Has a NTSB Final been issued for N123SX?

[radfordc]

What did they know that they didn't want the paying customer to know?
Ken W

That is perhaps the slimiest thing anyone has ever posted here! Ken, you need to straighten up.

[daleandee]

I don't really have a horse in this race as I fly a Corvair that I'm extremly pleased with but I would like to add a few observations I haven't seen addressed as yet.

1) The surveillance video of the flight showed what the investigator called "white smoke" appearing a couple of times from the aircraft. They tried to duplicate this with fuel changes and even water. Did they consider that this had to be oil burning as it is light blue and would appear nearly white? There was a cracked bearing housing found in the turbo. There is no way for them to know if this was a pre or post impact crack. Could it be that the turbo was cracked and the smoke was seen because of oil entering the turbo and being burnt? Could this be the cause for a turbo seizure and power loss? Power output without a turbo would be very low considering the restriction and the large prop for the 100 hp set-up. Did Jeremy pull the mixture to idle cutoff as we are all trained to do when he knew he was facing a forced landing?

2) It was noted that the turbo had 25 hours in the plane after install. I don't remember where I seen the test cell time but it seems that the total time on the turbo unit both in the test cell and on the aircraft was less than 75 hours. Don't mean to be offensive but I just do not see how a company can justify selling the turbo as a sucess with so little testing on one unit. I'm thinking it should have been a 1/2 dozen with a few hundred hours on each of them.

3) How many passegers had been flown in this aircraft? Did the factory do any gross weight testing with the turbo installed? How many passengers did Jeremy himself fly in this aircraft or was Mike his first passenger? We all know that these aircraft at gross weight with no power will come down in a hurry without power and slow down in a hurry with out power with the nose up. I've seen Jeremy fly and understand he was a well trained pilot. I'm not doubting his abilites but am wondering how much time he had in this aircraft at gross weight. Whatever went wrong did so in a hurry and there wasn't much time to make decisions and no really good options out front.

Without a doubt this is difficult for many of us to speak of. The few times I have spoken with Jeremy I found him to be a very personable and likable young man. He has a beautiful family that I'm certain miss him greatly everyday. There is no question that this has been very difficult for those much closer to him & Mike than we are. Keep this in mind and please remember these in your prayers.

Dale Williams
N319WF @ 6J2
Myunn - "daughter of Cleanex"
120 HP - 3.0 Corvair
Tail Wheel - Center Stick
Signature Finish 2200 Paint Job
137.0 hours / Status - Flying

[WaiexN143NM]

Hi Dale,
Well spoken. Concur.
WaiexN143NM
Michael

[vigilant104]

What did they know that they didn't want the paying customer to know?

This goes well beyond your assertion that there has been inadequate testing, data collection, and analysis. It is an allegation that Sonex LLC deliberately withheld and is continuing to withhold safety-of-flight information from this community. That allegation is a serious one that, as far as I can see, is not supported by a shred of evidence and is highly irresponsible.

[Sonerai13]

1) The surveillance video of the flight showed what the investigator called "white smoke" appearing a couple of times from the aircraft. They tried to duplicate this with fuel changes and even water. Did they consider that this had to be oil burning as it is light blue and would appear nearly white?

This was discussed during the investigation. Nothing that was found would indicate that there were any oil leaks of any kind in or on the turbo.

There was a cracked bearing housing found in the turbo. There is no way for them to know if this was a pre or post impact crack.

Wrong. The NTSB lab verified that the broken turbo housing was due to impact damage. It was broken around the circumference where the compressor housing is held to the central bearing block. There were no cracks in any location that would have allowed oil to enter the exhaust or intake. There were no pre-existing cracks of any kind.

Could it be that the turbo was cracked and the smoke was seen because of oil entering the turbo and being burnt? Could this be the cause for a turbo seizure and power loss? Power output without a turbo would be very low considering the restriction and the large prop for the 100 hp set-up.

Again, as I have stated earlier in this thread, there was no evidence of a turbo seizure, either partial or full. I verified this personally during the investigation.

2) It was noted that the turbo had 25 hours in the plane after install.[/quote]

That is incorrect. The airplane had recently returned from a 25 hour cross-country to Florida and back. The engine had considerably more time on it than that, first in the test cell and then on the airframe. I personally witnessed all the testing on this engine, and I flew the cross-country to Florida and back. The engine performed flawlessly throughout the entire program.

3) How many passegers had been flown in this aircraft?

The airplane was flown with passengers several times, both by myself and by Jeremy.

Did the factory do any gross weight testing with the turbo installed?

Yes, I did this testing personally.

How many passengers did Jeremy himself fly in this aircraft or was Mike his first passenger?

Jeremy had given a number of rides in the airplane, to several different people.

There is no question that this has been very difficult for those much closer to him & Mike than we are. Keep this in mind and please remember these in your prayers.

And don't read more into the report than is there, or try to guess at what is not. And certainly do not for a minute think that Sonex has withheld information from the customers. That is just ludicrous and offensive. (This last comment is referring to a previous post in this thread, not to this post from Dale than I am replying to.)

[kmacht]

Is the factory going to make any sort of a statement now? We were told to not speculate until after the report was out. Now that it is out we are still being told to not read into it and speculate based on the findings.

The fact is that something went wrong with the motor during takeoff. Joe seems pretty confident that it wasn't the turbo. Flying behind a non turbo aerovee where two factory aircraft have now crashed on takeoff due to engine issues doesn't exactly instill confidence in the aerovee.

So if it wasn't the turbo, what is the next most likely cause. There has to be some theories by the factory as to what could have caused the loss of power even if it couldn't be proved conclusively by the ntsb. I get the feeling like we are being asked to believe that everything was perfect with the engine when we know that isn't the case. There have been far too many engine failures shortly after takeoff in the sonex community to just keep ignoring the fact that something is causing it.

Keith
#554

[Direct C51]

In my opinion, it is ludicrous and offensive that a company has lost power on takeoff causing 2 factory built airplanes with factory built engines to be destroyed, injuring 2 and killing 2 others, and their only comments are basically nothing is wrong with this engine. I think it is ludicrous and offensive that this company keeps selling this engine without figuring out and fixing the problem first. These engines didn't quit because of poor assembly, they quit because of a flaw. Again, in my opinion, the tactic of saying nothing was wrong with the engine isn't working. Clearly something was. I really want Sonex to succeed here, but no one has confidence in this engine, and it's truly hurting the brand. Please be open and honest with us and help everyone out.

[daleandee]

This was discussed during the investigation. Nothing that was found would indicate that there were any oil leaks of any kind in or on the turbo.

Then it must have been something in the engine. I'm only speculating here but for sure that "white smoke" reported will not come from burning gasoline. Only oil would produce what I seen on the surveilence video. The turbo was damaged. I'm not sayiong that was the cause but I can't dismiss it either as we simply do not know.

There were no pre-existing cracks of any kind.

Call me ignorant but I'm not believing that. There is just no way that they could know that after the fact.

Again, as I have stated earlier in this thread, there was no evidence of a turbo seizure, either partial or full. I verified this personally during the investigation.

That's not what the report says. It says clearly, more than once, that the turbo would not turn and that there was no evidence that it was turning at the time of impact.

That is incorrect. The airplane had recently returned from a 25 hour cross-country to Florida and back. The engine had considerably more time on it than that, first in the test cell and then on the airframe. I personally witnessed all the testing on this engine, and I flew the cross-country to Florida and back. The engine performed flawlessly throughout the entire program.

Sorry Joe but the total time I gave was absolutely correct! I had the test cell and airframe times reversed. The report confirms this also. From the factory website:

Sonex Sport Acro N123SX first flew in 2007, and has most-recently been fitted with the 100 hp AeroVee Turbo. The engine had accumulated approximately 25 hours of operation in the Sonex Aircraft test cell as part of the AeroVee Turbo development program, and approximately 50 flight hours on N123SX after moving from the test cell to the Sport Acro airframe in the spring of 2014.

http://www.sonexaircraft.com/news/newsarchive122.html


I am thankful for your efforts in providing information to us. No ... I would never say, and in no way suspect, that the company is hiding anything from their customers. I have always believed that they have sought to run that business with a lot of integrity and ethics ... even if I disagree with some of the approches they make.

Good to know that the proper gross weight testing was done. I was just curious as to how familiar Jeremy was with the aircraft at gross seeing as how the testing would most like not be done by him.

As far as to speculating and guessing as to what has happened ... we disagree. This community has been extremely respectful in waiting a long time for answers. We haven't gotten the one we need and may never get it. But please ... do not insult me by now telling me that we can't dive into the details and look to see what could have gone wrong. For all of the noise you make about being part of the investigative team we still do not have an answer or even a good guess. Many of us are quite disappointed with this investigation. Not because it didn't render an answer so much as because there were a few other roads that were not followed that should have been.

Dale
N319WF

[kmwoody]

Point taken, I did not need to add that last remark.

Ken W
Sonex 959
CAMit 3300

[Sonerai13]

There were no pre-existing cracks of any kind.

Call me ignorant but I'm not believing that. There is just no way that they could know that after the fact.

Actually, they can. They analyze the crack surface and determine whether the crack was pre-existing or not. You see reports from NTSB all the time about pre-existing cracks in propeller blades, cylinders, engine cased, etc. They did not find any evidence of pre-existing cracks in the turbo on the Sonex. If they had, it would have been clearly noted in the report.

Again, as I have stated earlier in this thread, there was no evidence of a turbo seizure, either partial or full. I verified this personally during the investigation.

That's not what the report says. It says clearly, more than once, that the turbo would not turn and that there was no evidence that it was turning at the time of impact.

Yes, that is what the report says. The fact that the turbine wasn't turning at the time of impact only indicates that the engine was not running. It does not indicate that the turbo was malfunctioning. I specifically checked the turbo for any sign of seizure, either partial or full, and there was none. Even after disassembling the turbo completely, there was no evidence of any seizure or foreign material in the turbo anywhere.

Many of us are quite disappointed with this investigation. Not because it didn't render an answer so much as because there were a few other roads that were not followed that should have been.

I too am disappointed that they were not able to find a specific cause for the apparent engine failure. There was no evidence that they could base any opinions on. Mechanically, everything was normal (other than impact damage). Unfortunately, this will continue to be a mystery.