Australian seaplane crash deaths

[melthebell]

seems the recent seaplane that crashed killing the UK businessman and family had been rebuilt following a previous crash where it was "destroyed"

 

https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/38483249/revealed-tragic-nsw-seaplane-was-involved-in-previous-crash/

 

somebodys going to be in big bother

[Andbreathe]

seems the recent seaplane that crashed killing the UK businessman and family had been rebuilt following a previous crash where it was "destroyed"

 

https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/38483249/revealed-tragic-nsw-seaplane-was-involved-in-previous-crash/

 

somebodys going to be in big bother

 

That’s really not good. My insurers replaced my car after a slight bump to rear

Let’s hope they don’t find duck tape..

[melthebell]

That’s really not good. My insurers replaced my car after a slight bump to rear

Let’s hope they don’t find duck tape..

take more than duct tape if it was destroyed and rebuilt lol

[L00b]

Considering the plane is reported to have made 19,000 flights since it was acquired by the operator in 2006, and that was some time after the rebuild that followed the 1996 fatal crash, I doubt that this accident and rebuild some 20 odd-years ago has got much to do with what actually happened.

 

If the plane crashed due to a stall, as has been reported, then the aircraft speed was the problem -and there could be any number of reasons to do with that (bad fuel/fuel mix, engine failure, prop failure, wind shear <etc.>)- not the plane's structural integrity. DHC2 Beavers are proper workhorses, built like brick outhouses, they're kind of the Land Rovers of the sky.

 

Of course, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the recent crash was due to a fatigue of the repairs of 20 years ago.

 

The aircraft crashed and cartwheeled in 1996 due to wing contact with the ground, so it's a fair assumption that the airframe and wing spars would have been bent, at least some, at the time. But it's an equally fair assumption that the repairs and the whole airframe would have been very rigorously inspected to regain airworthiness certification - this is Australia, not back-of-beyond central Africa or other highly remote worldspot.

 

The aircraft was used as a cropduster in 1996 at the time of the first crash, so presumably in 'land' configuration with a wheeled undercarriage, rather than floats. But since the repairs it's been used as a seaplane for at least the last 11 years. Marine environment is more corrosive, sea landings and take offs are more stressful to the structure.

 

Lots of further variable in play. The investigation will tell in due course I'm sure.

Edited January 4, 2018 by L00b