crashed

rick bell · #1 02-15-10, 06:12 PM

one down this afternoon near Trenton n.j. maybe 5 dead

hharney · #2 02-15-10, 06:50 PM

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201..._on_landi.html

This aircraft has Winglets, as depicted in the video on the link above. I have to speculate that this may be N12NA, a Riley Super Skyrocket. Again, this is only a guess based on the winglets and the paint scheme. This aircraft, N12NA, has the extended wing tip tanks also as shown in the picture below. Tragic accident, the media makes it sound like something came off the aircraft while it was landing. This is awful.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/201...lane_cras.html

By looking at this photo I can see the boom with N12 on it.

Skymaster337B · #3 02-15-10, 07:59 PM

If you watch the video you'll see the right wing tip broken off over the runway. I noticed it had the wing tip mods too. Not sure if the two things are related, but here we are all talking about the wing root inspections.....perhaps Cessna overlooked something. Notice how the wing/fuselage mounts are still connected even after the accident.

Roger · #4 02-15-10, 08:43 PM

Terrible . Hard to surmise what happened at this point, because of all the different info from witnesses. Some say the plane was going very fast which doesn't sound right for a take off. But the gear was allegedly up, so it would appear that it could have rotated and cycled up. More likely a landing or low approach, or missed. For the wing tip to be in the position it is in, it seems like it might have hit before the accident, i.e. scrapped the runway, broke off, then flipped? Marks on the runway may tell the story. Regadless, what a horrible thing.

Guy Paris · #5 02-15-10, 10:19 PM

WALL TOWNSHIP -- A small plane broke apart over Monmouth Executive Airport in Wall Township today, sending the aircraft into a nose dive that destroyed the plane and killed at least two people. Three others remain missing as authorities continue to search the debris field, officials said.

Eric Ross, a helicopter pilot, witnessed the plane crash at Monmouth Executive Airport. Eric Ross, 47, was flying near the airport at the time of the crash and reported it was a Cessna 337 Skymaster, a twin-engine plane with propellers on the front and rear of the fuselage. Ross said the plane appeared to be making a "high-speed, low pass across the runway" just before the crash. Ross said he saw "mangled bodies" inside the plane

hharney · #6 02-15-10, 11:08 PM

Reports are saying now that they have located two of the missing and that they were ejected from the aircraft. A fifth person is still missing. Three of the five were related, two of the five were younger, one teen and one child. There may have been family watching them leave from the ground but may not have seen the crash. They were going to NYC for a sightseeing flight.

wfreestone · #7 02-16-10, 12:50 PM

It appears that it probably was N12NA. The Fox NY web site's TV reporter broadcast says that: all five victims have been recovered, that the FAA said it was a 1973 T337 registered to Jack Air LLC, Wilmington, Delaware (which matches N12NA's FAA Registration info), and that an eyewitness saw the aircraft with the gear retracted approach the runway, hit the runway with the gear retracted, and pull up after hitting the runway.

hharney · #8 02-18-10, 02:08 PM

I keep wondering if they were just doing a low approach fly-by, like many of us do. If that was the intent, what went wrong? The right wing tip was not damaged from hitting the runway but appears to have just broke off at the extended fuel cell attach point. If the fuel cell broke off while performing a fly-by at high speed this could roll the aircraft clockwise very quickly. One would expect that it may look similar to the reports that witness's described. If this is the case why did the fuel cell separate? High speed? Structural? We may never know.

Interesting story relating to the crash:

http://www.examiner.com/x-35334-Newa...illfated-plane

jack374dn · #9 02-18-10, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hharney

I keep wondering if they were just doing a low approach fly-by, like many of us do. If that was the intent, what went wrong? The right wing tip was not damaged from hitting the runway but appears to have just broke off at the extended fuel cell attach point. If the fuel cell broke off while performing a fly-by at high speed this could roll the aircraft clockwise very quickly. One would expect that it may look similar to the reports that witness's described. If this is the case why did the fuel cell separate? High speed? Structural? We may never know.

Interesting story relating to the crash:

http://www.examiner.com/x-35334-Newa...illfated-plane

Did this aircraft have the extended wing mod. to increase gross take-off weight ?

Jack

hharney · #10 02-18-10, 09:34 PM

I don't know which optional tanks it had. Given the winglets are Aviation Enterprises maybe the fuel cells are also. I know that some of the optional tip tanks do have a jetison system so that if you have to land before exhausting the fuel the fuel can be dumped so that the gross weight is legal for landing. The increased gross weight is for T/O and flight only and not landing.

Here is the info on the Flint extended tip tanks. It increases the Gross Wgt to 4,630 except where the GW is already 4,700 from Cessna. No dump system on the Flint Kit.

http://www.flintaero.com/337.htm

jack374dn · #11 02-18-10, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hharney

I don't know which optional tanks it had. Given the winglets are Aviation Enterprises maybe the fuel cells are also. I know that some of the optional tip tanks do have a jetison system so that if you have to land before exhausting the fuel the fuel can be dumped so that the gross weight is legal for landing. The increased gross weight is for T/O and flight only and not landing.

Thanks Herb ....

Jack

birddog · #12 02-21-10, 08:54 PM

Has there been a report released on the may 2008 skymaster that went down in Millville, Cumberland County, with Stephen Claussen on board?
________
RED HEAD GIRL LIVE

hharney · #13 02-21-10, 09:29 PM

If I remember reading this incident it had something to do with fuel management. Here is the dialog findings about the fuel system.

The main tanks contained either trace amounts, or were completely devoid, of fuel. The right auxiliary tank contained approximately 11 gallons, and the left auxiliary tank contained approximately 2 gallons. The recovered fuel was clear and bright, with no visible contaminants. Tests with water-detection paste were negative, which indicated that no water was present in the fuel.

The fuel selector valve handle for the front engine was found in the "Left Aux" position, and the corresponding fuel selector valve was found set to the port from the left auxiliary tank. The fuel selector valve handle for the rear engine was found in the "Right Main" position, and the corresponding fuel selector valve was found set to an unused port, which was the "off" position.

Here's the full report

http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?...08FA184&akey=1

Weight and Balance Report
http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Aviation...184/424353.pdf

Skymaster337B · #14 02-23-10, 01:59 AM

Wow, a fuel thing. Seems to be the cause of many 337 accidents. My rules: 1. Always top off the mains 2. Never fly more than 3 hours on the mains 3. Never switch the aux tanks at the same time, wait at least 5-10 minutes 4. Always feel for the indent 5. Grease the fuel valves during each annual 6. Burn main tanks for at least 2 hours before switching to the aux tanks (book says 1 hour, but why do just the minimum?)

Comments?

hharney · #15 02-23-10, 09:46 AM

I like to use my aux tanks as soon as possible on long trips because you can't use the aux for landing. I wait the 60 minutes on the mains and then switch to the aux's and finish them early into the trip. I let the aux's run for 60 minutes and then switch the front back to the main while the rear runs out on the aux then once the main is back in place on the rear I switch the front back to the aux and run it out. Typically about 75 - 80 minutes per aux at normal cruise.