Tuesday, September 18, 2012

Cal Fire plane outfitted with new infrared camera system

SAN DIEGO (CNS) - A $200,000 infrared video camera that can relay timely wildfire images to fire commanders was unveiled Tuesday as regional officials gathered at Montgomery Field to promote cooperative disaster response among government agencies, businesses and universities.

 "San Diegans have a history of coming together during emergencies, as do local governments and private businesses," San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders said. "That same cooperative spirit is on display here today, along with some of the most innovative fire fighting technology in the nation."

The camera, which is mounted under a Cal Fire spotter aircraft, can "see" through smoke to enable firefighters to see temperatures within a wildfire, signifying hot spots or burned-out areas. That also helps pilots pinpoint the best spots for water drops.

"The images from this camera will improve firefighter safety and usher in a new era of real-time tactical information, regardless of the conditions," said Ron Roberts, chairman of the San Diego County Board of Supervisors.

The images would be a part of the "next generation incident command system" that provides data on where people and equipment are deployed, Roberts said. He plans to ask the board Sept. 25 to approve $14,400 to cover the cost of moving the system from MIT's Lincoln Labs to UC San Diego's Supercomputer Center.

San Diego Gas & Electric contributed $100,000 to the San Diego Regional Fire & Emergency Services Foundation that provided a grant to the San Diego County Fire Authority, then matched with county funds to cover the cost of the camera system.

SDG&E also installed 29 cameras atop transmission towers on the Sunrise Powerlink route that automatically alert the utility to a perceived threat and planned to install seven more on the section running through Cleveland National Forest, officials said.

"The availability of real-time visual data for firefighters from remote locations around the county -- and from the air during actual incidents -- is a huge benefit in coordinating our fire response," said Thom Porter, Cal Fire's San Diego Unit Chief and county Fire Authority Unit Chief. "This capability pushes us way beyond what we've been able to do in the past."


Story and video:   http://www.760kfmb.com

Cessna 182, the tremendous bush aeroplane: "Good performance, good endurance, good speed," says one owner, when talking about his beloved Cessna 182 aircraft

Cessna 182 Association president, Andrew Lott, inside his 1965 aeroplane 
(ABC: Tasha Impey)


Andrew Lott, president of the Cessna 182 Association, has been flying his 1965 airplane for 11 years. 

 He calls a Cessna 182, the tremendous bush airplane.

"It's particularly good in bush situations where there are rough airstrips and short airstrips."

Mr Lott is part of a tight-knit aircraft community that comes together twice-a-year, owners of Cessna 182s, where around 60 people get together to sample local produce, raise some money for charity and of course, talk about their beloved airplanes.

This year's spring fly-in saw 22 Cessna 182s of all ages and from every state in Australia come to Mount Gambier.

First built in 1956, the Cessna 182 was represented in Mount Gambier with a 1958 model right through to a 2010 aircraft.

While the actual design hasn't changed a great deal, in 2004 Cessna 182s changed from the conventional instrument panel to the glass cockpit, equipped with a Garmin G1000 system.

Read more here:  http://www.abc.net.au

Liberty University: School of Aeronautics Makes Deal With Airline

Lynchburg, VA - Students at Liberty University's school of aeronautics will get a little help after they graduate.

The school signed a deal with ExpressJet, which guarantees their pilot graduates jobs with the regional airline. They have to meet specific requirements, including finishing all flight hours and maintaining at least a 2.5 GPA.

LU's agreement with ExpressJet comes after a long-term relationship with the airline.

"We have been very blessed in our growth, blessed in the quality of students, the instructors and the equipment we have and all of this combine together has led us to where we are today with this particular arrangement with ExpressJet," said Dave Young, the dean of the School of Aeronautics.

Leaders at the school hope to make more deals with other big airlines in the near future.

http://www.wset.com

Pilatus PC-12/47, PR-DOG: Taxi to runway 36A Bacacheri Airport (SBBI), Brazil on September 18, 2012

A herd of Cessna 150′s



 Published on September 14, 2012 by therabbit0 

“The Cessna 150 in its natural environment takes off from the watering hole to fly south for nesting season and better grazing land! Such a majestic specimen!”

Calling All Pilots! Bruce Dickinson Auctioning Off Co-Pilot Spot for World Record Flight Simulation Attempt

Iron Maiden‘s Bruce Dickinson loves to fly, and the musician is looking for a co-pilot (if you have the money to spend) for his upcoming world record flight simulation attempt.

The singer-pilot is raising funds for Aerobility’s plans for a disable-adapted flight simulator that will prove invaluable for disabled student pilots to learn how to fly through all sorts of conditions.

The challenge at hand for Aerobility is to make the simulator “pay for Itself” through sponsored circumnavigation, with stops at “real” destinations over a 22,000 mile course that would be plotted out through Aerobiliity’s real training aircraft.

Dickinson is one of 100 pilots who will fly a leg during the global journey, which will run from October 5th through approximately October 15th. During his portion of the trek, Dickinson has offered the highest bidder the opportunity to be his co-pilot for the record-setting run. Those interested can bid via the U.K. eBay website, and at last check the highest bid was £1,950 (approximately $3163).

The Aerobility simulation flight will kick off October 5 at Blackbushe Airport in the Canberley U.K. headquarters building. For more information, check the Aerobility website.

Tweed-New Haven (KHVN), New Haven, Connecticut: Noise at airport due to rise; study could enable mitigation work for 9 houses (document)

NEW HAVEN — Aircraft noise around Tweed New Haven Regional Airport is likely to increase by 2017 but can be mitigated with a number of noise-reduction measures, according to the preliminary draft of a year-long noise study that will be released soon.

The study identifies nine houses, primarily along Burr Street, directly opposite Tweed’s passenger terminal in New Haven, that are most affected by current noise. It is expected to open the door for federal funding to address their issues, said Tweed Executive Director Tim Larson.

It forecasts an increase in noise levels by 2017 because of modest general aviation growth and a “planned new commercial service introduction” to Washington Dulles airport and O’Hare International Airport in Chicago, according to a recent visual presentation to the Tweed New Haven Airport Authority.

The possible new service routes the study took into account are the same ones airport officials have long discussed with various airline officials, Larson said. No airline has made a decision to add service at Tweed, he said.

The Federal Aviation Administration will only let Tweed use current noise conditions for any funding applications it may submit, Larson said. Any houses beyond the nine identified would only qualify for mitigation measures if addition growth takes place, he said.

Options available — all voluntary — include soundproofing such as double-pane windows at affected homes, construction of a noise barrier and, if neighbors are willing, purchasing of some properties, a representative of the Virginia-based consultant doing the study said.

The draft study will recommend that the airport relocate the General Aviation helipad and that run-up locations be moved about 500 feet to the southwest, said Jawad Rachami, director of operations of Wyle Aerospace Group, based in Arlington, Va.

The version presented to the authority last week also suggested a feasibility study for a noise barrier west of the terminal, which it said could lower sound levels 5-10 dB. Other possibilities include “voluntary noise abatement procedures” by pilots, increased use of GPS equipment and establishing a voluntary curfew for late-night flights.

Rachami met with the Tweed New Haven Airport Authority recently. He went over preliminary results with the Authority board last week, including computer model animated simulations of three different types of airplanes taking off and landing.

The simulations show, via color-coded bands, how far various levels of noise reach in each case. The three simulations are of a turboprop plane, a business jet and a typical general aviation “touch and go” training exercise.

While Rachami released the simulations — which also are now posted on the study website — and discussed options, he said Wyle will not release numerical findings of the study until Oct. 1, the scheduled release date of the study in advance of an Oct. 16 public hearing.

The hearing will begin at 6 p.m. on Oct. 16 in the Nathan Hale School auditorium, 480 Townsend Ave.

The simulations of the noise generated are viewable now on the video/simulations tab of the study website, located at www.tweedupdate.com. They can be accessed directly at www.tweedupdate.com/video.html.

The study’s key goals were to evaluate existing and future airport noise and potential measures to abate and mitigate it, establish eligibility for federal funding to address noise and promote a sustainable and collaborative relationship between the airport and the community.

Among other things, it established two study committees, a Technical Advisory Committee and a Community Advisory Committee:

Community Advisory Committee member Barbara Carroll — a Morris Cove resident who also is chairwoman of the East Shore Management Team in New Haven — said she has been impressed with the work the consultants and airport officials have done so far.

“They are very committed to the neighborhood” and “Tim Larson, who is the executive director, (is) always willing to listen to what people say,” said Carroll, who said her yard was one of three on the New Haven side that Wyle had installed noise monitoring equipment in a year ago when the study began.

Another three noise monitors were installed in yards on the East Haven side of the airport, which straddles the border between New Haven and East Haven.

“They sat in my yard for probably a half-hour each day” for two weeks, “just taking the data off the monitor,” said Carroll, who lives on Hyde Street, which runs parallel to Burr Street between Burr and Townsend Avenue.

She said she looks forward to learning the results of the study. Some of her neighbors would like to get double-paned windows, but Carroll said that because the terrain slopes up from Tweed toward Townsend Avenue on the New Haven side, she doubts that a noise barrier would help.

It would have to be very high in order to make a difference, she said.

Source:   http://www.nhregister.com

Injured men die in Quebec float plane crash

Two men rushed to hospital after their floatplane crashed north of Forestville, Que, on Monday have died.

Forestville Quebec The incident happened near a lake on the North Shore.

The two men, one in his 50s and the other in his 20s, were located by a Canadian Forces rescue team and rushed to hospital in Baie-Comeau.

Their deaths were confirmed this morning.

The Sureté du Québec said it's still unclear what caused the crash.


http://www.cbc.ca

Plane becomes entangled with power lines, crashes in Mesa County, Colorado


 
A small aircraft crashed in Glad Park when it became entangled in power lines on September 18, 2012.
 (Mesa County Sheriff's Office)



 
GLADE PARK, Colo. (KKCO) -- A small plane has crashed in the Glade Park area. 

 It happened around 10:15 a.m. at 15801 Pinyon Park Lane.

According to the Mesa County Sheriff's Office, Glade Park resident James Lee Dittrick, 74, was flying his ultralight plane from a private airstrip when strong winds blew it into the power lines nearby.

It got tangled and crashed one quarter mile away from where he took off.

He was the only one on board at the time, and he walked away from the wreckage with just a scratch on his face.

Grand Valley Power is on the scene to fix the downed power lines. Officials say they have not gotten any reports of power outages, but if your electricity goes out, call the power company immediately.
 

 MESA COUNTY, Colo. — A small plane was in the process of taking off from when it became entangled in power lines and crashed in the Glade Park area Tuesday morning. 

 According to the Mesa County Sheriff’s Office, the plane was leaving from a private air strip when strong winds blew it into power lines at approximately 10:15 a.m.

The plane crashed near 15860 Pinyon Park Lane as a result of being tangled in the lines, according to authorities.

Police could not confirm how many individuals were abroad the plane, but did say that there were no injuries. In fact, police witnessed the plane’s pilot walking around at the scene of the crash.
 

 GLADE PARK, Colo - Around 10:30 a.m., KJCT heard reports of a small plane crash near Glade Park.

Our crew on scene is gathering more information and has learned that there was one person flying the Ultralight Aircraft. He wasn't injured in the crash.

The crash occurred on Pinyon Park Lane, approximately 3 to four miles north of the Glade Park Store.

According to emergency personnel, the pilot was taking off from a private runway when he caught a freak gust of wind that caused the wing to dip.

The plane then hit power lines before crashing to the ground.

Residents of Glade Park are without power. There's no word how long it will be before power is restored.

Continue to follow KJCT News 8 as we learn more details.


GLADE PARK, Colo. A man crashes his plane in a Glade Park field and walks away with a mere scratch on his face.

 According to the Mesa County Sheriff's Office, deputies got a call around 10:45 a.m. Tuesday, from a Glade Park resident who watched a small plane crash into a nearby field. When deputies arrived on scene, they found the plane tangled in power lines.

Officials say the pilot, 74-year-old James Lee Dittrick, is a Glade Park resident and was the only person on board. Dittrick suffered a scratch on his face but was not taken to the hospital.

Officials say Dittrick took off from the Glade Park air strip that is less than a 1/4 mile away from where he crashed.

Grand Valley Power is on the scene of the crash, and temporary power outages to the area are possible as the work to clear the plane from the tangled power lines.

Indian River County commissioners phase out $8 million Piper Aircraft incentive package

By Henry A. Stephens
Posted September 18, 2012 at 1:48 p.m.


VERO BEACH — Indian River County commissioners Tuesday phased out an incentive package that would have given $8 million to Piper Aircraft Inc. for remaining in the city, employing more than 1,000 workers and making Piper Altaire jets .
 

"This is nothing more than a bookkeeping matter," county Commissioner Peter O'Bryan said.

O'Bryan, the commission's economic-development liaison, won a 5-0 vote on his motion to move the $8 million from the incentive fund back to the unrestricted reserves, where County Administrator Joe Baird said it would be treated as cash.

The commission in 2008 agreed to pay up to $12 million to Piper, and then-Gov. Charlie Crist's administration agreed to pay $20 million, in installments through 2016 if Piper would meet payroll and jobs benchmarks.

The company in 2008 employed 1,014 people, qualifying for the first $4 million from the county and $6.7 million from the state, but laid off enough people by the following summer to drop to 580 workers, below the county's requirements.

Piper officials in December, citing the global economic downturn, said they wouldn't be seeking the rest of the incentive package.


Source:   http://www.tcpalm.com

Inquiry into Ryanair incident in Spain

TIM O'BRIEN

Circumstances surrounding an incident involving a Ryanair plane at Madrid airport last weekend are to be jointly investigated by the Irish Aviation Authority and its Spanish counterpart, it was announced this afternoon.

The decision to hold a joint investigation came as a delegation from the Spanish ministry of development was briefed in Dublin on Irish oversight of the safety of Ryanair’s operations in Spain.

The visit of Spanish officials, led by the Spanish secretary general for transport, is the latest move in an ongoing row between Ryanair and the Spanish authorities over alleged safety issues.

On Sunday, a Ryanair plane which was covering a route between Paris Beauvais and Tenerife, landed at Madrid’s Barajas airport due to what the company described as a “small technical problem”. Ryanair apologised to the 159 passengers, who completed their journey after a two hour delay.

It has also emerged the Spanish ministry of development has sent a letter to the European Commissioner for Transport Siim Kallas, detailing its concerns with the airline’s aviation safety in relation to a number of previous incidents.

Ryanair in turn has accused the Spanish government of orchestrating a publicity campaign against it. The company has been increasing its presence in Spain in recent years and is now the largest carrier of passengers in the country.

Ryanair’s Michael O’Leary recently wrote to the Spanish development minister Ana Pastor calling on her to “take action against the leaking of false information” about the airline. He also invited her to send a delegation of officials to visit Ryanair facilities.

Today’s delegation was invited by the Department of Transport to discuss oversight of the airline’s operations in Spain. The Irish authorities also invited their Spanish counterparts to visit the Irish Aviation Authority and to be briefed in detail on safety oversight issues with particular regard to Ryanair.

After the visit, Minister for Transport Leo Varadkar backed Ryanair’s safety record and pointed to the Irish Aviation Authority’s “rigorous” oversight of, and “satisfaction” with Ryanair’s safety standards.

A statement issued on Mr Varadkar’s behalf said Ryanair’s safety standards were “on a par with the safest airlines in Europe”.

The statement went on to say there was “good cooperation between the Irish Aviation Authority and its Spanish counterpart AESA, and it was agreed that the two organisations will develop a memorandum of understanding on increased cooperation. The directors general of civil aviation in the two jurisdictions will also meet regularly”.

In response to the arrival of the Spanish delegation today, Ryanair said it welcomed the transport authority’s statement “which affirms that Ryanair’s safety standards are on par with the safest airlines in Europe.”

It said the airline had also invited the Spanish Ministry to send a team of inspectors to Dublin to correct any “misplaced concerns about Ryanair’s compliance with Europe’s highest operating and maintenance standards by providing them with unfettered access to Ryanair operating, maintenance and flight training facilities and unlimited access to Ryanair’s safety, flight management, engineering and maintenance personnel.”

 Source:   http://www.irishtimes.com

Beechcraft 400 Beechjet, Dewberry Air LLC, N428JD: Accident occurred September 18, 2012 in Macon, Georgia

Aviation Accident Final Report - National Transportation Safety Board: http://app.ntsb.gov/pdf 

Docket And Docket Items -   National Transportation Safety Board:   http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms

Aviation Accident Data Summary  -  National Transportation Safety Board:   http://app.ntsb.gov/pdf

http://registry.faa.gov /N428JD

NTSB Identification: ERA12FA567 
 14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, September 18, 2012 in Macon, GA
Probable Cause Approval Date: 06/23/2014
Aircraft: BEECH 400, registration: N428JD
Injuries: 2 Minor,1 Uninjured.

NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

The pilot was seated in the left seat and was the flying pilot. The pilots reported that prior to departure, there were no known mechanical malfunctions or abnormalities with the airplane, including the brakes, flaps, anti-skid, or thrust reversers. The copilot, who was the pilot monitoring, calculated a Vref speed of 108 knots for the landing weight. Postaccident analysis determined that a more precise Vref based on weight would have been 110 knots. Both pilots reported that they set their airspeed index bugs to 108 knots about 11 miles from the airport.

The pilot reported that the airplane touched down about 1,000 feet from the approach end of the runway. Both crewmembers reported that, although they used maximum thrust reversers, brakes, and ground spoilers, they could feel a “pulsation” in the brake system and that the airplane hydroplaned. The airplane overran the wet runway with standing water and came to rest 283 feet beyond the paved portion of the runway in a treed area off the airport.

Postaccident examination of the airspeed index bugs revealed that the pilot’s was set to 115 knots and that the copilot’s was set to 105 knots, which correlated with their calculated and reported V1 and V2 departure speeds. It is likely that they did not move the airspeed bugs during the approach to landing. Postaccident testing of the brake system components did not reveal any mechanical malfunctions or abnormalities that would have precluded normal operation.

Based on radar data, the airplane was likely 15 to 19 knots above the reference speed of 110 knots when it crossed the runway threshold. The data further revealed that the approach was flown with about a 4-degree glideslope approach angle instead of the recommended 3-degree glideslope angle. The pilots reported that the precision approach path indicator lights, which would have provided an approximate 3-degree approach, became inoperable shortly after activation. Although the touchdown location could not be accurately determined, given the approximate glideslope and the excessive speed, the airplane likely floated before touching down.

It is also likely that the pilots, familiar with landing at their home airport, which is configured with a grooved runway that mitigates wet runway conditions more effectively, relied on their past wet runway experience and failed to calculate their landing distance using the appropriate performance chart for the contaminated runway. Based on the airplane’s performance charts, on a contaminated runway, an airplane with a Vref of 110 knots would need a 4,800-foot runway; at Vref + 10 knots, the airplane would need 6,100 feet to land. The runway was 4,694 feet long. Hence, the lack of a clear understanding of the actual wet runway landing distance necessary to stop and the excessive approach speed resulted in the airplane crossing the approach end of the runway at a speed and flight profile unsuitable for the wet runway condition and without sufficient distance available to stop. Further, the pilots exhibited poor crew resource management by not using the appropriate chart for the contaminated runway, not recognizing the runway was too short based on the conditions, failing to reset their airspeed bugs before the approach, and not recognizing and addressing the excess approach speed.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot’s failure to maintain proper airspeed, which resulted in the airplane touching down too fast on the wet runway with inadequate runway remaining to stop and a subsequent runway overrun. Contributing to the landing overrun were the flight crewmembers’ failure to correctly use the appropriate performance chart to calculate the runway required to stop on a contaminated runway and their general lack of proper crew resource management.


HISTORY OF FLIGHT

On September 18, 2012, about 1003 eastern daylight time (EDT), a Beech 400, N428JD, was substantially damaged when it overran runway 28 during landing at Macon Downtown Airport (MAC), Macon, Georgia. The airplane departed from Charleston Air Force Base/International Airport (CHS), Charleston, South Carolina, about 0930. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan was filed. Both Airline Transport Pilots (ATP) and one passenger sustained minor injuries. The airplane was owned by Dewberry, LLC and operated by The Aviation Department. The corporate flight was conducted under the provisions of Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 91.

According to an interview with the pilots, they arrived at DeKalb-Peachtree Airport (PDK), Atlanta, Georgia, which was their home base airport, about 0400, and then drove about 4 1/2 hours to CHS for the 0930 flight. The flight departed on time, the airspeed index bug was set on the co-pilot's airspeed for a decision takeoff speed (V1) of about 102 knots and a single-engine climb speed (V2) on the pilot's side of 115 knots. The flight climbed to 16,000 feet prior to beginning the descent into MAC. When the flight was about 11 miles from the airport the flight crew visually acquired the airport and cancelled their IFR clearance with the Macon Radar Approach controller and proceeded to the airport visually. The second-in-command activated the runway lights utilizing the common traffic advisory frequency for the airport. Both crewmembers reported that about 3 seconds following activation of the lights and the precision approach path indicator (PAPI) lights, the PAPI lights turned off and would not reactivate. During the approach, the calculated reference speed (Vref) was 108 knots and was set on both pilots' airspeed indicator utilizing the index bug that moved around the outside face of the airspeed instrument. The landing was within the first 1,000 feet of the runway and during the landing rollout the airplane began to "hydroplane" since there was visible standing water on the runway and the water was "funneling into the middle." Maximum reverse thrust, braking, and ground spoilers were deployed; however, both pilots reported a "pulsation" in the brake system. The airplane departed the end of the runway into the grass, went down an embankment, across a road, and into trees. They further added that the airplane "hit hard" at the bottom of the embankment. They also reported that there were no mechanical malfunctions with the airplane prior to the landing.

According to an eyewitness statement, a few minutes prior to the airplane landing, the airport experienced a rain shower with a "heavy downpour." The witness reported observing the airplane on approach, heard the engine thrust reverse, and then observed the airplane "engulfed in a large ball of water vapor." However, he did not observe the airplane as it departed the end of the runway. Another witness was located in a hangar on the west side of the airport and heard the airplane, looked outside and then saw the airplane with the reverse thrusters deployed. He watched it depart the end of the runway and travel into the nearby woods.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

Pilot

According to Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) records and the operator, the pilot, age 43, held an ATP certificate with a rating for multiengine land airplane, a commercial pilot certificate with a rating for airplane single-engine land, and held a type rating in the make and model of the accident airplane. He held a first class medical certificate, which was issued on August 21, 2012, that contained no waivers and no limitations. The pilot's most recent training in the accident make and model airplane was completed on December 7, 2012. The pilot reported that he had 7,350 total flight hours, of which 6,700 were as pilot in command. He reported having 4,600 total flight hours in the accident aircraft make and model, of which the entire amount was as pilot in command. He accrued 80 hours in the last 90 days of which 76 of those hours were in the accident airplane make and model, and 25 hours in the preceding 30 days.

The pilot reported during a postaccident interview that he was notified of the trip the day prior and that the flight was scheduled to depart CHS at 0930. The evening before he completed some preliminary work by obtaining weather information, notices to airman (NOTAMS) for both airports, and filed a flight plan for the flight. On the morning of the flight he woke up about 0330 and he and the copilot met each other at PDK at 0400 and drove to CHS. The pilot drove approximately 2 hours at which point they stopped, got some coffee, and then switched drivers. After arriving at the airplane, they performed their preflight inspections and about 0905 they received a text message from the passenger that he was about 5 minutes away. After loading up the passenger, his dog, and some golf clubs he had notified the passenger there was some weather in the Macon area over the airport; however, at the time of arrival, the "weather should be good." He was seated in the left front seat for the flight, which departed at 0930.

Co-Pilot

According to FAA records, the co-pilot held an ATP certificate with ratings for airplane single-engine land, multiengine land, and also held a type rating in the make and model of the accident airplane. He held a first class medical certificate, which was issued on November 2, 2011, and it contained no waivers and no limitations. He reported 2,536 total flight hours, of which 1,485 of those hours were as pilot in command. He reported having 425 total flight hours in the accident aircraft make and model and none as pilot in command. He accrued 31 hours in the preceding 90 days, 8 hours in the last 30 days, of which 6 were in the accident airplane make and model, and 1 hour in the preceding 24 hours.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The airplane, a Beech BE-400 model, serial number RJ-13, was a low-wing, twin-engine, tail-mounted jet aircraft certificated in the transport category. According to FAA records, the airplane was issued an airworthiness certificate on June 24, 1986, and was registered to the corporation on April 26, 2004, as N3113B and was changed to N428JD on November 23, 2004. It was equipped with two Pratt and Whitney JT15D-5 engines. According to maintenance records, both main tires were replaced on June 5, 2012 with a recorded Hobbs reading of 2155.7 hours and total cycles of 5747. Both left and right brake assemblies was overhauled and reinstalled on August 11, 2012, with a recorded time of 5387.6 total airframe hours and a Hobbs recording of 2177.6 hours, and at that time the airplane had 5771 total cycles. On June 15, 2011, a recorded "A" airframe inspection was accomplished with a reported total time of 5187 flight hours.

The airplane was equipped with electrically controlled hydraulically actuated fowler flaps that ran approximately the full span of each wing, and had 3 positions; 0, 10, and 30 degrees. Flap position transmitters located on the flap operating system sent a signal to the alternating current (AC) powered flap position indicator, and also to a flap asymmetry detector to stop flap operation if a 5 to 7 degree discrepancy occurred between the left and right flaps. The flap on each wing consisted of a main and aft flap, which were hydraulically actuated with one actuator per side. The main flap drove the aft flap; the left and right side of the flaps were interconnected by a cable system to ensure symmetric flap extension.

The airplane was equipped with hydraulically actuated retractable tricycle landing gear; each main landing wheel was equipped with full powered multiple segmented brakes operated by toe action of the pilot or co-pilot's rudder pedals. Application of the brake pedals at either seat position delivered pressure to the directly connected master cylinder, which transferred it to a power brake valve through mixing valves. The power brake amplified the master cylinder pressure thereby increasing the pressure to the respective main landing gear brake. An electrically controlled anti-skid system was also incorporated in the power brake system. A stationary wheel speed transducer was mounted inside each main gear axle, and it electrically sensed any change in wheel rotation speed. By design, with the system on, as a skid is detected by the stationary wheel speed transducer, an electrical signal was supplied to the system which releases brake pressure. The system continued to operate as long as the brake pressure was sufficient to result in the skidding condition, but not below approximately 10 knots.

A ground safety system was also installed, which allowed for safe operation of several systems either in flight or on ground, including thrust reverser application for ground use only. Control was accomplished by the left and right squat switches that connected or removed an electrical ground from the coils of ground safety relays, which in turn enabled or disabled their respective systems according to the position of the safety switches.

METEOROLOGICAL INFORMATION

The 0953 recorded weather observation at Middle Georgia Regional Airport (MCN), located approximately 9 miles to the south southwest of the accident location, included wind from 180 degrees at 6 knots, visibility 7 miles due to light rain, broken clouds at 11,000 feet above ground level (agl), temperature 22 degrees C, dew point 21 degrees C and barometric altimeter 29.97 inches of mercury.

AIRPORT INFORMATION

The airport was a publically owned airport and at the time of the accident and it did not have an operating control tower. The airport was equipped with two runways designated as runway 10/28 and 15/33. Runway10/28 was reported as "in good condition" and runway 15/33 was reported as "in fair condition." Runway 10/28 was a 4,694-foot-long by 150-foot-wide non-grooved runway and runway 15/33 was a 2,614-foot-long by 75-foot-wide runway. The airport elevation was 437 feet above mean sea level. The airport was not equipped with an instrument landing system (ILS) approach but was serviced with 5 non-precision approaches.

In 2008, Runway 10/28 was resurfaced; the runway edge markings were painted at 50 feet from the centerline, which allowed an actual runway width of 100 feet with 25 feet on each side paved but not available for use during takeoff or landing. On June 10, 2011, the Georgia Department of Transportation conducted an airport inspection. During the inspection, Runway 28 was noted as meeting the minimum state licensing requirement but failed to meet federal requirements of a 34:1 obstruction-free non-precision approach surface. The obstructions were noted as trees 510 feet from the threshold and 200 feet to the left of the extended runway centerline. There were also trees and brush located about 250 feet from the centerline near the approach and along the bank.

Runway 28 was equipped with a 4-light PAPI located on the left side of the runway. The PAPI system consisted of four identical light units, installed in a single row. Each unit produced a beam of light split horizontally, with aviation white light in the top sector of the beam and aviation red light in the bottom sector. The PAPI provided the pilot with glidepath information that could be used for day or night approaches. Maintaining the proper glidepath provides the pilot with adequate obstacle clearance and allowed the airplane to touchdown within a specified portion of the runway. At the time of the accident, the pilots reported to the NTSB Investigator in Charge that shortly after activation of the runway lights, the PAPI lights ceased operation. At the request of the NTSB, the Airport Authority investigated the PAPI lights and issued a notice to airman that the PAPI lights were not operational. Subsequent investigation of the lights revealed a blown circuit breaker. Four days following the accident the circuit breaker was repaired and the lights were considered operational.

Home Base Airport

According to the flight crew, they departed and landed regularly at PDK. At the time of the accident PDK had 4 runways, one of the runways was designated 3R/21L and according to the pilot this was the primary runway they utilized. The runway was 6,001 feet-long and 100 feet-wide, was concrete, grooved, and considered in good conditions. The landing distance available (LDA) on runway 21L was 4,801 feet and the LDA on runway 3R was 5,411. According to a postaccident interview with the pilots, the normal stopping distance at PDK when the runways were wet was between 3,000 and 4,000 feet.

FLIGHT RECORDERS

The cockpit voice recorder (CVR) was forwarded to the NTSB Vehicle Recorders Laboratory in Washington, DC for readout. The CVR was a Fairchild GA-100, serial number 01572. The thirty-minute recording consisted of four channels of audio information. Good quality audio information was recorded from both pilots mircrophones. The unit was undamaged and audio content was extracted without difficulty. A CVR group was not convened.

The entire recording was not transcribed and in agreement with the investigator-in-charge, a summary of key events recorded on the CVR was transcribed. The transcription began at 09:37:37 (hh:mm:ss) and the recording contained events from cruise, descent, landing, and the accident sequence.

At 09:39:30, the pilot monitoring (PM) stated that he ran the approach/descent checklist down to engine syncs item.

About three minutes later, air traffic control (ATC) cleared the flight to descend to 11,000 feet followed five minutes later with a clearance to descend to 8,000 feet.

At 09:48:44, ATC informed the crew that rain was over the field and cleared the flight to descend to 4000 feet.

During the next, approximately 8 minutes, the flight was cleared to descend to 3,000 feet and then 2,200 feet.

At 09:59:52, the crew reported the airport in sight and was cleared for the visual approach.

At 10:00:10, an increase in background noise similar to the landing gear being extended was noted.

At 10:00:14, the crew canceled their IFR flight plan.

At 10:00:27, the pilot flying (PF) called for flaps 20.

At 10:00:37, the PM called three green, no red.

At 10:01:11, the PF called for flaps 30

At 10:01:38, the PM reported that winds at "other airport" were "220 at 4 knots."

From 10:01:50 to 10:02:20, there were three distinct recordings of several microphone "clicks."

At 10:02:41, a 500 foot automated call out was recorded.

At 10:03:11, the PM called "ref and 10."

At 10:03:19, a sound similar to touchdown on the runway was recorded.

At 10:03:20, the PF called for speedbrakes and the PM confirmed.

At 10:03:23, the PM called "hydroplaning."

At 10:03:26, a sound of increasing engine thrust similar to thrust reverser operation was recorded.

At 10:03:42, a sound similar to the airplane exiting the runway was recorded.

At 10:03:57, a power interruption was recorded.

One second after the power was restored the aircraft movement stopped and 14 seconds after the power restoration the sounds similar to an engine being shutdown was recorded.

The CVR stopped recording about 4:47 minutes after the power restoration.

For additional information on the CVR and its audio recording, refer to the "Cockpit Voice Recorder Specialist's Summary Report," located in the public docket for this accident investigation.

An examination of the Garmin GPS 500 reported that the battery was too depleted to record and save data.

The pilot had a Garmin 496 GPS, which was downloaded at the NTSB Vehicle Recorder Laboratory. The unit included a built-in Jeppesen database and was capable of receiving XM Satellite radio information. The unit was examined, power was applied, and the recorded point, route and tracklog data was successfully downloaded. The last recorded data point was about 5 minutes prior to the accident; at that point, the airplane was at a recorded altitude of 2,946 feet and approximately 16 nautical miles to the east of MAC. The XM radio subscription was current when the unit was tested and downloaded; however, no historical information was recorded.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The airplane came to rest upright on a heading of 292 degrees, at the base of a tree that was approximately 7 inches in diameter, 283 feet from the paved portion of the runway. The wreckage was also located at 412 feet above mean sea level.

Examination of runway 28 revealed evidence of tire tracks, beginning approximately 1,000 feet from the departure end of the runway. The tire tracks were lighter in color than the surrounding pavement. The tire track associated with the right main landing gear tire was located 10 feet, 8 inches to the left of centerline and subsequently located to right of centerline, consistent with the inability to maintain directional control associated with hydroplaning. The tire tracks that crossed over white painted runway markings were white in color, consistent with the "steam cleaning" phenomenon associated with various types of hydroplaning. Subsequently, the tracks exited the end of the runway into the grass, continued 76 feet to the crest of an approximate 25 foot embankment, across a two-lane paved highway, which exhibited a gouge across the entire width of the road, through some brush, and came to rest in a wooded area. In total, the airplane traveled 123 feet, 6 inches past the end of the pavement, prior to coming to rest. The tire tracks were measured at 9 feet 5 inches from the center of the left tire track to the center of the right tire track. From the center of the right tire track to the center of the middle tire track was 4 feet 9 inches, which correlates to the dimensions of the accident airplane's tire tracks.

Nose Section

The nose of the airplane exhibited impact damage, which resulted in a breach of the avionics compartment. The nose gear was impact damaged and remained attached by an electrical bundle and two hydraulic lines. The nose gear tire pressure was tested and was noted as 110 psi. The nose strut oleo exhibited a slight bend to the right approximately 4 inches from the base of the strut.

Right Wing

The right wing exhibited minimal impact damage. The main flap exhibited deformation in the positive direction on the outboard approximately 2 feet. The flap was extended to the approximate full flap position, which was verified by the flap actuator. The right main landing gear was extended, was locked, and secure in the down position. The right main landing gear oleo strut was extended 3.75 inches. The right main tire pressure was noted at 104.5 psi and had a tread depth of 0.08 inches.

Empennage

The empennage exhibited crush damage on the underside aft of Station 251.09. Both engines remained attached to their respective nacelles, and were free of debris. One N1 fan blade on the No. 2 engine exhibited soft damage; however, all other N1 fan blades exhibited no damage and rotated freely at the compressor. The thrust reversers were in the stowed position. The crush damage exposed the rudder control cables and associated pulleys. The cable was routed properly over the pulleys; however, due to the binding of the cables it could not be actuated. The cables aft of the pulleys were actuated and continuity was confirmed to the rudder. The cargo door was in the open position and the floor to the cargo bay was deformed in the positive direction, which correlated to the crush damage on the underneath side of the empennage. The hydraulic level was visually checked after repositioning the airplane to a level surface and a slight nose down attitude revealed the hydraulic fluid was slightly over half full quantity. The hydraulic shut off valves were in the closed position.

The horizontal stabilizer trim actuator was examined and 27 threads were exposed on the upper portion of the drive and 5 or 6 threads were exposed on the lower portion of the drive, which correlated to a negative 9.88 degree leading edge angle or almost a full nose up trim.

Left Wing

The left wing exhibited minimal impact damage to the leading edge, with slight dents similar in dimension to the brush and small sapling trees located in the vicinity of the accident site. The flap actuator was measured at 3.55 inches which correlated to a 30 degree or full flap position. The left main landing gear was extended, was locked, and secure in the down position. The main landing gear oleo strut was extended 1.5 inches. The left main landing gear had 109.5 psi in the tires and a tread depth of 0.09 inches.

Fuselage

The fuselage remained intact with breech deformation located at Station 251.09 and buckling continued aft of that breech to the empennage. The right side emergency exit was opened and the door was located on the ground, forward of the right wing. The door pins were operated and serviceable. The main cabin door was found opened, remained attached at the hinge, and operated smoothly. The locking mechanism was operational. The main cabin door was utilized as the point of egress for the occupants.

Cabin

The cabin appeared to be unbreeched and consisted of 9 passenger seats and 2 tray tables. The tray table on the right side, as viewed from the tail looking forward, remained extended and secured to the side of the cabin wall. The forward facing seat on the right side was utilized by the passenger, it remained attached, the seat belt was unbuckled and a water bottle was located in the associated bottle holder. No seats exhibited signs of the deformation and no seat belts exhibited signs of webstreching.

Cockpit

The cockpit remained intact; however, the floor was buckled in the positive and aft direction and the instrument panel was bowed inward toward the cockpit. Both seats remained intact, no deformation was noted, and the four-point, seat belt and shoulder harness, were unbuckled with no evidence of webstreching. Roll control continuity was confirmed from the control yoke to the left and right wing spoiler-speed brakes. It was noted that there was full roll authority to the right with normal travel and the left side had full down authority but only was able to maintain about one-half up authority due to binding. The left throttle lever was free to move in normal operation; however, continuity could not be confirmed to the hydro mechanical unit (HMU). The right throttle lever was jammed and could not be moved due to impact damage. Both airspeed indicators remained intact and the index bug on each instrument remained attached. The airspeed index bug on the pilot side indicated 115 knots and the index bug on the co-pilot side indicated 105 knots.

TEST AND RESEARCH

Systems Group Report

The condition of the braking system was documented on scene. In addition, the power brake valve, wheel speed transducers, antiskid control box, and brakes were removed for further examination. Examination of the removed items did not reveal any abnormalities or malfunctions that would have precluded normal operation. For further information on the examination of the braking system, see the "Systems Group Chairman Report" located in the docket associated with this accident.

Performance Study

Airplane performance information provided by the manufacturer in the Airplane Flight Manual
(AFM) and its supplements were utilized to determine landing distance. The landing distances published in the AFM supplement assumed the airplane was 50 ft. high and at Vref when it crossed the runway threshold. Higher heights above the runway, or speeds faster than Vref, could result in a "long" landing and longer landing distances. A steep approach (flight path above PAPI 3° glide slope) could result in excessive height over the threshold, faster than nominal approach speeds, or both. Radar data indicated that the landing was long and the airplane may have been 15 to 19 knots fast relative to a reference speed of 110 knots. About 1.25 nm from the runway threshold radar data indicated that the airplane was aligned with the runway, and flew an approximate 4° glide slope approach angle. Although radar data indicated that the ground speed was decreasing, the approximate speed while crossing the runway threshold was about 125 knots. However, due to uncertainty in the wind direction and speed, an exact speed could not be ascertained.

According to the performance chart titled "LANDING DISTANCE WET OR COMPACTED SNOW," which was located in the AFM in the section titled "Non-FAA Approved," the correlated approach reference speed for a 13,500 pound airplane would have been 110 knots. That chart revealed that the required landing distance at an approach speed of Vref would have been about 4,800 feet and a landing distance of about 6,100 feet if the approach speed was flown at Vref+10 knots.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Weight and Balance

According to numbers obtained from the airplane, pilots, and the FAA, the landing weight of the airplane was 13,683 pounds and the center of gravity (CG) was located 20.91 inches aft of the datum. At the time of the accident the airplane was considered to be within the CG envelope.

CFR Part 91.103

CFR Part 91.103 stated in part, "Preflight Action Each pilot in command shall, before beginning a flight, become familiar with all available information concerning that flight. This information must include –
For a flight under IFR or a flight not in the vicinity of an airport, weather reports and forecasts, fuel requirements, alternatives available if the planned flight cannot be completed, and any known traffic delays of which the pilot in command has been advised by ATC:
For any flight, runway lengths at airports of intended use, and the following takeoff and landing distance information:
For a civil aircraft for which an approved Airplane or Rotorcraft Flight Manual containing takeoff and landing distance data is required, the takeoff and landing data contained therein"

FAA-H-8083-3A

FAA publication FAA-H-8083-3A, "Airplane Flying Handbook" defined hydroplaning as "A condition that exists when landing on a surface with standing water deeper than the tread depth of the tires. When the brakes are applied, there is a possibility that the brake will lock up and the tire will ride on the surface of the water, much like a water ski. When the tires are hydroplaning directional and braking action are virtually impossible. An effective anti-skid system can minimize the effects of hydroplaning."

In Chapter 8, "Approaches and Landings, " it stated in part, "…The three basic types of hydroplaning are dynamic hydroplaning, reverted rubber hydroplaning, and viscous hydroplaning…Dynamic hydroplaning is a relatively high-speed phenomenon that occurs when there is a film of water on the runway that is at least one-tenth inch deep. As the speed of the airplane and the depth of the water increase, the water layer builds up an increasing resistance to displacement, resulting in the formation of a wedge of water beneath the tire. At some speed, termed the hydroplaning speed (Vp), the water pressure equals the weight of the airplane and the tire is lifted off the runway surface. In this condition, the tires no longer contribute to direction control and braking action is nil. Dynamic hydroplaning is related to tire inflation pressure. Data obtained during hydroplaning test have shown the minimum dynamic hydroplaning speed (Vp) of a tire to be 8.6 times the square root of the tire pressure in pounds per square inch (PSI)…It is important to note that the calculated speed referred to above is for the start of dynamic hydroplaning…Reverted rubber (steam) hydroplaning occurs during heavy braking that results in a prolonged lock-wheel skid. Only a thin film of water on the runway is required to facilitate this type of hydroplaning. The tire skidding generates enough heat to cause the rubber in contact with the runway to revert to its original uncured stated. The reverted rubber acts as seal between the tire and the runway, and delays water exit from the tire footprint area. The water heats and is converted to steam which supports the tire off the runway. Reverted rubber hydroplaning frequently follows an encounter with dynamic hydroplaning…Viscous hydroplaning is due to the viscous properties of water. A thin film of fluid no more than one thousandths of an inch in depth is all that is needed. The tire cannot penetrate the fluid and the tire rolls on top of the film. This can occur at a much lower speed than dynamic hydroplane, but requires a smooth or smooth acting surface such as asphalt of a touchdown area coated with the accumulated rubber of past landings. Such a surface can have the same friction coefficient as wet ice. When confronted with the possibility of hydroplaning, it is best to land on a grooved runway (if available). Touchdown speed should be as slow as possible consistent with safety…"

AFM Section VI Performance

According to the definitions located at the beginning of the section, "landing field length" was defined as "the distance from a point 50 feet above the runway surface to the point at which the airplane can come to a full stop under the existing conditions. Assumes a dry, hard-surfaced runway." During the postaccident interview, with the pilot, co-pilot, and a representative of the operator, the pilot stated there "is not an FAA approved wet runway chart." The representative for the operator stated that "Hawker Beech put out a contaminated runway performance chart but it was never FAA approved… and not one that you can legally use." Review of Federal Regulations revealed that the FAA does not require nor restrict the use of wet and contaminated runway performance data. However, the manufacturer developed and approved the data for international operators who have a regulatory requirement to utilize that data. That data is supplied as manufacturer approved performance data.

Advisory Circular (AC) 91-79, "Runway Overrun Prevention"

According to AC 91-79, its purpose was to "provide ways for pilots and operators of turbine-powered airplanes to identify, understand, and mitigate risks associated with runway overruns during the landing phase of flight. It also provides operators with detailed information that may be used to develop company standard operating procedures (SOP's) to mitigate those risks." Item 6, "Hazards Associated with Runway Overruns" references a study of FAA and NTSB data associated with runway overruns and indicated that in part "…that the following hazards may increase the risk of a runway overrun:
• nonstabilized approach
• excess airspeed
• landing beyond the intended touchdown point
• failure to assess required landing distance to account for slippery or contaminated runway conditions or any changed conditions existing at the time of landing."

In Appendix 1 of AC 91-79, Item 4, "Landing Performance and Standard Operating Procedures" stated in part "…Landing performance is influenced by a multitude of variable. Airplane weight and configuration, use of deceleration devices, airport elevation, atmospheric temperature, wind, runway length, runway slope, and runway surface condition (i.e. dry, wet, contaminated, improved, unimproved, grass, etc.) are all factors in determining landing performance… landing distances determined during certification tests are aimed at demonstrating the shortest landing distances for a given airplane weight with a test pilot at the controls and are established with full awareness that operational rules for normal operations require the addition of factors to determine minimum operational field length…Therefore, the landing distances determined under § 23.75 and 25.125 are much shorter than the landing distances achieved in normal operations…"

Table 2, "Rule of Thumb" on Landing Distance Calculations of the AC 91-79 indicated in part that "a Non-stabilized approach is unpredictable on determining the landing distance…that for every 10 knots of excessive airspeed add 500 feet of landing distance for a wet runway… to add an additional 2,500 feet per 10 knots of excessive airspeed to account for floating during an extended flare."

Advisory Circular (AC) 120-51E "Crew Resource Management Training"

According to AC 120-51E, "CRM [Crew Resource Management] training focuses on situation awareness, communication skills, teamwork, task allocation, and decision making within a comprehensive framework of standard operating procedures (SOP)." Paragraph 7 "Background" stated in part that "investigations into the causes of air carrier accidents have shown that human error is a contributing factor in 60 to 80 percent of all air carrier accidents and incidents. Many problems encountered by flightcrews had very little to do with the technical aspect of operating in a multi-person cockpit, rather, problems are associated with poor group decision making, ineffective communication, inadequate leadership, and poor task or resource management." Paragraph 16(a) "Crew Monitoring and Cross-Checking" stated in part "Several studies of crew performance, incidents, and accidents have identified inadequate flightcrew monitoring and cross-checking as a problem for aviation safety. Therefore to ensure the highest levels of safety, each flight crewmember must carefully monitor the aircraft's flight path and systems and actively cross-check the actions of other crewmembers. Effective monitoring and cross-checking can be the last line of defense that prevents an accident because detecting an error or unsafe situation may break the chain of events leading to an accident. This monitoring function is always essential, and particularly so during approach and landing…."

Advisory Circular 150/5300-13A "Airport Design," provides guidance and specific standards for airport geometric and design criteria. Some of the specific standards required traverse grades. However, the 10/28 runway rehabilitation project that was accomplished, was funded with state and local funding, therefore the airport was not required to use the guidance set forth for the runway paving segment.

On February 25, 2013, runway laser scan data was collected by a private company commissioned by the airport authority. Noted from the survey was that the contour for runway 10/28 had no crown section, most of the transverse grades on the 100-foot-wide runway sloped in one direction, and several areas indicated little to no slope. It was further noted in the FAA advisory circular standards that transverse slopes should be adequate to prevent the accumulation of water on the surface. Water will pond in flat areas and in some areas with transverse grades of less than 1.0%.


NTSB Identification: ERA12FA567 
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Tuesday, September 18, 2012 in Macon, GA
Aircraft: BEECH 400, registration: N428JD
Injuries: 2 Minor,1 Uninjured.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On September 18, 2012, about 1003 eastern daylight time, a Beech 400, N428JD, was substantially damaged when it overran runway 28 during landing at Macon Downtown Airport (MAC), Macon, Georgia. The airplane had departed from Charleston Air Force Base/International Airport (CHS), Charleston, South Carolina about 0930. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed and an instrument flight rules (IFR) flight plan had been filed. Both Airline Transport Pilots and one passenger sustained minor injuries. The corporate flight was conducted under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to an interview with the pilots, during the approach the calculated speed was 108 knots. They reported the airport in sight to Macon Air Traffic Control (ATC) Approach Radar Control and canceled the IFR flight plan. The landing was within the first 1,000 feet of the runway and there was water visible on the runway. Maximum reverse thrust, braking, and ground spoilers were deployed; however, both pilots reported a "pulsation" in the brake system. The airplane departed the end of the runway, traveled into the grass, went down an embankment, across the road, and into the trees. They further added that the airplane "hit hard" at the bottom of the embankment.

Examination of the paved portion of the landing runway revealed that beginning approximately 1,000 feet from the departure end of the runway, evidence of tire tracks were visible. The tire tracks were observed veering to the left of the centerline and then veering to the right of centerline. Subsequently, the tracks exited the end of the runway into the grass, traveled to the crest of, and subsequently down an approximate 25-foot embankment, traveled across a two-lane paved highway, through some brush prior to coming to a rest. The airplane came to rest upright and at the base of a tree 283 feet from the paved portion of the runway and on a heading of 292 degrees.

The cockpit voice recorder, Garmin 500 global positioning unit, Power Brake Valve, Antiskid unit, both wheel speed transducers, brake units, and hydraulic valve package, were retained by the NTSB for further examination.

 The damaged nose section of the jet.

An investigator from the FAA carries the box carrying the flight data recorder, often called the black box, past the embankment the jet dropped from after failing to stop on the Downtown Macon Airport runway. 


 
John Dewberry credits a pilot for saving his life and says things could have gone much worse had his plane flipped as it crashed into woods.


The pilot of the Beech 400, Brian Landers, of Atlanta, was trapped and had to be cut out by firefighters. The co-pilot, Joel Perkins, also of Atlanta, suffered minor injuries. Landers and Dewberry, who authorities said was in Macon on a business trip, were taken to The Medical Center of Central Georgia for evaluation.

 Dewberry, 47, on Thursday described the incident this way to WXIA, “It would be like driving a car off a 40-foot embankment at 100 miles an hour then basically hitting the highway and falling off the other side.”

He told WXIA he feels fortunate following the incident.

“If you think about what could have happened, right, if one of the wings' tips hits and you start flipping, we’re not having this interview…”

Dewberry credits the pilot with saving his life and added that he had, in fact, requested the same pilot for a flight he planned to make Thursday night on another leased plane to Charleston.


 One of Atlanta's most prominent businessmen and former Georgia Tech quarterback was involved in a small plane crash Tuesday morning in Macon.

47-year-old Dewberry was on the Beech Jet 400 Twin Engine plane that crashed at Macon's Herbert Smart Airport.

He was not seriously injured.

Airport official Matthew Singletary says the plane ran off the runway and crashed into the woods shortly after 10a.m.

Becky Beaman, spokeswoman for the Charleston International Airport, says the plane took off from Charleston Tuesday morning at 9:24 a.m.  She cites the cause of the crash as hydroplaning as it attempted to land at the Macon Downtown Airport.

Beaman says there were three passengers on-board the plane, which is owned by a company registered in Delaware.


 The wreckage of the private jet that crashed off the end of the runway at the Downtown Macon Airport on Tuesday is loaded onto a flatbed trailer near where it left the runway Wednesday afternoon. 


 Officials have removed the corporate plane that crashed Tuesday morning at Herbert Smart Airport.   Becky Beaman, spokeswoman for the Charleston International Airport, says the plane took off from Charleston at 9:24 a.m. She cites the cause of the crash as hydroplaning as it attempted to land at the Macon Downtown Airport.

Bibb County Sheriff's Office says the plane was piloted by Brian Landers, with co-pilot Joel Perkins, and one passenger; John Dewberry, who also owns the jet.
 

A National Transportation Safety Board investigator has started examining the corporate jet that hydroplaned Tuesday after touching down at the Macon Downtown Airport. 

 The plane crossed an embankment and Ocmulgee East Boulevard before crashing into a wooded area at about 10:05 a.m. Tuesday, according to the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office. Although firefighters had to cut the pilot out of the plane, the pilot, co-pilot and passenger were not seriously injured.

Shawn Etcher, a NTSB air safety investigator, said the cockpit voice recorder and a GPS box already have been removed from the jet and are on the way to a lab in Washington, D.C. for downloading and analysis.

Although the nose of the jet is quite damaged, the rest of the plane is in good enough condition to check for mechanical problems, he said.

“Overall the airplane is actually in not too bad a shape,” Etcher said, “It’s good enough to give us a lot of information that we need.”

Etcher said he’ll document the plane’s condition before it’s moved.

As part of his investigation, he also will check weather conditions, he said.

The plane landed during a heavy downpour and struck a puddle of water, according to the sheriff’s office.

Etcher said logistics for the airport, including the runway length, will be compared with performance numbers for the jet.

“That’s going to be in the days and weeks to come,” he said.

A salvage company is making plans to move the plane to a secure facility in Griffin for further examination, Etcher said.

The jet likely will be moved Thursday, he said.

The section of Ocmulgee East Boulevard near the airport will be closed for the move, according to the sheriff’s office.


Investigators from the NTSB and FAA, as well as aircraft salvage experts, look over the wreck of the private jet that crashed off of Ocmulgee East Boulevard while landing at the Downtown Macon Airport in bad weather the day before. 


Beechcraft 400A Beechjet, N428JD 


 
Former Georgia Tech Quarterback John Dewberry. 
 Beechcraft 400A Beechjet (N428JD) is owned by Dewberry Capital, a real estate company headquartered in Atlanta.
~



 A Beech 400 Jet owned by the Dewberry Air Corporation was attempting to land at the Herbert Smart Airport during a heavy down pour of rain. It hydroplaned, went over an embankment, crossed Ocmulgee East Blvd, and stopped in a wooded area, approximately 30 yards away, carrying Brian Landers, Joel Perkins, and John Dewberry. 





 First responders on the scene of the crash at the Macon Downtown Airport. 


 First responders on the scene of the crash at the Macon Downtown Airport.

 First responders on the scene of the crash at the Macon Downtown Airport. 

 First responders on the scene of the crash at the Macon Downtown Airport.



 First responders on the scene of the crash at the Macon Downtown Airport. 



Satellite view of the Macon Downtown Airport from Google Maps.

A National Transportation Safety Board investigator has started examining the corporate jet that hydroplaned Tuesday after touching down at the Macon Downtown Airport.  The plane crossed an embankment and Ocmulgee East Boulevard before crashing into a wooded area at about 10:05 a.m. Tuesday, according to the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office. Although firefighters had to cut the pilot out of the plane, the pilot, co-pilot and passenger were not seriously injured.

Shawn Etcher, a NTSB air safety investigator, said the cockpit voice recorder and a GPS box already have been removed from the jet and are on the way to a lab in Washington, D.C. for downloading and analysis.  Although the nose of the jet is quite damaged, the rest of the plane is in good enough condition to check for mechanical problems, he said.

“Overall the airplane is actually in not too bad a shape,” Etcher said, “It’s good enough to give us a lot of information that we need.”  Etcher said he’ll document the plane’s condition before it’s moved. As part of his investigation, he also will check weather conditions, he said.   The plane landed during a heavy downpour and struck a puddle of water, according to the sheriff’s office.

Etcher said logistics for the airport, including the runway length, will be compared with performance numbers for the jet.  “That’s going to be in the days and weeks to come,” he said.   A salvage company is making plans to move the plane to a secure facility in Griffin for further examination, Etcher said.  The jet likely will be moved Thursday, he said.  The section of Ocmulgee East Boulevard near the airport will be closed for the move, according to the sheriff’s office.


MACON, Ga. — One of Atlanta’s most prominent businessmen and former Georgia Tech quarterback was involved in a plane crash Tuesday morning in Macon. 

 47-year-old John Dewberry was on the Beech Jet 400 Twin Engine plane that crashed at Macon’s Herbert Smart Airport.

He was not seriously injured.

Airport official Matthew Singletary says the plane ran off the runway and crashed into the woods shortly after 10a.m.

Becky Beaman, spokeswoman for the Charleston International Airport, says the plane took off from Charleston Tuesday morning at 9:24 a.m. She cites the cause of the crash as hydroplaning as it attempted to land at the Macon Downtown Airport.

Beaman says there were three passengers on-board the plane, which is owned by a company registered in Delaware.

Sheriff’s office spokesman Sean DeFoe told 13WMAZ’s Austin Lewis that the plane is owned by the Dewberry Air LLc and that the passengers were in town for a business trip.


A corporate jet hydroplaned while landing at the Macon Downtown Airport Tuesday morning, crossed an embankment and Ocmulgee East Boulevard and crashed in a wooded area, according to the Bibb County Sheriff’s Office.

 The jet, a Beech 400, attempted a landing at about 10:05 a.m., said Lt. Sean DeFoe.

“There was a heavy downpour of rain that caused a pocket of water to stand on the roadway,” he said.

The pilots engaged the brakes, but “just like you would do driving a car, the brakes wouldn’t work,” DeFoe said.

The pilot was trapped and had to be cut out of the plane by firefighters. The co-pilot sustained minor injuries. The pilot, co-pilot and a passenger were taken to The Medical Center of Central Georgia for evaluation, he said.

Ocmulgee East Boulevard was blocked near the wreck site for nearly three hours. It reopened at about 12:45 p.m., but will close again after a Federal Aviation Administration investigator surveys the wreckage, likely later Tuesday, DeFoe said.

Eddie Lambert said he went to the Dollar General on Ocmulgee East Boulevard to buy a light bulb Tuesday morning and returned home to find a bunch of people standing in the road.

A neighbor told him that the jet had crashed in woods about 300 yards from his home, he said.

FAA records show the jet, a 1986 model, is registered to Dewberry Air LLC of Dover, Del.

The jet is owned by Dewberry Capital, a real estate company headquartered in Atlanta.

The passenger, whose name has not been released, was traveling to Macon for business, DeFoe said.

The nine-seat jet left Charleston, S.C. at 9:24 a.m., according to the Flight Aware flight-tracking website.

Traffic crashes slowed morning commutes in Bibb County following crashes on Eisenhower Parkway at Fulton Mill Road, Riverside Drive, just north of Tom Hill Sr. Boulevard and at Interstate 75 in the northbound lanes near mile marker 164, according to local law enforcement.

Rain pooling on Interstate 75 south also slowed traffic Tuesday morning.

In Baldwin County, storms toppled trees and downed power lines, according the Baldwin County Sheriff’s Office.

Georgia Power reported 1,400 power outages in Middle Georgia Tuesday morning. Of those, 1,300 were in Baldwin County.

Power is expected to be restored between noon and 1 p.m., said Carol Boatright, a Georgia Power spokeswoman.

Writers Linda Morris and Joe Kovac Jr. contributed to this report. Photographer Jason Vorhees contributed to this report.

An official at the Macon Downtown Airport says a plane ran off the runway and crashed into the woods.


 There are no known casualties and the pilot is communicating with the tower, says Matthew Singletary of Fixed Base Operations at the Macon Downtown Airport. It happened around 10:05 a.m.

Becky Beaman, spokeswoman for the Charleston International Airport, says the plane took off from Charleston this morning at 9:24 a.m. She cites the cause of the crash as hydroplaning as it attempted to land at the Macon Downtown Airport.

Beaman says there were three passengers on-board the plane, which is owned by a company registered in Delaware.

Sheriff's office spokesman Sean DeFoe told 13WMAZ's Austin Lewis that the plane is owned by the Dewberry Air corporation and that the passengers were in town for a business trip.

The aircraft is a Beech Jet 400 Twin Engine plane, Singletary says.

The Macon-Bibb Fire Department and Bibb County Sheriff's Office are on the scene.

The National Transportation and Safety Board is expected to arrive today to investigate the crash.

Boeing B75N1, N4473N: Accident occurred July 03, 2011 in Wetmore, Colorado

 
Sidney Emmert




DENVER (AP) -- Federal aviation investigators say pilot error was the likely cause of a vintage-biplane crash that killed the pilot and injured a passenger in south-central Colorado last year. The National Transportation Safety Board's final report on the crash says the probable cause was the pilot's failure to maintain clearance from the ground while maneuvering at low altitude. The report was issued last week. The 1947 Boeing two-seater crashed on July 3, 2011, near Wetmore in the San Isabel National Forest about 110 miles south of Denver. The crash killed 50-year-old Sidney Emmert of Oklahoma City. His passenger, Robert Hamilton of Wetmore, was treated at a Colorado Springs hospital and released. 

NTSB Identification: CEN11FA444 
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, July 03, 2011 in Wetmore, CO
Probable Cause Approval Date: 09/13/2012
Aircraft: BOEING B75N1, registration: N4473N
Injuries: 1 Fatal,1 Serious.


According to the passenger, the pilot was maneuvering the airplane at low altitude in mountainous terrain. The passenger reported that the pilot was flying the airplane “low and slow,” the airplane’s bank angle began to increase, and the airplane descended and collided with trees. A postimpact fire consumed a majority of the wreckage. An examination did not find any anomalies with the airframe or engine that would have precluded normal operation.

The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be:
The pilot's failure to maintain clearance from terrain while maneuvering at low altitude.


HISTORY OF FLIGHT 

 On July 3, 2011, approximately 1550 mountain daylight time, a Boeing B75N1, impacted terrain near Wetmore, Colorado. The commercial pilot was fatally injured and the pilot-rated passenger sustained minor injuries. The airplane was substantially damaged and a postimpact fire ensued. The airplane was registered to and operated by Quetzal Limited Partnership, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, under the provisions of 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91 as a personal flight. Visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the flight, which operated without a flight plan. The local flight originated from the Fremont County Airport (1V6), Canon City, Colorado about 1515.

The pilot-rated passenger reported that after departing 1V6, the airplane was flown at low altitude around several locations before circling the passenger’s home. While flying west from the passenger’s home there was no communication between him and the pilot. The passenger said that the airplane got low and slow, and the airplane’s bank increased. He further reported that the airplane descended and collided with trees. The passenger found the pilot unresponsive and attempted to get the pilot out of the airplane. A fire began and the passenger retreated from the spreading fire. The passenger remarked that there were no changes in engine noise.

PERSONNEL INFORMATION

The pilot, age 50, held a commercial pilot certificate for airplane single engine land, single engine sea, and instrument airplane. He held a private pilot certificate for airplane multi-engine land. A third class medical certificate, without restrictions, was issued on October 14, 2009, at which time the pilot reported having accumulated 1,500 hours of total time, with 90 hours in the previous six months. The pilot’s logbook was not obtained during the investigation and it is unknown how many hours in make and model the pilot had logged. The pilot had acquired the accident airplane on October 13, 2009.

AIRCRAFT INFORMATION

The tandem two-seat, tube and fabric, bi-wing airplane, serial number 75-1183, was manufactured in 1947. A 450 horsepower Pratt & Whitney R-985 engine drove a Hamilton Standard 2B20 constant speed propeller. The airplane was issued a standard aerobatic airworthiness certificate on August 19, 1992. The airplane was configured with dual pilot controls.

METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS

At 1331, an automated weather reporting facility at Pueblo, Colorado, located 28 nautical miles to the east of the accident, reported wind from 080 degrees at 23 knots gusting to 28 knots, visibility 10 miles, a clear sky, temperature 97 degrees Fahrenheit (F), dew point 26 F, and a barometric pressure of 30.01 inches of Mercury.

WRECKAGE AND IMPACT INFORMATION

The first impact signatures were damaged trees located 40 to 60 feet east southeast of the accident site. Several downed branches displayed clean angular cuts. The wreckage was located on the northern face of a ravine. The airplane came to rest in an upright position on a 240 degrees magnetic heading. The main wreckage consisted of the propeller, engine, and fuselage frame. Both bi-wings were almost completely consumed. Flight control continuity was confirmed to the rudder and elevators surfaces, and cable continuity was established to the aileron attachments. The cockpit instruments were unreadable due to thermal damage. The pilot’s restraint belt buckle was found in the secured position. One blade of the two-bladed metal propeller was partially buried in the ground. The other blade displayed gouges, chord wise scratches, and was bent forward near mid-span. The throttle quadrant was thermally damaged with the throttle, mixture, and propeller pitch lever set about 1/3 open. The engine was impact and thermally damaged. There were no anomalies detected with the airframe or engine which would have precluded normal operation.

MEDICAL AND PATHOLOGICAL INFORMATION

An autopsy was performed on the pilot on July 6, 2011, by the El Paso County Coroner as authorized by the Custer County Coroner. The manner of death was ruled an accident. The medical examiner noted the presence of smoke inhalation and a postmortem carboxyhemoglobin of 7 percent. The autopsy found no anatomic reason for the pilot’s incapacitation.

The FAA Civil Aerospace Medical Institute (CAMI), Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, performed forensic toxicology on specimens from the pilot. The toxicology report marked putrefaction “yes.” The specimens received were deemed unsuitable for carbon monoxide analysis. Tests for cyanide, ethanol, and drugs were negative.