The National Transportation Safety Board traveled to the scene of this accident.
Additional Participating Entities:
Federal Aviation Administration / Flight Standards District Office; Portland, Maine
Honeywell; Phoenix, Arizona
Hartzell Propeller; Piqua, Ohio
Castle Aviation
Location: Bedford, New Hampshire
Accident Number: ERA22FA086
Date and Time: December 10, 2021, 23:30 Local
Registration: N54GP
Aircraft: Swearingen SA226
Injuries: 1 Fatal
Flight Conducted Under: Part 135: Air taxi and commuter - Non-scheduled
On December 10, 2021, about 2330 eastern standard time, a Swearingen SA-226AT, N54GP, was destroyed when it was involved in an accident near Bedford, New Hampshire. The commercial pilot was fatally injured. The airplane was operated as a Title 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 135 on-demand cargo flight.
According to preliminary information from the Federal Aviation Administration, the airplane was on the instrument landing system approach to runway 6 at Manchester Boston Regional Airport (MHT), Manchester, New Hampshire. During the approach, the pilot reported an engine failure at 2330:42 but did not specify which engine. Radio and radar contact were lost at 2330:51, when the airplane was about 1/4 mile from the runway.
The wreckage was located on a river sand jetty, oriented north, and a post-crash fire consumed the cockpit, cabin, and both wings. No debris path was observed. A crater about 6 ft long, 3 ft wide, and 2 ft deep was observed at the beginning of the sand jetty. The left aileron was recovered in the water near the crater. The empennage was located just beyond the crater. The empennage remained intact, with the elevator and rudder attached and undamaged except for the right elevator tip. The right wingtip was located near the empennage and an outboard left-wing section was located 60 ft left of the main wreckage. Three landing gear were located near the main wreckage and the radome was located at the end of the sand jetty, in water. Elevator control continuity was confirmed from the elevator to the cockpit area. Rudder control continuity was confirmed from the rudder to the cabin area. No aileron cables were identified.
The left engine was located in the main wreckage. The left propeller had separated and was partially embedded in mud to the left of the left engine. All three blades remained attached to the hub and did not exhibit rotational damage. The right engine was located forward and left of the main wreckage. The right propeller remained attached to the right engine and all three propeller blade roots remained
attached to the hub and were charred. The right propeller blades appeared to be at or near the feathered position.
Both engines and propellers were retained for further examination. A copy of residential security camera video which recorded a portion of the airplane’s approach was obtained for further examination.
Aircraft and Owner/Operator Information
Aircraft Make: Swearingen
Registration: N54GP
Model/Series: SA226 AT
Aircraft Category: Airplane
Amateur Built:
Operator:
Operating Certificate(s) Held: Commuter air carrier (135)
Operator Designator Code: CSJA
Meteorological Information and Flight Plan
Conditions at Accident Site: VMC
Condition of Light: Night
Observation Facility, Elevation: MHT,221 ft msl
Observation Time: 23:21 Local
Distance from Accident Site: 1 Nautical Miles
Temperature/Dew Point: -2°C /-5°C
Lowest Cloud Condition:
Wind Speed/Gusts, Direction: / ,
Lowest Ceiling: Broken / 1700 ft AGL
Visibility: 10 miles
Altimeter Setting: 30.16 inches Hg
Type of Flight Plan Filed: IFR
Departure Point: Caldwell, NJ (CDW)
Destination: Bedford, NH
Wreckage and Impact Information
Crew Injuries: 1 Fatal
Aircraft Damage: Destroyed
Passenger Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Fire: On-ground
Ground Injuries: N/A
Aircraft Explosion: None
Total Injuries: 1 Fatal
Latitude, Longitude: 42.926696,-71.45179
Those who may have information that might be relevant to the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) investigation may contact them by email witness@ntsb.gov, and any friends and family who want to contact investigators about the accident should email assistance@ntsb.gov. You can also call the NTSB Response Operations Center at 844-373-9922 or 202-314-6290.
Emanuel "Manny" Vomvolakis
~
Vomvolakis, Emanuel A. "Manny" Linden Age 23, died in an airplane crash in Bedford New Hampshire on Friday December 10, 2021. A memorial service will be held 11 AM Friday, December 17, 2021 at Sharp Funeral Homes. Fenton Chapel, 1000 W. Silver Lake Rd., Fenton, MI 48430 with Pastor Scott Johnson officiating. The family will receive friends from 5-8 PM Thursday and 10 AM - 11 AM Friday at the funeral home. A reception will follow at Tyrone Hills. Manny was born August 19, 1998 in Grand Blanc, MI the son of Anthony Vomvolakis and Cindy Frohriep. He was a 2016 graduate of Linden High School. He loved living on the lake and earned his boater safety as soon as he was able. He loved boating and taking off on the jet ski any time he could. Manny spent his younger years playing hockey as a goalie. He loved the sport and the many teams and teammates he played with over the years. Manny was an old soul and was very passionate about aviation and flying. He earned his Private Pilot license at age 17 and went on to become a commercial pilot after attending ATP Flight School in Mesa AZ. Manny flew for the pure love of flying and accomplished and experienced so much during his short time on this earth. He managed to fly many different types of aircraft and was lucky to travel all over the country and Canada. His stories of his adventures were always entertaining and he would talk for as long as anyone would listen about all things aviation. He also was known for the big smile that he always had for everyone and everything. Especially if he was around an airplane. He will be greatly missed by his mother and step-father, Cindy and Jack Frohriep; father, Anthony Vomvolakis; half-sister, Paisley; grandparents, Robert and Della Poirier; his close aunt Chari and uncle Jeff Soja, Mitchell and Zachary. Manny was also blessed with a very large family including the extended Poirier family, the extended Frohriep family and the extended Vomvolakis family. He was preceded in death by his paternal grandparents, Emmanuel and Mary Vomvolakis. Tributes may be shared at www.sharpfuneralhomes.com. In lieu of flowers, contributions may be made to the Fly High Manny Memorial Fund which is being established in his honor to give scholarships to aspiring aviators at www.cfgf.org/flyhighmanny
Emanuel A. "Manny" Vomvolakis
1998 - 2021
~
BEDFORD, New Hampshire – A Michigan man piloting a small aircraft bringing medical supplies to Manchester from New Jersey perished in a fiery crash late Friday.
First responders from Manchester arrived at the scene of the crash in the woods next to the Merrimack River after receiving an initial call for a plane crash in the area of 69 Olmstead Avenue in Manchester at about 11:35 p.m.
Crews arrived on the scene to a brush fire in the woods in the area of 114 Technology Drive and the heavy odor of fuel.
The first of several 911 calls came in at 11:36 p.m. to Bedford Communications Center at 11:36 p.m. reporting a plane crash on the shore of the Merrimack River in the vicinity of 14 Technology Drive.
Fire crews searched the woods and worked to extinguish the burning brush and trees as rescuers worked to make their way to the crash site.
Remnants of the aircraft were located on the shore of the river and partially submerged. Manchester firefighters launched boats to deploy oil booms to prevent oil from flowing downriver.
Bedford Police on Saturday morning identified the pilot as Emanuel Vomvolakis, 23, of Linden, Michigan, although positive identification will be confirmed following an autopsy by the Chief Medical Examiner, Bedford police said.
The aircraft was transporting medical supplies but crashed shortly after the pilot reported engine trouble minutes before the scheduled landing.
According to the Federal Aviation Administration the Swearingen SA-226AT Merlin IV crashed in the Merrimack River just outside Manchester-Boston Regional Airport in New Hampshire at 11:30 p.m. Friday.
The aircraft, operated by Castle Air, experienced engine failure on final approach.
The flight took off from Essex County Airport in Fairfield, New Jersey.
The Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board are investigating.
The pilot was the sole occupant.
The public is asked to avoid the Bedford Heritage Trail in the area of 14 Technology Drive at this time.
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211211/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT/tracklog
ReplyDeletelooks like a space shuttle approach, crashed just short of runway 06
needed a shot of power and wasn't there?
11:35 PM EST = 23:35, +5 UTC offset = 04:35 Z UTC Day 11
DeleteMETAR (For reference):
KMHT 110453Z 36004KT 10SM BKN017 OVC075 M01/M04 A3015
KMHT 110421Z 00000KT 10SM BKN017 OVC075 M02/M05 A3016
For comparing the accident approach to previous at KMHT:
DeleteAccident approach:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211211/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT
Previous:
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211210/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211209/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211207/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211204/0415Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211203/0415Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211202/0415Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211201/0415Z/KCDW/KMHT
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211130/0415Z/KCDW/KMHT
I don't know anything about Castle other than their Facebook is loaded with Help Wanted posts - every and all positions.
ReplyDeleteThere's a reason for their numerous help wanted posts - they burn through employees like gasoline in a campfire - "you're easily replaced", has been the attitude...
ReplyDeleteThey bent pilot safety and rest period laws in their favor all the time, management rushing training and using intimidation to keep everyone in line opposing pilot concerns- a crash was bound to happen! They don't really give a shit about anyone working for them, only image and the bottom line. I hope their certificate gets permanently revoked!
ReplyDeleteSince I'm flying Merlins and Metros now after retirement from the major airline, I wonder a few things: 1. The pilot reported an engine failure shortly before the crash. Was his gear down at that time? 2. Did this 226 have spade doors? 3. Did he feather the failed engine's prop? 4.If he picked up ice during his inbound flight, did he have the engine anti-icing system on? 5. Were the igniters on? Even a lightly loaded 226 will not stay airborne under control on one engine with the gear down and a windmilling (or NTSing) propeller. I hope the insuing investigation uncovers a fault with the airplane and not this young pilot. I really do. At twenty-three, he was very, very young to be flying a Metroliner solo as PIC - especially if it had no autopilot. It is not an easy and forgiving airplane to fly.
ReplyDelete23 is not too young to fly anything.
DeleteBut it is too young to fly anything when things go wrong with it.
"23 is not too young to fly anything. But it is too young to fly anything when things go wrong with it."
DeleteA Metroliner is a handful while solo in night IFR for even the most seasoned pilot when everything is operating normally. No idea what his hours were in type, but this tragedy just wreaks of business over safety. And as we all know, the FAA is full of companies that are now defunct doing just that which got people killed.
^^I mean the FAA and NTSB accident reports are full of said former companies...
DeleteAbsolutely!
DeleteUnbelievable tragedy for this young man. I would have never flown a Metro IV solo, anytime in my 10,000+ hours of aviation. The airplane was a handful on a CAVU day, light. I hated the Garret engines, and the workload of the airplane in general.
DeleteI was flying a C47 at 19 and a T33 at 23.. EveryPT6 and TPE331 I have flown had autofeather.
DeleteTy for input
ReplyDeleteI’m going to guess he had gear down and full flaps. I was surprised to see how hot the approach was high and fast. Maybe that’s normal for a confident pilot, airspeed bled off fast, and he needed to add power that apparently was there. He had plenty of altitude to fly to the airport and circle to land but he did a hot straight in and ran out of airspeed and altitude
He got low and slow and reported an engine problem on short final
So , I do t think he had time to feather engine (right engine) I didn’t know you can’t hold / maintain altitude on one engine
I don’t think these planes have autopilots
The radar hits so a slight turn off course last 5 seconds and that makes me believed he stalled at last moment only a couple hundred yards short of runway
Let me first say, I know very little about flying a twin but just talking out of my rear end here I would say that the Metroliner is too much aircraft for ANY single pilot at night in IFR. Just how much time could any 23-year-old have??? To his family and friends, I'm sorry for your loss. May this young man RIP. You had to know he was living his dream. At his young age he had already done what others spend a lifetime only dreaming of.
ReplyDeleteRicco, You are so correct, hope other new Pilots read and learn from your message..
DeleteAt the age of 23, I had been flying for 8 years already. Age is not really a consideration about pilot skills. What about hours? Not the best measurement of a pilot's skills, just a guideline really. Some low-time pilots are very good and some high-time pilots still suck.
DeleteConcur. We have guys 24 years old flying F/A-18 Hornets single-seat in bad weather around the ship, and in years past who flew single-seat A-7s, F-8s, and A-4s, without all the modern day GPS and bells and whistles. High-workload airplanes at times. It's not age - it's training and hours. If this young lad was turned loose too early to be solo PIC in what is described as a complex turbine twin (I never flew one, just leveraging off the ones here who have), that is a training, doctrine, and leadership problem, not his young age.
DeleteLet the investigation run its course.
Aircraft that operate in the flight levels should require two pilots ... PERIOD!!!
DeleteIt there had been a SIC there might be two dead pilots.
Delete2 words- "Stabilized Approach"....
ReplyDeleteNothing stable with any of these approaches.
Delete373 MPH at 4,200 feet?
https://flightaware.com/live/flight/N54GP/history/20211207/0430Z/KCDW/KMHT
Perhaps someone can educate me, but what ever happened to speed restrictions? I know it is IAS and not TAS, but that must be one heck of a tail wind.
I believe it applies to 121,135 as well?
§ 91.117 Aircraft speed.
(a) Unless otherwise authorized by the Administrator, no person may operate an aircraft below 10,000 feet MSL at an indicated airspeed of more than 250 knots (288 m.p.h.).
(b) Unless otherwise authorized or required by ATC, no person may operate an aircraft at or below 2,500 feet above the surface within 4 nautical miles of the primary airport of a Class C or Class D airspace area at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph.). This paragraph (b) does not apply to any operations within a Class B airspace area. Such operations shall comply with paragraph (a) of this section.
(c) No person may operate an aircraft in the airspace underlying a Class B airspace area designated for an airport or in a VFR corridor designated through such a Class B airspace area, at an indicated airspeed of more than 200 knots (230 mph).
(d) If the minimum safe airspeed for any particular operation is greater than the maximum speed prescribed in this section, the aircraft may be operated at that minimum speed.
Some points to consider:
Delete1. Not sure why you mentioned a speed in MPH, but in aviation we deal in knots.
2. As you mentioned, its IAS. Flightaware shows ground speeds, so to convert those to IAS, you first must add/subtract the winds aloft and then also convert from TAS to IAS based on the aircraft's pressure altitude and OAT.
3. FlightAware speeds are not always accurate, especially when they are derived using MLAT. It has regularly shown my Cessna 172 with a 300 knot ground speed. FlightAware has said this is a known technical limitation.
So to answer the airspeed question, I have been told by ATC MANY times to maintain MAXIMUM forward speed to the threshold... especially when in congested airspace... the pilot was a fantastic pilot. I knew him personally.
Delete"Maximum forward speed to the threshold" is an illegal clearance, just so you and everyone reading this is aware, so having been issued it many times is unlikely unless you work with remarkably ignorant / non-compliant controllers. 7110.65 5-7-1(b) specifies the following:
Delete"b. Do not assign speed adjustment to aircraft:
1. At or above FL 390 without pilot consent.
2. Executing a published high altitude instrument approach procedure.
3. In a holding pattern.
4. Inside the final approach fix on final or a point
5 miles from the runway, whichever is closer to the
runway."
Needless to say, the threshold is a little closer to the airport than the FAF or 5 miles.
I have gotten "max forward speed" on final many times. In my case, it was a class D tower, so they would no doubt say it was just a "request" or "suggestion" and not an "assignment", and therefore not in violation 5-7-1.
DeleteWhether it's illegal, irregular, or whatever else you want to call it, ATC requesting MAX forward speed on final approach is EXTREMELY common...
DeleteAs long as it is outside the FAF or 5 miles, whichever is closer to the runway, that's fine. After reaching those points, or if you are cleared for an approach without a speed assignment being restated, any previous speed instruction is canceled and moot. Any attempt to hold a pilot to a speed assignment in the US inside of those points is contrary to regulations and the controller has zero authority to assign it. As long as everyone reading here understands that, whether they choose to maintain 100+ knots down the final in their C150 until touchdown or not, that's an improvement. Knowing that the controller has no say over speed then is obviously important for safety reasons.
DeleteThe advisory "maintain max forward speed" is somewhat common but to the pilot that should register as "maintain max forward speed consistent with safety." If and/or when that is assigned as an instruction, one can simply respond with "unable." The only time a controller has flown my plane was when I was checking out a controller in the aircraft.
Deleteradar hiits and times on final approach
ReplyDeletehttps://globe.adsbexchange.com/?icao=a6d637&lat=42.922&lon=-71.477&zoom=13.7&showTrace=2021-12-11&leg=3&trackLabels
approach plate ils 06 kmht
https://flightaware.com/resources/airport/MHT/IAP/ILS+OR+LOC+RWY+06/pdf
crashed 1/4 mile (short final) , notice how airspeed bled off, final radar speed 97 knots, crossed the highway at 400 ft, 1 mile out airport elevation tdze 224 ft! I don't know how you have dual engine flame out. Only thing that fits is he feathered wrong prop or got too slow and stalled.
Found this
ReplyDeletehttps://flightsafety.org/ap/ap_feb99.pdf
Amazing, I never heard of ice causing dual flame outs. 25 incidents by 1999 in this type
ReplyDelete"it is difficult for the pilot to recognize icing conditions and then to manually select the appropriate ignition switch position.”
It's can be difficult to "see" the ice. It's often clear ice on the intakes. Despite the centrifugal compressors, it doesn't take much ice to disrupt the air flow and cause a flame-out. There are no inertial separators like with PT-6 engines. Many accidents in this type occurred before the AD requiring switches for continuous ignition override. Pilots don't like using continuous ignition because of the annoying feed-back in their headsets. Not mentioned in your linked report is another AD that was issued on an emergency basis. That AD calls for high-lighting a sentence in the AFM suggesting the use of intake heat during and after icing conditions and enlarging a drain hole in a shroud around a lever to the fuel control unit that was trapping water which froze and lowered torque. Getting pilots to recognize icing conditions is not difficult. Getting pilots to understand the critical nature turning on protection is difficult.
DeleteNotes about Metroliners- This was a Metro2, not a 3. It has shorter wings, less powerful engines, and a lower MGTOW. Both have long dual-bogey very draggy landing gear and neither will maintain altitude with gear down on one engine. An engine failure can, and has, caused the hydraulic system to fail (the gear can't be retracted after extension). The engine's NTS system can has been known to fail preventing the prop from full feathering. A loss of oil pressure will cause the prop to windmill at coarse pitch and sometimes not feather. With the very few Metro's that are equipped with an auto-pilot, the A-P sucks big time. Metroliners are very efficient but at the expense of handling qualities. Then there's an often over-looked little sentence in the POH that is very important about using intake heat in icing conditions.
ReplyDeleteThat absence of a functioning, reliable A/P is one of the greatest reasons they should not be flown single-pilot in LIFR or other very-high-demand conditions, at least. I remember when CAMI and other folks at the FAA were looking at SP certifications of light jets decades ago and the remarkable number of simple and significant errors that even very experienced pilots made when the workload got past a certain point without automation assisting. It doesn't require turbofan power for that to happen even with a pilot's pilot being in the left seat and the only one onboard.
DeleteI willing to bet Castles' Op Specs require a functional autopilot for this aircraft in order to operate single pilot. I flew a CE208B single pilot, cargo and autopilot was required. I doubt it would've made much difference in this situation though. It reads like the pilot became overwhelmed and got behind the airplane.
DeleteI flew single pilot IFR in a Caravan in 135 cargo ops and no autopilot was required. It would be required for an operator carrying passengers if one elected to fly single pilot IFR and use the autopilot in lieu of a second in command.
Deleteaviation enthusiast/short time private pilot here. MGTOW means max gross take off weight in aviation. MGTOW means something completely different according to Google's most common usage (something I'd never heard of and with no aviation application I'm familiar with). Just FYI :)
DeleteYou were fortunate and missed the rise and fall of Roosh V if google is how you discovered the common usage MGTOW reference.
DeleteCultural usage frequency drives search engine, spell check and closed caption/text to speech behavior. Best example is repeatedly seeing "descent" in comments here show up as "decent", because of auto-correct presuming a typo.
Too many times, a marginal aircraft is operated by a marginal company( revolving door theory).. with pilots that only have a marginal skill level at that time in the early days of their careers. A recipe for a disaster.
ReplyDeleteMy advice to anyone in this business as a retired aviation professional is this. Always...Always own the word NO. If you don't, retirement in this industry may only be a fleeting thought.
As a former Castle guy, can confirm the the revolving door, corporatism first nature and rushed training of that shithole. The first guy down from the scumbag owner (owner's got a fake public persona and connections
ReplyDeleteto manipulate people - or at least make your life difficult if anyone crosses him) primarily used intimidation and scare/sketchy mob-feel tactics to get what they wanted from us - safety or pilot concerns be damned. The current, snarky head dispatcher was basically their lapdog, also not giving a shit and either overworking or underscheduling us on favoritism - felt like working with the mob...STAY AWAY FROM THIS TRAP OF A COMPANY IF YOU VALUE YOUR LIFE OR QUALITY OF IT!
I saw these fly-by-night 3PL small air freight operators come and go for decades in Florida. Shady owners will get safety shut down by the FAA (or sued by family members into oblivion), fold, and then pop up in another area. The slimy attitudes of the owners all seemed alike: arrogant, rule bending (FAA rules to be sure), passive-aggressive, predatory on desperate young pilots trying to build up time, and at times threatening. There's a special place in hell for them.
DeleteSwearingen SA226AT Merlin IV https://www.baaa-acro.com/aircraft/swearingen-sa226at-merlin-iv
ReplyDeleteThe Bureau of Aircraft Accidents Archives (B3A) was established in Geneva in 1990 for the purpose to deal with all information related to aviation accidentology.
61 occurrences in the ASN Database for the Merlin IV:
Deletehttps://aviation-safety.net/database/types/Swearingen-Merlin-IV/index
The older SA226's built in the 70's are actually Metro II's..
DeleteThis aircraft is actually SA226-AT Merlin IVA, which is a Merlin IV
Deletewith minor changes, most noticeably with ovalised rectangular cabin windows instead of round windows; it is the corporate version of a Metro II
This aircraft was used for corporate travel until it was converted for freight use at some point after Castle bought it in 2015.
Photo of interior in 2008 before being converted:
https://flightaware.com/photos/view/232282-f5ede217a0379a855a1452171762d264151c18c7/aircraft/N54GP/sort/votes/page/1
Brief chronology of the Swearingen Merlin
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swearingen_Merlin
Castle maintained the Merlin's passenger configuration, but used it for freight as well, opting to load smaller objects inside, such that the interior won't be damaged by typical cargo wear-and-tear.
DeleteThe big differences between the Metro 2 and the Merlin 4 are fuel quantity and passenger oxygen outlets. The Merlin 4 has large fuel tanks. It also has only 9 oxygen outlets in the cabin. Many people, including the FAA, miss the fact that a Merlin 4 can not be put on a Part 135 AOC for carrying passengers.
Delete"You can fly the airplane single pilot, but unless your captain is at the top of his or her game and has a ton of experience in it, that’s probably a bad idea. At least, so it appears in the database of the National Transportation Safety Board, where you’ll find some 300 records relating to incidents and accidents with all models of the aircraft. However, the Merlin IV seems to have a good safety record in corporate operations, according to the Flight Safety Foundation’s Aviation Safety Network; its reports show that only one of the hull-loss accidents occurred during a business or private flight. That was in 1975 when a pilot attempted a visual approach in fog. (This is why they give out Darwin Awards.)" https://www.bjtonline.com/business-jet-news/used-turboprop-review-merlin-iv-the-agony-and-the-ecstasy
ReplyDeleteNice link and comments, ty to gretnabear and raffles
DeleteI watched the video "A day in the life...". Single pilot day/night all weather operation, Metroliner, no autopilot is crazy and an accident looking for a place to happen. I have 11,000+ hrs on on types from C150 to King Air to Skyvan to B727, charter, cargo, freight, medevac, 121, VIP, flight instruction since 1982.
ReplyDeleteIt's amazing how safe these freight operations are. Castle, Ameriflight, Key Lime..Etc have very few fatal accidents. Anytime, anywhere, these pilots go out in some serious crap circumstances. Per flight hour, or mile, you can thank these guys for your medicine, mail or package arriving the next day.
DeleteOr sometimes not... The equipment let them down, or the pilot did. RIP boys and girls. Thank you for your service!
Worked for Castle, it's NOT in the same class as Key Lime and Ameriflight for cutting corners, abusing pilots. Their maintenance is absolutely great - their rushed training for woefully low-time crew and abusive, revolving door corporate nature was a ticking timebomb that finally went kaboom. I think they need thoroughly investigated and their certificate revoked
DeleteI fly out of KAPA so familiar with Key Lime. Their safety record has improved significantly but they went through a very rough period. It’s a very tough and, I think dangerous job to fly single pilot with no Autopilot or Flight Director in IFR at night.
DeleteSome aircraft are capable and forgiving. This one isn't forgiving. Especially SP, at night and LIFR.
ReplyDeleteThe ifr wasn't that low, 1700 bn, 7500 ovc 10 m vis, in fact not IFR but your points are well taken. The weather went low ifr 5 hours later as the front was moving in.
ReplyDeletei think both engines flamed out as these engines had that problem. Continuous ignition switch should been engaged or auto working.
29 similar accidents with this problem prior to 1999. That might explain slam dunk approach, get thru juicy clouds fast
In the 80s and 90s I flew over 2000 hrs in the SA226 and SA227. The 227 was a huge improvement in performance, particularly on one engine. Both aircraft though had a propensity to build ice on the prop spinners that you could not deice. It usually shed as a chunk when the temp warmed up quite often going into the engine and could cause flameouts. That is why anytime you were in icing conditions the ignitors had to be on. In the 226 the pilot had to do it manually. This accident looks like a classic example of descending into warmer air with ice buildup on the spinners.
ReplyDeleteVery impressive to me the amount of real knowledge shared in this Merlin post. Equally impressed by the pro's and retired pro's who still seek to learn from accidents.
ReplyDeleteI read these things to try my best not to be in one.
I read them also. You have to learn from the mistakes of others. No one has enough time or luck to make them all themselves.
DeleteIGN AUTO has been SOP for many years, doubt icing was the problem here.
ReplyDeleteThis Merlin IV (like most Merlins) had an autopilot.
The approach was high at the IF and fast throughout. PL's would have had to be back against the flight idle stops and waiting to slow down to gear and flap speeds. At these low power settings, abnormal yaw would have been less an aid in failure identification than at a higher power setting which would have been the case in a more stabilized approach.
I question why the pilot was taught to fly the Merlin this way and if he was not why was this not caught and corrected early on.
My condolences to the family and those that were close to the pilot.
Yes, Merlin 4s generally came with excellent Collins Nav package with F/D and A/P. I’m betting the Cargo operator either removed them or inop’ed them to save weight/money. Perhaps a second pilot would have helped. Who knows.
DeleteVery sad to see a beautiful young person die like this. IMO single pilot, twin engine IFR, night flying is the most dangerous job in aviation. There will be lots of blame to go around but I think the biggest problem is that the FAA feels that cargo crews are disposable. If this were a passenger flight, a second pilot would be required. I flew the 226/227 two thousand hours, mostly Metroliner pax ops. with two pilots but I also flew corporate single pilot Merlin 2 and 3 but with autopilot and flight director. The merlin is a tough airplane to fly single pilot on one engine and its often impossible with gear down.
ReplyDeleteObit on FB. Family has set up a scholarship fund for young pilots. Cfgf.com/flyhighmanny
ReplyDeleteCORRECTION! donation site cfgf.org/flyhighmanny
ReplyDeleteWhere I live Castle 920 comes to kbuy (Burlington nc) nightly in a piper Aerostar wide open in and out ! I see it all most every night while watching it and aircraft on flight aware. It shocked me it was one of their planes which I know nothing about them. I'm use to seeing pc12's coming in and out because we are home of labcorp inc and that's their fleet plus a few pc24's bringing and taking medical specimens
ReplyDeleteRIP to Emanuel Vomvolakis
FLY HIGH MANNIE
I have almost 10 years in 331's. And quite a bit in 227. The power of the 226 wasn't a factor here. He most likely feathered the wrong engine or had a load of ice, and put the both engine anti ice on at the same time. The last transmission was quiet. No engine sound.
ReplyDeleteIgnition is not the problem on these 331 engines. It helps, the issue may have been turning anti ice on after accumulation, and he may have turned both on at once. King air 200's intake lips are heated continuously. These were not. The p2 t2 sensor is also heated with engine anti ice. Was this guy the typical green card holder?
ReplyDeleteBorn and raised on the lake shore in Michigan, so says his obituary. Interesting comment about the green card, more interesting the way some people will draw a conclusion based on a name or appearance................
DeleteYou use aviation terms, so I suspect your not the average troll on this site, little more respect would be nice. Respect is something I have watched wither away in my 44 years in aviation. Just listen to guard for an extended period of time :)
Lots of info on ice effecting 331's, but how much moisture was there?
ReplyDeleteRadar from the time period doesn't show much happening in the area.
Boston composite radar 0424Z:
https://weather.us/radar-us/new-hampshire/reflectivity-composite/KBOX_20211211-042400z.html
National composite radar 0430Z:
https://weather.us/radar-us/usa/20211211-043000z.html
Pilots that were in the air in that area at the time reported basically no ice.
DeleteBeing checked out and qualified in an aircraft doesn't necessarily mean being capable and competent enough to fly single pilot, night IFR in potential icing conditions, in a very complex multi-engine aircraft, especially if that pilot hasn't had a lot of time or recent experience in that type.
ReplyDeleteI'd be interested to know just how much night-time engine-failure training this pilot received from Castle. I'm guessing that number is very low, if there is any at all. A night engine failure is far different than a daytime failure. I'd also like to know how often he flew this type aircraft.
An operation such as this, where they have multiple aircraft types, a revolving door HR department, varying levels of pilot experience and various routes, lends itself to pilots only getting sporadic time in each aircraft type. I have no idea if that's the case here, but it's something worth looking into. Also worth looking into would be the Castle pilots' training agreements and pilot retention policy, if they even have one.
Unfortunately, I'm not at all surprised by this crash. I'm more surprised that it's the first fatal they've had in a number of years. There is absolutely no substitute for training. Training takes money and time, neither of which they like to spend in these type operations. There is also no substitute for two pilots.
I will say it anonymously: As a young(or even an older) pilot looking for experience and trying to impress my new employer and fellow pilots, I'm never going to say "I'm uncomfortable in that aircraft alone at night or in icing or anything else". I'm going to take the assignment and do my best to finish the mission.
I don't have all the answers, but I do know the FAA oversight is horrible. When was the last time the FAA called any of us and asked if the company we work for is safe in every possible way and gave us an opportunity to answer in such a way as to remain completely and absolutely anonymous? It just doesn't happen, but it should.
Commenting based on personal experience in similar operations.
The FAA reporting hotline is there for you. Step up if you have concerns and make a report.
Deletehttps://hotline.faa.gov/
Don't file a false report.
https://thepilotlawyer.com/faa-hotline-complaints/
Perfect! another lawyer..............................just whats needed
DeleteThe takeaway from the avlawyer post was the bit about false FAA hotline complaints coming from a person who has gotten their nose out of joint and is going to "make them pay".
DeleteSeeing someone who poses as a pilot on a forum state "When was the last time the FAA called any of us and asked if the company we work for is safe..." reveals a child-like view of how the world should work.
If you were the FAA personnel looking into anonymous accusations against carrier operations, you would know that anonymous reports often turn out to be a "she's a witch" scenario, reminiscent of this video:
https://youtu.be/zrzMhU_4m-g?t=6
I'm a former Castle guy, and I can confirm it's a shit company I'm glad to get out of some years ago. They thrive on riding the gray areas of the law with very low time pilots and corporate intimidation tactics to "persuade" pilot compliance. Truly sad for the loss of the pilot and the Merlin IV, which was passenger configured and used for light freight duty on their 135 certificate, but I'm totally unsurprised, given the company involved
ReplyDeleteHow many crashes did they have while you were there, and how many since you quit them? Honest question....
DeleteNext question: Was your lack of reporting to the FAA the cause of any deaths by letting everything continue as it was?
NTSB prelim out -- suggests wrong engine shut down after engine failure.
ReplyDeleteTHis: "The left engine was located in the main wreckage. The left propeller had separated and was partially embedded in mud to the left of the left engine. All three blades remained attached to the hub and did not exhibit rotational damage. The right engine was located forward and left of the main wreckage. The right propeller remained attached to the right engine and all three propeller blade roots remained
Deleteattached to the hub and were charred. The right propeller blades appeared to be at or near the feathered position."