C-47 Takeoff Groundloop and Crash

[nbinont]

Thankfully everyone made it out alive. Though it is a tragic loss of a good aircraft. I've visited the CAF squadron at Burnet a number of times and they are a good group. Their C-47 appeared to be very well maintained from what I saw and just had "new" engines a couple years back. Sad to see her go up in flames.

[Victory]

The DC-3 is a single pilot aircraft by type certificate.

Hmmm, type certificate A-699 does not seem to mention minimum crew. Canadian standard 421, Appendix A does though, and specifies the DC-3 as a two crew aircraft. For my limited time flying one, I would not want to be doing it solo!

Unfortunately nobody cares about what TC says outside of Canada. It's the same with the Beech 1900. TC might say two crew but its a single pilot airplane from the FAA so good luck claiming it as multi-crew time for a job requirement or license conversion outside of Canada.

[Cat Driver]

How many DC3's are operated single pilot Victory?

I have done DC3 training and type ratings in several different countries and never saw one operated single pilot.

Also which seat do you sit in when flying it solo?

[C.W.E.]

Yes, the DC3 can be flown with one pilot if it meets certain criteria, however there are very few of them being flown single pilot.

Most DC3's require two pilots with DC3 type ratings.

For sure the R4D-8 does.

The R4D-8 is a real performer compared to the standard DC3 and you sit even higher in it.

The only drawback I found between the R4D-8 and the standard three was cross wind capability. The R4D-8 does not have the rudder effectiveness of a standard 3 so it will not handle as much cross wind when landing.

[Antique Pilot]

Stunning absolutely stunning.

Control locks in, .? Or C of G way out?

On June 23, 1957 a PWA DC-3 took off from the Port Hardy BC airport. They got airborne but crashed in the attempt to do a circuit and land. 12 desceased. Elevator control locks were in. DOT accident report RG12, Vol 1200, File 5002-526.

AP

[C.W.E.]

It has happened but how do you manage to get that far into a flight without noticing the elevator is locked???

[Antique Pilot]

It has happened but how do you manage to get that far into a flight without noticing the elevator is locked???

Yes It is hard to understand. Improper use or lack of a checklist?? What else?

AP

[C.W.E.]

Yes It is hard to understand. Improper use or lack of a checklist?? What else?

Even if you do not use a checklist I can not imagine starting a take off without making sure you have enough fuel and it is selected properly and you have done and controls free and normal check......don't they teach that anymore?

[Schooner69A]

"TC might say two crew..."

I don't think TC mandates the number of crew; I do believe the manufacturer does that.

(Might be wrong; I've been out of that business for a few years)

[GyvAir]

It's hard to imagine the lack of situational awareness required to get to the take off roll, let alone continue a take off roll with a control lock left on. Would they also not notice a locked steering wheel in the car until fully hitting something, backing out of a parking space on the way to the airport?

Regardless, I don't think this is the case in this accident.

[Victory]

"TC might say two crew..."

I don't think TC mandates the number of crew; I do believe the manufacturer does that.

(Might be wrong; I've been out of that business for a few years)

No TC mandates the number of crew for aircraft certified in Canada and it can be different than the manufacturer. I've never seen it be less though. Always more.

[switchflicker]

#19 Post by GyvAir » Mon Jul 23, 2018 1:55 pm

I've seen two DC3s flown single pilot in Canada. One Canadian registered and one N registered. Both flown by pilots sporting a bit of a renegade cowboy persona about them.

Gyvair,

Could you tell us about the Canadian registered one.

Thanks

[Schooner69A]

Victory: interesting. Has there ever been a case where the manufacturer said single pilot and TC mandated two pilots? The reason I ask is I spent some time in TC (years ago, admittedly) and never heard of TC going against the dictates of the manufacturer.

J

[Victory]

Yes, off the top of my head the DC-3 and Beech 1900.

[cncpc]

Yes, off the top of my head the DC-3 and Beech 1900.

This guy has some pretty good insight. Not pushing forward. For some reason.

https://www.facebook.com/dan.gryder/vid ... 468679866/

[pelmet]

Interesting how both hands have to be used to push forward and raise the tail. From the captain's point of view, that means no right hand on throttles in the event that an RTO is required leading to a delay in closing the throttles. Something that could require immediate action in the event of an engine failure at low speed where directional control will be lost quickly.

Any further comments from CWE about this would be interesting to hear.

[C.W.E.]

Interesting how both hands have to be used to push forward and raise the tail.

I have never flown an airplane that required two hands to raise the tail ...ever... especially a DC3.

If you can not raise the tail with one hand on the control wheel and the other hand on the throttles something is very wrong...reject the take off immediately.

As to the pilot in that video and his method of flying I guess we have different ideas and methods of controlling the airplane.

I have flown DC3's off of snow, ice, sand. gravel, grass, narrow gravel roads in the bush and of course paved runways.

I have never needed to use two hands on the control wheel, especially just before rotation and in the initial climb because I want to have complete control of the airplane...which means one hand on the control column and the other one on the throttles.

[goingmach_1]

No expierence on the old 3, but with reference to forgetting control locks, a biz jet out of Boston shows that it can be forgotten.

https://youtu.be/dKgJqe7Ml9c

[PilotDAR]

Today was my time for jumpseat in the turbine DC-3 for an hour of observation. The pilot (a very highly experienced DC-3 fellow) did lift the tail as the airspeed came alive, by pushing gently with one hand, while he set power with the other - no problem. The tail was nicely up by 40 knots, and the aircraft was lifted off at 82 knots.

During a quiet time, I reviewed the flight manual. It includes, in the limitation section, that two pilots are required. This corresponds well with the Canadian standard which also says this. I think a pilot can fly most planes solo - until something starts to go wrong. In the DC-3, if there is a hydraulic emergency, you're going to need either a lot of time and altitude, or a second pilot, at least to pump.

The characteristics displayed in the video of the DC-3 which crashed the other day, are exactly those I experienced while flying many hours of stall flight testing (at altitude) in the turbine DC-3 eleven years ago - it's flying find as it slows, a gentle buffet, and the left wing drops suddenly. All of my stall testing was on one airframe, so I cannot compare to other aircraft, but this one was freshly rigged straight out of Basler, and I was flying it with Basler's training pilot, so I had the benefit of his great experience. I would not call the stall gentle. Many later model types have the benefit of improved aerodynamic design (like washout in the wings). An aircraft whose wings stall from the tips in is going to give you a real ride if you stall it. Perhaps the pilot of the accident aircraft was more used to more benign aircraft, and did not realize that dragging a DC-3 into the air in ground effect is going to lead to tears if you allow it to stall.

As for lateral deviation, though heavy, the DC-3 is one of the more forgiving taildraggers I've flown. If you keep it pointed where you want it to go, it'll go there. There's lots of rudder effectiveness available to keep it straight in a crosswind. My observation from lots of taildragger training is that some pilots don't use all of the rudder available to them, or use it with too much delay. Many's the time I've passionately said: "rudder, Rudder, RUDDER!" only to push the pedal myself, and find that there had been lots more available to apply. Thus, I perfer the most narrow runway available for taildragger training, as it is a more constricting reminder to the pilot to not deviate from the desired path. It's the wide runways while lure careless taildragger pilots into trouble, they think that because the runway is wide, they can use that width. No, not if you're halfway sideways on the runway, headed to the other side! My home runway allows me to deviate by 4 feet either side of center before I could hit a wingtip float off a runway light - I haven't hit one yet! If my tracks are within a foot either side of the previous flight's tracks, I'm pleased with myself.

The industry is making new planes which are progressively more forgiving and easy to fly, so pilots wanting to fly older planes well, will have to keep their skills more and more sharp, compared to what modern planes demand.

[Schooner69A]

Victory:

All references to the DC-3 indicate 2 crew. As for the 1900, I think it was certified for 1 pilot, but that TC mandated 2 pilots for airline work? I'm not sure, but I'm guessing that a corporate of private 1900 could be flown single pilot? (Unless TC has mandated something about the number of passengers. It's been nearly twenty years since I left the department. Stuff changes...)