ARFF Daily News

Thursday the 25th of April, 2024

Doctor and pilot identified after UNC medical plane crash lands at RDU

Greg Funderburg, Hannah Leyva, Glyniss Wiggins, and Ashley Anderson

MORRISVILLE, N.C. (WNCN) — Two people aboard a UNC medical plane were hospitalized after a crash landing at Raleigh-Durham International Airport Wednesday morning at 10:10 a.m., RDU President and CEO Michael Landguth said.

In the latest update from the National Transportation Safety Board who is investigating the crash, witness statements provided to them have indicated the crash may have happened “after a missed approach to the airport.”

UPDATE: FAA says UNC medical plane ‘bounced’ while attempting to land at RDU

UNC Health said the plane was one of its UNC Air Operations Medical planes. They said in a statement that the plane was carrying Dr. Paul Chelminski, an internal medicine physician with UNC Health, and the pilot, Art Johnson.

They added, “He [Dr. Chelminski] was returning from Wilmington, where he gave a lecture to medical staff at Novant Health New Hanover Reginal Medical Center. Chelminski was taken to UNC Hospitals in Chapel Hill and discharged on Wednesday afternoon. The UNC Air pilot was Art Johnson, who joined UNC in 2013. Johnson was taken to Duke University Hospital in Durham and is in fair condition.”

Following the crash, a ground stop was issued at RDU at 10:30 a.m. and was lifted about an hour later after emergency crews rushed both the doctor and the pilot to area hospitals, according to the Federal Aviation Administration. The FAA announced all departures from RDU would be temporarily grounded “due to disabled aircraft on the runway.” 

“We just had a short one-hour delay,” said traveler Cally Bloch. 

“I was at a company meeting and came to the airport to discover my plane was delayed,” said traveler James Forker.

The plane can be seen in a grassy area near runway Runway 5R-23L with one wing no longer attached and a UNC-Chapel Hill logo. The plane’s tail number, N228CH is registered to a Socata TBM-850 aircraft, according to the FAA.

In a press conference Wednesday afternoon, Landguth said the accident took place on the east side of the airport, near Terminal 1. The aircraft and crash debris remain on the airfield and will remain there until the National Transportation Safety Board can conduct an investigation, he added.

“At this point, we anticipate returning to normal operations from this point forward,” he said, since the west side of the airport, including runway 5L-23R, is fully operational.

The plane’s flight plan shows it had taken off from Wilmington International Airport earlier Wednesday morning at 9:33 a.m. It’s flight log also showed a flight from RDU to Wilmington that took off at 6:54 a.m. and landed at 7:22 a.m.

In total, there were there have been 70 delays at RDU during the ground stop, Landguth said. Most commercial flights were diverted to Greensboro, Charlotte and Richmond.

At 5:40 p.m., crews with Dean’s Wrecker Service out of Raleigh were using a crane lift up and safely remove the plane from the airfield.

The NTSB further said, ” the wreckage is in the process of being recovered to an offsite facility for further examination.” A preliminary report from the agency will be available sometime within the next 30 days, a spokesperson said.

The NTSB and FAA are working to figure out what led to this incident.

https://www.wnct.com/news/north-carolina/single-engine-aircraft-crash-lands-at-rdu-airport-officials/amp/

Accidental takeoff of an Air Force plane at Silvio Pettirossi

An Air Force plane with seven people on board had a mechanical failure while taking off at the Silvio Pettirossi airport. 

By Press Edition

A CASA type plane of the Paraguayan Air Force with seven people on board had a mechanical failure at the time of takeoff this Thursday at the Silvio Pettirossi airport.

The pilot's action managed to prevent the aircraft from falling into a drainage canal.

Four military agents and three civilians were on board the plane that was bound for Concepción, as confirmed by Rubén Aguilar, director of Airports of the National Directorate of Civil Aeronautics (Dinac).

Aguilar indicated that the aircraft suffered a loss of power in one of the propellers in the middle of the takeoff but it was controlled by the pilot, preventing a tragedy from occurring.

The aircraft came to rest in a grassland next to the air terminal runway.

A similar event occurred last Saturday, when a practice training plane fell approximately 150 meters from the landing strip of the international airport.

Both the instructor and the person accompanying him suffered minor blows and did not suffer serious injuries.

Volunteer firefighters and personnel from the National Police from the 3rd Central Police Station went to the scene to carry out the procedure and assist those affected.

https://www.masencarnacion.com/articulo/accidentado-despegue-de-avion-de-la-fuerza-aerea-en-el-silvio-pettirossi

NTSB Final Report: Progressive Aerodyne Inc Searey LSA

Information Indicates The Flight Crew Failed To Assure There Was An Adequate Fuel Supply

Location: Detroit, Michigan Accident Number: CEN23LA214
Date & Time: May 31, 2023, 20:30 Local Registration: N316SR
Aircraft: Progressive Aerodyne Inc Searey LSA Aircraft Damage: Substantial
Defining Event: Fuel exhaustion Injuries: 2 None
Flight Conducted Under: Part 91: General aviation - Personal

Analysis: The airplane was returning to the departure airport after a local training flight when the engine lost all power. Restart attempts were not successful. The pilot reported that he glanced at the fuel gauge and it indicated ¼ full. During the forced landing the airplane contacted trees, which resulted in substantial damage to the left wing.

Examination of the airplane after the accident revealed that only a trace amount of fuel was visible in the semi-transparent plastic fuel tank; the tank did not appear to be breached. After the airplane was removed from the accident site and leveled on a trailer used for recovery, the fuel gauge read empty. A subsequent engine run was performed where fuel was added to the tank and the engine started. The engine was operated from idle to full throttle and no anomalies were detected during the engine run.

Based on the pilot’s report, the flight duration was about 2.5 hours; however, recorded flight track data indicated the flight actually lasted 3 hours. Available information indicates the flight crew failed to assure there was an adequate fuel supply for the flight, which resulted in fuel exhaustion and a complete loss of engine power. 

Probable Cause and Findings: The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident to be -- A loss of engine power due to fuel exhaustion that resulted from the pilots’ inadequate preflight planning.
FMI: www.ntsb.gov 

Today in History

44 Years ago today: On 25 April 1980 a Dan-Air Boeing 727 flew into a mountain while approaching Tenerife; killing all 146 on board.

Date: Friday 25 April 1980

Time: 13:21

Type: Boeing 727-46

Owner/operator: Dan-Air Services

Registration: G-BDAN

MSN: 19279/288

Year of manufacture: 1966

Total airframe hrs: 30622 hours

Engine model: Pratt & Whitney JT8D-7

Fatalities: Fatalities: 146 / Occupants: 146

Aircraft damage: Destroyed, written off

Category: Accident

Location: Esperanzo Forest -   Spain

Phase: Approach

Nature: Passenger - Non-Scheduled/charter/Air Taxi

Departure airport: Manchester International Airport (MAN/EGCC)

Destination airport: Tenerife-Norte Los Rodeos Airport (TFN/GCXO)

Investigating agency: AIB

Confidence Rating:  Accident investigation report completed and information captured

Narrative:

Dan-Air flight 1008 took off from Manchester Airport (MAN) at 09:22 UTC en route for Tenerife-Norte Los Rodeos Airport (TFN). After an uneventful flight, the crew contacted Tenerife North Airport Approach Control at 13:14, informing them that they were at FL110 and at 14 nautical miles from the TFN VOR/DME. Approach Control replied, "Dan Air one zero zero eight, cleared to the Foxtrot Papa beacon via Tango Foxtrot November, flight level one one zero expect runway one two, no delay." The Dan Air crew repeated the clearance and requested meteorological information, which was given as: "OK runway in use one two, the wind one two zero zero five, visibility six from seven kilometres clouds, two oktas at one two zero metres, plus four oktas at two five zero metres, plus two oktas at three five zero metres, November Hotel one zero three, temperature one six, dew point one, and drizzle." Approximately one minute later Approach Control told the aircraft to descend and maintain FL60. Receipt of this message was acknowledged by the aircraft, whereupon the controller immediately requested it to indicate its distance from the TFN beacon. The crew replied that it was at 7 NM from TFN.

At 13:18:48 UTC the aircraft notified Approach Control that it had just passed TFN and that it was heading for the 'FP' beacon. The controller then informed them of an unpublished hold over Foxtrot Papa: "Roger, the standard holding over Foxtrot Papa is inbound heading one five zero, turn to the left, call you back shortly." Dan Air 1008 only replied "Roger" without repeating the information received, which was not compulsory under the ICAO regulations in force at the time of the accident. Almost one minute later, the aircraft the crew reported: "Dan Air one zero zero eight, Foxtrot Papa level at six zero, taking up the hold" and Tenerife APP replied: "Roger". Instead of passing overhead FP, the flight had passed this navaid at 1.59 NM to the South. Instead of entering the 255 radial, the Boeing 727 continued its trajectory in the direction of 263 degrees for a duration of more than 20 seconds, entering an area with a minimum safety altitude (MSA) of 14500 ft. The co-pilot at that point said: "Bloody strange hold, isn't it?" The captain remarked "Yes, doesn't isn't parallel with the runway or anything." The flight engineer then also made some remarks about the holding procedure. Approach control then cleared them down to 5000 feet.

The captain then remarked: "Hey did he say it was one five zero inbound?". It appears that at this moment the information received on the holding flashed back to the Captain's mind, making him realize that his manoeuvre was taking him to magnetic course 150 degrees outbound from 'FP', whereas the information received was "inbound" on the holding, heading 150 degrees towards 'FP'. The copilot responded: "Inbound yeh". "I don't like that", the captain said. The GPWS alarm sounded. The captain interrupted his left hand turn and entered a right hand turn and ordered an overshoot. They overflew a valley, temporarily deactivating the GPWS warning. The copilot suggested: "I suggest a heading of one two two actually and er take us through the overshoot, ah." But the captain continued with the turn to the right, because he was convinced that the turn he had been making to the left was taking him to the mountains. The captain contacted Approach Control at 13:21: "Er ... Dan Air one zero zero eight, we've had a ground proximity Warning." About two seconds later the aircraft flew into the side of a mountain at an altitude of approximately 5450 ft (1662 m) and at 11.5 km off course.

PROBABLE CAUSE: "The captain, without taking into account the altitude at which he was flying, took the aircraft into an area of very high ground, and for this reason he did not maintain the correct safety distance above the ground, as was his obligation.

Contributing factors were:

a) the performance of a manoeuvre without having clearly defined it;

b) imprecise navigation on the part of the captain, showing his loss of bearings;

c) lack of teamwork between captain and co-pilot;

d) the short space of time between the information given and the arrival at 'FP';

e) the fact that the holding was not published" (Spanish report)

UK authorities agreed in general with the report, but added some comments to give the report 'a proper balance':

1. The information concerning the holding pattern at FP, which was transmitted by ATC, was ambiguous and contributed directly to the disorientation of the crew.

2. No minimum safe altitude computed for holding pattern.

3. Track for holding pattern at 'FP' is unrealistic.