Bearskin Crash — FEB 25, 2020 — Dryden, ON

[Dronepiper]

https://www.tbnewswatch.com/local-news/ ... en-2116317

Any word on who was involved? Skycare? Bearskin?

[opinionated]

Bearskin. Glad all are OK.

https://www.drydennow.com/local/emergen ... en-airport

[flyinhigh]

One pax is in hospital.
A good family friend was on that aircraft and as can imagine is quite shaken up. Sounds like they hit a snow bank on departure.

[mmm..bacon]

Sounds like they hit a snow bank on departure.

So they ran it off the side or the end of the runway, then?

[bobcaygeon]

Off the side, barely outside the lights, couldn’t have been going very fast. “Crash” is a big overstatement. They towed it out of the snowbank once they had a towbar I’ve been told. Runway was closed for 3 hrs.

Passenger released from hospital a couple hrs later, got a few stitches I heard.

[opinionated]

"the plane was travelling down the runway when the pilot reported he had 'no steering and no brakes.' [...] the plane then skidded into a snowbank and the propeller pierced through the plane’s fuselage"

https://www.country1053.ca/2020/02/24/p ... cNJn4ldMxA

[altiplano]

NWS problem on a Metro took them off the side?

[digits_]

That wouldn't explain the lack of brakes though. Realistically the nosewheel steering system and brake system is completely separate, although stranger things have happened.

Then again, just the brakes wouldn't be enough to overwrite a faulty nose wheel steering, which might give the illusion of non operational brakes. And if things happen that quickly, you might not have enough time to play with reverse either.

[Illya Kuryakin]

That wouldn't explain the lack of brakes though. Realistically the nosewheel steering system and brake system is completely separate, although stranger things have happened.

Then again, just the brakes wouldn't be enough to overwrite a faulty nose wheel steering, which might give the illusion of non operational brakes. And if things happen that quickly, you might not have enough time to play with reverse either.

Been a while but I seem remember the nose wheel goes “shopping cart” if it dies? Brakes and throttle should have kept her straight. As I say, it’s been a while. Bearskin have tillers, or rudder steering?
The chap who was hospitalized had cuts on his hands from the prop. He’s a lucky guy. Did the gear collapse? Can’t see the snow bank taking out a prop. Could have been far worse.
Cheers
Illya

[ogc]

Been a while but I seem remember the nose wheel goes “shopping cart” if it dies? Brakes and throttle should have kept her straight. As I say, it’s been a while. Bearskin have tillers, or rudder steering?
The chap who was hospitalized had cuts on his hands from the prop. He’s a lucky guy. Did the gear collapse? Can’t see the snow bank taking out a prop. Could have been far worse.
Cheers
Illya

Yes the nosewheel goes shopping cart. You can easily steer and park the plane with differential brakes and power.

Bearskins planes are likely rudder steering. I think there are a couple metros that came with a tiller but it was a very very rare option.

As for the prop, I'm pretty sure bearskin and perimeter both use composite props so shatter instead of bend.

[digits_]

That wouldn't explain the lack of brakes though. Realistically the nosewheel steering system and brake system is completely separate, although stranger things have happened.

Then again, just the brakes wouldn't be enough to overwrite a faulty nose wheel steering, which might give the illusion of non operational brakes. And if things happen that quickly, you might not have enough time to play with reverse either.

Been a while but I seem remember the nose wheel goes “shopping cart” if it dies? Brakes and throttle should have kept her straight. As I say, it’s been a while. Bearskin have tillers, or rudder steering?
The chap who was hospitalized had cuts on his hands from the prop. He’s a lucky guy. Did the gear collapse? Can’t see the snow bank taking out a prop. Could have been far worse.
Cheers
Illya

There are different fail modes. The most dangerous one and most common one -although still rare-, is where one of the valves fail. You get in a situation where the nosewheel steering has pressure but is uncontrolled, so the wheel takes a random position and stays there.

I believe Bearskin has rudder steering.

I don't know any further details about the incident.

[sstaurus]

That wouldn't explain the lack of brakes though. Realistically the nosewheel steering system and brake system is completely separate, although stranger things have happened.

Then again, just the brakes wouldn't be enough to overwrite a faulty nose wheel steering, which might give the illusion of non operational brakes. And if things happen that quickly, you might not have enough time to play with reverse either.

Been a while but I seem remember the nose wheel goes “shopping cart” if it dies? Brakes and throttle should have kept her straight. As I say, it’s been a while. Bearskin have tillers, or rudder steering?
The chap who was hospitalized had cuts on his hands from the prop. He’s a lucky guy. Did the gear collapse? Can’t see the snow bank taking out a prop. Could have been far worse.
Cheers
Illya

There are different fail modes. The most dangerous one and most common one -although still rare-, is where one of the valves fail. You get in a situation where the nosewheel steering has pressure but is uncontrolled, so the wheel takes a random position and stays there.

That was my first thought too.. This failure only occurs on the Metro III as far as I know, I don’t know which reg was involved..

[Maynard]

That wouldn't explain the lack of brakes though. Realistically the nosewheel steering system and brake system is completely separate, although stranger things have happened.

Then again, just the brakes wouldn't be enough to overwrite a faulty nose wheel steering, which might give the illusion of non operational brakes. And if things happen that quickly, you might not have enough time to play with reverse either.

Been a while but I seem remember the nose wheel goes “shopping cart” if it dies? Brakes and throttle should have kept her straight. As I say, it’s been a while. Bearskin have tillers, or rudder steering?
The chap who was hospitalized had cuts on his hands from the prop. He’s a lucky guy. Did the gear collapse? Can’t see the snow bank taking out a prop. Could have been far worse.
Cheers
Illya

With NWS off, it goes shopping cart. No Tiller, rudder input. It can fail (flashing green NOSE STEERING on the III) which is an un-commanded fault (NWS is doing something the rudder input didn't command) On takeoff, when speed levers go high, it disconnects the NWS. There's a thumb button on the power levers to engage the nose steering for the takeoff roll, to be disconnected by 60 knots (I always did 40 since there's rudder authority and if it did @#$! off, 40 was slow enough to keep control. Above 60 with it engaged is very sensitive and not ideal. The gear didn't collapse, the props only have about 8-10" clearance and the MT wooden props disintegrate. This was a Metro 23, so the Amber Nose Steer Fail would illuminate if it failed which would be corrected by disengaging it. That's all I got.

[pelmet]

One pax is in hospital.
A good family friend was on that aircraft and as can imagine is quite shaken up. Sounds like they hit a snow bank on departure.

C-GJVB, a Fairchild SA227-DC operated by Perimeter Aviation as flight Bearskin Airlines 344, was
conducting a VFR flight from Dryden Regional (CYHD), ON to Sioux Lookout (CYXL), ON with 2
crew members and 6 passengers on board. As C-GJVB started the takeoff roll on Runway 12, the
aircraft directional control was lost and the aircraft exited the right side of the runway. The
propellers subsequently contacted a snow bank and broke apart. Parts of the broken propellers
penetrated the fuselage, injuring 1 passenger. The aircraft was substantially damaged.

Once again, why I prefer not to sit in a row near the propeller.

[co-joe]

Off the side, barely outside the lights, couldn’t have been going very fast. “Crash” is a big overstatement. They towed it out of the snowbank once they had a towbar I’ve been told. Runway was closed for 3 hrs.

Passenger released from hospital a couple hrs later, got a few stitches I heard.

Crash is not the correct term, but since someone was injured I believe the term "accident" applies.

An aviation accident is an occurrence resulting directly from the operation of an aircraft in which

a person is killed or sustains a serious injury as a result of
being on board the aircraft,
coming into direct contact with any part of the aircraft, including parts that have become detached from the aircraft, or...

[flyinhigh]

Thanks Pelmet.
After this incident I subscribed to the CADOR so I could keep up on the most recent info and pass it on to our friends.

One pax is in hospital.
A good family friend was on that aircraft and as can imagine is quite shaken up. Sounds like they hit a snow bank on departure.

C-GJVB, a Fairchild SA227-DC operated by Perimeter Aviation as flight Bearskin Airlines 344, was
conducting a VFR flight from Dryden Regional (CYHD), ON to Sioux Lookout (CYXL), ON with 2
crew members and 6 passengers on board. As C-GJVB started the takeoff roll on Runway 12, the
aircraft directional control was lost and the aircraft exited the right side of the runway. The
propellers subsequently contacted a snow bank and broke apart. Parts of the broken propellers
penetrated the fuselage, injuring 1 passenger. The aircraft was substantially damaged.

Once again, why I prefer not to sit in a row near the propeller.

[ozone]

Not much left of the composite MT prop

https://www.salvagesale.com/for-sale/Ai ... pnLink=yes

[flyinhigh]

CADOR says it was not mechanical.

[J31]

No problem with the nose wheel steering.

Right engine start locks not disengaged. Then no one looking at the torque as the power was pushed up for takeoff. https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... c0016.html

"The engaged start locks prevented the right propeller from producing the required thrust, which resulted in a significant thrust differential. With less thrust being generated by the right engine, the aircraft experienced a loss of directional control and exited the runway."

[Dronepiper]

No problem with the nose wheel steering.

Right engine start locks not disengaged. Then no one looking at the torque as the power was pushed up for takeoff. https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... c0016.html

"The engaged start locks prevented the right propeller from producing the required thrust, which resulted in a significant thrust differential. With less thrust being generated by the right engine, the aircraft experienced a loss of directional control and exited the runway."

[BTD]

No problem with the nose wheel steering.

Right engine start locks not disengaged. Then no one looking at the torque as the power was pushed up for takeoff. https://www.tsb.gc.ca/eng/rapports-repo ... c0016.html

"The engaged start locks prevented the right propeller from producing the required thrust, which resulted in a significant thrust differential. With less thrust being generated by the right engine, the aircraft experienced a loss of directional control and exited the runway."

Wow! I was not expecting this. That was a very senior and experienced Captain who was PM. Yes the FO was somewhat new, but the SOPs at Bearskin (As of 2019) states that the captain will apply the power and keep his hands on the power (similar to most 705 ops). It’s very easy to tell if the start locks are not dis-engaged by watching the gauges as you apply power. It will become obvious in about 1 second. There would be no difference in sound, so it would only be gauge indications.

I made this same mistake on a metro around a decade ago. Although in that case I did complete the action for the start lock disengagement but one of them didn’t come off the lock. (Perhaps I didn’t go as far into reverse as I thought). Didn’t notice at all on the taxi. I believe it was the FO flying who was new at the time. As soon as we applied power it veered and I rejected immediately. I was able to tell what the problem was very quickly so we taxied off and I moved it off the lock.

The metro is squirrelly to begin with and it doesn’t take long to veer. Maybe I just got lucky. Bummer though.

[pelmet]

First day of line training for the F/O. The captain had loads of experience on type but unfortunately didn't seem to be performing particularly well. Anyone can miss a checklist item but it is too bad that he didn't check the torques as the power was brought up. Improper blade angles can send a multi-engine aircraft off the runway very quickly(if they are asymmetric).

Torques are often your best way of discovering this. One aircraft I flew had lights to let you know when you could go into reverse, but they didn't always illuminate due to unreliable contacts. Checking for even torques could confirm if the blades had hung up or it was a light problem.

The checklist seems strange as well. The response to 'Start Locks' is.........'Clear, Clean, Wing Cap On'. That means three things have been checked but none of them have anything to do with start locks.Released might be a better response with the other response something like 'Props and Wings'.

[boeingboy]

First day of line training for the F/O. The captain had loads of experience on type but unfortunately didn't seem to be performing particularly well. Anyone can miss a checklist item but it is too bad that he didn't check the torques as the power was brought up. Improper blade angles can send a multi-engine aircraft off the runway very quickly(if they are asymmetric).

Torques are often your best way of discovering this. One aircraft I flew had lights to let you know when you could go into reverse, but they didn't always illuminate due to unreliable contacts. Checking for even torques could confirm if the blades had hung up or it was a light problem.

The checklist seems strange as well. The response to 'Start Locks' is.........'Clear, Clean, Wing Cap On'. That means three things have been checked but none of them have anything to do with start locks.Released might be a better response with the other response something like 'Props and Wings'.

I disagree with pretty much everything you just said.....once again Pelmet comes to the rescue - going on about stuff he knows nothing about.

The captain didn't do his job. Period. He was supposed to watch the torque as they applied initial power for takeoff and obviously didn't do that. You can make all the checklists in the world and still screw the pooch. The checklist item may seem odd to those on the outside but actually makes sense. It's a command - "I want to release the locks" your checking that there is nothing in front of you before you pull reverse power, checking the wings are free and the fuel cap is on - all before the locks are released. In other words after the response - you release the locks....it's not a check for the locks. You do them all as your looking out the window on the respective side.

Anyone with an ounce of common sense will know if their start locks did not release. First - any time the power lever is advanced that engine still on the locks will accelerate a LOT faster than the one that has been released, and second it will pull when it taxi's. Can't really blame the FO as he had never flown it before - but someone should have wondered why they have a whole lot of rudder (or joystick, or tiller) while they taxi a metro.

[pelmet]

The captain had loads of experience on type but unfortunately didn't seem to be performing particularly well. Anyone can miss a checklist item but it is too bad that he didn't check the torques as the power was brought up. Improper blade angles can send a multi-engine aircraft off the runway very quickly(if they are asymmetric).

Torques are often your best way of discovering this. One aircraft I flew had lights to let you know when you could go into reverse, but they didn't always illuminate due to unreliable contacts. Checking for even torques could confirm if the blades had hung up or it was a light problem.

The checklist seems strange as well. The response to 'Start Locks' is.........'Clear, Clean, Wing Cap On'. That means three things have been checked but none of them have anything to do with start locks.Released might be a better response with the other response something like 'Props and Wings'.

I disagree with pretty much everything you just said.....once again Pelmet comes to the rescue - going on about stuff he knows nothing about.

Perhaps...Lets see what I said and what you might disagree with(and you said it was pretty much everything). I said....

The captain had loads of experience on type but unfortunately didn't seem to be performing particularly well. Anyone can miss a checklist item but it is too bad that he didn't check the torques as the power was brought up.

You said.....

The captain didn't do his job. Period. He was supposed to watch the torque as they applied initial power for takeoff and obviously didn't do that.

I said......

First day of line training for the F/O.

You said....

Can't really blame the FO as he had never flown it before

I said.....

Improper blade angles can send a multi-engine aircraft off the runway very quickly(if they are asymmetric). Torques are often your best way of discovering this. Checking for even torques could confirm if the blades had hung up or it was a light problem.

You said......

He was supposed to watch the torque as they applied initial power for takeoff and obviously didn't do that.

Sounds like you actually agree with almost everything I said. Perhaps I know what I am talking about

I would add for the F/O that even if it was his first day of line training and therefore extremely inexperienced, should at least know to have all checklist items responded to properly and the appropriate checklists completed.

The one actual single thing that you disagree with me on is the checklist. I will discuss that further below.

[pelmet]

The checklist seems strange as well. The response to 'Start Locks' is.........'Clear, Clean, Wing Cap On'. That means three things have been checked but none of them have anything to do with start locks.

The checklist item may seem odd to those on the outside but actually makes sense. It's a command - "I want to release the locks" your checking that there is nothing in front of you before you pull reverse power, checking the wings are free and the fuel cap is on - all before the locks are released. In other words after the response - you release the locks....it's not a check for the locks. You do them all as your looking out the window on the respective side.

As for the checklist, does checking that the fuel caps are on have anything to do with releasing the start locks. Does checking that the wings are free from contamination have anything to do with releasing the start locks.