King Air at Gillam, MB

[goingnowherefast]

Cause we can't say for certain that they did. Looking likely, but not for certain. It bothers me IF they ran out of gas, but I'd like to give this crew the benefit of the doubt first. It's the shoot first, ask questions later style that bothers people.

There is the possibility that it is fuel contamination, but yet some posters come across that they want it to be empty tanks so they can continue their rhetoric that pilots run out of gas. A very self supporting conclusion, not drawn from facts, but speculation.

Maybe the apprentice put both fuel systems together wrong? It's anybody's guess how it would behave then. Perhaps the fuel gauges were way out of whack and they thought they had enough? Fuel leak?

[trey kule]

What bothers me is the rationalization that speculation is ok because it is all about learning.
And that we need to know right now.

I predict that the cause of this accident will not be the first time that it has happened.

Which makes me wonder why the all fired rush to need to speculate at all. Or castigating TSB for taking the necessary time to get it right. Unlike many here, they have the annoying habit of checking everything.
This should be an easier case because the crew is available and the plane is pretty much intact.

Lets all wait awhile shall we.

Then we can bring out the tar and feathers.

[pelmet]

What bothers me is the rationalization that speculation is ok because it is all about learning.
And that we need to know right now.

Which makes me wonder why the all fired rush to need to speculate at all. Or castigating TSB for taking the necessary time to get it right. Unlike many here, they have the annoying habit of checking everything.
This should be an easier case because the crew is available and the plane is pretty much intact.

Lets all wait awhile shall we.

It is bizarre. There will be all this endless speculation and arguing on a thread after an accident. Then, it eventually stops. After a year or two a report comes out and we find out the actual story(perhaps not always but frequently). It gets posted by someone like me and there is a fraction of the discussion.

[digits_]

It is bizarre. There will be all this endless speculation and arguing on a thread after an accident. Then, it eventually stops. After a year or two a report comes out and we find out the actual story(perhaps not always but frequently). It gets posted by someone like me and there is a fraction of the discussion.

Not really. The final report usually says exactly what happened. There is much less to talk about. It's usually also one of the many options that people already speculated about. A lot of the possible options have already been "pre-discussed" if you wish.

The only thing remaining could be the discussion as to why it happened, or what lead to the accident, but even that is usually covered in quite some detail in the TSB report.

[trey kule]

Pelmet.

It is as you say.

People seem to enjoy speculating without any facts.
When the report does come, there seems to be no desire to learn from it.

BTW. I read all your accident posts. I have found lots to learn from them.

[digits_]

If you were to post a TSB report from an accident that nobody heard from before, there would be much more discussion because a lot of new possibilities and "what-ifs" could be discussed.

People seem to enjoy speculating without any facts.
When the report does come, there seems to be no desire to learn from it.

BTW. I read all your accident posts. I have found lots to learn from them.

That's where you are wrong. The speculating *IS* the learning: what could have gone wrong, why could it have gone wrong, who or what caused it, etc.

For example, viewers of this thread have now a better understanding of the King Air fuel system. Information that probably wouldn't have been included in the TSB report.

[trey kule]

If you fly a King Air, you will, or should have, an understanding of the fuel system. It is, or should be, part of the training. If it is not,then your training organization is the place to learn it.
If you do not fly a king air, exactly what value does learning about a king airs fuel system do for you. Allow you as an anonymous future poster to pretend you understand the system? don,t you think that should be part of a training program and not a casual internet thread where you may, or maybe not, be getting factual information, or maybe it only applies to certain models and years of king airs. A little knowledge can be very dangerous in an airplane.

I am very biased towards good and thorough training. Not so called learning from speculation. To many computer captains who really don’t know much pretending they do.

To put it bluntly, “ the learning” is just an excuse to gossip.

[C.W.E.]

If you fly a King Air, you will, or should have, an understanding of the fuel system. It is, or should be, part of the training. If it is not,then your training organization is the place to learn it.
If you do not fly a king air, exactly what value does learning about a king airs fuel system do for you. Allow you as an anonymous future poster to pretend you understand the system? don,t you think that should be part of a training program and not a casual internet thread where you may, or maybe not, be getting factual information, or maybe it only applies to certain models and years of king airs. A little knowledge can be very dangerous in an airplane.

I am very biased towards good and thorough training. Not so called learning from speculation. To many computer captains who really don’t know much pretending they do.

To put it bluntly, “ the learning” is just an excuse to gossip.

The above should end this discussion because it is factual.

However I do have one question to ask.

If a crew wrecks an airplane through gross mismanagement such as running out of fuel should there be a price to pay for their mismanagement... or is just a learning experience?

[goingnowherefast]

If it truly is taking off without enough fuel, and continuing on regardless, then wrecks the plane and survives. Then it will probably cost them their jobs and careers.

If somebody does take off without enough gas, own the mistake, turn around and go back and get more. You'll get in shit, but that's the least of your worries compared to continuing on and running out.

If it's a fuel leak, fitting vibrated loose and dumped fuel at scary rates, then could be "good job making it almost to a runway".

A lot of "if" statements because nobody on avcanada knows why they maybe ran out of gas.

[C.W.E.]

If a crew wrecks an airplane by running out of fuel because they did not have enough in the airplane for the trip would the insurance company pay for the damage?

[trey kule]

It is not that simple, as there are some other factors to be considered, but from my experience, almost certainly if there are no personal injury claims or large third party losses.
In the grand scheme of things a simple hull loss is not a huge deal to an insurer.
There is however, the matter of subrogation , and holding the crew liable for the loss.
The old policies had, for an extra premium, a breech of warranty clause for just these kinds of situations. Taking off without the required fuel might just fall into that category.
But it is never usually that black and white.
Maybe someone who is current on insurance can post if these clauses are still included in policies. Can get really ugly for a crew if they are.

[corethatthermal]

WoW What a huge big safe lake they landed on ! UM, I mean touched down on on their way to destroy the plane !! How many landable lakes did they overfly on the way to totalling their aircraft? Did they do a high/steep approach path with the lake as an alternate? Boy, were these pilots STUPID !!!!

[Crsaviation]

Do tell me; how the hell is a flight crew supposed to know how thick the ice is on the lakes below? Don't remember seeing surrounding lake ice thickness on METAR reports. The speculation here, based entirely on a vague CBC article is sick. Get a life people and show some respect.

[703doge]

The CADOR almost reads as a non event


Aircraft Event InformationFuel - leakDiversionHard landingCollision with terrain

Occurrence Summary

Date Entered:

2019-05-01

Narrative:

A Keewatin Air Beech B200 (C-FRMV/KEW202) reported minimum fuel due to a fuel leak and advised diverting to Gillam, MB (CYGX). Aircraft landed and nose gear collapsed. No other impact to operations







http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/2/c ... =2019C1526

[digits_]

The CADOR almost reads as a non event


Aircraft Event InformationFuel - leakDiversionHard landingCollision with terrain

Occurrence Summary

Date Entered:

2019-05-01

Narrative:

A Keewatin Air Beech B200 (C-FRMV/KEW202) reported minimum fuel due to a fuel leak and advised diverting to Gillam, MB (CYGX). Aircraft landed and nose gear collapsed. No other impact to operations







http://wwwapps.tc.gc.ca/saf-sec-sur/2/c ... =2019C1526

"No other impact to operations"

I'm wondering what you need to do to impact operations.
Closing an airport and writing off an airplane isn't enough apparently.

[FlyGy]

I'm not familiar with the B200 fuel system. Do the starboard tanks feed the starboard engine and the port tanks the port side engine with the ability to transfer fuel from one wing to the other?

I'm just trying to wrap my head around where the leak may have occurred to kill both engines.

[telex]

FUEL CROSSFEED SYSTEM
Crossfeeding is conducted only during single-
engine operation, when it may be necessary
to supply fuel to the operative engine
from the fuel system on the opposite side
(Figure 5-9). The simplified crossfeed control
positions are labeled CROSSFEED
FLOW and OFF (Figure 5-5). The STANDBY
PUMP switches must be positioned to OFF
for crossfeeding.

[FlyGy]

Okay, so the engines normally run off the tanks in that wing and transferring fuel from one wing to the other is only done in the event of a shutdown?

It also looks like it's a complex enough procedure that involves too many steps for an unintentional draining of the fuel tanks, so is there a location in the fuel system that both wings would be able to drain from without the knowledge of the flight crew or without the accidental flip of a switch?

[pelmet]

It will be interesting to learn more about the reported fuel leak. An important additional piece of info.

[corethatthermal]

Do tell me; how the hell is a flight crew supposed to know how thick the ice is on the lakes below? Don't remember seeing surrounding lake ice thickness on METAR reports.

Any good pilot flying into the north will have some idea of the ice thickness and its suitability for a precautionary or emergency landing otherwise, I would consider them useless twits trained in college in some big city like Toronto and practically useless for the north !