Bombardier Challenger 600 - Naples FL - 9 Feb 24

So in an odd twist I was in town and there was a group of Challenger pilots talking at the local Juicery about this crash who were convinced it was pilot error and bad placement of engine controls causing both engines to flame out by mistake. (I of course suggested they comment here, so hopefully I can be corrected)

They threw cold water on the fuel theory I posited by noting the aircraft had been in the air too long.
 
Winthrop said:
So in an odd twist I was in town and there was a group of Challenger pilots talking at the local Juicery about this crash who were convinced it was pilot error and bad placement of engine controls causing both engines to flame out by mistake. (I of course suggested they comment here, so hopefully I can be corrected)
Click to expand...
I hope they join us as I would like to hear their input.

I had wondered about that as well. It is a busy time before landing. Terrible error if true.
 
Not sure if there are any 135 pilots here, but from what I can tell in the cheap seats, one issue is that outside of the big fractional companies, many 135 pilots are flying different types all the time and that causes confusion.
 
Winthrop said:
many 135 pilots are flying different types all the time and that causes confusion.
Click to expand...
But they're still required to have the type-rating and current experience. Regardless, its been reported on other sites that it was a very experienced crew with both men captains and the right-seater had over 25,000 hours. Doesn't mean they couldn't screw the pooch but we're not talking about a fly by night ops.
 
rotorwrench said:
But they're still required to have the type-rating and current experience. Regardless, its been reported on other sites that it was a very experienced crew with both men captains and the right-seater had over 25,000 hours. Doesn't mean they couldn't screw the pooch but we're not talking about a fly by night ops.
Click to expand...
Peter were you with me when that kid bounced the Citation 680 at PHX? Sure they have the time, but it's hard for me to transition between my two cars let alone different aircraft.
 
Winthrop said:
Peter were you with me when that kid bounced the Citation 680 at PHX? Sure they have the time, but it's hard for me to transition between my two cars let alone different aircraft.
Click to expand...
No, but of course I can speak to the difficulties of switching aircraft types from personal experience - sadly.
 
"The red alignment marks on the throttle lever spindle and lever arm were consistent with an IDLE throttle position."

I think that is pretty close to the speculation here?

"After the airplane came to rest, the cabin attendant stated that she identified that the cabin and emergency exits were blocked by fire and coordinated the successful egress of her passengers and herself through the baggage compartment door in the tail section of the airplane."

That is impressive work on the part of the cabin attendant.
 
Winthrop said:
"The red alignment marks on the throttle lever spindle and lever arm were consistent with an IDLE throttle position."

I think that is pretty close to the speculation here?

"After the airplane came to rest, the cabin attendant stated that she identified that the cabin and emergency exits were blocked by fire and coordinated the successful egress of her passengers and herself through the baggage compartment door in the tail section of the airplane."

That is impressive work on the part of the cabin attendant.
Click to expand...
I suppose the prospect of burning alive is quite the motivator.
 
Winthrop said:
"The red alignment marks on the throttle lever spindle and lever arm were consistent with an IDLE throttle position."

I think that is pretty close to the speculation here?
Click to expand...
That was for the #1 engine. The #2 engine indication was that the throttle was above the idle stop. So still potentially leaves at least one engine running. Regardless, with both throttles at or above the idle position the engines should still technically be running. Had the report indicated they were at the cut-off position then I think it would fit the "speculative" argument.

Definitely an interesting situation given the investigative fuel checks came back clean except for the aux tank. I think the CVR will be key to knowing the the real reason.

Here's a drawing from another site depicting the thrust lever quadrant:
1709247721738.png
 
Last edited:
rotorwrench said:
That was for the #1 engine. The #2 engine indication was that the throttle was above the idle stop. So still potentially leaves at least one engine running. Regardless, with both throttles at or above the idle position the engines should still technically be running. Had the report indicated they were at the cut-off position then I think it would fit the "speculative" argument.

Definitely an interesting situation given the investigative fuel checks came back clean except for the aux tank. I think the CVR will be key to knowing the the real reason.
Click to expand...
Perhaps I conflated those two settings then.
 
Winthrop said:
Perhaps I conflated those two settings then.
Click to expand...
The "speculative" argument is based on if the aircraft is flown from the right seat, when the PF calls for flaps, the PNF reaches across the control quadrant as the PF pulls back the levers while setting up the approach. With the idle stop release latches located on the aft side of the throttle levers, if the PNF arm across the quadrant its "possible" the stop release latch could contact the PNF arm and release allowing the PF to inadvertently pull the throttle levers below both idle stops effectively shutting down both engines. Since it appears in the report both levers were at or above the idle stops takes some wind out of the speculative side.

My SWAG is if that did happen I would think the first reaction of the PF would be "Oh F..." and he would have slammed the throttles full forward and left them there.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top