes were just short of final. GoJump pilots were always very professional and polite. Sorry to hear about this and the loss for their family and friends. Thanks for covering this.
Tell us about the terrain and how does it affect final? I have been told that it is a little tricky and the runway might be slighty uphill compared to approarch......Is that true?
@@hubriswonk My C182 is hangared at this airport. The runway sits parallel to a river at the bottom of a valley. The winds are ALWAYS shearing. There are also high tension power lines perpendicular to the approach end of RWY 25 (you can see them in the picture - the plane came to rest perpendicular to the runway - look straight past the right wing). I always approach a little high and carry a little extra speed here to be ready for any shear. The eye witnesses (my neighbors) said that this particular flight was lower, slower and “more wobbly” than any of the thousand of other Go Jump flights seen. They said the plane then suddenly fell while “flipping” to the right, describing a stall/spin with about a quarter turn before the right wing caught the ground and tore off. The one that crashed in February was described as having flown straight into the ground as if coming in too steep. They may have both landed short in the same place for the same reason (engine failure) but they each had definitely different flight paths. In response to the other comment, KOKB uses a modified right pattern for RWY 25 that keeps air traffic over the river, ocean and mostly unpopulated areas. Residents near the airport have a significantly greater chance of injury or death from the increase in cars on Hwy 76 due to the proposed housing development than any aircraft incident. “Close the airport” is an ignorant statement by an uninformed person. Despite the Go Jump incidents, which seem to be more about the company operations than the airport, KOKB is safe and stands as one of the last bastions of GA airports in the San Diego area.
They don't seem very professional to me. They might talk the talk and walk the walk, but their actions speak much louder than words. The FAA needs to camp out there for a while. I've been a professional pilot for way too many decades and have never seen an operation with a record like this. It isn't happenstance. The pilots of Oceanside will certainly lose this airport because of these accidents.
Great explanation of the PT6 turboprop as well as the skydiving accidents. I have 1,000 hours with them, and 350 hours Garrett TPE331. Both very great engines. Enjoy your analysiss 👍🏻
When I was doing a job out of Nome AK, I saw the Garrett TPE331 on Bearing Air's Caravan's, Bearing Air in Nome developed that conversion and the STC! What a beast! It made that sluggish caravan run like a thoroughbred!
A few important notes on the TPE-331. I flew the Garrett engine on its’ unique KingAir application the B100 for a few years. The NTS system is fairly simple in how it works vs an auto feather (optional) in the PT-6. It is a mechanical gear system with interlocking “vanes” that in normal flight (engine driving propeller) are held in place by torque. When the propeller starts to turn the engine (negative torque). The angle off these vanes will force the gear attached to the propeller to pop out and trigger the propeller to dump oil pushing it “towards feather”. The interesting thing about this process is that eventually the engine catches up and the propeller attempts to return to its flight pitch before it is cycled again. It winds up causing a rapid pulsing as the propeller is taken in and out of a low pitch-high pitch setting until the pilot either feathers the propeller manually or, the engine runs out of energy. While it may seem counter intuitive to present a pilot with a strange pulsing situation on top of an engine failure it is designed to keep the shaft spinning in case a re-light is achieved. And prevent a rapid slowdown of the engine that could cause shaft warping. The shaft in these engines carry allot of rotational energy and, likewise it takes allot of energy to get them back going. In the B100 we had two 24v batteries as opposed to other KingAirs that had one. We also had a switch where we could operate them in series (48v) to help starts in cold weather. The Garrett is also more susceptible to FOD and Ice damage than the reverse flow PT-6. The Caravan “Super Van” conversion is unique in that they use an engine application that is left turning on a single engine aircraft. Because of this transitioning often between a PT-6 caravan and a TPE-331 caravan can be fundamentally tricky as torque effects now require left rudder rather than right rudder. Because of this, many operators will stick to one engine or the other and avoid a mixed fleet. Other than it’s idiosyncrasies, the Garrett engine is typically a much more efficient and powerful option on most of its applications besides the advantage of nearly instantaneous power. The B100 was a New England to South Florida airplane in most conditions doing the same trip as a light jet taking only 45m longer but burning 1/3rd of the fuel. The fuel burn was also similar to the smaller KingAir 90 despite having the cabin of the larger KingAir 200 and nearly the range of the KingAir 350. (Not to mention the most obvious advantage… being able to be heard from 5 miles away over an idling PT-6 😂). Great insight as always! Without a doubt these videos make a difference keeping aviation safer!
Great to see the PT6 engine. In my time in the Dutch air force the PT6-A-25A used on the Pilatus PC7 trainer was by far the most reliable turboshaft of the lot , with zero failures during the TBO.
Thanks Juan for reporting and hosting a platform for discussion. Condolences to the lost Pilot in training. I too live in Oceanside (although I fly out of Fallbrook). I got to view both crashed planes. The first appeared to be a "out of fuel/loss of power" scenario. This one, seems to be loss of power and a stall.( It too could be a low fuel situation as there didn't seem to be much fuel at the crash site...) The NTSB inspector stated that there was signs of fuel leakage in the soil (right wing torn from aircraft). However, I couldn't smell it a few hours later...
These clips feel like informal flight school; they're so densely packed with information and I'm learning all sorts of stuff about engines, flying and airplanes. My head spins after one of these, but in a good way! Keep 'em coming Juan, and don't listen to anyone telling you to dumb these videos down!
Reminds me of when I was 11 or 12 and the teacher allowed me to explain to the class how a RR Dart worked ... shortly after a Vickers Viscount flew over our town.
The caravan has an 8 gallon header tank that both tanks fuel into. Aux pump is in the header tank. The side slip restrictions are to prevent the lack of fuel to the header tank. There is a warning light for low fuel in the header tank.
Here at our local skydive op the pilot gets down as the jumpers are landing, I believe he keeps the rpm up and flattens the pitch, turning the prop into a big speed brake… he turns base so close to the runway you’d swear he won’t make the runway, he also banks about 60-90 degrees base to final. He nails it every time, despite what his approach looks like. It’s fun to watch! They operate a 208 with a beefed up PT-6.
they do that here especially with the twin otter... it's like yea getting ready to turn bas but it's more of a downwind turn to final and completely ignoring the base leg lol
@@WX4CB the fly overs by Skydive Arizona during their Holiday Boogie were beauty beyond belief. thanks larry hill and family for all the memories o'er the years.
@@johndonaldson3619 are ag pilots cowboys? If he has adequate stall margin, no problem. 90 degrees was an exaggeration after thinking about it,all of 60 degrees though, but it’s a lot of bank angle. If you were to watch it, I bet you would come away thinking he is a great pilot flying well within the envelope of the airplane .
There have been a lot of comments stating that the 331 will do this or do that in a particular situation. I’ll refrain from doing the same. I worked for many years rigging fuel controls on both the 331 and the PT6. A number of fuel control units have been used on the 331 including a fly by wire computerized fuel control. Not knowing the engine fuel control system installed on this particular engine means it’s all a guess what he may have been doing with his home grown power management techniques and what the results may have been. Regarding the NTS system, a portion of the engine setup included in flight testing of the NTS system and In flight testing of the Beta mode. Situations a pilot would normally never experience. I was also qualified to fly the aircraft which we were servicing and had a fair amount of stick time doing such. I can certainly understand how a hot dogging pilot could cheat a bit on the approved operating parameters in furthering his rapid decent and short field game. Our testing was always done at altitude as an unstable thrust output or a high drag factor could be a fine and sensitive line, even capable of destabilizing the aircraft to an alarming degree if the fuel control setups were not spot on. (One of the reasons for test flying) It certainly appears the pilot operated in the realm of a test pilot and got caught up in his hot dogging game.
As a lifelong non-pilot aviation enthusiast I found this video the best explanation of how a turbo-prop engine operates, the differences between the designs and the cause and effect relationship between propeller pitch (i.e. need to feather) and engine flame-out. It will be interesting to see if similar poor decisions by the pilot led to the second crash. The comment in the report of the first accident about the passenger taking phone videos showing the controls made me think how useful the implementation of a standard requiring all planes to have a camera mounted in the cockpit above the pilot to record a view of controls and what actions the pilot takes to change them in addition to the current voice and data recorders would make determining causes of crashes easier. The video technology is available and inexpensive and wouldn’t be any more difficult or expensive than using a GoPro to record a blog.
I am still hoping to see CVR and FDR become obsolete in my lifetime and replaced with real time telemetry. The excuse that accidents are so rare just doesn't cut it anymore. The time and money spent on trying to find Malaysia 370 shows that it's not about how many accidents but rather the cost of one when it happens.
No, you have no idea what you are taking about and Juan stated almost no facts. Wait until more offical info is released before making iggnorant statements. The plane was flying and lined up for landing and any number of things could have happened on final.
Jaun Thank you for showing the two different engine diagrams and explaining the higher drag from an un-feathered windmilling propeller as well as Beta mode (for ground operations only ) I so appreciate your knowledge and research Really a well done video again 10 stars ✨ out of 10 stars ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ Best wishes to you always from Las Vegas Craig Bravo 👏🏻 “See you Here”
There are four fat garret blades as opposed to three skinny Pratt blades. The garret in flight idle is low pitch/high rpm. The garret has FADEC. You don’t touch the prop control during any phase of flight or ground operations. The garret STC comes with a whole new van POH for operation with the garret. The garret has an abysmal glide compared to the Pratt. I only have 30 or so hours on the garret van in a jump operation. It’s been over a year since I’ve flown one. That’s what I remember.
Barnstormer, on the contrary - on some aircraft it comes into play during an emergency descent procedure from high altitude. One can almost point the nose at the dirt without overspeeding the aircraft due to the high drag/lack of thrust as the engine is NTSing. One gets an almost surging sensation in the aircraft as the engine moves in and out of a negative torque state, hence its limitation to an emergency procedure situation. If a pilot decided to incorporate this feature into his normal operating plan, one might expect to eventually see the results witnessed. One of the features of a fixed turbine engine is its almost instantaneous reaction to any change in the engine fuel delivery schedule in contrast to a free turbine which has a somewhat cushioning effect on changes. In general this is a very pleasant attribute, but to a hot dogging pilot it could be viewed as a thrust output versus drag magic wand. Playing with that magic wand is prohibited if following published engine normal operating procedures.
The Garrett is not FADEC, it has a SRL system to prevent over temp and over torque. The prop lever should be all the way back for start and taxi operations.
@@GlacierPilotGst See my post at the beginning of the comments regarding various 331 fuel controls installed. Not knowing the system utilized on this aircraft leaves one guessing. The Cessna Conquest 441 with -8s and -10s used a total fly by wire fully computerized engine management system. With this system the prop speed can be set in flight. This is backed up by a somewhat rudimentary mechanical fuel control function in the event of a computer failure. So I suppose it depends on one’s definition of FADEC. The 331 has been around a long time and the fuel controllers have gone through a number of iterations with each being more sophisticated.
Great Job Juan ! Used to fly the Embraer Banderante with the PT6-34 Engines ! I had an Engine Failure over SBA at 8000 ‘ about the time I got the Failed engine identified it was already Feathered ! I was headed to SBP with A full load of Passengers ! I flew a single eng ILS into SBA ! I also use To fly the Merlin Metro with the Garett Engs . Flying from LAX to SBP 18 Pax again engine fail over SMX Had to feather this one fly a single engine ILS RWY 12 . During Vectors For app I kept in a descent never leveled off . Wasn’t sure I could maintain alt in level flight . I prefer The Pt 6’s over the Garrett’s . PT6 Much more versatile. Oh by the way Both Eng fails were do to Engine driven fuel pumps ! Worn spline Shafts . Emb was Imperial Airlines And the Metro was Sun Airlines . 10 yrs between engine failures ! 25000 hrs and only two engine failures not bad odds . That’s my 2 cents ! Captain Mark H Wirth ( True Safety Is No Accident ) Oh !
This is right by my house. I live right by the San Luis Rey Mission in Oceanside. When I take my dog to the park I watch this pilot land every 30 min. He's a very good pilot (at least he looks the part on approach). Like all sky diving pilots, he takes a very steep high bank final approach to get down fast and get the divers back up for another jump. I was always saying to myself if something goes wrong on that approach there's not much energy to get you to the field.
I have flown into okb many times. I was slated to fly that plane for the skydiving company- but other things came up. It is pretty Awsome to take off over Oceanside harbor and drop off the paying passengers. Love your stuff.
I've jumped here. I have photos of me in the foreground with the Cessna Caravan we just departed nose-down in the background. Yes, racing skydivers in freefall to terra firma. Didn't seem particularly safe. This was several years ago.
We can't forget prayers for the jumpmaster and her family. Skydivers are a rare and very different breed. Amazing humans. So much love, so little fear.
Nice slides of the turbine engines. Very interesting the amount of power the compressor sections require during operation. JayZ has some insight on the free turbine style engines (as well as everything turbine). Thanks Juan.
I'm not a pilot but there's one thing I got from this. If I were to get my PPL and my own plane, I would sure want to learn all about my engine, how it works internally, and what I can and can't do with it in the many different situations. Thanks for the insight.
The only thing I would add s get another engine. I just think two engined planes are much safer no matter how good a pilot you are. Your life basically depends on the one engine. Where I live I was in my backyard about 2 years ago when a small plane passed overhead. I said to my sister who was visiting, that engine sounds sick, glad I am not in it. She rang me later and said it had crashed while trying to land on a suburban golf course when engine failed. The occupants an instructor and student were rescued by golfers, but plane was totaled, they were very lucky as lost all control near end.
@@arunta5 Sometimes having two engines is far more dangerous in an engine failure situation. All depends on the pilot, but at least with a single engine it's a relatively uneventful sputter when it fails. Many twins have been wrecked by a failed engine causing the plane to roll over before the pilot catches it in time.
I have considerable experience with TPE331’s and I found them to be reliable engines. However, I had two incidents during which reverse mode was entered inadvertently during approach. I was extremely lucky to recover just in time before crashing.
Just like a Pratt....a Garret 331 engine(before Honeywell) prop will go to feather whenever there is a loss of engine oil pressure....in fact, you have to put the prop on "START LOCKS" during shutdown to prevent the prop going to feather after shut down....this was necessary for an easier start...because the 331 has a single shaft...which makes starting more difficult.
@@Bugdriver49 Sort of, yes. I was single piloting an MU2 at altitude over South Texas when the drive gears to the fuel control failed. The engine quit like turning off a light! It shut itself down, but I finished the job. ;)
Same. I've flown supersonic, ultra-light, 4-engine heavy jet, corporate landed on the ice in the Antarctic and atolls mid-ocean. And always was a coward. You live longer in this business that way.
Reading that first accident report though - can only imagine what that pilot passenger was feeling as all that stuff was happening. I spent some time doing medevac flights in East Africa, lots of which were in Caravans and the condtion of the some of the strips it would tolerate gave me great respect for the aircraft. We always had the option of landing pretty much everywhere! So sad that someone died...
Add "no flaps", most likely purged the engine of fuel from windmilling, usable fuel slung out board in the right wing, this guy created a very bad situation with all that drag, reduced lift and no time for a restart (getting straight and level long enough to get fuel into the hot section, sufficient airflow and rotation). He was 5 minutes behind the airplane when it ran out of sky. RIP Jumpmaster.
Very good analysis. Pilots in sketchy operations can develop bad "family" habits while thinking that they can out-think the warnings and cautions and prohibitions in the Aircraft Flight Manual. The Chief Pilot is in for some sweaty conversations with the FAA. If the FAA doesn't shut down this operation, their insurance company will. Sad.
Juan, In fact, the PT6 Compressor Section rotating parts turn in the opposite direction of the Power Turbine wheels... Just a bit of trivia. :-) Thanks!!
I've flown various flavors of PT6 & Garret powered aircraft, and while these power-plants have different pros and cons, they require radically different handling. I suspect these two accidents have one thing in common: Unexpected flame-out due to excessive attitude resulting fuel tank un-porting (is that the correct term?) and the engine momentarily being fed air, not kerosene. The 2 different engine types require different procedures for air restart but in these cases I suspect the killer in these accidents is prop control: A turboprop in idle (or flamed out!) and prop controls at max RPM (not to mention in Beta range) creates immense drag, and a pilot using or exceeding this part of the envelope must be intimately familiar with getting the prop out of fine pitch. The only aircraft I know that can safely be abused in this way (near-vertical attitude with the prop in beta) is the PT6-powered Pilatus PC-6 Porter. I have never flown the type, but I imagine the critical issue is the design of the fuel system.
Can you look into the one that happened today in Panama City Beach. (ECP) The news said there were 2 fatalities and 1 in critical. The weather wasn’t bad today and the winds didn’t seem anything out of the normal.
Hey Blanco...my previous experience with the Garret TPE-331 was in the J41. There was an "NTS" or Negative Torque Sensing system whereby the system would sense negative torque and turn on ignition to prevent a flame out. I can't recall if there was an auto-feather teature (maybe on take-off?) or not. What's your experience with Garret?
The MU2 I flew with the TPE331 didn't have auto-feather, just reduction. It was a fairly unreliable engine. I had 1 engine failure in only 2,000 flight time.
The NTS system ONLY reduces the prop pitch, it doesn't fully feather it. NTS is NOT auto-feather. The NTS system does NOT impact ignition in any way. Many TPE-331 equipped planes were equipped or later retrofitted with automatic ignition systems to alleviate flameouts, especially as a result of ice ingestion in-flight. The Swearingens even got an inlet redesign because of ice ingestion causing flameouts.
Lots of time in a jetstream back in the mid 80’s with garrett 331 engines. I agree with all the posts below. Also FYI same engine was used in the old 737 models for the apu
Several things. The torque on the engine is in the same direction weather in flight or beta mode as the prop continues to spin in the same direction. The issue with beta in flight is, in a single engine installation, pushing the air forward in front of the prop robs all your tail surfaces air flow. No rudder, no elevator authority. Ground operation in beta is limited by engine temp because of reduced/no airflow. The NTS is only to keep the prop from turning the engine to fast. Without this protection the prop could overspeed the turbine. None of the single engine installations I have flown had a feather control. As long as the engine is turning and making oil pressure the prop will not feather but will continue to windmill at a speed less than 105%.
There have been two major fatal accidents in Sweden in recent years concerning skydiving operations. Örebro 2021 (investigation not complete, but seems to have stalled just after take off) and Umeå 2019 (stalled and went into a spin just before jumping, air speed was too low to manage the weight transfer of the jumpers moving towards the door). There were nine fataities in each accident. It seems the aeroplane part of skydiving might possibly be more dangerous than the parachute part.
We had a turbine lancair at Flagstaff and the pilot, a former A6 Vietnam Vet emphasized you always turn boost pump on when changing tanks, because cone valves effect fuel pressure without the boost pump leading to ....drum roll.. engine unlighting.
Good review. I had an engine failure years ago flying an MU2 with TPE331 engines. FYI, it isn't full auto feather. Its negative torque sensing reduces blade pitch, but the pilot must still feather the engine.
@@alphasportstv Yes, it is. That's why so many of them have crashed, even though it's well made. Small wing (65 lb/sq ft wing loading, same as B727), full span fowler flaps, and spoiler roll control make it a handful. Not suitable for inexperienced or poorly trained!
I'm a jumper, not a pilot, but have many jumps out of the 208B. The following comments are not directed at the incidents at GoJump. The 208 and 208B are very common in skydive operations. The Garret conversion is a great balance of power versus fuel burn and a major upgrade compared to the stock 675 SHP P&W. A full plane and the number of jumper loads per hour is what makes the dropzone money. The time to jump run altitude and time of decent are equally as important. In turbine operations, the time of decent of the plane is common for the plane to be landing +/- the same time as the jumpers. It's not a race, just the way things time out. For jump operations, it is common for the plane to be fueled for 3 loads plus required reserves. Once the plane becomes a glider, with engine out and prop feathered, the plane will have an incredible glide rate if it is empty of jumpers and the light fuel load. The pilot can underestimate the glide and land longer than anticipated. As dropzones are frequently on smaller airports with shorter runways, there have been several incidents where the pilot was able to get the plane onto the runway, then over ran due to loss of BETA, no drag from the feathered prop and only the hydraulic brakes. Obviously, the altitude of engine loss, if passengers still onboard, and amount of time the plane is a glider makes a difference when deciding to feather or not. Since for jump operations, the climb/decent is circling around the airport, the maximum amount of required glide might not be as important as compared to a travelling flight where just getting back to a runway is of first priority. I have jumped at this DZ, but when it was operated by the previous drop zone owner.
I used to live in Oceanside for about 6 years one street over from the beach right by the pier love that place.That sounds like to me they've got a problem with hot dog pilots at this company, when the plane is constantly on the ground before the jumpers and there are allot of complaints of reckless and dangerous flying that tells you a little something right there. I now live right next to Ft Bragg in North Carolina and there's a little airport right here off the base where they skydive and some of those pilots nose dive it just to get down before the jumpers. I don't know if it's like their culture that's the normal way they fly but I've noticed not just this operation, but other operations I have personally witnessed that this kind of flying seems to be the norm.
It is the norm and there is nothing wrong with it. The reason for the nose dive is to get the plane on the ground as fast as possible to save fuel and get another load of jumpers in the air. These jump planes are work horses. The general public is used to commercial airlines that fly planes in such a mannor as to not scare the general public, but planes, just like cars, can do a lot more than what most people think. And it is done safely everyday. I suspect the terrain of this airport might have something to do with these two accidents. I know the pilot that suvived and I know the people that own the plane and I will wait for a more details. RIP to the pilot that perished.
I launched myself on several jumps from the Caravan operated out of Skydive San Diego. I never once recall the pilots talking about nor anyone talking about taking the engine into beta during descent.
All me and my mom jumped out of for my 30th birthday a few years ago was a small Cessna with nothing inside but the pilots seat😆. Everything else had been taken out. At around 11,000ft out we jumped out over Danridge Tennessee.
The FARs specifically list parachute drops flights, aerial photography, flight instruction, Local sightseeing tours and some other ops as Part 91 operations. These are not loopholes you are slipping.
Ha! My first gig was flying a 182 for jumpers with Tide Water Sky Sports, Suffolk Virginia, in 1986. Summer heat! What an into into the industry! On my first day I was told by the owner that if I couldn't put it down on the ground before my jumpers he would find somebody who could and having just completed my commercial rating I was happy as a clam rolling the damn thing over and Diving back towards the ground
I was teaching a guy to fly a 208 at a dropnzone. When the jumpers wentout, he pulled the fuel level to off instead of throttle back. Had to do restart it took a good 1500' it get spooled up again. I was 10k so no big whoop. But I did start keeping hand by the fuel lever when every taught someone else.
Just the direction facing the ocean makes me wonder if there was a strong on shore wind at altitude and a wind shear near the ground due to near surface turbulence. Visualize the surface wind acting like a bunch of tumbleweeds, possible associated with the lapse rate.
I rode front right seat down with a full load after weather moved in. The pilot flying the 208 used Beta to get us lower. The intense vibration on the tail was very much like a stall event.
That's correct. The TPE331 doesn't have full auto-feather, only reduction. The pilot must feather after inflight shutdown. I know, I flew the MU2 and had 1 shutdown inflight. lol
Although the POH does state not to use Beta in flight, I doubt it’s the cause in either of these accidents. You can see Mike Patey experiment with beta on a PT6 in flight, and there is no speed restriction for using beta on the ground. My best guess for both accidents is uncoordinated flight with low fuel levels. The caravan has pretty low dihedral, and long slender fuel tanks. It would be very easy to unport the fuel drain at these low fuel levels. Add on top of that that the fuel can drain from one wing to the other through the reservoir. There is a warning in the POH about sustained uncoordinated flight. My guess is the reservoir was burned while they were descending with the pickups in the tank un-ported. Also notice the flaps in the up position. I’ve done a few engine outs in the sim in a caravan, and it is very difficult if not impossible to keep the nose up if the speed gets below the 100kt flaps up landing speed. And it’s an incredibly high landing attitude even with power on. The caravan loves 20 degrees of flaps.
@@philipmartin708 I’ve never flown skydive myself, so I’m not sure, but you can get some pretty serious decent rates just at flight idle. Guess it depends how long the jumps are under canopy. I know there are videos on TH-cam of skydive pilots beating jumpers in a King Air without doing anything outrageous with the airplane.
there appears to be an error in your youtube video. the caravan that crashed on feb 24 2022 near oceanside municipal airport did NOT have a stock pw-pt6, but also had the STCed honeywell (garrett)-conversion
There was a jump school at one airport I flew out of. Saying they have a different culture is too kind. They asked if I would fly for them, but after looking at their "planes" and the condition of their jumpmasters (often high before they fly), I declined.
Should the fuel be sloshed out of the inlet and the engine stalls for lack of fuel, how long would it take for the boost pump to get fuel to the engine once returning to coordinated flight?
Thanks for the explanation of the workings of the PT6. I was told years ago by an engine LAME that (theoretically), one could hold on to a propeller connected to a PT6 for about 30 seconds after ignition, but after that it would be impossible. :) With the Garrett direct-drive engine, is it possible to overfuel the engine if the propeller RPM drops far enough, e.g. by having the propeller pitch too coarse? The reason why I ask is that the Rolls Royce Dart engine coupled to the 4-blade Dowty-Rotol propeller (as fitted to the F-27) was susceptible to that, especially when taxiing and somehow getting the prop past the ground fine lock - once the EGT needle headed to the right, the turbine had cooked and it was too late to save the engine. There were a few incidences of F-27s experiencing engine failure on approach when the pilots had the pitch set too coarse for the HP cock setting, thus overfuelling the engine and cooking the turbine.
We would commonly use a 60 degree bank and with a little bit of rudder to keep the nose up.. this gave best decent. But you would want to mix your turns left and right equally.
That is not what the book says. Another comment by the voice of reason that I would bet will be highly scrutinize. Thanks Juan for your abilities and saying the right thing at the right time.
Change rapid decent procedures. Require a level out and power application at a specific height AGL based on aircraft type such that an engine out during that phase of flight would allow for an approach and landing on a runway.
UPDATE 7/1/22 NTSB Preliminary Report t.co/KZhZ9Lx0jd
Pilot: Why would anyone leave a perfectly good aircraft?
Skydiver: You've never seen a jump plane.
California Pilot to NTSB: We were just hanging 10 when I set up for some chill time with the terra firma. Then I slid the jet juice to Bravo and was like WOAH!, and my chill pal was like WOOOOOAAAHHH, and the plane was like WOAH, and the ground kinda like reached up and just crushed our groove and harshed our mellow.
LOL
When you read it with a hippie / stoner voice, it’s great!
@@BWADaniel DUUUUUUUUUUDE!
I read this in Spinelli's voice for some reason... 😂😁
Er…ATC? oh what a bummer dude, It’s like…and I was like…. And he was all…I mean, seriously dude.
Hello? Hello sir? Are you on edibles and in charge of an aircraft?
Juan, have been a Patreon patron, am a patron, and will continue to support such great reporting. Love your details and intuition. Hope you continue your great reporting for a very long time.
I agree , the only time I don’t like it is when Juan DOESN’T post!
Juan
I was bitching about the patron but this was an amazing video I might have to get on board
Great video Juan !! I don’t always agree with some of Juan’s regulatory stances but I can’t argue with the facts again great video
I’ve got about 10 years of skydiving ops experience, roughly 1300 in these Garrett vans. This airplane is the easier than a 182 to fly in my opinion, really stable and a nice platform. With that said, if you get slow enough with no power, you can and will see the beta light illuminate and you need to be ready to stand on the prop if you will to keep the airspeed. I saw this accident and immediately thought of a trainee pilot getting slow and/or catching an ill timed downdraft. The story you referenced about the guy saying he was going to put it into beta to beat the divers down, that’s the same condition I’m referencing here. They don’t go over the gate per say, but when the prop fines out to match rpm at low airspeeds, she drops like a homesick bowling ball. You can turn 4 loads an hour like clock work on 66 gallons or so an hour, these planes are a great investment with the right training. There’s no reason ever to skimp on fuel in this ship, they never stop climbing. Rest In Peace!
Finally a smart post. Winds and terrian are a little tricky at this airport from what I was told. When the correct infomation comes out I think you will be spot on, pun intended. I know the pilot that survived, but I do not know the pilot that passed. RIP.
I always called flight idle the “now mode” for putting the aircraft on the ground if you carried a little too much speed onto short runway. Rarely ever used it but it was there if we needed it and boy did it work! That plane would sit down like an arthritic elephant.
Part of the scene at Oceanside is that the Jump plane has to go over to Palomar Airport to refuel. At least that was it when I was jumping there a few years ago. So there would be an incentive to keep flying jumpers as long as possible before taking the plane off line for refueling. Especially with a one plane operation like Go Jump Oceanside on a busy day. Same reason for getting back asap for another load. $$$$. Seems a bit crazy with only 20 gal. onboard.
@@terrysullivan1992 From what I was told it is a tandem factory now.........I do not know about the black Caravan but the SDS Caravan had plenty of fuel.
@@terrysullivan1992 That’s interesting, I would understand a new guy feeling pressure in a stock caravan but I’ve run 140 tandems plus fun jumpers in that grand van fueling at an auxiliary airport and I’m done by 5-6 in a SuperVan. That’s why I said there’s no reason ever to skimp on fuel on this platform. My loads were 13/18k turns as well. No reason to push it, ever.
I have flown parachute jumpers with a Cessna 206. The club had very strict operational procedures, which included power settings for climb and descent. We never used idle power during descent because we wanted to preserve the engine. With turbine engines, you can be more "reckless". But beta mode is absolute off limit. As far as I know, only the PC-6 Turbo Porter is certified for beta mode in flight. Its engine is modified for that purpose.
Juan Thank you for all you do to keep us informed I really enjoy the channel.
Thanks Nancy!
Juan Brown does another very detailed and interesting analysis. I appreciate them all. As a former US Navy aviator and survivor of 3 A/C accidents, I live by the motto that "whatever can go wrong, will go wrong!" Looks like in this case, the going wrong had a lot of help from the pilot.
Actually, this is the worst analysis I have yet to see from Juan and after talking to the owner of the plane I wish Juan would stop commenting on jump planes accidents completely.
yeah.... that pilot was a pro at one thing... screwing up.
@@hubriswonkoh i guess the plane didnt crash them😂
@AlanMydland-fq2vs I know the owner, I know the pilot in the right seat, but I didn't know the female PIC who passed away. I know more than Juan concerning this accident, and his report was not on point. He has an unjust POV concerning skydiving operations, which is ridiculous. As you mocking the dead, hopefully you'll find yourself in a plane that didn't crash them.
RIP to the jumpmaster, and prayers for his family and friends for strength.
Excellent details on that turbine, Juan! Those engines are fascinating. Amazing how they work. Mind-boggling costs involved with those! Just amazing engineering.
It was a female pilot that perished.
Juan, thanks for covering this. I worked with and knew the person who passed away. I’ve been in aviation since 1991, and I’ve lost a number of friends in accidents. It never gets easier, but hopefully we can all learn something.
@@wren1024 I am so sorry for your loss.
@@wren1024 so sorry for your loss too
I went through flight training with Paige. Too young
Hey Juan, quick correction. Both Caravans were Supervans with Garrett Conversions from Texas Turbine. It’s common for FAA registration not to update STC’s for the engine. Beta is also a no go in the Garrett’s. Texas Turbines are extremely nose heavy and lose elevator authority when slow. Additionally once slow, the prop will flatten out to its finest pitch resulting in a huge drag increase exacerbating your already slow airspeed.
I can see an aircraft designed to have a large load in the back having a very heavy nose when nothing is in the back. I've flown several aircraft like that. You had to carry power into the flare to keep the elevator effective or hit nose-wheel first.
I started following you during the Orville days and I’m continually impressed with your sincerity and ability to convey what is actually going on or has happened in such instances as this.
Timothy Skattum
Juan is a blessing for us pilots who come to him when there is an accident. It's sad that we have to learn from the misfortune of others, but there it is.
Using Beta in flight has caused many accidents. They have an idle gate for a reason in the caravan and most turbo props.
We were watching a 208 at our airport decend to land and someone brought up beta lock. I could see that being the only thing to slow this plane that much.
Always appreciate your expert and ongoing investigative reporting. Small note: the highway near the Oceanside airport is not a Freeway. It has cross streets and traffic lights and a 45 mph. speed limit. It is called Hwy. 76 but really isn't even that near the airport.
Thank you Juan. I enjoy sitting back in the evenings listening to your latest videos. Very instructive, and I always learn something new
Tow pilots for sailplanes often have a similar practice, where they will dive back after you get off tow, sometimes executing a Split-S to get turned around and down. In their case they do have a legitimate incentive to get hooked up to the next sailplane as quickly as possible. However, when I was a fairly new student, I got sucked up into a real trash-mover thermal and was too inexperienced to pull the release and turn into it. Because I was high and no longer in his mirror, he thought I had gotten off tow and started his dive back, pulling me along. He then realized I was still on and pulled up, at which point I overshot him and the rope was in danger of wrapping over my wing. He dived again and we were able to finally adjust speeds and get off tow. That was a real pucker moment if I say so myself. Learned my lesson that day.😉
Holy cow, that was scary. 👍👍👍
Having participated in some glider towing myself, and having closely observed a number of skydiving operations, it has struck me that both communities have a tendency to do things with tow planes and jump planes that are unsafe in my view. The steep descents that I have seen conducted with these aircraft are accidents waiting to happen. The aircraft are subjected to maneuvering that pushes the certification (structural) limits, and they risk mid-air collisions with transient air traffic in the area, which are not expecting airplanes to be literally falling out the sky in front of them. As much as I have enjoyed towing gliders for a non-profit organization, I would never do it for a commercial operation, because I feel there would be substantial pressure to operate in an unsafe manner. Long story short.....some people in the glider and skydive business are doing stuff that gives general aviation a bad name, and it never surprises me that when we hear "THE REST OF THE STORY", we hear something like the story Juan just told here.
I tow a lot and won't change anything until I see the glider turned 90 degrees away from me and obviously disconnected, or hear the radio call "off tow".
@@kevinmadore1794 I have seen them doing this many, many years ago.
@@darrellhay Words of wisdom!
Thank you for covering these crashes. My house and office are very near this airport and I have watched thousands of takeoffs and landings here, especially the frequent daily skydiving flights. Since I moved here 4 years ago, I can't tell you how many times I've been out walking my dog and yelled up at the pilot of the skydiving plane, "you're coming in too fast and too high!" My family all calls that pilot "the hot-dogger" because of all the times we were sure he'd crash. It's really shocking to hear that our suspicions were right -- he was racing the skydivers to the ground (referring to the crash in February). The crash sites are only a few yards apart and that location is where they've just prepared the land to build 700 new homes and a surf park. You can imagine that now the locals are questioning the wisdom of building anything there. We're all following along to find out the cause of the crash on Friday. RIP to the Jumpmaster who died in the accident.
Unfortunately this is a thing with Caravan jump pilots. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. Same deal at my airport; scares me too
The airport poses a danger to the yet-to-be-built houses - close the airport.
@@jeffreythompson9549 I'm a huge supporter of the airport, so I'd be more inclined to say that the City shouldn't allow houses or a water park to be built so close to the runway.
@@jeffreythompson9549 I don’t understand why cities crowd airports with homes. The airport was there decades before oceanside built up. The city of oceanside should have zoned differently around the airport.
@@jeffreythompson9549 Close the housing project.
I grew up in Oceanside. KOKB was my home airport. Crazy these 2 crashes were just short of final. GoJump pilots were always very professional and polite. Sorry to hear about this and the loss for their family and friends. Thanks for covering this.
Tell us about the terrain and how does it affect final? I have been told that it is a little tricky and the runway might be slighty uphill compared to approarch......Is that true?
I don't consider what this pilot did to be very professional.
@@hubriswonk My C182 is hangared at this airport. The runway sits parallel to a river at the bottom of a valley. The winds are ALWAYS shearing. There are also high tension power lines perpendicular to the approach end of RWY 25 (you can see them in the picture - the plane came to rest perpendicular to the runway - look straight past the right wing). I always approach a little high and carry a little extra speed here to be ready for any shear.
The eye witnesses (my neighbors) said that this particular flight was lower, slower and “more wobbly” than any of the thousand of other Go Jump flights seen. They said the plane then suddenly fell while “flipping” to the right, describing a stall/spin with about a quarter turn before the right wing caught the ground and tore off. The one that crashed in February was described as having flown straight into the ground as if coming in too steep. They may have both landed short in the same place for the same reason (engine failure) but they each had definitely different flight paths.
In response to the other comment, KOKB uses a modified right pattern for RWY 25 that keeps air traffic over the river, ocean and mostly unpopulated areas. Residents near the airport have a significantly greater chance of injury or death from the increase in cars on Hwy 76 due to the proposed housing development than any aircraft incident. “Close the airport” is an ignorant statement by an uninformed person. Despite the Go Jump incidents, which seem to be more about the company operations than the airport, KOKB is safe and stands as one of the last bastions of GA airports in the San Diego area.
They don't seem very professional to me. They might talk the talk and walk the walk, but their actions speak much louder than words. The FAA needs to camp out there for a while. I've been a professional pilot for way too many decades and have never seen an operation with a record like this. It isn't happenstance. The pilots of Oceanside will certainly lose this airport because of these accidents.
@@tedmoss Seems like that company had a pervading culture of hotdoggery. A dangerous situation.
Great explanation of the PT6 turboprop as well as the skydiving accidents. I have 1,000 hours with them, and 350 hours Garrett TPE331. Both very great engines. Enjoy your analysiss 👍🏻
When I was doing a job out of Nome AK, I saw the Garrett TPE331 on Bearing Air's Caravan's, Bearing Air in Nome developed that conversion and the STC! What a beast! It made that sluggish caravan run like a thoroughbred!
ty, jb...the more i watch the more i learn, the turbo illustration in particular...shame this resulted in injury and worse.
A few important notes on the TPE-331. I flew the Garrett engine on its’ unique KingAir application the B100 for a few years. The NTS system is fairly simple in how it works vs an auto feather (optional) in the PT-6. It is a mechanical gear system with interlocking “vanes” that in normal flight (engine driving propeller) are held in place by torque. When the propeller starts to turn the engine (negative torque). The angle off these vanes will force the gear attached to the propeller to pop out and trigger the propeller to dump oil pushing it “towards feather”. The interesting thing about this process is that eventually the engine catches up and the propeller attempts to return to its flight pitch before it is cycled again. It winds up causing a rapid pulsing as the propeller is taken in and out of a low pitch-high pitch setting until the pilot either feathers the propeller manually or, the engine runs out of energy.
While it may seem counter intuitive to present a pilot with a strange pulsing situation on top of an engine failure it is designed to keep the shaft spinning in case a re-light is achieved. And prevent a rapid slowdown of the engine that could cause shaft warping. The shaft in these engines carry allot of rotational energy and, likewise it takes allot of energy to get them back going. In the B100 we had two 24v batteries as opposed to other KingAirs that had one. We also had a switch where we could operate them in series (48v) to help starts in cold weather. The Garrett is also more susceptible to FOD and Ice damage than the reverse flow PT-6.
The Caravan “Super Van” conversion is unique in that they use an engine application that is left turning on a single engine aircraft. Because of this transitioning often between a PT-6 caravan and a TPE-331 caravan can be fundamentally tricky as torque effects now require left rudder rather than right rudder. Because of this, many operators will stick to one engine or the other and avoid a mixed fleet.
Other than it’s idiosyncrasies, the Garrett engine is typically a much more efficient and powerful option on most of its applications besides the advantage of nearly instantaneous power. The B100 was a New England to South Florida airplane in most conditions doing the same trip as a light jet taking only 45m longer but burning 1/3rd of the fuel. The fuel burn was also similar to the smaller KingAir 90 despite having the cabin of the larger KingAir 200 and nearly the range of the KingAir 350.
(Not to mention the most obvious advantage… being able to be heard from 5 miles away over an idling PT-6 😂).
Great insight as always! Without a doubt these videos make a difference keeping aviation safer!
thanks for the great video, Juan. Patron here reporting in to ATC!
Great to see the PT6 engine. In my time in the Dutch air force the PT6-A-25A used on the Pilatus PC7 trainer was by far the most reliable turboshaft of the lot , with zero failures during the TBO.
Thanks, Juan, both for doing the video and responding to my email. Good job.
Thanks Juan for reporting and hosting a platform for discussion. Condolences to the lost Pilot in training. I too live in Oceanside (although I fly out of Fallbrook). I got to view both crashed planes. The first appeared to be a "out of fuel/loss of power" scenario. This one, seems to be loss of power and a stall.( It too could be a low fuel situation as there didn't seem to be much fuel at the crash site...) The NTSB inspector stated that there was signs of fuel leakage in the soil (right wing torn from aircraft). However, I couldn't smell it a few hours later...
Thanks!
These clips feel like informal flight school; they're so densely packed with information and I'm learning all sorts of stuff about engines, flying and airplanes. My head spins after one of these, but in a good way!
Keep 'em coming Juan, and don't listen to anyone telling you to dumb these videos down!
Reminds me of when I was 11 or 12 and the teacher allowed me to explain to the class how a RR Dart worked ... shortly after a Vickers Viscount flew over our town.
The caravan has an 8 gallon header tank that both tanks fuel into. Aux pump is in the header tank. The side slip restrictions are to prevent the lack of fuel to the header tank. There is a warning light for low fuel in the header tank.
Here at our local skydive op the pilot gets down as the jumpers are landing, I believe he keeps the rpm up and flattens the pitch, turning the prop into a big speed brake… he turns base so close to the runway you’d swear he won’t make the runway, he also banks about 60-90 degrees base to final. He nails it every time, despite what his approach looks like. It’s fun to watch! They operate a 208 with a beefed up PT-6.
they do that here especially with the twin otter... it's like yea getting ready to turn bas but it's more of a downwind turn to final and completely ignoring the base leg lol
@@WX4CB the fly overs by Skydive Arizona during their Holiday Boogie were beauty beyond belief. thanks larry hill and family for all the memories o'er the years.
_"he also banks about 60-90 degrees base to final"_ cowboy pilot
@@johndonaldson3619 I wonder how that sits on the old-pilot/bold-pilot spectrum.
@@johndonaldson3619 are ag pilots cowboys? If he has adequate stall margin, no problem. 90 degrees was an exaggeration after thinking about it,all of 60 degrees though, but it’s a lot of bank angle. If you were to watch it, I bet you would come away thinking he is a great pilot flying well within the envelope of the airplane .
There have been a lot of comments stating that the 331 will do this or do that in a particular situation. I’ll refrain from doing the same. I worked for many years rigging fuel controls on both the 331 and the PT6. A number of fuel control units have been used on the 331 including a fly by wire computerized fuel control. Not knowing the engine fuel control system installed on this particular engine means it’s all a guess what he may have been doing with his home grown power management techniques and what the results may have been.
Regarding the NTS system, a portion of the engine setup included in flight testing of the NTS system and In flight testing of the Beta mode. Situations a pilot would normally never experience. I was also qualified to fly the aircraft which we were servicing and had a fair amount of stick time doing such. I can certainly understand how a hot dogging pilot could cheat a bit on the approved operating parameters in furthering his rapid decent and short field game. Our testing was always done at altitude as an unstable thrust output or a high drag factor could be a fine and sensitive line, even capable of destabilizing the aircraft to an alarming degree if the fuel control setups were not spot on. (One of the reasons for test flying) It certainly appears the pilot operated in the realm of a test pilot and got caught up in his hot dogging game.
As a lifelong non-pilot aviation enthusiast I found this video the best explanation of how a turbo-prop engine operates, the differences between the designs and the cause and effect relationship between propeller pitch (i.e. need to feather) and engine flame-out. It will be interesting to see if similar poor decisions by the pilot led to the second crash.
The comment in the report of the first accident about the passenger taking phone videos showing the controls made me think how useful the implementation of a standard requiring all planes to have a camera mounted in the cockpit above the pilot to record a view of controls and what actions the pilot takes to change them in addition to the current voice and data recorders would make determining causes of crashes easier. The video technology is available and inexpensive and wouldn’t be any more difficult or expensive than using a GoPro to record a blog.
I am still hoping to see CVR and FDR become obsolete in my lifetime and replaced with real time telemetry. The excuse that accidents are so rare just doesn't cut it anymore. The time and money spent on trying to find Malaysia 370 shows that it's not about how many accidents but rather the cost of one when it happens.
@@MoMadNU Yes especially considering we can track flights in real-time on iPhones with apps like FlightAware.
Sloppy dangerous flying.
Thanks for the video Juan 👍
No, you have no idea what you are taking about and Juan stated almost no facts. Wait until more offical info is released before making iggnorant statements. The plane was flying and lined up for landing and any number of things could have happened on final.
Jaun
Thank you for showing the two different engine diagrams and explaining the higher drag from an un-feathered windmilling propeller as well as Beta mode (for ground operations only )
I so appreciate your knowledge and research
Really a well done video again
10 stars ✨ out of 10 stars
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Best wishes to you always from Las Vegas Craig
Bravo 👏🏻
“See you Here”
There are four fat garret blades as opposed to three skinny Pratt blades. The garret in flight idle is low pitch/high rpm. The garret has FADEC. You don’t touch the prop control during any phase of flight or ground operations. The garret STC comes with a whole new van POH for operation with the garret. The garret has an abysmal glide compared to the Pratt. I only have 30 or so hours on the garret van in a jump operation. It’s been over a year since I’ve flown one. That’s what I remember.
The Garrett engine is one that you also cannot descend at a fast rate due to the NTS system, unless you keep about 8-10% torque in.
Barnstormer, on the contrary - on some aircraft it comes into play during an emergency descent procedure from high altitude. One can almost point the nose at the dirt without overspeeding the aircraft due to the high drag/lack of thrust as the engine is NTSing. One gets an almost surging sensation in the aircraft as the engine moves in and out of a negative torque state, hence its limitation to an emergency procedure situation. If a pilot decided to incorporate this feature into his normal operating plan, one might expect to eventually see the results witnessed. One of the features of a fixed turbine engine is its almost instantaneous reaction to any change in the engine fuel delivery schedule in contrast to a free turbine which has a somewhat cushioning effect on changes. In general this is a very pleasant attribute, but to a hot dogging pilot it could be viewed as a thrust output versus drag magic wand. Playing with that magic wand is prohibited if following published engine normal operating procedures.
The Garrett is not FADEC, it has a SRL system to prevent over temp and over torque. The prop lever should be all the way back for start and taxi operations.
Oh and the Garrett Van glides the same.. just not with the engine running, the only way to feather it is to pull the emergency shut off handle.
@@GlacierPilotGst See my post at the beginning of the comments regarding various 331 fuel controls installed. Not knowing the system utilized on this aircraft leaves one guessing. The Cessna Conquest 441 with -8s and -10s used a total fly by wire fully computerized engine management system. With this system the prop speed can be set in flight. This is backed up by a somewhat rudimentary mechanical fuel control function in the event of a computer failure. So I suppose it depends on one’s definition of FADEC. The 331 has been around a long time and the fuel controllers have gone through a number of iterations with each being more sophisticated.
Great Job Juan ! Used to fly the Embraer Banderante with the PT6-34
Engines ! I had an Engine Failure over
SBA at 8000 ‘ about the time I got the
Failed engine identified it was already
Feathered ! I was headed to SBP with
A full load of Passengers ! I flew a single eng ILS into SBA ! I also use
To fly the Merlin Metro with the
Garett Engs . Flying from LAX to SBP
18 Pax again engine fail over SMX
Had to feather this one fly a single engine ILS RWY 12 . During Vectors
For app I kept in a descent never leveled off . Wasn’t sure I could maintain alt in level flight . I prefer
The Pt 6’s over the Garrett’s . PT6
Much more versatile. Oh by the way
Both Eng fails were do to Engine driven fuel pumps ! Worn spline
Shafts . Emb was Imperial Airlines
And the Metro was Sun Airlines .
10 yrs between engine failures !
25000 hrs and only two engine failures not bad odds .
That’s my 2 cents ! Captain Mark H Wirth ( True Safety Is No Accident )
Oh !
This is right by my house. I live right by the San Luis Rey Mission in Oceanside. When I take my dog to the park I watch this pilot land every 30 min. He's a very good pilot (at least he looks the part on approach). Like all sky diving pilots, he takes a very steep high bank final approach to get down fast and get the divers back up for another jump. I was always saying to myself if something goes wrong on that approach there's not much energy to get you to the field.
I have flown into okb many times. I was slated to fly that plane for the skydiving company- but other things came up.
It is pretty Awsome to take off over Oceanside harbor and drop off the paying passengers.
Love your stuff.
thank you JB. RIP to the jump monitor. Our condolences to the friends and family.
So nice to hear you with a better mic setup!!!
I've jumped here. I have photos of me in the foreground with the Cessna Caravan we just departed nose-down in the background. Yes, racing skydivers in freefall to terra firma. Didn't seem particularly safe. This was several years ago.
We can't forget prayers for the jumpmaster and her family. Skydivers are a rare and very different breed. Amazing humans. So much love, so little fear.
Juan - great job, as always!
Nice slides of the turbine engines. Very interesting the amount of power the compressor sections require during operation. JayZ has some insight on the free turbine style engines (as well as everything turbine). Thanks Juan.
I'm not a pilot but there's one thing I got from this. If I were to get my PPL and my own plane, I would sure want to learn all about my engine, how it works internally, and what I can and can't do with it in the many different situations.
Thanks for the insight.
The only thing I would add s get another engine. I just think two engined planes are much safer no matter how good a pilot you are. Your life basically depends on the one engine. Where I live I was in my backyard about 2 years ago when a small plane passed overhead. I said to my sister who was visiting, that engine sounds sick, glad I am not in it. She rang me later and said it had crashed while trying to land on a suburban golf course when engine failed. The occupants an instructor and student were rescued by golfers, but plane was totaled, they were very lucky as lost all control near end.
@@arunta5 My multiengine training is teaching me that it is not so plain and simple with one extra engine
Nobody asked you about your opinion ! You are a nothing.
@@arunta5 Sometimes having two engines is far more dangerous in an engine failure situation. All depends on the pilot, but at least with a single engine it's a relatively uneventful sputter when it fails. Many twins have been wrecked by a failed engine causing the plane to roll over before the pilot catches it in time.
@@arunta5if you’re very adept at flying the twin then yes….but it creates a new set of problems.
I have considerable experience with TPE331’s and I found them to be reliable engines. However, I had two incidents during which reverse mode was entered inadvertently during approach. I was extremely lucky to recover just in time before crashing.
Very informative, thanks, Juan.
Just like a Pratt....a Garret 331 engine(before Honeywell) prop will go to feather whenever there is a loss of engine oil pressure....in fact, you have to put the prop on "START LOCKS" during shutdown to prevent the prop going to feather after shut down....this was necessary for an easier start...because the 331 has a single shaft...which makes starting more difficult.
The TPE331 doesn't have full auto-feather, only reduction. The pilot must feather after inflight shutdown.
@@CaptainSteve777 Have you ever intentionally shutdown a 331 in flight??
@@Bugdriver49 Sort of, yes. I was single piloting an MU2 at altitude over South Texas when the drive gears to the fuel control failed. The engine quit like turning off a light! It shut itself down, but I finished the job. ;)
Excellent Video, Thanks Brother Juan.
"There are no old, bold pilots" still hold true 41 years after my first solo.
That’s definitely true. I agree 100%
Same. I've flown supersonic, ultra-light, 4-engine heavy jet, corporate landed on the ice in the Antarctic and atolls mid-ocean. And always was a coward. You live longer in this business that way.
There are a lot of cowboy pilots whose mission is to land before the jumpers at any cost
On May 11 2022, a Brazilian Caravan with 9 parachuters aboard, crashed in Boituva. All injured.
Reading that first accident report though - can only imagine what that pilot passenger was feeling as all that stuff was happening. I spent some time doing medevac flights in East Africa, lots of which were in Caravans and the condtion of the some of the strips it would tolerate gave me great respect for the aircraft. We always had the option of landing pretty much everywhere! So sad that someone died...
Add "no flaps", most likely purged the engine of fuel from windmilling, usable fuel slung out board in the right wing, this guy created a very bad situation with all that drag, reduced lift and no time for a restart (getting straight and level long enough to get fuel into the hot section, sufficient airflow and rotation).
He was 5 minutes behind the airplane when it ran out of sky.
RIP Jumpmaster.
Very good analysis. Pilots in sketchy operations can develop bad "family" habits while thinking that they can out-think the warnings and cautions and prohibitions in the Aircraft Flight Manual. The Chief Pilot is in for some sweaty conversations with the FAA. If the FAA doesn't shut down this operation, their insurance company will. Sad.
Good report. I`m anxious to see if you`re going to comment on the C 152 fatal crash at KMWC in Milwaukee. I worked on my PPL there.
Juan, In fact, the PT6 Compressor Section rotating parts turn in the opposite direction of the Power Turbine wheels... Just a bit of trivia. :-) Thanks!!
JUAN, GREAT VIDEO, SEE YOU NEXT TIME...
I've flown various flavors of PT6 & Garret powered aircraft, and while these power-plants have different pros and cons, they require radically different handling.
I suspect these two accidents have one thing in common: Unexpected flame-out due to excessive attitude resulting fuel tank un-porting (is that the correct term?) and the engine momentarily being fed air, not kerosene. The 2 different engine types require different procedures for air restart but in these cases I suspect the killer in these accidents is prop control: A turboprop in idle (or flamed out!) and prop controls at max RPM (not to mention in Beta range) creates immense drag, and a pilot using or exceeding this part of the envelope must be intimately familiar with getting the prop out of fine pitch.
The only aircraft I know that can safely be abused in this way (near-vertical attitude with the prop in beta) is the PT6-powered Pilatus PC-6 Porter. I have never flown the type, but I imagine the critical issue is the design of the fuel system.
Seems I am made to subscribe every time I come to visit your channel. Great channel. I have learned so much from your videos.
Thanks as always for the updates .Sad to hear of ,fatality .condolences to families
he gave practially no info on the actual crash on Friday and from what I have been told by the owner of the plane almost nothing Juan said is fact.
Can you look into the one that happened today in Panama City Beach. (ECP) The news said there were 2 fatalities and 1 in critical. The weather wasn’t bad today and the winds didn’t seem anything out of the normal.
Hey Blanco...my previous experience with the Garret TPE-331 was in the J41. There was an "NTS" or Negative Torque Sensing system whereby the system would sense negative torque and turn on ignition to prevent a flame out. I can't recall if there was an auto-feather teature (maybe on take-off?) or not. What's your experience with Garret?
The MU2 I flew with the TPE331 didn't have auto-feather, just reduction. It was a fairly unreliable engine. I had 1 engine failure in only 2,000 flight time.
@@CaptainSteve777 not sure what you had in the moo-2… but the -10 and -12 are very reliable engines… much more than previous versions.
3400tt on SW3 and SW4 running TPE 331-11 and -13. No eng failure. NTS system on -13, IIRC
The NTS system ONLY reduces the prop pitch, it doesn't fully feather it. NTS is NOT auto-feather.
The NTS system does NOT impact ignition in any way. Many TPE-331 equipped planes were equipped or later retrofitted with automatic ignition systems to alleviate flameouts, especially as a result of ice ingestion in-flight. The Swearingens even got an inlet redesign because of ice ingestion causing flameouts.
@@ParadigmUnkn0wn True, no auto-feather system.....but without being on "start locks" that prop will feather with the loss of oil pressure.
Lots of time in a jetstream back in the mid 80’s with garrett 331 engines. I agree with all the posts below. Also FYI same engine was used in the old 737 models for the apu
Wow. One of these skydiving Caravans went off the runway on June 4th at a local airport near me also.
Love the pause at 19:34 to appreciate a high performance engine coming on by, reminds me of the air races
Several things. The torque on the engine is in the same direction weather in flight or beta mode as the prop continues to spin in the same direction. The issue with beta in flight is, in a single engine installation, pushing the air forward in front of the prop robs all your tail surfaces air flow. No rudder, no elevator authority. Ground operation in beta is limited by engine temp because of reduced/no airflow. The NTS is only to keep the prop from turning the engine to fast. Without this protection the prop could overspeed the turbine. None of the single engine installations I have flown had a feather control. As long as the engine is turning and making oil pressure the prop will not feather but will continue to windmill at a speed less than 105%.
There have been two major fatal accidents in Sweden in recent years concerning skydiving operations. Örebro 2021 (investigation not complete, but seems to have stalled just after take off) and Umeå 2019 (stalled and went into a spin just before jumping, air speed was too low to manage the weight transfer of the jumpers moving towards the door). There were nine fataities in each accident. It seems the aeroplane part of skydiving might possibly be more dangerous than the parachute part.
Indeed.
We had a turbine lancair at Flagstaff and the pilot, a former A6 Vietnam Vet emphasized you always turn boost pump on when changing tanks, because cone valves effect fuel pressure without the boost pump leading to ....drum roll.. engine unlighting.
Good review. I had an engine failure years ago flying an MU2 with TPE331 engines. FYI, it isn't full auto feather. Its negative torque sensing reduces blade pitch, but the pilot must still feather the engine.
MU2 is a tricky beast, basically car keys with a small wing affixed!
@@alphasportstv Yes, it is. That's why so many of them have crashed, even though it's well made. Small wing (65 lb/sq ft wing loading, same as B727), full span fowler flaps, and spoiler roll control make it a handful. Not suitable for inexperienced or poorly trained!
@@CaptainSteve777 Sounds like a B-52.
I'm a jumper, not a pilot, but have many jumps out of the 208B.
The following comments are not directed at the incidents at GoJump.
The 208 and 208B are very common in skydive operations. The Garret conversion is a great balance of power versus fuel burn and a major upgrade compared to the stock 675 SHP P&W. A full plane and the number of jumper loads per hour is what makes the dropzone money. The time to jump run altitude and time of decent are equally as important. In turbine operations, the time of decent of the plane is common for the plane to be landing +/- the same time as the jumpers. It's not a race, just the way things time out.
For jump operations, it is common for the plane to be fueled for 3 loads plus required reserves. Once the plane becomes a glider, with engine out and prop feathered, the plane will have an incredible glide rate if it is empty of jumpers and the light fuel load. The pilot can underestimate the glide and land longer than anticipated. As dropzones are frequently on smaller airports with shorter runways, there have been several incidents where the pilot was able to get the plane onto the runway, then over ran due to loss of BETA, no drag from the feathered prop and only the hydraulic brakes.
Obviously, the altitude of engine loss, if passengers still onboard, and amount of time the plane is a glider makes a difference when deciding to feather or not. Since for jump operations, the climb/decent is circling around the airport, the maximum amount of required glide might not be as important as compared to a travelling flight where just getting back to a runway is of first priority.
I have jumped at this DZ, but when it was operated by the previous drop zone owner.
I used to live in Oceanside for about 6 years one street over from the beach right by the pier love that place.That sounds like to me they've got a problem with hot dog pilots at this company, when the plane is constantly on the ground before the jumpers and there are allot of complaints of reckless and dangerous flying that tells you a little something right there. I now live right next to Ft Bragg in North Carolina and there's a little airport right here off the base where they skydive and some of those pilots nose dive it just to get down before the jumpers. I don't know if it's like their culture that's the normal way they fly but I've noticed not just this operation, but other operations I have personally witnessed that this kind of flying seems to be the norm.
It is the norm and there is nothing wrong with it. The reason for the nose dive is to get the plane on the ground as fast as possible to save fuel and get another load of jumpers in the air. These jump planes are work horses. The general public is used to commercial airlines that fly planes in such a mannor as to not scare the general public, but planes, just like cars, can do a lot more than what most people think. And it is done safely everyday. I suspect the terrain of this airport might have something to do with these two accidents. I know the pilot that suvived and I know the people that own the plane and I will wait for a more details. RIP to the pilot that perished.
Yep, I noticed it too. Back in 1966. I don't remember the airport, I was taking jump lessons. I remember a couple of Eskimo lady jumpers.
@@hubriswonk "And there is nothing wrong with it". Well except for two crashes in a few months and a death. Please stop flying if you are doing it.
@@zak2u2 the rapid decent had nothing to do with either of these crashes.
I launched myself on several jumps from the Caravan operated out of Skydive San Diego. I never once recall the pilots talking about nor anyone talking about taking the engine into beta during descent.
I used to see the ov-10 broncos all the time in Vietnam and at fort Sill Oklahoma when I got back and I had a plastic model of one
Cool to see OV-10's still in service!! It was the first military aircraft I supported for DOD!!
All me and my mom jumped out of for my 30th birthday a few years ago was a small Cessna with nothing inside but the pilots seat😆. Everything else had been taken out. At around 11,000ft out we jumped out over Danridge Tennessee.
Go Jump usually operate PAC 750s. That they were running a Caravan is interesting, and I wonder if the different flying characteristics factored in.
Was wondering that myself. Did they move the PAC to Vegas ?
The FARs specifically list parachute drops flights, aerial photography, flight instruction, Local sightseeing tours and some other ops as Part 91 operations. These are not loopholes you are slipping.
Ha! My first gig was flying a 182 for jumpers with Tide Water Sky Sports, Suffolk Virginia, in 1986. Summer heat! What an into into the industry! On my first day I was told by the owner that if I couldn't put it down on the ground before my jumpers he would find somebody who could and having just completed my commercial rating I was happy as a clam rolling the damn thing over and Diving back towards the ground
Saw this plane on Saturday as we drove by. It hit pretty hard in the nose, and right wing was off the aircraft. Very sad to see first hand.
I was teaching a guy to fly a 208 at a dropnzone. When the jumpers wentout, he pulled the fuel level to off instead of throttle back. Had to do restart it took a good 1500' it get spooled up again. I was 10k so no big whoop.
But I did start keeping hand by the fuel lever when every taught someone else.
Just the direction facing the ocean makes me wonder if there was a strong on shore wind at altitude and a wind shear near the ground due to near surface turbulence. Visualize the surface wind acting like a bunch of tumbleweeds, possible associated with the lapse rate.
I rode front right seat down with a full load after weather moved in. The pilot flying the 208 used Beta to get us lower. The intense vibration on the tail was very much like a stall event.
If I remember correct the NTS on TPE engines would feather to about 90 % feathered position. Maybe not quit enough to get a low Vmc on a MU-2 se
That's correct. The TPE331 doesn't have full auto-feather, only reduction. The pilot must feather after inflight shutdown. I know, I flew the MU2 and had 1 shutdown inflight. lol
Although the POH does state not to use Beta in flight, I doubt it’s the cause in either of these accidents. You can see Mike Patey experiment with beta on a PT6 in flight, and there is no speed restriction for using beta on the ground. My best guess for both accidents is uncoordinated flight with low fuel levels. The caravan has pretty low dihedral, and long slender fuel tanks. It would be very easy to unport the fuel drain at these low fuel levels. Add on top of that that the fuel can drain from one wing to the other through the reservoir. There is a warning in the POH about sustained uncoordinated flight. My guess is the reservoir was burned while they were descending with the pickups in the tank un-ported. Also notice the flaps in the up position. I’ve done a few engine outs in the sim in a caravan, and it is very difficult if not impossible to keep the nose up if the speed gets below the 100kt flaps up landing speed. And it’s an incredibly high landing attitude even with power on. The caravan loves 20 degrees of flaps.
You sound like somebody who knows the answer to this question. Would the pilots have to use Beta to beat the jumpers to the ground?
@@philipmartin708 I’ve never flown skydive myself, so I’m not sure, but you can get some pretty serious decent rates just at flight idle. Guess it depends how long the jumps are under canopy. I know there are videos on TH-cam of skydive pilots beating jumpers in a King Air without doing anything outrageous with the airplane.
@@tledeboer1 I was hoping that would be the answer. Thanks.
Good job as always juan . your reporting is spot on. Also you should open up an account on rumble they do not censor content creators such as yourself
is that trumps site lol
Juan, would you mind making your cursor larger, I am having trouble distinguishing it from the background.
I've tried, no luck so far with this software...
I've been meaning to jump Oceanside... I'll maybe stick to Perris and Elsinore for a while longer.
there appears to be an error in your youtube video. the caravan that crashed on feb 24 2022 near oceanside municipal airport did NOT have a stock pw-pt6, but also had the STCed honeywell (garrett)-conversion
My reaction to “those gauges are inaccurate” is to get them looked at and calibrated if needed, not simply fly it and assume you’re okay on fuel.
There was a jump school at one airport I flew out of. Saying they have a different culture is too kind. They asked if I would fly for them, but after looking at their "planes" and the condition of their jumpmasters (often high before they fly), I declined.
Should the fuel be sloshed out of the inlet and the engine stalls for lack of fuel, how long would it take for the boost pump to get fuel to the engine once returning to coordinated flight?
Respects to the family of the Jumpmaster, on their deep loss.
I made my first jump in Baldwin in 1978...static line. Been jumping since!! I am 64 last Saturday.
I Jumped there occasionally in the eighties and nineties (more of an Osceola jumper). We may have crossed paths.
Thanks, Juan
Another great analysis!
Juan, you might look at the hot section on the cutaway in the video it seems the turban wheel is turning backwards.
Your 100% right. It counter rotates vs the gas generator by design. Helps to reduce the torque from the engine.
By design...
Thanks for the explanation of the workings of the PT6. I was told years ago by an engine LAME that (theoretically), one could hold on to a propeller connected to a PT6 for about 30 seconds after ignition, but after that it would be impossible. :)
With the Garrett direct-drive engine, is it possible to overfuel the engine if the propeller RPM drops far enough, e.g. by having the propeller pitch too coarse? The reason why I ask is that the Rolls Royce Dart engine coupled to the 4-blade Dowty-Rotol propeller (as fitted to the F-27) was susceptible to that, especially when taxiing and somehow getting the prop past the ground fine lock - once the EGT needle headed to the right, the turbine had cooked and it was too late to save the engine. There were a few incidences of F-27s experiencing engine failure on approach when the pilots had the pitch set too coarse for the HP cock setting, thus overfuelling the engine and cooking the turbine.
We would commonly use a 60 degree bank and with a little bit of rudder to keep the nose up.. this gave best decent. But you would want to mix your turns left and right equally.
As much as I love your videos, I hate to see so many recent accidents. Stay safe Juan!
1 suggestion. put adblock extension on your browser.
That is not what the book says. Another comment by the voice of reason that I would bet will be highly scrutinize.
Thanks Juan for your abilities and saying the right thing at the right time.
Change rapid decent procedures. Require a level out and power application at a specific height AGL based on aircraft type such that an engine out during that phase of flight would allow for an approach and landing on a runway.