Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 48

Thread: Lear 35 down approaching Teterboro

  1. #1
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default Lear 35 down approaching Teterboro

    Looks like some kind of departure from controlled flight. Impacted a residential area resulting in a fire and destruction of buildings and vehicles. No casualties reported on the ground, but I imagine this will trigger another discussion about that neighboring threat...

    According to CNN, this is the 53rd fatal Learjet 35 accident since 1977.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/us...o-plane-crash/

  2. #2
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,096

    Default

    Purest of preliminary, unsubstantiated speculation: Lear's are known for PIO, and if you get to within (or beyond) 1/4 of a mile of the Airport and then crash a plane, with no 'obvious' distress call at this point...

    Of course, I would NEVER get myself into a PIO, although I had an old rear-wheel drive Toyota Corolla wagon that got real nasty if you started swerving for fun on a gravel road...the fishtails really seemed to amplify and I had some wide eye moments.

    How do you say slip vs. skid but actually both in Espanol?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  3. #3
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    how do you say slip vs. skid but actually both in Espanol?
    ...or in Portuguese? We once had a specialist here at JP for the Portuguese language.

    Carlstadt NJ, that's much nearer to Teterboro than I am to DUS. But the 06 at TEB is only 6,000 ft , so, nothing which I'd think about. Sully also only needed a few seconds to avoid TEB, in an A320. But in a Learjet?

    A Lear 36A theoretically only needs 2,900 ft (900 m) for a perfect landing. They should've made it.

    Good that only the captain and the F/O were on board. Bad that both died.. only 1 nautical mile away from the TEB 06? That's hard.
    One evening, not long ago, I watched TV and I wondered what you will possibly do after you've lost one parent. Strange question, why did I wonder. You will possibly be annoyed because he will miss so many happenings which you liked to show him. But after you somehow have regained your countenance, you will also join again people who you don't know. Stay strong, Jimmy.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  4. #4
    Member BoeingBobby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    MIA
    Posts
    928

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Looks like some kind of departure from controlled flight. Impacted a residential area resulting in a fire and destruction of buildings and vehicles. No casualties reported on the ground, but I imagine this will trigger another discussion about that neighboring threat...

    According to CNN, this is the 53rd fatal Learjet 35 accident since 1977.

    http://edition.cnn.com/2017/05/15/us...o-plane-crash/

    1973 - 1994 738 35 & 36's built. As of January, 2007, the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board database lists 19 fatal accidents for the 35/35A, and two for the 36/36A.

  5. #5
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Purest of preliminary, unsubstantiated speculation: Lear's are known for PIO, and if you get to within (or beyond) 1/4 of a mile of the Airport and then crash a plane, with no 'obvious' distress call at this point...

    Of course, I would NEVER get myself into a PIO, although I had an old rear-wheel drive Toyota Corolla wagon that was harder than hell to straightened out if you started playing around fish-tailing on a gravel road...how do you say slip vs. skid but actually both in Espanol?
    Pilot Induced Oscillations (PIO) - for those of us who quite rarely sit in the left seat of a Lear.

    Ach Herrje. Ob das dieses Mal gut geht?

    New York State or NYC, both are good for so much. Calspan is a professional provider for Lear 35/Lear 36A training, which exactly includes maneuvers to avoid PIO. Thus, I assume that the Calspan crew includes Lear 35/Lear 36A flight instructors.

    I wasn't aware that a Lear 35 is prone for PIO, but as I said earlier, I'm still learning a lot. That indeed does not mean that the TEB accident is already solved.
    One evening, not long ago, I watched TV and I wondered what you will possibly do after you've lost one parent. Strange question, why did I wonder. You will possibly be annoyed because he will miss so many happenings which you liked to show him. But after you somehow have regained your countenance, you will also join again people who you don't know. Stay strong, Jimmy.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  6. #6
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    I always say that I am a service oriented human bein, so.. Have a look (in German, but I translate):

    PIO, explained by the de wiki

    "Insbesondere wenn die Steuersysteme des Luftfahrzeugs nur mit Verzögerung auf die Kommandos des Piloten reagieren, ..."
    In English: Especially if aileron, rudder or the throttle quadrant of an a/c do only react with response time to the input of one of the pilots, ...

    Hm. I should ask a B744/B748i flight instructor, but isn't that a phenomenon that occurs in almost all jets? The bigger the jet the more preparation time you need? I know that a B744 needs
    ALOT of preparation before "she" is ready to pass the t.o.d. point...

    And also the two Lear 35 jet engines do not react as quick as a Baron 58... or do they.

    As we hadn't been on board it sometimes seems easy to explain phenomenons. RIP, you young pilots. Lear 35 or CR9 pilots often are not older than me.

    Is anyone able to publish the age of the two men in the Lear 35 cockpit?

    PS: Imho, in German there is one very short word, only a little bit longer than PIO: überziehen. Wow. That seems to be something that can happen by reflex. You try to gain alt, and you pull, but you forget that ALL a/c - not only jets - lose speed,
    the longer you pull the slower the a/c gets.
    That's the reason why I've NEVER used vnav in my B744. At least three times during a flight you should really feel how "she" reacts: during t/o, during step climb, and during descent. A/P is off in my B744 when that happens.

    And it is indeed a phenomenon when you pull and "she" takes off.
    Last edited by LH-B744; 05-16-2017 at 12:55 AM. Reason: Überziehen
    One evening, not long ago, I watched TV and I wondered what you will possibly do after you've lost one parent. Strange question, why did I wonder. You will possibly be annoyed because he will miss so many happenings which you liked to show him. But after you somehow have regained your countenance, you will also join again people who you don't know. Stay strong, Jimmy.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  7. #7
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    Sully, and I didn't understand it until I watched "his movie", always tried to explain another problem.

    208 seconds? As far as I remember that was the time in which Flight Captain C. Sullenberger had to
    a) take off
    b) gain alt, and the A320 was successful even after the loss of all engines
    c) see the geese and perceive that there is no way to avoid contact, the A320 will definitely make geese fricassee, at alt 3200
    d) perceive that all engines remain silent after the geese fricassee
    e) avoid TEB in a now sailing A320 after you turned off all frequencies
    f) be so keen and transform an A320 into a ship and save "all souls on board? - Yes, all 155." Which again is not only brilliant, and it deserves a Golden Star for Sully the Movie,
    but also the real Flight Captain Sullenberger deserves a Golden Star with a Diamond, and that's an opinion which I don't have all to often. Not either all too many men save 155 lifes in an a/c after the loss of all engines.

    Sully really deserves more than only the respect of one rather young semipro aviation enthusiast.

    Time is always short or very short in a jet. And I often had the idea to try "the Sully" in my semipro B744 simulator. But you don't try something like that only for fun, don't ya. I haven't tried it until today, and most probably I'll fail, as btw ALL persons failed who until today tried it: US Air A320 flight instructors, Airbus A320 aircraft engineers, nobody was able to reach TEB within 208 seconds.

    But in a Lear 35, with all engines running? Hm. The recorders should solve that case. I expect that a Lear 35 has a FDR, right?
    One evening, not long ago, I watched TV and I wondered what you will possibly do after you've lost one parent. Strange question, why did I wonder. You will possibly be annoyed because he will miss so many happenings which you liked to show him. But after you somehow have regained your countenance, you will also join again people who you don't know. Stay strong, Jimmy.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  8. #8
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LH-B744 View Post
    ...Sully really deserves more than only the respect of one rather young semipro aviation enthusiast...
    Do not lay praises on Sully where Gabriel might see it.

    Gabriel points out that his water landing, albeit adequate, was not super duper perfectly nailed.

    HOWEVER, he then points out that Sully's QUICK DECISION PROCESS was pretty impressive...

    ...but it's usually a much longer discussion.

    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  9. #9
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LH-B744 View Post
    And also the two Lear 35 jet engines do not react as quick as a Baron 58... or do they.
    I've heard it said that if one of those engines fails and the other is abruptly throttled up, the Lear 35 has a quick spin reaction...

  10. #10
    Senior Member LH-B744's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    1 hr away from EDDL
    Posts
    1,004

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    I've heard it said that if one of those engines fails and the other is abruptly throttled up, the Lear 35 has a quick spin reaction...
    Wow. Is this the first time in almost a decade that you quote me, and not vice versa? First of all, Thank You. I am not all to often quoted by men who I always consider to be
    friendly, professional and interested in the solution of crimes/fatal accidents/incidents etc.

    Since 2008, I think that also somebody here at JP asked me, if jet pilots always have an extra education by the BEA or the NTSB. That was also an honor for me. No, I don't have something like that, but I am interested, like you.

    A quick spin reaction...
    Now, I assume that a Lear 35 spins mainly around the aileron axis, after all what you've described so far. That indeed sounds quite fatal.
    I don't wanna imagine that "my" tailfin on one very bad day shows to the ground, and not into the sky. Brr.

    Sometimes I tend to be a little off topic, but this story fits. As long as I am an aviation enthusiast, especially with this home airport,

    I've heard that CR7 and CR9 do taxi with only 1 engine, and if these, let's call them mini jets, used both engines, they almost take off while you try to stay on the twy..
    They obviously have alot of power, for a jet that is less long than my nickname is high..

    And, if you ask me, exactly due to that fact, I'd probably never give 100% thrust (or more) in a CR7. Not before an experienced Lear35/Lear36A or CR9 flight instructor had told me preflight, what the consequences could be.
    One evening, not long ago, I watched TV and I wondered what you will possibly do after you've lost one parent. Strange question, why did I wonder. You will possibly be annoyed because he will miss so many happenings which you liked to show him. But after you somehow have regained your countenance, you will also join again people who you don't know. Stay strong, Jimmy.

    Aviation enthusiast since more than 30 years.

  11. #11
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    This smells like your typical Piper PA-11 flying-club-class turn-to-final stall when tightening the turn because you are overshooting the extended centerline, especially if you come with a tailwind component in the base leg.

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  12. #12
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    This smells like your typical Piper PA-11 flying-club-class turn-to-final stall when tightening the turn because you are overshooting the extended centerline, especially if you come with a tailwind component in the base leg.
    You have a track on this one?

  13. #13
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    This smells like your typical Piper PA-11 flying-club-class turn-to-final stall when tightening the turn because you are overshooting the extended centerline, especially if you come with a tailwind component in the base leg.
    Failure to:

    -Monitor/maintain healthy airspeed.
    -Recognize a moderately-relentless pull up
    -Recognize the pattern of a steep, low altitude, low energy turn (and the 'synergy' of a crosswind requiring a tighter turn...)

    Again?

    (I know- AND am reminded that it might not be as obvious in a big, comfortable airplane versus cheap aluminum single engine crackerboxes).
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    You have a track on this one?
    No, but...

    The facts of the report show New York Approach Control cleared the aircraft for the ILS Runway 6, circle to land Runway 1, with strong northwesterly winds translating into a slight tailwind component as the aircraft tracked inbound on the localizer.
    The Runway 6 ILS, circle to Runway 1 is a common approach to TEB, with aircraft normally leaving the localizer at the final approach fix nearly four miles from the end of the runway. In the May 15 accident, the Learjet remained on the localizer until less than a mile from the end of Runway 6 before starting a right turn to land on Runway 1. That would have potentially placed the aircraft less than 500 feet above the ground. Leaving the localizer so near the airport would have also required a tight turn, close to the ground just to reach the numbers of Runway 1.
    As the Learjet began its right turn toward the landing runway, the full force of the wind now at its tail, would have increased its ground speed, pushing the aircraft toward the landing runway even faster. A turn of at least 130 degrees would have been necessary to give the pilot much of a chance for a smooth turn back to final. But with the strong tailwind, everything would have been happening very fast.
    What we don’t know is how far south the Lear flew before it began the turn back to Runway 1. According to the NTSB report, a TEB Tower controller did report the airplane banked hard to the right in the turn south and that he could see the belly of the airplane with the wings almost perpendicular to the ground. The airplane then appeared to level out for a second or two before the left wing dropped, showing the entire top of the airplane. Other ground witnesses reported the airplane in a right turn with the wings in a high angle of bank, some noting the airplane's wings "wobbling" before the left wing dropped and the airplane descended to the ground.
    http://www.flyingmag.com/teterboro-w...A0NDAzNDgwMQS2

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  15. #15
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    Can you shed some light on how this circle to land is done here from the RWY 06 ILS? The only ILS 06 to visual 01 approach I can find involves breaking off the ILS in a right bank and then turning LEFT to final over Giant's Stadium. But, if I'm getting this right, the Lear was making a hard RIGHT turn to final when it lost control. Does that involve breaking off ILS and cycling right turns back to 01? That seems illogical to me.

  16. #16
    Senior Member Gabriel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Buenos Aires - Argentina
    Posts
    5,887

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Can you shed some light on how this circle to land is done here from the RWY 06 ILS? The only ILS 06 to visual 01 approach I can find involves breaking off the ILS in a right bank and then turning LEFT to final over Giant's Stadium. But, if I'm getting this right, the Lear was making a hard RIGHT turn to final when it lost control. Does that involve breaking off ILS and cycling right turns back to 01? That seems illogical to me.
    Yes, the normal and logical circling from 06 to 01 seems to be first right and then left. But that should be started at 5 miles out, not 0.5 miles out. Starting the circling so short would require much more significant turns (in the same directions as said before). Maybe the stall happened during the first right turn. I initially thought that they overshot the runway during the left turn so they had to ter left more than the RWY heading to come back and then make a right turn to align, but it seems that the accident happened much earlier in the process. The tower does report a steep left bank and the nose going down, which would be compatible with a turn to final.

    In any event, it still seems to be a garden variety of stall-spin-crash-burn-die while maneuvering in the pattern (or in the circling in this case).

    --- Judge what is said by the merits of what is said, not by the credentials of who said it. ---
    --- Defend what you say with arguments, not by imposing your credentials ---

  17. #17
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gabriel View Post
    The tower does report a steep left bank and the nose going down, which would be compatible with a turn to final.
    The way I read that, the left bank was probably unintentional, the result of an asymmetric stall. I can't recall where the right turn was first stated as a turn to final (maybe that was your assumption?) but I tend to think the alleged stall happened when turning right, off the localizer... very late and very steep. I guess aerobatics, tailwind gusts and wingtip tanks don't mix.

    Still, would that be considered a 'circle to land' approach? Seems more like... shuffle to land...

  18. #18
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    Still, would that be considered a 'circle to land' approach? Seems more like... shuffle to land...
    http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1706/00890IL6.PDF

    Technicalities...when you land on a runway OTHER than the one the ILS is for, it is generally termed 'circle to land'....and generally, you can 'circle around' all over creation to whatever runway you need...I believe the major rule is to maintain visual contact with the airport, along with some basic altitude rules.

    Based on Gabe's flying article and the 'eyewitness accounts' of extreme banks, I now disagree with Gabe (that it's the ole subtle cramped turn to final with speed decay and visual speed misinterpretation), but more like gross deviation from the good FUNDAMENTAL practice of don't bank the hell out of the plane when down low (or if you are doing anything close to commercial flight).

    Sure, the winds may have contributed a bit, but if they were really banked as steep (or roughly as steep) as what the tower reported...someone had really bad tunnel vision, or were doing Evan's default of Cowboy disregard for fundamentals and procedure, both...

    Pure speculation- I think Gabe may be out of line that the turn needed to be 5 miles out...not sure that's Kosher in the New Yark crowded airspace with airports all over creation...BUT, indeed they waited too long...I was disappointed that Flying did not mention visibility or ceiling- as conceivably, that might force a guy to push it...delays in breaking out and seeing the airport and/or concerns with losing contact while 'circling'.
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

  19. #19
    Senior Member Evan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    5,408

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 3WE View Post
    Pure speculation- I think Gabe may be out of line that the turn needed to be 5 miles out...not sure that's Kosher in the New Yark crowded airspace with airports all over creation...BUT, indeed they waited too long...I was disappointed that Flying did not mention visibility or ceiling- as conceivably, that might force a guy to push it...delays in breaking out and seeing the airport and/or concerns with losing contact while 'circling'.
    I always thought a 'circle to land' needed a downwing leg.

    Anyway...

    In a reasonably executed circle to land, I believe that Lear would need a circling radius of about 1.5 miles. Breaking off the ILS at 2 miles out, that seems unlikely to put you on the TDZ of RWY 1.

  20. #20
    Senior Member 3WE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    4,096

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Evan View Post
    I always thought a 'circle to land' needed a downwing leg.
    Indeed the term is inspired by a single-runway situation where you shoot the ILS, break out, and circle back around 180 degrees to land in the opposite direction (which actually is maybe more of a teardrop and not a circle)

    That said, with lots of runway configurations and the concept that you fly the ILS to get under the clouds and then land on a different runway results in the "circling minimums" that exist on typical approaches. http://155.178.201.160/d-tpp/1706/00890IL6.PDF

    Circle, teardrop, side-step, shuffle, and Lord knows what other gyrations might be used to land elsewhere...Yeah, it's insider jargon that conflicts with common, "Webster Dictionary" meanings, but is more efficient than "Maneuvering-for-another-runway minimums." Maybe you'd like 'MFARMS', better, but you may have to do more than post in this forum to get the industry to address it.

    So maybe break it off at 3 miles, then. Plus, I wonder if there might be issues with flying over the stadium?
    Les règles de l'aviation de base découragent de longues périodes de dur tirer vers le haut.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •