Flight problems, not turbulence, found in death of former White House official

Why do you post links to the Washington post when you can't read them without a subscription. !

"The plane then experienced violent, uncontrolled movements, speeding up and down and putting passengers under the dramatic stress of more than four times the force of gravity, according to the preliminary report.

Typed in CL-60's and they have a tracing g-meter in all that I am aware of. 4G's + is well above the certification load factor limit of 3.2g's and below the ultimate LF limit of 1.5 times cert. limit. Glad I wasn't there and I bet it was a wild ride for the seemingly not so aware or safety conscious flight crew! Bombardier flying machines are not simple tic-tac-toe disciplines to learn even at the top of your game.

I used to keep my hand on the wheel every time I touched the auto switch... Sometimes that servo is holding a lot of stick pressure you are unaware of... Flew a fighter jet simulator once with a wacky trim switch and it was like wrestling a bear.

Pay Wall... Washington post will never see any bucks from me! Here is a better version: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/25/white-house-official-flight-death-turbulence

Report of an extremely similar incident in 2010, with "porpoising" of the aircraft resulting in injuries: https://skybrary.aero/sites/default/files/bookshelf/2391.pdf

Free link: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/25/white-house-official-flight-death-turbulence

link leading to the full article requires registration/login on washingtonpost. FLightaware ought to offer full article to it's members.

I read the NTSB preliminary report. Looks like the pilots weren't up to the task that day. Sad that a paying customer died as a result.

Did bother with formatting. Pretty certain all the words are here in the correct order...GS

The flight that left a former White House official dead earlier this month was marked by multiple missteps, alerts and system issues before the plane lurched violently in the sky, according to a preliminary report Friday from the National Transportation Safety Board.

The Federal Aviation Administration and NTSB initially described the incident as a turbulence event, with the safety board saying it also was investigating a reported issue with a flight control system. According to the new report, pilots said there was no remarkable turbulence during the flight, including around the time the plane lost control.

Instead, the report says, a key probe affixed to the outside of the plane was initially left covered, a takeoff was aborted, and pilots received a string of alerts on the ground and in the air before switching off a key flight control system immediately before the deadly incident.

The plane departed March 3 from New Hampshire, headed for Leesburg Executive Airport in Virginia. It was carrying Dana Hyde, 55, of Cabin John, Md., her husband, Jonathan Chambers, and one of their sons as the family was returning from a trip to visit schools in New England. Hyde worked in the Clinton and Obama White Houses and was counsel on the 9/11 Commission, which investigated the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.

Investigators said the pilots on the Bombardier Challenger 300 began their takeoff with a critical speed-measurement probe mistakenly still covered. When two airspeed indicators showed different readings, the pilots aborted the takeoff. The second-in-command pilot then walked to the front of the plane, removed the red cover and returned to the cockpit, according to the NTSB.

As the chief pilot restarted the left engine and prepared to take off again, an alerting system noted a “RUDDER LIMITER FAULT,” the NTSB report said. The chief pilot told investigators he tried two tests to clear the message. When that was unsuccessful, the pilots continued with the flight, “given that the message was an advisory, and not a caution or warning,” the report said.

Just how dangerous is turbulence?

During takeoff, the second-in-command noticed that key speed-related parameters were not set, requiring him to call one out from memory, the NTSB said. The plane continued climbing to about 6,000 feet, investigators said, when a barrage of additional alerts emerged.

Among the alerts was one for an autopilot stabilizer trim failure. Trim generally refers to a flight control system that makes it easier for the pilot to maintain the airplane’s flight path. Another caution indicated the autopilot was “HOLDING NOSE DOWN,” according to the NTSB.

The pilots consulted a checklist on how to address the problems, then turned the stabilizer trim switch off. “As soon as the switch position was moved, the airplane abruptly pitched up,” according to the NTSB.

The plane then experienced violent, uncontrolled movements, speeding up and down and putting passengers under the dramatic stress of more than four times the force of gravity, according to the preliminary report.

“Four G’s. That’s four times your body weight. Objects that were 100 pounds were now weighing 400 pounds, and moving in an up or down direction,” said Jeff Guzzetti, a former accident investigator with the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation Safety Board. “That’s a tremendous amount of G force for an airplane to experience.”

According to the NTSB, the head pilot said that when the plane first pitched up, his “left hand was on the flight controls and his right hand was guarding the right side of the flight controls.” The pilot immediately used both hands to regain control of the plane “in what he estimated to be a few seconds after the airplane’s pitch oscillated up and down.”

The NTSB said the pilots were employed by Executive Flight Services, which also managed the aircraft. The pilot in command and second-in-command had each accumulated thousands of hours of flight time overall, with 88 hours and 78 hours, respectively, in the make and model jet in this incident, the NTSB said. Executive Flight Services did not respond to a request for comment. The FAA declined to immediately release records related to the firm.

Chambers said in an email earlier this month to employees and clients of rural broadband consulting firm Conexon, where he is a partner, that “the plane suddenly convulsed in a manner that violently threw the three of us. My wife was badly injured.”

The plane made an emergency landing in Connecticut. Hyde was taken to a hospital but died of her injuries. The aircraft is owned by Conexon, which is based in Kansas City, Mo. The company and Chambers declined to comment on the NTSB’s preliminary findings.

Thomas H. Kean and Lee H. Hamilton, the former chairs of the 9/11 Commission, remembered Hyde — from the earliest days of the investigation until work was completed 20 months later — as “everything anyone would want in a colleague.”

“Her expertise in her field and the diligence with which she pursued her work helped answer many vital questions and greatly enhanced the security of the American people,” they wrote, offering condolences “to her family and all she leaves behind.”

Hyde was born in rural eastern Oregon, according to her husband. She was a senior adviser at the State Department during the Obama administration before becoming an associate director of the White House Office of Management and Budget. Hyde had a long-standing focus on international development and poverty issues during her years in Washington.

“Dana was the best person I ever knew. She was a wonderful mother to our boys and she was accomplished professionally,” Chambers wrote to colleagues earlier this month. “She loved and was beloved.”

Shane Harris and Cate Brown contributed to this report.

The NTSB report shows PIC and SIC both had many thousands of flight hours but each of them had under 100 hours in the accident aircraft, at 88 and 78 hours respectively. I'm not a pilot nor in aviation. Are those numbers low? Would there be any expectation that at least one of them would have more hours flying the aircraft in question than that? Report says both earned PIC rating in that aircraft in Oct 2022. Would they both be considered "rookies" in this plane?

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23722207/report_era23la135_106816_3_24_2023-10_09_31-am.pdf has this report in full without a paywall. Both Washington Post and NY Times require subscriptions. Can't even see a summary. Apparently, they have news only for those who choose to pay for it. Google also has other links.

WA Post is a gutter rag not fit to wrap fish in.

Well for a reasoned and thoughtful analysis see Blancolirio's post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oc_71HNJZhU (NTSB Preliminary N300ER Challenger 300 Dana Hyde)

It was not turbulence, but appears to be pilot error resulting in a series of abrupt pitch up/down moves, with +4.2 g and -2.3 g accelerations. The pitch up/down could easily snap the neck of someone, even if seatbelt was on. (basal skull fracture like Dale Earnhart)

The first sign of thing’s going wrong was when they aborted the takeoff to remove the pitot cover. Clearly they didn’t have a clue about the aircraft. I worked 20years avionics and electrical on the CRJ-200/700/900 aircraft. After two failed attempts to engage the auto pilot with master caution they should have flown the aircraft manually or returned to the departure airport.

Again, not a pilot nor in aviation, but could the crew have caused this by referring to the wrong checklist for the cautions being shown? Specifically, it seems they looked up PRI STAB TRIM FAIL and executed that list, rather than AP STAB TRIM FAIL, which was the actual caution message? This is from the preliminary report:

The flight crew reported that around 6,000 ft, they observed multiple EICAS caution messages. The crew recalled EICAS messages of ‘AP STAB TRIM FAIL’ [autopilot stabilizer trim failure] ‘MACH TRIM FAIL’ and ‘AP HOLDING NOSE DOWN’. Neither crewmember could recall exactly what order the EICAS messages were presented. They also reported that additional EICAS messages may have been annunciated. The PIC asked the SIC to refer to the quick reference handbook. The SIC, via an electronic flight bag (iPad), located the quick reference card and the ‘PRI STAB TRIM FAIL’ [Primary Stabilizer Trim Failure] checklist. The SIC visually showed the PIC the checklist, and they both agreed to execute the checklist. The first action on the checklist was to move the stabilizer trim switch (‘STAB TRIM’), located on the center console, from ‘PRI’ (Primary) to ‘OFF.’ The SIC read the checklist item aloud and he subsequently moved the switch to off. As soon as the switch position was moved, the airplane abruptly pitched up.

Challenger 300 BOMBARDIER INC BD-100-1A10 Regis. N300ER

The preliminary report for accident ERA23LA135 is on NTSB website. ( The WaPo article links to that NTSB report ).

I don’t know how you pull 4Gs in a corporate type aircraft but if they did I don’t know how the tail didn’t come off.

https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/23722207/report_era23la135_106816_3_24_2023-10_09_31-am.pdf has this report in full without a paywall. Both Washington Post and NY Times require subscriptions. Can't even see a summary. Apparently, they have news only for those who choose to pay for it.

Trim runaway is an emergency procedure practiced in recurrent PC12 training. We used to joke about how that would never happen...

By the way the NTSB Preliminary Report is the most authoritative here is the link.
ERA23LA135

Some of you may have partisan political issues with the Washington
Post, but it is not a left-wing propaganda sheet any more than the Wall Street Journal is a right-wing propaganda sheet. I read and appreciate both for their solid, fact-based journalism.

To bad it was published in a garbage paper

This article appears on a leftist propaganda paper. They require a subscription and I will not subscribe to this type of propaganda.

I have a bigger question that the operation of the aircraft... Why is it that someone who works (or used to work) at the White House using a plane that is partially owned by her husband? If her husband is part owner and the government has a contract to fly White House staff members... does that violate any laws?

This happened (them landing) in my state. And was written about, on the Patch, several times. Yet, in the comments to all of those articles (on Patch), I have still yet to see anyone STATE THE OBVIOUS.....the 'Clinton Body Count'!! But, no; NO ONE QUESTIONS ANYTHING! They are told a 'story' and accept it.....hook, line and sinker!

Should read flight control system related issues contributed to passengers death…