This is a follow-up to my previous post. That poor Aerostar, N619L, hasn't flown in over a decade. I have some pictures, that I posted as attachments. The links below are someone else's pictures from 2008 and 2005.
http://www.airport-data.com/images/aircraft/large/000/002/002082.jpg
http://www.airport-data.com/images/aircraft/large/000/331/331452.jpg

I think a saying my Dad use to recite often is due at this time:

Exceptional pilots use their exceptional judgement to stay out of situations that will require the use of their exceptional skills.

Thanks for all the input everyone! This is why we come to this place, to get other folk's input and situational assessment. As Mike said this was the highlite reel. This is about 5% of the detail that went into these items. I hope to post on more depth to help clarify the different pieces.

Thanks again for taking the time to post!

Chris

I love this thread. Once you weren't endangering anyone else! I'd definitely have gone back and replaced both boost pumps though.

Here's a good read from the Twin Cessna Forum related to a chain of events with an airplane with deferred maintenance and the decision to launch at night to an airfield that was close by which ended up bad.

--------------------

This one happened about 10 days ago. The owner was at the TAS seminar back in May. He was planning to go back the week after the accident to have some work done. The Risk Meter was off the scale on this one.


NTSB Identification: CEN13FA044
14 CFR Part 91: General Aviation
Accident occurred Sunday, November 04, 2012 in Stotts City, MO
Aircraft: CESSNA 310, registration: N6BS
Injuries: 2 Fatal.

This is preliminary information, subject to change, and may contain errors. Any errors in this report will be corrected when the final report has been completed. NTSB investigators either traveled in support of this investigation or conducted a significant amount of investigative work without any travel, and used data obtained from various sources to prepare this aircraft accident report.

On November 4, 2012, approximately 1800 Central Standard Time, N6BS, a twin-engine Cessna 310 airplane, was substantially damaged when it collided with trees and terrain near Stotts City, Missouri. The commercial pilot and the pilot rated passenger were fatally injured. The airplane was registered to and operated by the pilot rated passenger. No flight plan was filed for the flight that originated from the Monett Regional Airport (HFY), Monett, Missouri, approximately 1735, and was destined for a private airstrip in Miller, Missouri. Night visual meteorological conditions prevailed for the repositioning flight conducted under 14 Code of Federal Regulations Part 91.

According to a witness, who was a friend of both pilots, he said the airplane’s right engine was recently overhauled and this was the first flight after the new engine was installed. He said the pilots had originally planned to fly to Miller on November 2nd, but had to postpone the flight because the left main landing gear brake was “soft” during the engine run-up. The witness, who was also a pilot, said that in addition to the left main landing gear brake problem, the nose landing gear strut was also flat. According to the mechanic, who was hired to overhaul the engine, the pilot rated passenger asked him if he would fix the nose gear. The mechanic told him it would take at least a day to do the repair. Since the owner planned to fly the airplane to Ohio later that week for a corrosion inspection; he told the mechanic he would have the gear fixed then. In the meantime, he would have to fly with the landing gear extended or “stiff-legged” because he was concerned the gear would get stuck in the nose well. As a temporary fix, the mechanic used shop-air provided by the Monett Airport manager to inflate the nose strut.

The witness said the flight was re-scheduled for November 4th and he met both pilots at the Monett airport around 1700. During the preflight inspection, the pilots noted the nose gear strut was flat again and there was another discussion about keeping the gear extended for the flight. The witness said the two pilots boarded the accident airplane, started the engines, and taxied toward the runway. The airplane stopped on the taxiway and the engines were run-up three or four times. He said the pilots then taxied back to the hangar and shut the engines down. The commercial pilot got out of the airplane and said the right engine was not “feathering” and it needed to be fixed. The pilot rated passenger called the same mechanic and asked him if he could look at the problem. The mechanic arrived 30-40 minutes later and opened the right inboard cowling on the right engine. About five minutes later, the mechanic said they were, “Good to go.”

According to the mechanic, the pilot rated passenger called him at 1648 and told him that the right propeller control lever was not moving smoothly through its full range of travel. There was no mention that the propeller was not feathering. The mechanic said he was surprised that they were planning to do an engine flight test at night. About 30-40 minutes later he arrived at the Monett airport and opened up the right inboard cowling for the right engine. The mechanic asked one of the pilots to move the propeller control lever in the cockpit through its full range of travel. The mechanic said the arm on the propeller governor moved smoothly from stop to stop as the lever was moved. He told one of the pilots to adjust the friction lock for the lever, which eased the tightness of the lever. He also noticed the nose gear strut was flat again.

The witness said he heard the two pilots discussing if they should postpone the flight because it was getting dark. They originally were going to make a few circuits around the traffic pattern before they flew to Miller. However, since they were delayed they agreed to just fly to Miller.

The witness said the pilots got back in the accident airplane;the pilot rated passenger got in the front left seat and the commercial pilot sat in the front right seat. Both engines started normally. The airplane taxied toward the runway and did another long engine run-up on the taxiway, which included cycling the propeller several times. The witness also noted that only the airplane’s beacon lights were turned on.

The mechanic provided a similar account of the engine run-up and also confirmed that only the beacon lights were turned on.

After the accident airplane departed Runway 18, the witness departed in another airplane and followed them to Miller.

The mechanic said that he was surprised when he saw the airplane heading north toward Miller because he thought they were going to stay in the traffic pattern to test the engine. He then called his assistant, who lives at the private airstrip in Miller, and told him that the accident airplane was headed that way.

In an interview, the assistant said he received a call from the mechanic at 1738. He was surprised that anyone would attempt to land on an unlighted grass airstrip at night. The assistant said that by the time he and his girlfriend walked over to the runway, he could see the airplane approaching from the west. Only the airplane’s beacon lights were turned on and he could not tell if the landing gear were extended because it was too dark. The airplane was approximately 500-800 feet above the ground and in a level flying attitude. The assistant said both engines sounded normal and there was “nothing indicating any distress.” The airplane then made a smooth right turn toward the south and maintained a constant altitude. As the airplane turned south, the assistant said he got a call from the owner of the airstrip and asked if he would bring a fire extinguisher out to the airplane when it landed. The assistant said he grabbed a nearby extinguisher, but the airplane never returned.

According to the witness, once he departed Monett airport, he established communication with the other pilots via a common air-to-air traffic frequency and made visual contact with the accident airplane. While en route, the witness noted that the accident airplane was not on course for the private airstrip. The pilot rated passenger asked if they were heading in the right direction and the witness said they needed to correct 20-30 degrees back to the left. Shortly after, the pilot rated passenger said that “fuel or oil” were coming out of the right engine. He asked the witness to arrange for a fire extinguisher to be available when they landed, which he did. A few minutes later, the pilot rated passenger asked the witness where the private airstrip was located, and the witness told him they were "right on top of it". The pilot rated passenger said they informed him that they were losing oil pressure and were returning to Monett, followed by, “We shut the engine down.” The witness responded, “Ok, I’ll follow you.” At this time, the witness said the accident airplane was turning from crosswind to downwind approximately 800-900 feet above the ground. The witness said he then flew up along the right side of the accident airplane and noted that there was no smoke or fire coming from the engine. The witness then trailed back and to the right. He could not recall if the landing gear were extended, but did recall that the light on the nose gear was turned on.

According to the witness, when the accident airplane was approximately a mile south of the private strip, the pilot rated passenger announced, “110 knots.” About 30 seconds later, he said they were having trouble gaining altitude followed by they were not able to maintain altitude. The pilot rated passenger then asked the witness for a vector to Mount Vernon Airport. The witness responded that it was 127 degrees and 4 miles, and he turned the runway lights on for them. The pilot rated passenger again informed the witness that they were not able to maintain altitude. The witness said he could see the airplane losing altitude and advised them that Interstate 44 was one mile ahead. The commercial pilot then announced they were going to land on the interstate.

The witness said the accident airplane continued to lose altitude. The pilot rated passenger then said, “Oh my God, I think we are going to crash.” This was followed by, “We’re going to crash.” The witness said he saw the light on the accident airplane's nose gear come on (the witness thought the light had been turned off at some point) and illuminate the trees in front of them. He then said the nose of the airplane pitched up, rolled slightly to the right, and then pitched forward, followed by flames and a fireball.

The airplane collided with a stand of tall trees and traveled approximately 100 feet on a heading of 185 degrees before it came to rest on a large pile of wooden planks and other debris. A post-impact fire consumed most of the cockpit, fuselage, and portions of both wings and the tail section. The entire airplane was accounted for at the site. From the initial impact point to where the wreckage came to rest, impact marks on the trees became progressively lower along the airplane's direction of travel.

Examination of the airplane revealed the flaps were in the retracted position and the main landing gear were out of the wheel wells. Each of the wing mounted landing lights were found retracted. Both engines had separated from the airplane. The right propeller assembly had separated from the engine and was partially buried in the ground. The two-bladed propeller was found in the feathered position. The left propeller assembly remained on the engine. Both blades exhibited aft bending and leading edge damage. Both engines were retained for further examination.

The commercial pilot held a commercial pilot certificate for airplane single and multi-engine land, and instrument airplane. He was also a certified flight instructor for airplane single and multi-engine land, and instrument airplane. In addition, he held an airframe and power plant certificate. A review of his logbook revealed that as of October 6, 2012, he had a total of 3,299 flight hours; 411 hours in multi-engine airplanes, of which, 102 hours were in a Cessna 310.

The pilot rated passenger held a private pilot certificate for airplane single-engine land, and instrument airplane. A review of his logbook revealed that as of September 28, 2012, he had a total of 1,621.8 hours; of which, all 10.6 hours of multi-engine time were in the accident airplane.

Weather at Joplin Regional Airport (JLN), Joplin, Missouri, about 24 miles west of the accident site at 1753, was reported as wind from 120 degrees at 3 knots, clear skies, temperature 13 degrees Celsius, dewpoint 3 degrees Celsius, and barometric pressure setting of 30.08 inches of Hg.

You find a derilict twin rotting for 5 years.

You choose an airframe that is overpowered and lacks enough rudder. Losing one at TO condition will require instant and perfect response.

It has monster engines prone to cam failures when sitting, in addition to deteriorated fuel and turbo control systems.

You fire it up.

You fly the airplane knowing the emergency fuel pump is inop.

The one piece of metal that may save your life WHEN the Lyc fails was broken, so you spot weld it (rather than wait a day).

You post it all on BT, indicating you don't know what you don't know.

Chris, I hope you have some good friends. If you were mine, I would fly up there and ground you myself. :bud:

PS - when you kill yourself in a Beech, it affects all of us. Every tally mark hurts the community, adds regulation, increases insurance, adds to the public distaste. This year has been terrible. We need to police our own. Chris deserves the SWAT team.

PPS - I actually love that you are bringing that plane to life. You should know by now (as a follower of your Tbone thread) that patience is required. Do it right and you will have a beast. I would not fly that plane again without sending out the fuel system and the turbo controllers. The cams and lifters need to be seen, which is not easy on those motors.

Goodmorning Everyone!

I finally got home about 3am this morning. It's about an 8 hour drive. Let's go ahead and clarify a few items that have been red flagged with detail and my decision process so it can be examined in depth.

The boost pump failure was the initial reason for the abort. Remember that this airplane has two boost pumps, one in each main. So that gives me 2 engine driven fuel pumps and two boost pumps to operate 2 engines. Upon loosing one boost pump I moved the right engine to run off the left tank for take off. Which has a good working boost pump and 80 gallons of fuel which is more then an hour of fuel at a steep and fast climb. In this airplane the boost pumps are only on for take off per POH. So after this configuration I have three pumps running two engines, which also per spec. One boost pump will run both engines without any other assistance from the engine driven fuel pumps. This was not the most ideal situation but as it stands it was not a mortifying risk.

Now the connection rod for the rudder. This rod is about 1/4" in diameter and hollow on the inside. The connection rod was broke right in the center which is common in these. I first took a steel rod that was the exact same O.D. As the I.D. Of the connecting rod. I fit the rod into place. This was probably. 3/32" rod increasing the tensil strength of this piece before welded by atleast 50%. Then I mig welded the shaft all the way around (cert welder with 2 years training) . Once that was done I ground the excess slag down and installed a steel tube with the exact I.D. as the O.D. Of the shaft. The steel tube has 3/32" walls as well. I made the tube 2" long which was an inch over each side of the weld. Then I welded the steel tube in place on both ends. With the installation of the internal core rod I gained 50% tensil, with the broken shaft and re welded I would say it's only 75% as strong as original, by added the tube over it as a doubler I gained another 75% tensile strength. So all in all the link which is only used a push pull tool was 150%.

I appreciate all the input guys and I thank you for taking the time to post. You make me and everyone else a better pilot. But I must say every situation is assessed and human instinct is self preservation. Weather it's me or my close friend Kev. No one wants to be in harms way.

Thanks again,

Chris

I'd swear every airport around here has a version of THAT awful aerostar sitting, rotting. I'm thinking $0.40/lb less towing and sawzall rental.

Keeping the tiedown current on something like that is an act of madness.

I think a lot of these planes you could turn up in the middle of the day with a truck and an engine hoist, casually harvest any parts you want, and leave. No one would ask any questions or look at you twice.

We had a 182 at my home field which turned into a parts donor. Once someone stole the door, it was like buzzards cleaning a carcass. Within 6 months there was not much left. The guy paid the tie down fees for 5 years and would hang up on anyone trying to buy it. He finally stopped paying the fees and the county sold it at auction (what was left of it).

Vince

Man, tough crowd. Now I'm kinda concerned about parking my old Bo at some remote Kansas airfield while I see family...

Maybe I can retrofit a car alarm on it ...

We had a 182 at my home field which turned into a parts donor. Once someone stole the door, it was like buzzards cleaning a carcass. Within 6 months there was not much left. The guy paid the tie down fees for 5 years and would hang up on anyone trying to buy it. He finally stopped paying the fees and the county sold it at auction (what was left of it).

Vince

Make sure it looks clean. If we see a 'weathered look', ITS ON!

Christopher, you made a wise choice in selecting a twin to rescue!

Chris,

If you step back and take a breath, I think you will see where we are coming from.

You are a talented guy with a great attitude and highly motivated. I know there are many around you who want you to pump the brakes. A couple of extra weeks are meaningless.

Send out the components full of little rubber diaphragms, pieces, and parts (fuel and turbo system). Inspect the cam and lifters (this may save you from destroying a good cam with bad lifters). Put her back in the sky with a operational fuel system and no leaks.

Even if the "health" risk is acceptable, you may be trashing good motors by rushing. I am hoping you filled them with oil overnight before you fired them up??!!

Best,